Religion in Greyhawk! - Downloaded from the Wizards Community, all coding removed by Solauren

Religion in Greyhawk!

Post/Author/DateTime Post
#1
Argon
May 04, 2004 0:06:52 I always felt that the number of gods in many game settings where very large but then so was the greek pantheon. I decided to take the names of gods and basically cross reference them with other gods this way Heironious could be the god of war for humans and is known Clanggedin Silverbeard the god of war for Dwarves. Pelor is the god of the sun which often means life and magic therefore the elves call him Corellon. Olidamarra is the god of rouges, tricks and mischief, he could also be the god known to halflings as Brandobarious.

These are some things I have played with for years. I have Iuz being known as Shargass the night lord of the Orcish pantheon. This could explain his orcish following. I have plenty of other examples I just want some feed back or other house rules you might use in your campaign. The Last one I was playing around with is that Istus and Lendor are one and the same god.
#2
zombiegleemax
May 05, 2004 9:13:56 I like the idea although I've never practiced it.

I've never liked the seperation between human, humanoid, and demi-human pantheons.
#3
Argon
May 05, 2004 9:29:31 Abyss, I just looked at real world mythologies and if you think about it the greek and roman gods where know by different names but were ideally the same gods. In some cases the exact same name or a close copy of one was used. Of course each mythology had a few gods which were unique to their pantheon as well. How would you like Bralm to be Moradin? It could be the case these are just examples nothing is set in stone.
#4
zombiegleemax
May 05, 2004 10:32:15 I never minded the seperation between the human and non-human pantheons per se but the overabundance of human gods and the overlapping areas of concern have always bugged me. So I did a similar reworking of the human pantheons so that there is in effect one large human pantheon (I think 35 gods excluding demi-gods) with no overlapping (or minorly overlapping) areas of concern. I understand that the designers simply followed the real world model of different pantheons for different cultural groups, but the problem is that the real world counterparts were never assumed to really co-exist (or shouldn't have been) because that would make no sense. How could both Zeus, Odin, and Mithra have dominion over the sky? Or over essentially everything since they are supposed to be supreme?

In Greyhawk however, they are assumed to be part of one overall divine scheme. This creates the following scenario:

I am Jascar, Suel god of the hills and mountains!

How about those hills over there?

Well, no, those are Oeridian hills. They might be Ulaa's. I'm not sure.

And those? They're populated by Suel.

Well, no, those are my brother Fortubo's.

That's pathetic. Are you sure you're a god?

I think it makes much more sense to have one pantheon for at least humans and to have (human) racial affinities for those gods reflect culture, not exclusiveness. IMC, all humans acknowledge the power of the greater gods but for example only the Bakluni really venerate Istus. All the gods of war (Kord, Heironeous and Hextor) reflect different aspects of the overall concept of war (chaotic war, tyrannical war, honorable war) and certain cultures (Suel, Oeridian, etc.) gravitate their worship towards the deity which best reflects their cultural attitude towards war.

Combine this with the idea of different human cultures having slightly different concepts for the same deity and you can shrink your pantheon down to a respectable level. You could even extend it to non-humans, as you have, but IMHO I think that there's room for the elves, dwarves, etc. to have their own small pantheons (less than 8) that covers all aspects of life for their particular race.

Unfortunately, the trend in both GH and FR products is to expand the roll of gods even further when what they should be doing is introducing new names and cultural concepts for the old, already existant gods. The more gods you have the more illogical the concept of any divine scheme or order and the more that one god becomes hard to differentiate from the next.
#5
Majoru_Oakheart
May 05, 2004 12:52:25 Then again, depending on the source, Greyhawk gods are often not so godly. They are routinely captured or killed by mortals. A lot of them used to be mortal.

GG even wrote some stories about "gods" who lived in forests, acting like normal people, who were powerful, but didn't seem more powerful than wizards.

I've always got the impression from the things I've read that the gods in Greyhawk were more like really powerful mortals. They had severe limitations to their powers, which was why they didn't get involved everywhere. Very similar to the way that Deities and Demigods was talking about the gods, they don't see everything, they can only see so many things at once, and only if they are specifically looking, and that there is something that involves them present there (like someone saying their name, or a mountain for a mountain god, etc.)
#6
Greyson
May 05, 2004 14:28:35 I agree that there is too much overlap in the human construction of the Pantheon. I have taken the list of 184 Greyhawk gods and reduced it to 56 deities, as described by others above. Some I have entirely removed from the pantheon. Many others I have combined, as indicated above. A deity of a specific theme, mountains for example, is known by different names by different ethnic groups and different races - but, there is only one. Other deities are not gods. Just pagan myths, false idols, perceptions of the cosmos.

I think the question of Zagyg's imprisonment of gods will forever haunt us Greyhawkers. It doesn't seem right, does it? But that is a topic for another time (again, LOL).
#7
caeruleus
May 05, 2004 15:49:09 The Greeks and Romans may have had "the same" gods with different names, but are they the same as the Norse gods, or the Sumerian gods?

In ancient times, I believe, different pantheons were assumed to exist. If one group were to defeat another group, it was described as the first group's gods killing the gods of the other group.

So, perhaps there are many gods that want dominion over some aspect of the world, and they compete for it. Different individuals would access powers relating to that domain by swearing allegiance with one of those deities.
#8
Argon
May 05, 2004 23:29:21 Good points made by all! Yes the Greeks and Romans shared the same or similar gods but tell me that Odin couldn't of been Zeus to the Greeks and Odin to the Norse. Hercules is but a demigod to the Greeks but is the Mighty Thor to the Norse. Whose to say that Hades isn't also Osiris. Different cultures had gods for many of the same aspects and while the people believed that their gods fought for supremacy of their spheres and their people.

In the end it was one group of religious people warring against another group of religious people. Whose to say that some of this was'nt merely caused by what one group refered to as Ra and the other group refered to as Odin. Both Ideals are similar but the names and some of the philosphy about the leader of the pantheon differ as defined by the culture which worships them.
#9
zombiegleemax
May 07, 2004 5:00:15 Heh - if you think the GH human pantheons are overcrowded, take a look at the Hindu pantheon. Gods by the thousands and millions; at least two different pantheons messily spliced together in often contradictory ways (just try and figure out who the head god is for example) and both pantheistic and monotheistic at the same time!

So there's a RW precendent for overlapping and overcrowding in pantheons - especially if there's no central relgious authority exercising theological and doctrinal control. That's part of the reason the various Hindu Puranic texts contradict each other. They were written in different times and places by different people unaware of the content of the other Puranas.

It'd be no surprise if there's something similar in the pantheons of Oerth. The Suel, Flan, Oeridian and Baklunish pantheons would have evolved seperately for the most part. Hence the overlap between some of the portfolios. There seems to be very little in the way of a central authority for most of the faiths (Rao being a possible exception), let alone the pantheons, so it's likely that there's going to be a wide range of orthodox practices even between national churches of the same faith, as well as some differences of opinion as to the relationships between the gods within a pantheon (the old "my god's bigger than your god" schtick that the Palish in particular seem so fond of).

An interesting thing to consider is the whether the common gods are throwbacks to a time when all the human races had the same faith (like the ancient cult of the Earth Mother in Eurasia and probably elsewhere) OR whether they're a product of the millenium or so of cultural mixing. Probably a little from column A (esp the powerful Flan gods that are common - Beory, Pelor, Rao, Nerul) and a little from Column B (the demigods and the more minor common gods).

Gary H. touched on this with his mention of Solan - what the Oeridians called Pelor - in the Death Knight articles. Was Solan worshiped in the Oeridian homelands in the west or was he acquired on the Migrations?

There's pros and cons on both sides - like if Solan was recent, why did the Aerdi stick him on their banners? OR if Solan was ancient, why wasn't he more revered in the GK, despite being on their banners?

One explanation was that Solan was ancient, but in the upheavals of the Migration and the development of a more civilised Oeridian state, he lost ground in the face of the more "useful" gods - Pholtus (law), Zilchus (trade and wealth) and Heironious/Hextor (war).

This has a parallel in Hinduism, where the original Vedic triad of main gods: Agni (fire), Indra (rain/lightning) and Surya (the sun) - all related to the natural world - are superceded in later times by the Puranic triad of Bramha (creator), Vishnu (preserver) and Shiva (destroyer), who have more abstract concerns.

P.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 Argon May 04, 2004 0:06:52	I always felt that the number of gods in many game settings where very large but then so was the greek pantheon. I decided to take the names of gods and basically cross reference them with other gods this way Heironious could be the god of war for humans and is known Clanggedin Silverbeard the god of war for Dwarves. Pelor is the god of the sun which often means life and magic therefore the elves call him Corellon. Olidamarra is the god of rouges, tricks and mischief, he could also be the god known to halflings as Brandobarious. These are some things I have played with for years. I have Iuz being known as Shargass the night lord of the Orcish pantheon. This could explain his orcish following. I have plenty of other examples I just want some feed back or other house rules you might use in your campaign. The Last one I was playing around with is that Istus and Lendor are one and the same god.
#2 zombiegleemax May 05, 2004 9:13:56	I like the idea although I've never practiced it. I've never liked the seperation between human, humanoid, and demi-human pantheons.
#3 Argon May 05, 2004 9:29:31	Abyss, I just looked at real world mythologies and if you think about it the greek and roman gods where know by different names but were ideally the same gods. In some cases the exact same name or a close copy of one was used. Of course each mythology had a few gods which were unique to their pantheon as well. How would you like Bralm to be Moradin? It could be the case these are just examples nothing is set in stone.
#4 zombiegleemax May 05, 2004 10:32:15	I never minded the seperation between the human and non-human pantheons per se but the overabundance of human gods and the overlapping areas of concern have always bugged me. So I did a similar reworking of the human pantheons so that there is in effect one large human pantheon (I think 35 gods excluding demi-gods) with no overlapping (or minorly overlapping) areas of concern. I understand that the designers simply followed the real world model of different pantheons for different cultural groups, but the problem is that the real world counterparts were never assumed to really co-exist (or shouldn't have been) because that would make no sense. How could both Zeus, Odin, and Mithra have dominion over the sky? Or over essentially everything since they are supposed to be supreme? In Greyhawk however, they are assumed to be part of one overall divine scheme. This creates the following scenario: I am Jascar, Suel god of the hills and mountains! How about those hills over there? Well, no, those are Oeridian hills. They might be Ulaa's. I'm not sure. And those? They're populated by Suel. Well, no, those are my brother Fortubo's. That's pathetic. Are you sure you're a god? I think it makes much more sense to have one pantheon for at least humans and to have (human) racial affinities for those gods reflect culture, not exclusiveness. IMC, all humans acknowledge the power of the greater gods but for example only the Bakluni really venerate Istus. All the gods of war (Kord, Heironeous and Hextor) reflect different aspects of the overall concept of war (chaotic war, tyrannical war, honorable war) and certain cultures (Suel, Oeridian, etc.) gravitate their worship towards the deity which best reflects their cultural attitude towards war. Combine this with the idea of different human cultures having slightly different concepts for the same deity and you can shrink your pantheon down to a respectable level. You could even extend it to non-humans, as you have, but IMHO I think that there's room for the elves, dwarves, etc. to have their own small pantheons (less than 8) that covers all aspects of life for their particular race. Unfortunately, the trend in both GH and FR products is to expand the roll of gods even further when what they should be doing is introducing new names and cultural concepts for the old, already existant gods. The more gods you have the more illogical the concept of any divine scheme or order and the more that one god becomes hard to differentiate from the next.
#5 Majoru_Oakheart May 05, 2004 12:52:25	Then again, depending on the source, Greyhawk gods are often not so godly. They are routinely captured or killed by mortals. A lot of them used to be mortal. GG even wrote some stories about "gods" who lived in forests, acting like normal people, who were powerful, but didn't seem more powerful than wizards. I've always got the impression from the things I've read that the gods in Greyhawk were more like really powerful mortals. They had severe limitations to their powers, which was why they didn't get involved everywhere. Very similar to the way that Deities and Demigods was talking about the gods, they don't see everything, they can only see so many things at once, and only if they are specifically looking, and that there is something that involves them present there (like someone saying their name, or a mountain for a mountain god, etc.)
#6 Greyson May 05, 2004 14:28:35	I agree that there is too much overlap in the human construction of the Pantheon. I have taken the list of 184 Greyhawk gods and reduced it to 56 deities, as described by others above. Some I have entirely removed from the pantheon. Many others I have combined, as indicated above. A deity of a specific theme, mountains for example, is known by different names by different ethnic groups and different races - but, there is only one. Other deities are not gods. Just pagan myths, false idols, perceptions of the cosmos. I think the question of Zagyg's imprisonment of gods will forever haunt us Greyhawkers. It doesn't seem right, does it? But that is a topic for another time (again, LOL).
#7 caeruleus May 05, 2004 15:49:09	The Greeks and Romans may have had "the same" gods with different names, but are they the same as the Norse gods, or the Sumerian gods? In ancient times, I believe, different pantheons were assumed to exist. If one group were to defeat another group, it was described as the first group's gods killing the gods of the other group. So, perhaps there are many gods that want dominion over some aspect of the world, and they compete for it. Different individuals would access powers relating to that domain by swearing allegiance with one of those deities.
#8 Argon May 05, 2004 23:29:21	Good points made by all! Yes the Greeks and Romans shared the same or similar gods but tell me that Odin couldn't of been Zeus to the Greeks and Odin to the Norse. Hercules is but a demigod to the Greeks but is the Mighty Thor to the Norse. Whose to say that Hades isn't also Osiris. Different cultures had gods for many of the same aspects and while the people believed that their gods fought for supremacy of their spheres and their people. In the end it was one group of religious people warring against another group of religious people. Whose to say that some of this was'nt merely caused by what one group refered to as Ra and the other group refered to as Odin. Both Ideals are similar but the names and some of the philosphy about the leader of the pantheon differ as defined by the culture which worships them.
#9 zombiegleemax May 07, 2004 5:00:15	Heh - if you think the GH human pantheons are overcrowded, take a look at the Hindu pantheon. Gods by the thousands and millions; at least two different pantheons messily spliced together in often contradictory ways (just try and figure out who the head god is for example) and both pantheistic and monotheistic at the same time! So there's a RW precendent for overlapping and overcrowding in pantheons - especially if there's no central relgious authority exercising theological and doctrinal control. That's part of the reason the various Hindu Puranic texts contradict each other. They were written in different times and places by different people unaware of the content of the other Puranas. It'd be no surprise if there's something similar in the pantheons of Oerth. The Suel, Flan, Oeridian and Baklunish pantheons would have evolved seperately for the most part. Hence the overlap between some of the portfolios. There seems to be very little in the way of a central authority for most of the faiths (Rao being a possible exception), let alone the pantheons, so it's likely that there's going to be a wide range of orthodox practices even between national churches of the same faith, as well as some differences of opinion as to the relationships between the gods within a pantheon (the old "my god's bigger than your god" schtick that the Palish in particular seem so fond of). An interesting thing to consider is the whether the common gods are throwbacks to a time when all the human races had the same faith (like the ancient cult of the Earth Mother in Eurasia and probably elsewhere) OR whether they're a product of the millenium or so of cultural mixing. Probably a little from column A (esp the powerful Flan gods that are common - Beory, Pelor, Rao, Nerul) and a little from Column B (the demigods and the more minor common gods). Gary H. touched on this with his mention of Solan - what the Oeridians called Pelor - in the Death Knight articles. Was Solan worshiped in the Oeridian homelands in the west or was he acquired on the Migrations? There's pros and cons on both sides - like if Solan was recent, why did the Aerdi stick him on their banners? OR if Solan was ancient, why wasn't he more revered in the GK, despite being on their banners? One explanation was that Solan was ancient, but in the upheavals of the Migration and the development of a more civilised Oeridian state, he lost ground in the face of the more "useful" gods - Pholtus (law), Zilchus (trade and wealth) and Heironious/Hextor (war). This has a parallel in Hinduism, where the original Vedic triad of main gods: Agni (fire), Indra (rain/lightning) and Surya (the sun) - all related to the natural world - are superceded in later times by the Puranic triad of Bramha (creator), Vishnu (preserver) and Shiva (destroyer), who have more abstract concerns. P.