Tabletop Games Have Weird Politics: If the players bring about Jesus' death, great!

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Tabletop Games Have Weird Politics: If the players bring about Jesus' death, great!

«‹›47 »

Toph Bei Fong: Feb 29, 2008

Reveilled posted:

Cool, could you cite where he called himself an atheist.

https://tricycle.org/trikedaily/buddha-god-human/

quote:

Buddhism is famous in the West as an �atheistic religion,� in the sense that, unlike the Abrahamic religions of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, it does not recognize a single creator deity. However, one should not assume from this that Buddhism has no gods. It has not one, but many.

In traditional Buddhist cosmology, the gods�or deva in Sanskrit, a cognate of �divinity��are distributed among 27 heavens (svarga): six are located in the sensuous realm (kamadhatu) along the slopes, at the summit, and in the air above Mount Sumeru, the mountain at the center of the world; 17 in the meditation heavens of the realm of subtle materiality (rupadhatu); and four are in the immaterial realm (arupyadhatu), where there is no form, only consciousness. Because each of these heavens is located within samsara, the realm of rebirth, none of these heavens is a permanent abode of the gods who live there, and none of the gods is eternal.

Rebirth as a god is based on virtuous actions performed in a previous life, and when the god�s lifespan is over, the being is reborn some place else. Thus, no god in Buddhism has the omniscience, the omnipotence, or the omnipresence of God in the Abrahamic religions. This does not mean, however, that gods have no powers. They have powers far beyond those of humans. And over the long history of Buddhism, Buddhists, including monks and nuns, have propitiated various gods for blessings and boons. A substantial part of tantric practice, for example, is devoted to inviting gods into one�s presence, making offerings to them, and then requesting the bestowal of various powers (siddhi).

What then is the status of the Buddha? Technically, he is a human, among the five other rebirth destinies (sadgati) in samsara: gods, demigods, animals, ghosts, and denizens of hell. But he is unlike any other human, both in his relation to the gods and in his physical and mental qualities.

In his penultimate lifetime, the Buddha-to-be was a god, abiding, where all future buddhas abide, in the Tushita heaven. It was from there that he surveyed the world, and chose the place of his final birth, his caste, his clan, and his parents. After his enlightenment, the Buddha spent 49 days in contemplation in the vicinity of the Bodhi Tree, concluding, the story goes, that what he had understood was too profound for others to understand, and thus futile to try to teach to anyone.

The most powerful of the gods, Brahma, descended from his heaven to implore the Buddha to teach, arguing that although many might not be able to understand, there were some with �little dust in their eyes� who would. This is an important moment because it makes clear that the Buddha knew something that the gods did not, and that the gods had been waiting for a new buddha to appear in the world to teach them the path to freedom from rebirth, even from rebirth in heaven. For this reason, one of the epithets of the Buddha is devatideva��god above the gods.�

Although a human, the Buddha has a body unlike any other. It is adorned with the 32 marks of a superman (mahapurusalaksana), such as images of wheels on the palms of his hands and soles of his feet, a bump on the top of his head, 40 teeth, and a circle of hair between his eyes that emits beams of light. Some of the marks are characteristics found in animals rather than humans: webbed fingers and toes like a duck�s, arms that extend below the knees like an ape�s, and a penis that retracts into body like a horse�s. His mind knows all of his past lives and the past lives of all beings in the universe. In fact, he is omniscient (although the various Buddhist schools have different ideas about exactly what this means).

Even in the early tradition, it is said that he can live for an eon or until the end of the eon, if he is asked to do so. And in the Lotus Sutra it says that his lifespan is immeasurable. He can go anywhere in the universe. He can perform all manner of miracles.

Did he create the universe? No. Is he omniscient? Yes. Is he omnipotent? It depends on what you mean. Is he eternal? Sort of. Is he God? You decide.

# ? Mar 12, 2022 19:05

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 23, 2024 09:17

Schwarzwald: Jul 27, 2004; Don't Blink

SlothfulCobra posted:

also there's a giant bat demon in the mix.

well why not, really

# ? Mar 12, 2022 19:13

Arivia: Mar 17, 2011

Reveilled posted:

Apparently though, while he publically backed down and toed the line, he seems to have sent a letter to Ao's luminous manager who backed him up a few editions later:

Of course technically they haven't actually said it's gone, but I don't see them ever referring to it as a thing that exists in future based on that. If there's no way to find out it exists without going out of your way to read previous edition content, for all practical purposes it doesn't exist any more, since any players who don't have a lore nerd proclivity or a pre-5e experience of the setting will never know it exists.

I've never been much convinced by the idea that the wall is necessary somehow, since the fact it was created when Myrkul came to power cements that relatively speaking the wall is fairly new, less than two millenia old, and it was seemingly not necessary for the vast majority of all of existence. Insofar as it is necessary, it is only so because Ao has willed it so, and Ao could just, y'know, will something else. It also creates some kind of weird conflicts with the religions in Kara-Tur, Zakhara and Maztica.

If my players ever do decide to go crusading, I have a few ideas lying about on how to kill Kelemvor, how to disable or bypass the fugue plane and so on, that they can pursue. Then Ao can decide if he wants to directly step in and for a change actually personally interact with some mortals who are blowing up his precious wall, or he can come up with a new system that's not so monstrously evil. But until then the Wall stays up, at least at my table.

It's important to know that the D&D designers on 5e have publicly said they don't consider anything other than the actual 5e game book products canon so making critical comparisons between editions is now sadly illegible. Of course, whatever works for you and your game is what matters most.

The Wall's necessity was reiterated when the relationship between Powers and mortals was reconstructed after the Time of Troubles, so when Cyric and then Kelemvor were gods of the dead. It's entirely possible it wasn't necessary beforehand, but it was explicitly so afterwards (and frankly as horrible as the Wall is, I shudder to think of what utter nightmare Jergal had going beforehand.) And yes, you're right that it's never really connected to the non-Faerunian pantheons, I think there's a note in the Player's Guide to Faerun for 3e that they have their own separate afterlives.

# ? Mar 12, 2022 20:00

Reveilled: Apr 19, 2007; Take up your rifles

Owlofcreamcheese posted:

He was born thousands of years before that word existed.

Exactly. So your claim that he was a pre-modern buddhist who described himself as an atheist is false, isn't it?

I understand what the buddhist viewpoint on the gods is. What I'm disputing is your contention that, pre-modernity, this would have been recognised by its adherents as a form of atheism. And remember that the key point here is that we're hypothesising what it would make sense for an individual in a fantasy setting with a polytheistic faith who self-describes as an atheist to believe, and what positions they would hold that would distinguish them from a theist in such a setting.

If you take someone with beliefs like this:

Toph Bei Fong posted:

https://tricycle.org/trikedaily/buddha-god-human/

And drop them in a standard fantasy setting, this individual is a theist. Your average denizen of Rome or Waterdeep is going to recognise this as a novel but entirely valid theistic viewpoint. And if they wouldn't treat it as atheism, and the adherents wouldn't consider it atheism, it's not really a good model for what our hypothetical fantasy atheist would believe.

# ? Mar 12, 2022 20:15

Triskelli: Sep 27, 2011; I AM A SKELETON
WITH VERY HIGH
STANDARDS

Josef bugman posted:

Not exactly. You see the God learners represent Imperialism, so they expanded too much and collapsed and were not "correct" just because they were powerful. They tried to switch too grain goddesses who possessed the same runes to "prove" there was no difference. When they did Millet wouldn't grow for one half of the swappers, and for the other marriages would not last longer than a year. It was an understanding based on flattening all culture to serve the ends of the dominant one and, as always, it failed because it did not appreciate or understand, it assigned.

Right but the ability to extract and relocate the gods themselves, or summoning up long forgotten ones seems to imply they have a deeper understanding of metaphysics than anyone, and only the Lunar Empire is anywhere close to attempting similar feats.

# ? Mar 12, 2022 20:41

Toph Bei Fong: Feb 29, 2008

I think we have some competing definitions of atheist going on here.

Atheist as in "Does not believe in the existence of gods" vs "Does not worship the gods, regardless of their existence"

The former is a rather modern understanding of religion, and something foolish to do in settings where the evidence of one's own eyes would prove the existence of multiple gods who regularly perform miracles and give their servants tremendous powers in exchange for worship.

The latter makes more sense in many games, as one can easily imagine a character who refuses to worship out of some personal motivation (i.e. anger, spite, jealously). See, for example, Hrafnkels saga

# ? Mar 12, 2022 20:58

Xiahou Dun: Jul 16, 2009; We shall dive down through black abysses... and in that lair of the Deep Ones we shall dwell amidst wonder and glory forever.

Toph Bei Fong posted:

I think we have some competing definitions of atheist going on here.

Atheist as in "Does not believe in the existence of gods" vs "Does not worship the gods, regardless of their existence"

The former is a rather modern understanding of religion, and something foolish to do in settings where the evidence of one's own eyes would prove the existence of multiple gods who regularly perform miracles and give their servants tremendous powers in exchange for worship.

The latter makes more sense in many games, as one can easily imagine a character who refuses to worship out of some personal motivation (i.e. anger, spite, jealously). See, for example, Hrafnkels saga

Reveilled is being very specific and consistent about meaning the former for this conversation.

Also I want to see the translation notes for anyone bringing up something from another language that says �god�, full stop, we can�t proceed until then. I know how loaded that is in any languages I speak and I�m wary of it in others.

# ? Mar 12, 2022 21:29

Killer robot: Sep 6, 2010; I was having the most wonderful dream. I think you were in it!; Pillbug

Toph Bei Fong posted:

I think we have some competing definitions of atheist going on here.

Atheist as in "Does not believe in the existence of gods" vs "Does not worship the gods, regardless of their existence"

The former is a rather modern understanding of religion, and something foolish to do in settings where the evidence of one's own eyes would prove the existence of multiple gods who regularly perform miracles and give their servants tremendous powers in exchange for worship.

The latter makes more sense in many games, as one can easily imagine a character who refuses to worship out of some personal motivation (i.e. anger, spite, jealously). See, for example, Hrafnkels saga

That's exactly the point though. It would not make sense to be a real world atheist in those settings in the same way that it would not make sense to disbelieve in ghosts. Or to disbelieve in alien encounters in a world where they're landed and at the UN. This seems to discomfit some atheists in much the same way that fantasy worlds with explicitly non-Christian cosmology discomfits some Christian fantasy fans. But it makes a little less sense since the case for real-world atheism is the lack of evidence for real world divinity, and "what if fake poo poo were real" is a core fantasy conceit.

# ? Mar 12, 2022 21:34

Reveilled: Apr 19, 2007; Take up your rifles

Toph Bei Fong posted:

I think we have some competing definitions of atheist going on here.

Atheist as in "Does not believe in the existence of gods" vs "Does not worship the gods, regardless of their existence"

The former is a rather modern understanding of religion, and something foolish to do in settings where the evidence of one's own eyes would prove the existence of multiple gods who regularly perform miracles and give their servants tremendous powers in exchange for worship.

The latter makes more sense in many games, as one can easily imagine a character who refuses to worship out of some personal motivation (i.e. anger, spite, jealously). See, for example, Hrafnkels saga

I think both of those definitions make sense as atheism, but the understanding I have of owlofcreamcheese's "atheism" is that it's neither of these, it's "Thinks the gods are merely particularly powerful magical beings", and my objection isn't that this is a silly position for an atheist to take, it's that it is not a particularly controversial position for a theist to hold. Like, it's an objection to the gods that comes across as a complete non-sequitur, since you don't need to believe that a god is "special" or "different" from merely being a particularly powerful magical being to do sacrifice to get blessings or ward curses, and you don't need to believe Lathander has some ephemeral spark of divinity (even if, as it happens, he does) to hope that he takes you into his service in the afterlife.

# ? Mar 12, 2022 21:37

Arivia: Mar 17, 2011

Reveilled posted:

I think both of those definitions make sense as atheism, but the understanding I have of owlofcreamcheese's "atheism" is that it's neither of these, it's "Thinks the gods are merely particularly powerful magical beings", and my objection isn't that this is a silly position for an atheist to take, it's that it is not a particularly controversial position for a theist to hold. Like, it's an objection to the gods that comes across as a complete non-sequitur, since you don't need to believe that a god is "special" or "different" from merely being a particularly powerful magical being to do sacrifice to get blessings or ward curses, and you don't need to believe Lathander has some ephemeral spark of divinity (even if, as it happens, he does) to hope that he takes you into his service in the afterlife.

Lathander is on the list of 10 or so deities that definitely demonstrably has a divine spark hes�s been hosed with so much. Poor guy.

# ? Mar 12, 2022 21:58

narm00: Feb 18, 2006

Owlofcreamcheese posted:

Ha, I was going to say marvel has stuck for a while with ONE-ABOVE-ALL as the impossibly unknowable god that was only briefly shown and existed beyond all the comic book stuff for a while. But looks like the last 2 years of comics I haven't read have been a huge story about introducing evil ONE-BELOW-ALL which they will have to fight and the admission of ONE-ABOVE-ALL that he is not actually all powerful and might not be the actual highest power.

I think it's basically impossible to keep an unknowable god in long running escalating power fiction that has other gods. Someone eventually writes "what if we fought it!" no matter how impossibly distant and powerful it was originally written.

This was mainly in Immortal Hulk (now finished), and they had the big confrontation with the One-Below-All('s vessel) in the finale, stopping its current plan... and a big implication was that the One-Below-All was essentially the One-Above-All's Hulk equivalent.

# ? Mar 12, 2022 22:18

Reveilled: Apr 19, 2007; Take up your rifles

Arivia posted:

Lathander is on the list of 10 or so deities that definitely demonstrably has a divine spark hes�s been hosed with so much. Poor guy.

The various heresies surrounding Lathander and Amaunator are one of the go-to things I use to explain why I like FR as a setting, how FR religion is weird and overlapping and messy in a way that feels very realistic for a setting which have actual gods vying for influence over varying domains and mortals who only kinda sorta understand what's going on above their heads.

# ? Mar 12, 2022 22:22

Arivia: Mar 17, 2011

Reveilled posted:

The various heresies surrounding Lathander and Amaunator are one of the go-to things I use to explain why I like FR as a setting, how FR religion is weird and overlapping and messy in a way that feels very realistic for a setting which have actual gods vying for influence over varying domains and mortals who only kinda sorta understand what's going on above their heads.

I like you.

# ? Mar 12, 2022 23:38

Fighting Trousers: May 17, 2011; Does this excite you, girl?

The Something Awful Forums� Debate & Discussion � Tabletop Games Have Some Weird ~~Politics~~ Theology

Fighting Trousers fucked around with this message at 01:30 on Mar 13, 2022

# ? Mar 12, 2022 23:38

Owlofcreamcheese: May 22, 2005; Can't post for 9 years!; Buglord

Reveilled posted:

I think both of those definitions make sense as atheism, but the understanding I have of owlofcreamcheese's "atheism" is that it's neither of these, it's "Thinks the gods are merely particularly powerful magical beings", and my objection isn't that this is a silly position for an atheist to take, it's that it is not a particularly controversial position for a theist to hold. Like, it's an objection to the gods that comes across as a complete non-sequitur, since you don't need to believe that a god is "special" or "different" from merely being a particularly powerful magical being to do sacrifice to get blessings or ward curses, and you don't need to believe Lathander has some ephemeral spark of divinity (even if, as it happens, he does) to hope that he takes you into his service in the afterlife.

I'm saying, a level 2 wizard with a rope and a pinch of powdered corn can create a pocket universe. That saps a lot of the transmundane out of meeting the guy that created the universe. A whole universe is a big spell, but not too different in kind. A fantasy world atheist would see a title like god as needless puffery. Like the aliens from stargate, they really existed, they were far more powerful than the Egyptians, they just weren't capital G "Gods", they were just guys saying they were gods to make themselves feel special and exploit people easier. The "fire god" granting a cleric level 9 spells might not seem so special to the warlock that gets the same thing by owning a particularly evil sword or having met a genie once.

# ? Mar 13, 2022 00:48

Xiahou Dun: Jul 16, 2009; We shall dive down through black abysses... and in that lair of the Deep Ones we shall dwell amidst wonder and glory forever.

Owlofcreamcheese posted:

I'm saying, a level 2 wizard with a rope and a pinch of powdered corn can create a pocket universe. That saps a lot of the transmundane out of meeting the guy that created the universe. A whole universe is a big spell, but not too different in kind. A fantasy world atheist would see a title like god as needless puffery. Like the aliens from stargate, they really existed, they were far more powerful than the Egyptians, they just weren't capital G "Gods", they were just guys saying they were gods to make themselves feel special and exploit people easier. The "fire god" granting a cleric level 9 spells might not seem so special to the warlock that gets the same thing by owning a particularly evil sword or having met a genie once.

And what the hell does this have to do with Buddhism?

# ? Mar 13, 2022 02:15

Reveilled: Apr 19, 2007; Take up your rifles

Owlofcreamcheese posted:

I'm saying, a level 2 wizard with a rope and a pinch of powdered corn can create a pocket universe. That saps a lot of the transmundane out of meeting the guy that created the universe. A whole universe is a big spell, but not too different in kind. A fantasy world atheist would see a title like god as needless puffery. Like the aliens from stargate, they really existed, they were far more powerful than the Egyptians, they just weren't capital G "Gods", they were just guys saying they were gods to make themselves feel special and exploit people easier. The "fire god" granting a cleric level 9 spells might not seem so special to the warlock that gets the same thing by owning a particularly evil sword or having met a genie once.

Why though? What makes the title "god" puffery? That point of view only makes sense if you're coming from a world where the default meaning of god is like, the abrahamic god. Absent that context, it's just a name for the particular class of supernatural entity that these beings fall into. It's like saying that the title "ghost" is puffery. I think the fact that you reach for "the guy that created the universe" is telling--that's how monotheists understand the idea of god, but it's not how polytheists would understand the term. Like, just consider Deverra, Roman goddess of midwives and brooms. I don't think anyone's expected to be impressed by Deverra, goddess of brooms. If these entities are not gods to this hypothetical atheist, what is a god? How has the atheist arrived at this definition, within the context of this universe?

# ? Mar 13, 2022 02:37

Owlofcreamcheese: May 22, 2005; Can't post for 9 years!; Buglord

Xiahou Dun posted:

And what the hell does this have to do with Buddhism?

Buddhism is a real world religion that has people that see gods as existent but just as just another type of guy

# ? Mar 13, 2022 15:32

Xiahou Dun: Jul 16, 2009; We shall dive down through black abysses... and in that lair of the Deep Ones we shall dwell amidst wonder and glory forever.

Owlofcreamcheese posted:

Buddhism is a real world religion that has people that see gods as existent but just as just another type of guy

This is like 5 [citation needed]s in a trenchcoat trying to sneak into an adult argument.

Buddhism is a complicated belief system with multiple, mutually incompatible sub-groups just in the culture I'm familiar with, and you've provided no evidence that this is the case.

I really only know the history of Buddhism in China enough to talk about it with any degree of authority, but I can tell you that you're straight up wrong there. You're keying off the fact that some words are translated as "god" and taking that as evidence, when it's at best an unreliable translation of a complicated cultural ideal.

You're taking a Wikipedia summary of a bad translation of an entire loving religion as evidence and it's really hosed up.

# ? Mar 13, 2022 18:00

Shrecknet: Jan 2, 2005

Xiahou Dun posted:

You're taking a Wikipedia summary of a bad translation of an entire loving religion as evidence and it's really hosed up.

welcome to the OOCC experience! :psyduck:

# ? Mar 13, 2022 19:13

Vulpes Vvardenfell: Jan 30, 2011

Owlofcreamcheese posted:

I'm saying, a level 2 wizard with a rope and a pinch of powdered corn can create a pocket universe. That saps a lot of the transmundane out of meeting the guy that created the universe. A whole universe is a big spell, but not too different in kind. A fantasy world atheist would see a title like god as needless puffery. Like the aliens from stargate, they really existed, they were far more powerful than the Egyptians, they just weren't capital G "Gods", they were just guys saying they were gods to make themselves feel special and exploit people easier. The "fire god" granting a cleric level 9 spells might not seem so special to the warlock that gets the same thing by owning a particularly evil sword or having met a genie once.

This sounds kind of like the beliefs of the Athar in Planescape.

# ? Mar 13, 2022 20:21

Bony-Eared Assfish: Oct 4, 2018

Vulpes Vvardenfell posted:

This sounds kind of like the beliefs of the Athar in Planescape.

It's literally what Athar NPC Kesto Brighteyes does, he sets up public shows of his illusion magics creating "worlds" and "living beings" and asking watchers what exactly is the difference between him and the Powers other than that they are better at this.

# ? Mar 14, 2022 10:35

Owlofcreamcheese: May 22, 2005; Can't post for 9 years!; Buglord

Xiahou Dun posted:

I really only know the history of Buddhism in China enough to talk about it with any degree of authority, but I can tell you that you're straight up wrong there. You're keying off the fact that some words are translated as "god" and taking that as evidence, when it's at best an unreliable translation of a complicated cultural ideal.

It doesn't sound like you are disagreeing, Devas being extremely godlike but not "Gods" is exactly what I'm saying. They are very powerful and a buddhist may believe they exist, but can still say they don't believe in "gods". Some do say they believe in gods, or say specific beings are different than the others and some are Gods, but I think it's rare to see buddhism generally described as polytheistic, it has lots of supernatural entities, but few or no Gods.

This is how an atheist wizard would see the universe. Belief in very powerful beings existing, disbelief they are separate and above the systems of the universe. They play by the same rules as he does, just with vastly more tools to play with within those rules. A very enlightened wizard might start to understand there is a player's handbook with rules even the gods follow and the gods didn't write those rules and are just as subject to them as anyone else (even if they have far more tools to interact with them more favorably).

# ? Mar 14, 2022 14:53

Captain Oblivious: Oct 12, 2007; I'm not like other posters

Owlofcreamcheese posted:

It doesn't sound like you are disagreeing, Devas being extremely godlike but not "Gods" is exactly what I'm saying. They are very powerful and a buddhist may believe they exist, but can still say they don't believe in "gods". Some do say they believe in gods, or say specific beings are different than the others and some are Gods, but I think it's rare to see buddhism generally described as polytheistic, it has lots of supernatural entities, but few or no Gods.

This is how an atheist wizard would see the universe. Belief in very powerful beings existing, disbelief they are separate and above the systems of the universe. They play by the same rules as he does, just with vastly more tools to play with within those rules. A very enlightened wizard might start to understand there is a player's handbook with rules even the gods follow and the gods didn't write those rules and are just as subject to them as anyone else (even if they have far more tools to interact with them more favorably).

Most Buddhists are gonna have no reservations talking about gods. That you are stepping in to say �yeah but they don�t MEAN gods according to my Abrahamic understanding of the word� is ethnocentric/chauvinistic as fuuuuuuck and you should probably shut the gently caress up.

Jesus christ fucks like you are why we still have to unwind all the British projections onto Zoroastrianism.

# ? Mar 14, 2022 15:09

Owlofcreamcheese: May 22, 2005; Can't post for 9 years!; Buglord

Captain Oblivious posted:

Most Buddhists are gonna have no reservations talking about gods. That you are stepping in to say �yeah but they don�t MEAN gods according to my Abrahamic understanding of the word� is ethnocentric/chauvinistic as fuuuuuuck and you should probably shut the gently caress up.

What, I think you have this totally backwards.

It's Europeans that would try and talk about the Buddhist sun god or something and the Buddhists that would be like "lol, what? no, we don't have a sun god, what are you talking about?"

# ? Mar 14, 2022 15:19

Xiahou Dun: Jul 16, 2009; We shall dive down through black abysses... and in that lair of the Deep Ones we shall dwell amidst wonder and glory forever.

Owlofcreamcheese posted:

What, I think you have this totally backwards.

It's Europeans that would try and talk about the Buddhist sun god or something and the Buddhists that would be like "lol, what? no, we don't have a sun god, what are you talking about?"

What word in what language do you think you�re talking about when you say �god� in a Buddhist context?

It�s like trying to talk about Scoville heat units per pound per square inch : you�re using a technical word for one thing in a totally different context and expecting it to work. Buddhism has its own cosmologies that interact with other parts of culture(s), so you can�t do this 1 to 1, find-replace bullshit.

# ? Mar 14, 2022 15:26

Owlofcreamcheese: May 22, 2005; Can't post for 9 years!; Buglord

Xiahou Dun posted:

What word in what language do you think you�re talking about when you say �god� in a Buddhist context?

It�s like trying to talk about Scoville heat units per pound per square inch : you�re using a technical word for one thing in a totally different context and expecting it to work. Buddhism has its own cosmologies that interact with other parts of culture(s), so you can�t do this 1 to 1, find-replace bullshit.

I think you are very angrily agreeing with me.

# ? Mar 14, 2022 15:35

Reveilled: Apr 19, 2007; Take up your rifles

Owlofcreamcheese posted:

It doesn't sound like you are disagreeing, Devas being extremely godlike but not "Gods" is exactly what I'm saying. They are very powerful and a buddhist may believe they exist, but can still say they don't believe in "gods". Some do say they believe in gods, or say specific beings are different than the others and some are Gods, but I think it's rare to see buddhism generally described as polytheistic, it has lots of supernatural entities, but few or no Gods.

This is how an atheist wizard would see the universe. Belief in very powerful beings existing, disbelief they are separate and above the systems of the universe. They play by the same rules as he does, just with vastly more tools to play with within those rules. A very enlightened wizard might start to understand there is a player's handbook with rules even the gods follow and the gods didn't write those rules and are just as subject to them as anyone else (even if they have far more tools to interact with them more favorably).

But again, this relies on the idea that theists in the setting our atheist wizard inhabits would see this viewpoint as wrong. And the examples I provided speak to the fact that no, this is a viewpoint that's essentially consistent with "standard" historical polytheistic viewpoints. This is how a theist wizard could see the universe.

# ? Mar 14, 2022 15:38

Xiahou Dun: Jul 16, 2009; We shall dive down through black abysses... and in that lair of the Deep Ones we shall dwell amidst wonder and glory forever.

Owlofcreamcheese posted:

I think you are very angrily agreeing with me.

No because I know enough to not make the comparison.

Define your terms.

# ? Mar 14, 2022 15:48

Owlofcreamcheese: May 22, 2005; Can't post for 9 years!; Buglord

Xiahou Dun posted:

No because I know enough to not make the comparison.

Define your terms.

Define your terms. Why would a buddhist think of Lorth as a "god"

(USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)

# ? Mar 14, 2022 16:25

Xiahou Dun: Jul 16, 2009; We shall dive down through black abysses... and in that lair of the Deep Ones we shall dwell amidst wonder and glory forever.

Owlofcreamcheese posted:

Define your terms. Why would a buddhist think of Lorth as a "god"

It�s your assertion that Buddhism has anything to do with this fantasy bullshit. You�re making a claim.

Slow day at work?

# ? Mar 14, 2022 16:43

Triskelli: Sep 27, 2011; I AM A SKELETON
WITH VERY HIGH
STANDARDS

Still gotta give major respect to Eberron for not having an active pantheon and sealed off from all the other DnD cosmologies.

# ? Mar 14, 2022 17:43

Mormon Star Wars: Aug 13, 2005; It's a minotaur race...

The only fantasy RPG with good religion is GURPS Banestorm, because half the population of Yrth are on the The Straight Path. Even goblins!

# ? Mar 15, 2022 10:22

NikkolasKing: Apr 3, 2010

I really enjoy Fantasy Religions because of the intense cultural relativism. Stuff like in Pathfinder with Zon-Kuthon saving Nidal from certain destruction. "Evil" is just a part of the setting, a part of peoples' lives. "My god/goddess is part of my heritage and my people owe them everything."

Such is my thinking, anyway. Execution tends to be blander than that but oh well. I mostly just read lore books and think on this stuff myself, anyway.

# ? Mar 15, 2022 10:46

90s Cringe Rock: Nov 29, 2006

There's always T�kumel but setting aside the weird child sacrifice it turns out the creator was publishing ss revenge fanfic through a serious white nationalist press.

# ? Mar 15, 2022 10:49

Josef bugman: Nov 17, 2011; Pictured: Poster prepares to celebrate Holy Communion (probablY)

This avatar made possible by a gift from the Religionthread Posters Relief Fund

Triskelli posted:

Right but the ability to extract and relocate the gods themselves, or summoning up long forgotten ones seems to imply they have a deeper understanding of metaphysics than anyone, and only the Lunar Empire is anywhere close to attempting similar feats.

One doesn't need to have a deep understanding of something to be able to use it to hit other people round the head with it. The user of a firearm does not have more knowledge about gunpowder just because they are using one.

The metaphysics of the setting are based on both the push and pull of human factors alongside larger mythic ones. The inherent flaw in attempting to use an understanding of things in order to impose your own will on the situation without realising that you are just storing up consequences for a letter time. Arkat, for all his dickishness, understood this and influenced the world by understanding its metaphysics but also through respecting them.

He understood that the most important thing to do was to respect what you are doing and who is giving you power, whilst also fulfilling your objectives. There is a reason that he retired to a farm having killed Nysalor.

# ? Mar 15, 2022 11:34

Mormon Star Wars: Aug 13, 2005; It's a minotaur race...

90s Cringe Rock posted:

There's always T�kumel but setting aside the weird child sacrifice it turns out the creator was publishing ss revenge fanfic through a serious white nationalist press.

What white nationalist press was publishing Muhammed Abdulrahman Barker?

# ? Mar 15, 2022 12:31

90s Cringe Rock: Nov 29, 2006

Mormon Star Wars posted:

What white nationalist press was publishing Muhammed Abdulrahman Barker?

These chaps.

Serpent's Walk, written under a pseudonym.

# ? Mar 15, 2022 12:45

Mormon Star Wars: Aug 13, 2005; It's a minotaur race...

90s Cringe Rock posted:

These chaps.

Serpent's Walk, written under a pseudonym.

Oh my God, that sucks.

# ? Mar 15, 2022 13:01

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 23, 2024 09:17

Xander77: Apr 6, 2009; Fuck it then. For another pit sandwich and some 'tater salad, I'll post a few more.

It feels like "a modern day definition of an atheist, someone who outright doesn't believe the gods exist, wouldn't really work in a universe where the gods are demonstrably real. But they might refer to a deist or theist, who doesn't believe the gods are anthropomorphic \ deserving of worship, as an atheist" isn't that complex of a notion.

https://talesoftimesforgotten.com/2019/09/18/what-evidence-is-there-for-atheism-in-ancient-greece/

# ? Mar 15, 2022 13:31

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > Tabletop Games Have Weird Politics: If the players bring about Jesus' death, great!

«‹›47 »