Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[chucks]

and since religions that don't fit the worshippers make people unhappy (but I WANT to have sex with guys), people will leave bad (for them) religions.

Edit: 
Another benefit to leaving the old gods is that if the new gods have no powers (but the old gods do), the divine magic of the world will slowly decrease.  As intended. 

New gods should definitely begin to gain power and influence and majesty as their number of worshippers rise.  See Terry Pratchet's Small Gods.

Who intends for divine magic of the world to slowly increase?  I don't.

EDIT:
Increase, decrease, I've been staring at performance metrics all day and got cross-eyed.

[ChairmanPoo]

Another benefit to leaving the old gods is that if the new gods have no powers (but the old gods do)

Iä Iä Cthulhu fthagn

New gods should definitely begin to gain power and influence and majesty as their number of worshippers rise.  See Terry Pratchet's Small Gods.

Who intends for divine magic of the world to slowly increase?  I don't.

Nah, I dont like the Pratcherian/D&D theme of gods having power depending on people's faith in them. I think that gods, and megabeasts-as-gods, should have power unto themselves, regardless on how many people worship them.

Following this: I dont think that new gods should be necessarily powerless, but perhaps creatures without too many inherent magical powers could end up as gods due to their position. (namely, deified kings)

[Granite26]

The most compelling argument for atheism I've seen is an analysis of who gets what from religion.  Priests get a living, Worshippers get moral superiority, sense of purpose and (for good priests) a dedicated social servant.  What do Gods get?

Obviously, if gods exist and they want or encourage worship, the get something from it, and the simplest answer is their power. 

Very nice and neat from a cynic's perspective about how a world with active Gods would work, assuming that you want religions to work largely similar to how they have historically.

I dislike it too.  Obviously there are some situations where it works.  Pratchett's Small Gods is a great example, because it's a good metaphor for saying that all religion isn't bad, but derives it's power and character from the worshipers (and not the deity at the core).

The question still remains, assuming the gods are active, Why do they encourage worshippers?

• They don't (encourage them)
• Ego
• Temporal power
• 

Who intends for divine magic of the world to slowly increase?  I don't.

Comes back to the nature of the game and the ages.  Megabeasts don't breed, races die off, the world gets more boring.

To a large extent, this is a feature, because it creates a dynamic tension in the world, while leaving the end state in flux.  History has an overarching story, rather than a pseudo-balanced give and take.  Don't take it as 'this is where you'll be playing' so much as 'The world starts here' and 'the world settles towards a steady state like so', but you get to pick where you want to play.  (My justification is based on the ages, and the fact that they advertise the loss of magic in the world)

[Mel_Vixen]

I took a quick and dirty trip to Wikipedia and want to add some theisms and subforms of theisms which we should consider in this religion thread.

Kosmotheism

The world itself plays a central role as creating and organizing force. Shes not result of a willfull act of a creating "God" therefor has existed before Gods respectively came to existence without help of "God(s)".

Kosmotheism can be seen as "a-", "poly-" or "mono-" theistic therefore the common thing is the believe in a kharma like force to which even Gods are bound.

Hindu- and Buddhism are pretty much Kosmotheistic even thought they are to good parts of Poly respective Atheistic.

Pantheism

The believe that everything is a part of "God" even the "believer" himself and the universe itself is "God".
In contrast to Animism Pantheism asumes that there is only a "all-God" and not that every thing (incl. Stones) is its own personal "god/soul".

for Pantheism "God" and "Universe" are synonym.

Panentheism

Similar to Pantheism with the difference that the universe itself is a part of "God". This means "God" is more then then the Universe.

Henotheisism

Many Gods and one is the biggest most important (Armok anyone?). Henotheism can be seen as step between Polyteism and Monotheism.

Monolatrie

A additional step between Henotheism (see above) and Monotheism. Only one God gets worshipped but the existence and influence of other Gods is not denied.

Agnostizism

Maybe not a "religion"-form itself but i think it fits here. Agnostics acknowledge that "Gods" and alike may exist but dont see them as important for theyr lives or dont acknowledge so called "proofs" that certain God exists.

On the question if "God(s)" exist a agnostic would most likely answer:"I dont/cannot know" / "Maybe." and alike.

I think Goblins are as long they dont worship a creature or a deity most likely agnostics which see the existence of a megabeast as proof that Gods exist and then convert.

Deiism

Deiism is the believe that a single "God" created the world but doesnt takes active role in it. The most prominent examples would be Leibniz who speaks of the "clockmaker God" who created the "Clockwork universe" and Conrad Zuse who brought up the "Matrix" (as in the Movie) idea which means that the universe is simulated in a computer.[/b]

[Craftling]

What about mortal gods?
Like the goblins king declares that he is a god and then the goblins worship him?

[chucks]

I like the ideas of mortal that claim divine powers and such.  Perhaps they could be puppets for greater wicked magic creatures and dark gods, possibly promise powers and riches for their corrupting influences.  Maybe the more powerful dark gods would smite the arrogant mortal for his blasphemy once he outlives his purpose in their grand plans.

I just finished watching season 2 of ghost in the shell: stand alone complex and it really made me think.  Maybe different leaders and gods are followed based not just on promises of eternal paradise or conquest their followers believe in, but also their own attributes and masteries and charisma could influence mortals in their service (or make more converts).  A highly charismatic priest could inspire more followers, and a honorable and battle-hardened palladin would inspire acolytes in the holy cult of divine smiting and justice.

Perhaps this could tracked such that an extremely legendary badass cleric of whatever variety could be given a place in the pantheon of his religion as a great, saintly champion.  If mortals could acheive some sort of deification after their deaths, they could become weak gods or gods-like entities in the service of the god they worshipped in their lifetime.

Monotheisms are interesting and factual, but they can be boring if they don't have enough fun or complexity added to them and their interactions with other religions.  With polytheistic religions, creation and destruction of lots of small, low to mid powered gods is a bonus.  Only a small handful of extremely powerful gods should exist and be in conflict and struggle, otherwise a very uninhabitable world would arise from their epic battles on the physical plane.  Gods and pantheons and religions should also have conflicts and alliances and alignments to gods of similar spheres and persuations, in a semi-political fashion.

[Granite26]

That sounds a lot like White Wolf's new game...

I was doing some thinking about how living beings would get added to a pantheon.  I guess Achilles may be the best historical example, as there's a lot of verifiable fact in the Iliad. (Maybe not a lot, but some)

Perhaps, if Legendary becomes a harder rank to achieve (or just use Legendary 5), a character will get added to the pantheon of the local dwarves (with low devotion?).  This will enable a certain veneration of those of great skill (totally appropriate) that may develop into worship at some point (probably later) and may even (should) spread to other sites.  The individual's spheres would be based on the skill(s) that had acheived legendary.  (Legendary 5 in one skill is enough to qualify, but lesser legendaries count for spheres)

While this is a historically accurate model, it doesn't enable gods to favor their followers, nor does it allow for there to be a consolodated 'REAL' pantheon, since areas would each have their own minor gods.

Perhaps a restriction on Deities' 'power' based on the geographical spread of their worship (for polytheism, at least)?  It also leads to a system of 'incarnations' if you use the edible gods system.  Anyone reaching Legendary 5 and being 'consumed' by the dominent god could be seen as an incarnation of that deity.  One cost/benefit for Poly vs Mono/Atheist/whatever would be to add 'power' for being an incarnation in Poly, but only allow one incarnation at a time (if level 5 would make you an incarnation of a god that already has one, you can't get level 5)  It shouldn't be too hard to balance the 'Power' you get to be worth being stuck with a bunch of dwarves that can 'only' reach Legendary 4.

Is a consolodated Pantheon for a Polytheism required for the Pantheon to have real power?

What about mortal gods?
Like the goblin's king declares that he is a god and then the goblins worship him?

Directly supported by the monotheism foundation ideas, especially since goblins are, by nature, a theocracy.  In the proposed system, however, the goblin would 'errupt' as a divine figure, convert all around him, and THEN be placed in charge of the civ rather than vice versa.

I'm going to remap the OP to emphasize the questions/etc that haven't been mentioned.  I'll also try to format in some of the comments

[chucks]

I don't want magic of the world to increase exponentially, but I also don't want to see it completely die off.  Have magic and divine influence in worlds wax and wane back and forth like the phases of the moon.  Balancing anything like this is a bitch, but have some variables that encourage growth when there has been very little magic activity on a broad scale in the world for a while and have some variables inhibit and discourage growth if there is too much of a surplus of magic generating in worlds or regions.


As far as mortals entering the religious pantheon, the best examples I have for this are a) ancestor worship, and b) Egyptian style god-kings.

As for ancestor worship, each individual ancestor spirit would have a very low or minor power.  To offset this low power, there could be some attribute that indicates that there exists nearly no conflict and strife (or only just a very little bit) between them, allowing for greater cooperation between them to perform miracles and oversee their living progeny.

As for Egyptian style god-kings, these were often seen as mortal incarnations of a pre-existing, more supreme deity.  Everytime the rule would die and pass on into the afterlife, their heir would take on the divine identity of the past ruler and the dead king would either add power to the pre-existing god of the afterlife/underworld.  This could either been viewed in games terms as adding power to the existing god, or being converted into a very weak servant demigod to him.

I can already see an emergent trend for god-king lineages.  The longer the rule of a dynasty of god-kings, the more powerful the respective deities.

[Felblood]

Two words gentlemen:

Variable Metaphysics!

Toady has expressed an interest in making the very nature of the gods something that can be manipulated through world-gen parameters.

Religion is going to evolve very differently in a world where the gods make regular appearances at the local pub, or smite people who convert away from their worship, or reveal cosmic truths to chosen prophets once every ten thousand years. We need to take the full scope of these possible origin points into consideration.

Ideally all these scenarios and far more should be possible in the mythical V 1.0.

The question before us is, How can we make that happen without bloating the game beyond all reason? Which in turn means that we need to know, How can we model the religious beliefs of dwarves and civs in a way that is useful in all of these scenarios?

In a world where new gods can be created, or mortals can become gods, even a very active pantheon could be phased out in favor of a newer, more hip religion.

[Granite26]

So... other than the need for a worldgen 'GodPower' ('GodActive', etc) and 'NewGodPower' number with range and std-dev, what's your point?

[Felblood]

It's considerably more complicated than that. More than just the power levels of the gods, but the rules that define them could someday become variables.

What if you generate a world, where gods can literally absorb smaller gods? What if this event happens as a result of changing belief structures on the world? What if it happens regardless of people's beliefs?

Shouldn't we propose a system robust enough to support a world where two separate religions can worship the same pantheon, only one group believes that the god's are all one god, and the other supports them as separate entities?

[Granite26]

How would you create a system where these possibilities would come about organically?

[ChairmanPoo]

What about mortal gods?
Like the goblins king declares that he is a god and then the goblins worship him?

To equip the God King for his journey we shall  bury him with his favourite possessions. Such as his heart and liver.  And the
many goods he left in his royal bedroom. Also, this bag of cat's our culture  considers holy.  And a couple of soapmakers, for good measure

[Felblood]

People's ideas about gods need to be connected to, but distinct from the gods themselves.

Currently, a church dedicates itself to one god, and builds it's religion/faction around his actual spheres. Dwarves each worship a given god, but don't have any real connection to the religions.

I recommend a system, where each religion has a sphere list all of it's own, and attempts to collect a list of gods to fill in all of it's spheres (either by assimilating foreign gods, inventing new gods, or adding spheres to existing gods). Which might be bound directly to the spheres of the gods(beliefs about him directly alter his properties), or completely independent, depending on the local physics.

Once these two pools of data exist independently, the number of ways they could interact with each other and the peoples around them are practically infinite. I'll try to hit the high points in this post, without digressing too much.

In this abstraction, each dwarf has a religion in place of his current worshiped deity, but I'm open to more intricate systems if someone can make one feasible. This relationship can grow or decay in the same way as personal relationships, based on the social actions of people who represent that religion.

Ideas would need to be able to evolve over time. This is the random sort of evolution that doesn't imply that later states are inherently superior; if a generally good god, creates a generally good religion, it would be just as possible for evil or false concepts to creep in as the opposite.

Religions that are founded by gods would have a sphere set based on that of the god. Perhaps quite loosely, if the quality of the revelation is poor, or a lot of ideological drift occurs.

Religions that are founded by mortals, either through superstition or philosophical intent, could have a sphere set based on the type of people who created it and their environment (fire dominant regions would be more likely to have the fire sphere, etc).

If the gods really do band together in pantheons and tribes, then they might work cross-promotion into their divine revelations, leading to the addition of gods to pantheons that aren't really interested in their spheres.

For added complexity, religions could also maintain an enemy list. This would be gods that were, not only disallowed entry to the pantheon, but actively opposed by the religion. A god of light might encourage his followers to smite the goblins of a shadow demon cult, a high priest who hates elves might declare an elven deity to be the devil, or two gods who got in a bar fight might encourage their followers to fight with each other.

The Hermanubis scenario could play out a wide variety of ways depending on the number and nature of local religions, even leaving aside the interesting metaphysical solutions to the issue.

If the deity list can contain rituals and rules about each god, in a sufficiently fine grained manner, the previous paragraph might be rendered redundant.

[Granite26]

That seems a bit muddy to me.  I have a personal preference for a system that creates unique religions rather than a bunch of churches, each with a grab bag of deities.  Especially since random behaviour over hundreds of game years will almost certainly shake them up to almost truly random with some mechanism of separation or domination. 

I'm going to assume there's more than two layers, since a dwarf should be able to have a personal relationship with the deities in his religion's pantheon (patron saints, for instance).  I like the idea of there being an 'official' religious position defined by the priesthood (much like a civ's position would/should/will be defined by it's 'culture' and changes heavily influenced by the rulers)

I also think you are making a mistake by preaching relativism so hard.  Things should get better, because good ideas stick around where bad ones get dropped.  If practices and religions don't evolve to better suit their civs, there's a problem.  A religion that better suits the actors involved IS a better religion. 

Admittedly, I may be biased in thinking that monotheisms developed and spread during world gen make for a better story than the history of a bunch of drunken rednecks fighting on a mountain for centuries.  Blame Salvatore's Demonworld, which IMHO is the best use of religion in fantasy ever, by 3 orders of magnitude.  Compare it to the FR's Avatar series (Blech)

Back to this:

What if you generate a world, where gods can literally absorb smaller gods? What if this event happens as a result of changing belief structures on the world? What if it happens regardless of people's beliefs?

How is this different from the absorbtion mechanic mentioned earlier.  It seems like you are presenting multiple mechanisms for this to occur, with different ones being true for different worlds.  Would this simply be a binary switch?  The alternative is to create a continuous spectrum of possibilities, and I don't see that happening.

I feel very strongly that if there are too many metaphysics active in a singleworld, things stop making sense (hence the drastic split between prophet/enlightenment based mono's and active gods polys in the OP.  Two sets of metaphysics only.)

I'm not saying that more shouldn't be possible, just that worldgen would need to pick a functionally complete set of metaphysics from the possibilities and turn off everything else.  Unless some things are possible in some worlds and not in others, your worlds won't be a spectrum of colour, they'll just be a big splotch of indifferentiated grey.

One thing that hasn't come up is the concept of loosely associated patron gods.  The god of the Babylonians versus the god of the Assyrians kind of thing.  I suppose that's just a case of simple cross pantheon rivalry, but it muddies the water between belief and worship.

For added complexity, religions could also maintain an enemy list. This would be gods that were, not only disallowed entry to the pantheon, but actively opposed by the religion.

If a religion has a position on a deity, shouldn't that deity be in the religion's pantheon?  By definition, if nothing else...  I don't think you'd say that Satan wasn't a part of the Christian religion.

 You mention:

Currently, a church dedicates itself to one god, and builds it's religion/faction around his actual spheres.

Which is similar.  Greece had temples to Athene and Apollo and whatnot, but that didn't mean they were different religions.  They just had different patrons.  While that's an argument for creating cults and heresies within a religion*, I don't think it justifies creating a separate religion. There's more in common than there is different, so it makes a good container entity.  It's kind of what I meant when I said Null-Pantheon.  The problem (IMHO) isn't that temples are created to a single entity, but that there is no relationship between deities


 *Interesting... Cults, Heresies, and Monastic Orders could all be handled by the same mechanism under religions... The only difference is how they were treated by the main religion.  Adds a fourth layer to the entities
I think any mono-creation system should be able to support Confuscius, Buddha, Christ, and Muhammad (That is, founders with varying levels of personal divinity attached to their person's)  on a continuous scale.   This gets back to your variable metaphysics.  In a world where these things have evident power, the power level (divinity) of these emergent godheads should be set by world.  Possibly with a low std dev. as well.