The Campaign Builder's Guild

Quote from: MythMageCan you name a few such polytheisms so I can see what you're talking about?

Perhaps you misread my post. As I stated that:

Quote from: GhostmanI don't recall any examples of polytheist religions where a change in the power structure/usurpation actually led to the new biggest god on the block being less tolerant of other powers.

Quote from: MythMagePossible, but it seems more likely to me that such a being sees them as not worthy of any fear (and thus don't require a grand effort to kill them off). After all, complacency's a big part of what leads many primordial gods to defeat in multi-generational pantheons, isn't it?

Going by examples, that very same complacency would be the expected behaviour for the new top dog also, wouldn't it?

Also, I think the idea that a god would want to kill all other gods of lesser power just so that he could be unchallenged, is something that should not be assumed as default behavior - regardless of whether he's the original #1 or the usurper. Such an assumption can be justified if the god has been assigned specific personality traits (eg. paranoia, great ambition) but not when we're speaking of pantheons *in general*. Most gods in polytheisms seem to enjoy the company of other gods to some degree at least, and would probably not opt for eternal solitude for the sake of unchallenged power.

That brings up another interesting angle for comparing many gods vs single god cosmologies: monotheist gods seem to have no problem with being alone. Of course, that might just be because they've never known anything else?

Quote from: GhostmanThat brings up another interesting angle for comparing many gods vs single god cosmologies: monotheist gods seem to have no problem with being alone. Of course, that might just be because they've never known anything else?

I think it has more to do with the fact that Monotheistic Gods are (almost always) omniscient, omnipresent and Omnipotent. Not to mention that many Monotheistic Gods have a much closer and more direct relationship with their followers.

Quote from: Elemental_ElfI think it has more to do with the fact that Monotheistic Gods are (almost always) omniscient, omnipresent and Omnipotent.

can't[/i] know - can't conceive - of anything else.  Unless, of course, the cosmology changes.

Now that might be interesting - new deities arrive in a world/plane/reality once inhabited by only one, single, omnipresent god.  Suddenly, the god isn't absolutely everywhere; for the first time, it perceives an "other" to its "self," and it isn't present within that other.  It has gone in an instant from "I am the world" to "I am part of the world" with no warning or the least bit of mental preparedness to deal with this complete paradigm shift.  Cue the divine nervous breakdown.

Quote from: Ghostman

Quote from: MythMageCan you name a few such polytheisms so I can see what you're talking about?

Perhaps you misread my post. As I stated that:

Quote from: GhostmanI don't recall any examples of polytheist religions where a change in the power structure/usurpation actually led to the new biggest god on the block being less tolerant of other powers.

:) I'm sorry, there's a misunderstanding here, but not the one you think. I wasn't asking for you to offer examples for the position you disagreed with. I was asking for examples that countered my position. That is, can you give any example of a polytheism that became a virtual monotheism, and then the new head god didn't push aside all the others more or less completely? I can't think of any polytheistic system that actually became monotheistic at all, rather than a polytheism simply being pretty much replaced by a new religion altogether.

Quote from: Ghostman

Quote from: MythMagePossible, but it seems more likely to me that such a being sees them as not worthy of any fear (and thus don't require a grand effort to kill them off). After all, complacency's a big part of what leads many primordial gods to defeat in multi-generational pantheons, isn't it?

Going by examples, that very same complacency would be the expected behaviour for the new top dog also, wouldn't it?

Just the opposite. If a primordial god fell that way earlier in the history of that world, the new top dog will want to avoid suffering the same fate. Even without such a past example, the new top dog managed to grow from merely one god among many to the greatest - that god would have to be quite unwise not to realize another god could follow suit the same way (you know, unless their ascension really was a unique event).

Quote from: GhostmanAlso, I think the idea that a god would want to kill all other gods of lesser power just so that he could be unchallenged, is something that should not be assumed as default behavior - regardless of whether he's the original #1 or the usurper. Such an assumption can be justified if the god has been assigned specific personality traits (eg. paranoia, great ambition) but not when we're speaking of pantheons *in general*. Most gods in polytheisms seem to enjoy the company of other gods to some degree at least, and would probably not opt for eternal solitude for the sake of unchallenged power.

Fair enough. I concede that point. I didn't mean that the god wanted to kill all the rivals, just sever their power bases and thus render them nearly harmless. You're right that a NG/CG/CN god would probably be pretty liberal with lesser gods, while a LG or LN god seems more likely to carefully dominate rather than outright crush the power of rivals. Although if the god ascends to become omnipresent, then they may not have any risk of solitude issues.

This is an all around fascinating discussion.  I myself have a world dominated by a monotheistic religion

My world is relatively low magic, and while what magic there is is often connected to members of faith, it remains ambiguous as to whether their power truly comes from the God, or from some inborn talent.  Furthermore, channeling of divine power often requires a special material.  Since I have both a monotheistic and a polytheistic religion in conflict, it is fundamental to the overall fabric of the world that there be enough room for doubt that the different religions would have a basis for struggling.  

Quote from: PolycarpIt has gone in an instant from "I am the world" to "I am part of the world" with no warning or the least bit of mental preparedness to deal with this complete paradigm shift.  Cue the divine nervous breakdown.

A most intriguing scenario, if the deity in question has fragile enough psyche to be affected in this way. Fuel for an epic story.

Quote from: MythMage:) I'm sorry, there's a misunderstanding here, but not the one you think. I wasn't asking for you to offer examples for the position you disagreed with. I was asking for examples that countered my position. That is, can you give any example of a polytheism that became a virtual monotheism, and then the new head god didn't push aside all the others more or less completely? I can't think of any polytheistic system that actually became monotheistic at all, rather than a polytheism simply being pretty much replaced by a new religion altogether.

Your position that I disagreed with was, with emphasis added:

Quote from: MythMagean up-and-coming young god is more likely to suppress threats to his hegemony

I mentioned that I'm not aware of any examples of this sort of thing, as I was wondering if perhaps you did know of such examples. Since you made the statement, aren't you the one that should present evidence to support it?

I pointed that in polytheist mythologies, it would seem to be the norm than when the old most powerful god is deposed, the new most powerful god simply takes his place and rules thereafter in much the same manner - that is, with a whole bunch of lesser gods around. I don't see why this should not be assumed to be the more likely(OR even equally likely!) case, regardless of how wide is the "gap" of relative power between the head god and the lesser ones.

Quote from: GhostmanI mentioned that I'm not aware of any examples of this sort of thing, as I was wondering if perhaps you did know of such examples. Since you made the statement, aren't you the one that should present evidence to support it?

Presenting evidence for it after I already said I didn't have any and conceded the point would seem counterproductive. ;) Evidence either way would be useful in a situation with so little precedence for it, but in the absence thereof, logic and extrapolation from pre-existing examples have to do.

Quote from: PolycarpIt has gone in an instant from "I am the world" to "I am part  of the world" with no warning or the least bit of mental preparedness to deal with this complete paradigm shift. Cue the divine nervous breakdown.

Or it might continue to see itself as "the world" (and may be right), in which case foreign deific influence may constitute a direct violation of the world deity's self. Foreign miracles become literal abuses against the first god, as any manipulation of the world is a manipulation of the god's own self.

Quote from: Spacious Angles

Quote from: PolycarpIt has gone in an instant from "I am the world" to "I am part  of the world" with no warning or the least bit of mental preparedness to deal with this complete paradigm shift. Cue the divine nervous breakdown.

That assumes that a foreign deity could have any influence (magical or otherwise) in a universe that is, literally, one with a single omnipresent deity.

Of course I like the idea of the foreign God perverting and twisting the native deity through divine miracles. How much perversion would need to occur until the native God morphs into something wholly different? Could just 1 spell irrevocably harm the native god?  

Another point would be, god is a living being, incomprehensible to mortals but a living being none the less. Could he not have the divine equivalent to anti-bodies that would swarm upon and destroy the foreign body (i.e. the foreign God)?

Quote from: everything.

And of course, like a child, the confused and thwarted deity might do exactly what children at this age are known for - throw a tantrum.

[quoteOr it might continue to see itself as "the world" (and may be right), in which case foreign deific influence may constitute a direct violation of the world deity's self. Foreign miracles become literal abuses against the first god, as any manipulation of the world is a manipulation of the god's own self.

divine[/i] diseases we're talking about here - they might have a much higher level of consciousness and awareness than the common cold.

Yet another way to look at it could be that as the invasive deities enter the universe (which literally IS the omnipresent god), they effectively become incorporated into that original god's mind as additional personalities. So suddenly you have a schizoid god with multiple, conflicting personalities! Imagine the theological ramifications, if the mortals were to realize this.

Without reading everything (I had a few musings I wanted to post before they're influenced by everyone else's postings), here's a few of my thoughts on the matter.

First, looking at the different interpretations of the Judeo-Christian-Islam God goes to show how a single divinity within a setting can still spawn multiple religions. Depending on the distance of the deity, people could have many interpretations.

I think there are two ways a monotheistic setting can work well: you either need a distant, if not non-intelligent, overdeity, or you need to have a near duality (with a God and a Devil figure). I like the non-intelligent creative energy as a deity, as it allows for countless interpretations.

Quote from: XeviatFirst, looking at the different interpretations of the Judeo-Christian-Islam God goes to show how a single divinity within a setting can still spawn multiple religions. Depending on the distance of the deity, people could have many interpretations.

What's interesting, to me, about the first two religions is just how much the 'human' element was used in their construction. Many of the stories and images in the Old Testament/Torah were influenced by the myths of Babylon (the flood, angels, etc.). The Bible was written by people who did not know Jesus and wrote long after he was dead. To make matters worse, the New Testament was arbitrarily compiled after centuries of debate (the books not chosen were often excluded for equally arbitrary reasons).

Beyond this (and getting slightly back on topic), if God is silent (or 'acts in mysterious ways') then obviously different religious forces will rise up as a means of uniting and codifying a people's culture. So some may see the will of God through the guise of a hundred-god pantheon, each god representing a different (mortally interpreted) aspect/personality of God. Other's may follow the word of a prophet while still other's may see/utilize his will through a more philosophical/life-way -oriented 'religion' (like Buhdism or Taoism). The problem with this is that, in some ways, it may feel too real-life for a fantasy setting (which could be an underlying reason as to why RPG's favor polytheistic rather than monotheistic religions?).