Falconer
Enchanter
Knight Bachelor
AD&D, Middle-earth, Star Trek TOS
Posts: 330
|
Post by Falconer on May 11, 2009 6:13:30 GMT -5
If Cuthbert is a "saint", obviously the intent of that title is to "flavor" his religion, but let's take it at face value. The implication is that Cuthbert was a human, a member of a religion that = Christianity. I imagine his career similar to Ignatius of Loyola: a knight turned priest who founded a monastic order. But his popularity as an object of veneration and patron saint of the common folk is more akin to Francis of Assisi, Dunstan of Canterbury, or, yes, the historical Cuthbert of Lindisfarne.
But then Cuthbert is not himself understood and worshipped as a god, even though he is an immediate source of divine intervention. I suppose it's sufficient to say that "God" is the god of the Cuthbertines (i.e., leave Jesus Christ out of it as too specific to our world). The problem is, monotheism doesn't really work in a world where a of any rival faith can indeed demonstrate miracles. So picking a religion is really more about "my god is better than your god" instead of "your god doesn't exist and mine does!"
The whole Hommlet "Old Faith and New Faith" thing gives it away, too. St. Cuthbert is part of something larger, something ascending as the Old Faith gives way.
Maybe Cuthbert is kind of like Mohammed. That is, there may be other saints (witness St. Trowbane) within the same religion, but all believers acknowledge St. Cuthbert's dogma as the true way, and therefore Cuthbert defines the Cuthbertines the way Mohammed defines the Mohammedans.
Understand that I'm not asking for St. Cuthbert's AD&D stats. Rather, how a believer is to understand his faith. Are other gods vilified as demons or just as inferior gods? I have more thoughts on the subject but I'd like to hear how you do it.
|
|
|
Post by Scott on May 11, 2009 7:02:40 GMT -5
My view is pretty different. Saint, is more of an adjective than a noun, saintly is the descriptor for the lawful good alignment on the PH alignment graph. The title was bestowed on him by his followers because of his actions and deeds as a mortal cleric, and the title just stuck with him after his ascension. He is definitely considered a god. I see Cuthbert’s origin as a post migration human cleric. I’ve not been able to settle on a god, I usually lean towards Rao. Definitely not an Oeridian god. Perhaps he was an Oeridian who chose to worship the Flan god Rao in the migration period. This would explain the animosity with the clerics of Pholtus. I see him as originating, or settling, in the area that is now Furyondy or Veluna where he has a strong following and frequent encounters with the followers of Iuz might occur, explaining that enmity.
|
|
GT
Wizard
Duke of Indiana, Knight Commander
Posts: 2,032
|
Post by GT on May 11, 2009 10:19:53 GMT -5
Well, since I run a pretty much "Gygaxian" deity system, I run closer to Scott on this one. I have toyed with adding an "angelic" hierarchy specific to the Seven Heavens (since Seraphim and Cherubim are derived from more ancient sources--their true forms are not really anthromorphic!); but I wouldn't tie them to God (Yahweh, Jehovah, Allah, whatever). I was playing with the idea of some deity that manifests as an eye surrounded by flames that judges beings based on its strict interpretations of "law" and "good". This based on an old game from my youth called Ka-Bala! Said deity would be no more powerful than Istus or Rao, but would be of a more distant derivation--perhaps from the same roots as Tharizdun.
|
|
GT
Wizard
Duke of Indiana, Knight Commander
Posts: 2,032
|
Post by GT on May 11, 2009 10:23:34 GMT -5
Come to think of it, I played with a similar idea back in the 90's for the deity to whom the grigori answered--an eye that sees all, but is simply intent on the maintenance of balance.
|
|
|
Post by geneweigel on May 11, 2009 11:46:51 GMT -5
If you split hairs over it then I'll say that Gary was fierce about taking his own religious beliefs out of the content the game.
I spoke to him with the language of "gods" intermixed with the language of "God" as if they are the same thing just categorized differently and he didn't want to hear it. He was of the mind that "his belief" doesn't deserve or should be disgraced with that kind of treatment but he would use elements from it anyway.
The case of Cuthbert is a perfect example of this. Cuthbert is more comparative to the "fun" of Heracles than to any auspicious saint of history at least thats the way he saw it. Just like the druid he wanted to make it a quasi-medieval version by injecting them in.
I've observed that for D&D to get just right flavor you have hang off the 14th century dangling well below into the past sometimes ignoring (gunpowder, etc.) or readdressing (Leviathan/Behemoth to Tiamat/Bahamut) then current themes of the period.
|
|
|
Post by amalric on May 11, 2009 14:41:13 GMT -5
I was playing with the idea of some deity that manifests as an eye surrounded by flames....perhaps from the same roots as Tharizdun. You haven't perhaps been watching the LotR trilogy again, GT?
|
|
Falconer
Enchanter
Knight Bachelor
AD&D, Middle-earth, Star Trek TOS
Posts: 330
|
Post by Falconer on May 11, 2009 15:33:56 GMT -5
Alright, fair enough, but if Cuthbert was such a stout cleric of Rao or whoever, doesn't it follow that worship of that god is core to the Cuthbertian faith? Since that is what he taught when he taught the faith or otherwise attracted followers in his mortal life. The fact that he ascended to godhood himself surely doesn't lead to either him or his followers abandoning their former faithfulness.
|
|
|
Post by Scott on May 11, 2009 15:47:49 GMT -5
Shit! I just deleted this big explanation I wrote.
|
|
|
Post by Scott on May 11, 2009 15:57:58 GMT -5
Take 2. I was pissed, so this is less detailed than the original. I usually write in Word just to avoid those kinds of mishaps.
You have to consider that it’s been close to 1,000 years since Cuthbert achieved godhood. His following would evolve. You’re also dealing with a ‘no doubt about it’ polytheistic world where worshipping multiple gods is probably closer to the norm. Upon his ascension, I wouldn’t say his followers/fellow devotees converted en masse to being exclusive Cuthbert worshippers. Most probably added him to their existing pantheon, or added a ‘with a lesser devotion to…’ to their profiles. The more devout would remain devoted as before, but would acknowledge Cuthbert as a god, and most likely an ally. After that, his following would build as new individuals would choose him as a patron, or become clerics, etc.
|
|
|
Post by geneweigel on May 11, 2009 18:23:44 GMT -5
Other factors to consider are the original players. Its obvious they were playing these "clerics" in Hyborea (read: "Greyhawk") with the real "Odins" and "Saint Cuthberts" in mind as background flavor. You have to figure that these original cleric players played it from their own "Sunday school experience" rather than from a compulsion to explore "trans-temple dynamics in the style of the glory days of Rome", right? That is, while Gary may have been motivated to move away (from the Jewish layout of Christians and Islamics, etc.) what was to stop the players? Like it or not when people play a cleric they source it straight from going to mass in an actual religion and certainly not from researching long lost actual religions! So while the behaviors of the "St. C. faithful" remained in leftover campaign flavor nuggets (seen in the Dei&Dem of WOG article and T1) his "homogenization" into the "WORLD OF GREYHAWK" contradicts that scope. He can no longer be a true "saint" even though clues point that way, it was moved away for the published version.
|
|
Falconer
Enchanter
Knight Bachelor
AD&D, Middle-earth, Star Trek TOS
Posts: 330
|
Post by Falconer on May 11, 2009 20:46:25 GMT -5
Yeah, lots to think about. Lots of ways to approach it.
I think it would be neat to take it from a loosely Christian perspective without actually touching God or Christian dogma.
So good faiths might include Saint Cuthbert, Saint Tikhon, Saint Benedict, Melchizedek, Moses, Archangel Raphael.
Evil faiths might include Baal, Marduk, Mahomet, Mammon, Belial, Nyarlathotep, Sauron, Tash.
Neutral faiths might include Odin, Bacchus, Mars, Andvari, Thor, Aphrodite.
Hmmmm...
|
|
|
Post by geneweigel on May 11, 2009 21:23:04 GMT -5
Or Law versus Chaos, etc. to make it lean more towards the original stuff.
|
|
GT
Wizard
Duke of Indiana, Knight Commander
Posts: 2,032
|
Post by GT on May 12, 2009 8:34:01 GMT -5
I'm glad that Gary added the two beams of Balance, rather than just having a Tolkeinesque Good vs. Evil or Moorcockesque Law vs. Chaos, as it adds complexity to the Multiverse and the alignments of characters (both PC and NPC). As to the deities, remember that Gary's original notion of St. Cuthbert (and several others) was as a "Demigod"--aka: the Nine Imprisoned in Castle Greyhawk. Then he retro-fitted some of those deities as Lesser Gods. Also, he made a point in one or both of the last two Gord novels of pointing out that the gods in general derive their level of power from their worshippers. So maybe the Nine were demigods while imprisoned (one could make the excuse...) because in their enforced absence they lost a few worshippers, which they gained back after regaining freedom.
|
|
|
Post by Scott on May 12, 2009 8:55:21 GMT -5
I like the expanded alignment system as a guide to creatures actions, but I'm not so sure as a set up for the multiverse. For the outer planes I've considered a 3 plane system, or an option where it's an undefined number of planes, and rather than seperating it by alignment each god, or group of gods have their own plane/dwelling.
|
|
|
Post by geneweigel on May 12, 2009 11:35:47 GMT -5
I'm not even that big on alignment anymore so both from different POVs could stand.
|
|
GT
Wizard
Duke of Indiana, Knight Commander
Posts: 2,032
|
Post by GT on May 12, 2009 14:50:24 GMT -5
No, GW!!! Don't turn to the evil "no alignment" side!! Heh! At any rate, I don't necessarily see the given planes as a ring around the inner planes---that's just an easy representation. The Outer Planes simply represent the major power bases of the greater beings active in the Greyhawk cosmos; and they're simply "out there"! As to alignment, well I like it--Hitler was a Lawful Evil being--he was prtobably "mad" (especially near the end...), but he invoked order and much evil. Likewise, Gandhi was Lawful Good--he imposed certain restrictions upon himself to attempt to achieve goals he perceived as benign (one might argue for "lawful neutral, with good tendencies", but still we're on track!). Alignment works when given "the big picture", as well as the "here and now"--this person is usually very nice, but right now he is starving and wishes to slay you for your coins so he can get food. "DING!": Evil! All past actions aside, he wishes harm on another, regardless of his reasoning, so watch him! The ability to detect alignment might be called "detect intention", because it operates in the moment. Some alignments never really change... Oinodaemon, a solar, etc.Others might. The ability to detect this is still a valid ability from where I'm playin'! ^__^
|
|
|
Post by geneweigel on May 12, 2009 15:12:16 GMT -5
No, GW!!! Don't turn to the evil "no alignment" side!! I'm not against alignment I'm just not for it being omniversal anymore and have it more as a certain point of view of behaviors that some adhere to and even have language for but another part of the world may have an ultra complex alignment and another might have "fire" and "ice", etcetera...
|
|
|
Post by Scott on May 12, 2009 15:34:28 GMT -5
this person is usually very nice, but right now he is starving and wishes to slay you for your coins so he can get food. "DING!": Evil! All past actions aside, he wishes harm on another, regardless of his reasoning, so watch him! ^__^ I disagree. After all, bandits are never very nice, and they would slay and rob you for much more selfish reasons, and they're neutral.
|
|
|
Post by geneweigel on May 12, 2009 18:21:08 GMT -5
Now this is the reason i don't like alignment! Seriously, if you need to call upon the gods to make them pay attention then what about when the gods are not watching?
|
|
GT
Wizard
Duke of Indiana, Knight Commander
Posts: 2,032
|
Post by GT on May 12, 2009 21:59:41 GMT -5
I would contend that a bandit that simply robs for sustenance might be Neutral, but one who additionally slays his victims is Evil (unless it is done defensively, then Neutral could still be argued).
|
|