D&D General What do you think about Wizard's canon changes for the Forgotten Realms?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Shiroiken

Legend
I never understood the whole Wall of Faithless thing.

Other than the small issue of maybe being a wee bit offensive, there's the separate issue of not making sense. Think about it... if you are in a world with cleric casting spells given to them by deities, it would be pretty hard to say, "Yeah, those gods don't exist."
The basic premise of atheism in FR (and most settings with divine magic) isn't that the gods don't exist, it's that they're not really divine. They're simply ultra-powerful beings who can grant some of their power to followers. Archdevils and Demon Lords can do the same thing, yet they're not "divine." There aren't any gods under this worldview, even though Mystra and others exist.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Actually, the offensiveness is exactly that. It's not, as far as I understand the complains about it, that it's a device that punishes in-setting atheists -- and as such, it's as offensive as an in-game device punishing practionners of any other real-life belief -- but that isn't the crux of the opposition. As an atheist myself, I have no problem with the Wall of the Faithless because, in the game, gods are demonstrably true. They pass the test. There is no reason not to select one of them (preferentially one who will get you to a nice afterlife).

But what can be found offensive by some other atheists is that the designers chose to make atheism a losing proposition in their story ; not that it makes sense for it to be a losing proposition within their narrative. They reproach the designers to use a Thermian argument because the designers chose in real life to make atheism a non-viable choice. While I can see this position, I think it also makes ANY real-life worship a losing proposition, since those gods don't exist in the setting and their followers in the realms would be sent to the Faithless Wall for worshipping someone who doesn't send a servant to take care of their soul. So, with regard to real-life philosophical choices, the FR story was "equal opportunity". But apparently, the Wall got removed. Which is bittersweet for atheism, since while it's a victory, the gods continue to be demonstrably true in the setting, so it remains offensive to those who hold the belief that there gods can't be demonstrably true. And instead of being dissolved and turning to a brick after death, the atheists will just... look like morons in the setting. Not really better if this is the beef to have to with the Wall, I guess.
Assumed connections with real-life Atheism aside, the Wall of the Faithless was a really, really dark element of the setting. If the criteria is really just "anyone who dies without having chosen a patron deity", that is an awful lot of innocent people condemned to have their souls dissolved or stolen by devils.
Of which, actual atheists are going to be a very small minority.
 

Assumed connections with real-life Atheism aside, the Wall of the Faithless was a really, really dark element of the setting. If the criteria is really just "anyone who dies without having chosen a patron deity", that is an awful lot of innocent people condemned to have their souls dissolved or stolen by devils.
Of which, actual atheists are going to be a very small minority.

This depends on what is the criterion on chosing... If it is enough to get an immediate baptism-like blessing at birth to be inducted into the worship of a deity, most people in the FR would. And since the gods need worshippers at least in some version of the canon, they would be ill-advised to put stringent requirement to join.
 

Morrus

Well, that was fun
Staff member
We had a long thread on this topic back in July which got closed. Let's not resurrect it again right now, thanks.

 

Status
Not open for further replies.
Remove ads

Top