Question about religion

[Laurent MEKKA]

Great

Another question.
Barrinor : "Ranged weapons are shunned as they are a craven?s weapon."
What about Stirling Rangers ? (could be extended to "all rangers of Ithria"). Don't they use bows ?

[Delbareth]

Hey! I didn't notice
You have already made an amazing work!
I've only red the overview and Imarus, but it's clearly much more rich and subtle than what it used to be.
Congratulations!

[David Roomes]

To Delbareth - Imarus got a lot of detail because he was the first one I did. Also, he's a really important god. My goal is to make MOST of the deities as interesting, deep and rich as Imarus. At least, there are certain gods that are fun and they will get a lot of detail. There are other gods that will probably get a bit less detail initially. It depends on the nature of the deity. There are a couple that I have found were hard to write about. But I'm glad you like it so far.

And to Laurent... yes, you are absolutely right! The Stirling Rangers do use bows and they would worship Barrinor. Hmmmm, I had honestly forgotten about them. I rather like the idea of the knights not using bows, but the rangers need to. And yet, they both need to worship Barrinor. I'll have to think about this.

One possible solution is that the laws of Barrinor are interpreted differently for different groups. The knights might be very strict about that law, but the Stirling Rangers are more lax in their observation of the weaponry restrictions. Sort of like different sects worshiping the same god, but having slightly different interpretations. So, that's one idea off the top of my head. I'll have to ponder this one. Anyone have any brilliant ideas to resolve this dilemma?   Or do people think knights should use bows?

[Laurent MEKKA]

As there's different "views" on Christian religions, it could be the same for Barrinor. For "normal" Christian (sorry don't know the right term, I hope it's not offensive), Protestantism is not the right way to worship God but they have no problem with it (in France at least !), but Jehovah Witnesses are not well received and their view is mostly perceived as irresponsible (blood transfusion forbidden), not fun (no birthdays) and too intrusive ("preacher" knocking at your door every sunday to try to convince you...).
So, for the same God, in the same Country, I see without putting too much reflexion in it, 3 ways to worship the same god, the "common" way (in term of number of worshipper), another way with few worshipper here but more in other countries and a little bit more flexible (with pastors that can marry) and another way, mostly unpopular everywhere and seen as "weird".

So we could say the Barrinor Cult is like the Christian religion, popular but not too flexible "by the book" (for "extremists" like Knights and alike...), and the Rangers (and many others, more in some regions, less in others, maybe a few to Strathon,  but more to Stirling, closer to "real world dangers") more tolerant with using range weapons, not seen as shameful, but a way that could be right to Barrinor to deal with savage beasts and bandits without honor that don't deserve an "honorable" way to die.

[Laurent MEKKA]

Heh in fact I'm just saying the same thing as you I think :p

[David Roomes]

Yep, I think we agree. I like the idea of the knights being a bit on the "extremist" side. So, they would tend to be very strict. Hence, no bows for them. But others could be more lax. I'll have to rewrite that page a little bit, but I can make it work. Thanks for catching that.

[Roman]

Is it me or would Ynthari make excellent Jedi-like characters?

One thing I don't really understand (but that might just be my limited intelligence): why are the Ynthari opposed to the Dark Lords? Is it just because the Dark Lords are considered evil and it's simple 'common sense' to be against them? That I could understand, although that seems too simple a reason for a whole faith. If the Ynthari tenets are about body, mind and spirit, then I figure concepts like good and evil are inconsequential. A 'good' person could strive for perfection of body, mind and spirit as much as an 'evil' person could -- unless you believe that perfection of spirit is 'the ultimate good', which I don't. I'd interpret the perfection of spirit as a state that transcends concepts like good and evil. A state of nirvana. Both good and evil people could strive towards that. The former needs to overcome concepts like pity and kindness while the latter needs to overcome concepts like cruelty and egotism. Both sides are obstacles towards the perfection of mind. Hence I could see 'evil people' become Ynthari monks just as easily as 'good people', because good and evil are meaningless in their faith. Or am I missing/misinterpreting something?

On another note: David, is the deity Vallaurias still part of the pantheon? I loved the concept of a Rojavi, so I'd be saddened to see it gone.

[David Roomes]

Roman,

You are correct on several things. The Ynthar should be a bit more "neutral". I agree with you, the tripartite body/mind/spirit philosophy of the Ynthari could be practiced by both the good and the evil. I'll make a slight adjustment to the Ynthar page.

Second, the Ynthar do have a little bit of Jedi flavor to them. Not intentional, but there is a bit of a similarity. If you wanted to run a Jedi like character in Khoras, a disciple of Ynthar would be a great place to start.

Third... Vallaurius lives! Although he got adjusted slightly. Look under the Celestials and you will find "The Three Fates". Three ogre gods of war. One of them is Vallaurius, but modified a bit.

[tanis]

First of all, I just wanted to say that despite my earlier reservations, I'm extremely happy with everything you've done so far with the religions, Dave! Thanks for being awesome, as usual.

As to Barrinor, one way you could do it would be to either have the Stirling Rangers be a splinter group of the faith, a different denomination in utero, as it were, as you've already sort of mentioned.

But you could also have there be some internal issue within the Barrinor faith, where the Rangers worship Barrinor, but suffer some form of discrimination for it. Perhaps a caste-like distinction between the Rangers and the Knights, with only the Knights being able to move up within the rank structure, or something along those lines.

Otherwise, I'm not sure you could reconcile the Rangers with the current version of the faith.

And regarding the Yntharians, I think they are, in some ways, far cooler than Jedi are, but they're certainly similar, being monks devoted to balance and whatnot. Personally, I think that you're right, as far as people of diverse morals and temperaments being able to be Ynthari, but I think that they would be more neutral than "good AND evil", and I suspect than any truly evil individuals would probably be less tolerant of the sort of balance and discipline that is their focus. Not to mention that most Ynthari monks would likely be more focused on developing themselves than practicing said development.

Frankly, I've always gotten a strong Shaolin sort of vibe from them, with a touch of the Tao, where a holistic approach to monastic life serves to make all the aspects better, but the goal is still to remain focused on the practice of one's faith, rather than sojourning far and wide in search of disciples or adventure. Of course, they wouldn't be adverse to adventure, but I suspect it would be more a matter of individual temperament and interest than organizational influence.

As to their dealings with the Dark Lords, frankly, the Dark Lords are all specifically evil, and share common elements of destructiveness, violence, and the favoring of chaos to the exclusion of order. I find it hard to believe that many groups could survive being neutral to these faiths, except those which could be, at least temporarily and for mutual benefit, aligned somehow. The Ynthari would be unlikely to actively wage war on anyone, really, but I suspect that their tenets would preclude being on particularly good terms with most, if not all, of the Dark Lords.

I've always sort of considered things of philosophical interest to be more academic, and, therefore, more in line with the intellect, than the spirit, including issues of morality. When I think of "spiritual" excellence, I think more along the lines of being well-adjusted and in tune with oneself, nature, society, and whatever else, and being able to make one's way, and pursue the things that one feels need pursuing, with a sort of easy passion, something halfway between complete non-action and aloofness on the one hand, and fire and zealotry on the other. Something like nirvana, I suppose.

But nirvana really has very little to do with arguments regarding morality. It's something else, I feel, from what I understand of the concept. Something far more sublime.

As to any argument about good/evil/neutral dispositions, I will say only this: I have known many people, with widely varying moral beliefs, and the vast majority, even those who were decidedly amoral, and vocally so, have been, in my opinion, either good/seeking the good or relatively neutral. It is rare, in my experience, for anyone, regardless of their moral position, to be truly evil, but those who are generally are either mentally ill, or they so revel in their own hatefulness that they are wholly averse to doing anything so edifying as practicing a highly disciplined monastic life.

I suspect they would be more like Jedis. Sure, some of them go dark and do evil things, but they generally have become corrupted, or had the "evil" aspects of their nature come out of balance with the "good" aspects, rather than having been wholly evil from the outset. I guess I just feel that if you're talking in terms of good or evil dispositions, you have to talk about the morality, and if you wish to avoid it, it would be easier to drop those sorts of terms and considerations entirely.

[sid6.7]

just took a couple of days and went through the religion section of khoras and i think you did a stand up job dave the detail is incredible and i too really like the Ynthar way how you threaded it all together is amazing becuase of the detail.

[David Roomes]

Thanks! Glad you like it!

Draxorith (the last of the Dark Lords) and the Kindred Gods are coming soon.

[tanis]

That's great news, Dave.

[sid6.7]

okay i just noticed there are 2 gods of war kael and belhelizar is that because one is worship locally(the Coalition, the War Vale, Vorrik and Duthelm) and the other more world wide?

[tanis]

I could have misunderstood somewhat, but I think the idea is that Kael is a war god that is neutral, but aligned generally with the civilized "good" gods of the Eastern cultures, while Belhelizar is the chief god of "evil", and stands opposed to order and civilization as the god of chaos.

It's not so much that Belhelizar is a war god, as it is that he's a god of destruction, and war is simply one means to destroy the order of civilization and return the world to chaos.

I'm sure Dave will chime in and add anything that I missed or correct any mistaken assumptions I've made, but until then, hopefully this will give you a sense of where I think he was going.

[David Roomes]

Tanis is exactly correct. Belhelizar is chiefly the god of chaos, destruction, war - the antithesis of everything civilized. So, he's more a god of chaos/evil than a god of war.

Kael is purely a god of war. Although he's a member of the Elder Gods, his popularity goes across racial and cultural lines. Hence there's a line in there that says he is often worshiped by soldiers on both sides of a battle.

Other war gods would be worshiped in other geographic regions. Aggradar has a god of war (who will be detailed later), but he's only worshiped in Aggradar.