# Pantheon



## fete67 (Aug 15, 2011)

How do you make your pantheon; do you even have deities in your world?


----------



## Ravana (Aug 16, 2011)

'Fraid I'm gonna have to let this one wait until tomorrow… someone remind me if I miss it, eh?


----------



## Motley (Aug 16, 2011)

I have one world with a god/goddess pair, but no other gods. They come from water sources--the river is the god, a mysterious underground aquifer with accompanying pool, the goddess--and are the sources of what little magic is in the world. They are worshiped in general, and used in curses, but using them is outlawed.

Another of my worlds has occasional mentions of 'the gods,' but they are very much passe, so I haven't bothered to give them names or anything.


----------



## sashamerideth (Aug 16, 2011)

I have a Pantheon of gods, but none of them are real. My people made them up on their own.


----------



## Kaellpae (Aug 16, 2011)

I have three 'gods.'


----------



## fete67 (Aug 16, 2011)

sashamerideth, so you mean that there is no evidence of deities in your world? Are there any forms of higher power in your world?


----------



## sashamerideth (Aug 16, 2011)

Not exactly, the people worship imaginary gods, just like on earth. There is a second people who are human, isolationist manipulators with advanced tech that like to screw with the people on the planet.  The "gods" are blamed and praised for these manipulations but no one in my world knows this.


----------



## Ravana (Aug 16, 2011)

This is a revision of a post I made some months ago. I'll add some specific "pantheon building" notes afterward.
---
One of the problems with religion as an active, effective force is that pretty much either all sides have to be "correct," or else none of them: if only some of them were–that is, if only some religions received aid from their divinities–the others would quickly die out… a sort of Theological Darwinism, if you will. People can _believe_ anything they want, as long as no one is obviously receiving benefits from their worship–essentially, what we have in the real world (if you feel you've received divine assistance before, I'm not going to argue with you): but if god was on anybody's "side," it would be hard to explain why that side ever loses… unless there's also a god pulling for the opposition.

Mind you, that says nothing about the extent to which mortal interpretations of their divinities are "correct": if the god in question doesn't care how it is worshipped, or what strange rituals, mysteries, etc. they buy into, then the religions themselves can vary wildly, even when they're worshipping the same deity. 

Basically, I see the interaction of divinities, religions and the world as breaking down into the following possibilities:

(1) There are no religions (or, alternately, you don't bother writing them, because you aren't interested in that aspect).

(2) Religions receive no overt assistance from divinities.
(2A) There are no divinities; everybody's "wrong."
(2B) One or more divine beings exist, but for whatever reason do not provide overt assistance. (More subtle assistance may be another matter.)
- One very probable reason would be the divinities simply don't care. After all, why should they? (See the final bullet point for more on this.)
- Another is that they can't. Maybe the only "benefits" involve what happens to the soul after death.
(2C) One or more divine beings exist, but have good reasons not to provide overt assistance on a routine basis; exceptional situations, in which they are willing to provide such assistance, may arise, but will be exceedingly rare.
- One possibility would be that the divinities have a tacit–or even overt–agreement to avoid situations which would bring them into direct conflict with one another.

Note that in both (2B) and (2C), it is possible for some religions to be "correct"–that is, have a real but largely inactive patron–and others to be "incorrect."

(3) Religions _do_ receive overt assistance from divinities. This is possibly the most overlooked aspect among writers who create their own deities–as opposed to religions: _what happens when your gods actually exist_? Answer: it changes _everything_. Consider the Greek or Hindu mythologies (the two examples I'm most familiar with): in their stories, the gods manifest in the real world, in person, on a regular basis; they fight at the side of their followers, teach them, make love to them, etc. We're not talking about remote, impersonal forces that "speak" through a priesthood (or so the priests claim…); we're talking about gods who can show up, lay a hand on each of your shoulders, look you in the eye, and say "Listen up! I want you to do it _this_ way.…"

Would you be inclined to do as you're told under those circumstances? 

Here's where it starts to get interesting:
- There will be no "false" religions: any religion that survives, let alone prospers, _will_ be receiving assistance from something. (They may be incorrect, even deceived, as to the nature of this "something." It might not be "divine" at all: it could be an impostor, capable of fulfilling requests magically or even by direct, physical action… but its followers will be getting something for their worship, or they'll turn elsewhere.)
- Who receives assistance may be extended or limited in any number of ways, anything from exclusive priestly hierarchies being the sole mediators of divine power, to anyone invoking the deity's name–perhaps even insincerely–receiving some benefit.
- What benefits are extended can also vary wildly, and may depend upon the deity's sphere of activity, the petitioner making suitable sacrifice, or just about any other factor imaginable. Benefits may be extended automatically (even unconsciously) at some levels, with restrictions at others. (It's easy to imagine more popular divinities being "busy" much of the time, as they get bombarded by invocations, if the extension of their benefits is not unconscious… though they can always have "staffs"–angels, saints, etc.–dealing with "minor" requests.)
- What will _not_ happen, _ever_, is one religion's followers receiving significantly greater benefits than any other: this would result in "natural selection" again. This does not mean that there won't be people who follow certain "narrow" religions that cater to their interests, only that these will necessarily provide greater benefit _within that area_–i.e. to that individual–than following an otherwise more "favored," widespread (and probably more socially acceptable) faith. Choice of religion–or at least the choice to not follow the locally "dominant" religion, if there is one–becomes a cost-benefit analysis.
- Divinities will almost certainly "care" about their followers' activities to a certain extent, if they are going to lend portions of their power to them (and, again, the ones that don't will probably see their followings diminish over time, for various reasons).
-- Among other things, this means that there will _never_ be actively hostile sectarianism to any great or lasting extent among followers of the same deity. It's hard to see where a deity would find war between its followers to be a good thing–even if it's a war god, or a death god; even then… who receives divine favor in such situations? Both? Then both sides will feel finked out. Neither? Then both sides will wonder why they're bothering with this god instead of one that will help them. Just one side? It wins; heresy stamped out, refer back to previous arguments for why only "real/true" faiths exist.
-- It also means that the religions _will_ conform to the god's wishes, in terms of what the priesthood, and followers in general, are expected to do… because if they ever stray from this, they'll either stop receiving those benefits, or the god (or a messenger thereof) will show up and… "clarify" the issue.

Finally, for (2B), (2C) and especially (3):
- What are the deity's own motives for doing what it does? Why would a "divine" being–whatever that means in your situation–bother doing favors for worshippers? What's the god getting out of it? The answer(s) to this question can go a long way to fleshing out how the religions work… and depending on what they are, they don't have to be the same answer(s) for each individual deity. Here's where I'd recommend putting in serious "character development" work: if you're going to have "real" divinities, as opposed to remote, impersonal abstractions, define them as thoroughly as you would any other character; the results should breathe life into the religions formed around them. Or, to look at it another way, if they're going to be doing work for your characters, make them do some for you, too.


----------



## Ravana (Aug 16, 2011)

Okay: now pantheon building, in specific.

To start with: most "pantheons" in the real world are political entities–that is, the "members" of the pantheon were originally "only" gods of some limited geographical area; when that area was absorbed by some other entity, the god got fit in to the overall structure of the religion. I'm not aware of any pantheon arising _ab initio_… doesn't mean there aren't any, or couldn't be, I'm just not familiar with them. So whether or not you even have a pantheon is up to you, as is whether it formed the way they did in the real world, or whether the gods in question actually were an allied group at the outset.

The first thing you have to do is answer (for yourself) whether or not the gods are real, as previously mentioned. If not, anything goes, as far as what a pantheon might look like. 

If they _are_ real, the next thing you need to decide is whether or not they have unique spheres–i.e. is there a sun god? If there is, there's only going to be _one_ sun god. He might be called by any number of names throughout the world, forms of worship might differ, but there will never be two _real_ sun gods. On the other hand, there might be any number of beings who claim to be sun gods–but the only way they'll get away with this for any length of time is if there _isn't_ an actual god who genuinely controls the sun. 

More flexible would be a sphere such as weather: there may or may not be a god who "controls" weather in general, but weather is a local phenomenon, so there may be any number of gods who can influence the weather within the area they're worshipped… at least as long as the big boss weather god doesn't get offended by this.

Local gods can abound: each city can have its own. These gods may be assigned attributes by their followers that they do not actually possess: it's easy to claim to be a "god of everything" if, within the limited area you're active in, you _can_ influence everything. Again, assuming that any "bigger" gods that exist don't care. Likewise, if the god has a handful of lesser divine servitors (angels, demons, saints, etc.), these might be regarded within that locality as being "gods of X"–possibly whether or not their abilities are even specialized in that area. After all, if you were a "supreme" god, wouldn't you rather assign one of your flunkies to be the local "god of war," rather than seeing one imported from elsewhere, regardless of whether or not said flunky is any better at warfare than anyone else available? Presto… instant "pantheon." 

My usual approaches go one of two ways: 
(1) There are gods who have real power in specific spheres. This means there's only one of each for the entire world. See the previous post for the consequences of this as far as non-sectarianism, etc. are concerned.
(2) There are gods, but none of them specifically _controls_ a given sphere; they may be associated with one (usually several), but there is no _single_ deity who runs/rules the sun, the moon(s), the sea, etc. Most gods have at least some ability to influence just about anything; many will have specific personal interests in which they can influence those matters–or are willing to go to the trouble of influencing them–even in areas where they are not widely worshipped.

The first will produce a fairly consistent pantheon across the entire world, in terms of which gods appear… though of course some gods won't be highly regarded (or even mentioned) in parts of the world to which their sphere doesn't extend (desert nomads probably don't care about sea gods all that much). Whether the names, forms of worship, and so on are similar or different in different areas depends primarily on how much these details matter to the deity. 

The second can produce pretty much anything, from the same result as the first, to myriad separate and rival pantheons… and politics among the deities themselves can strongly influence this. Some areas might have single deities; others might have groups of allied deities; others may follow a variety of deities they regard as allied, but who may in fact have little interest in one another–so long as they aren't actively enemies of one another.


----------



## HÃ«radÃ¯n (Aug 16, 2011)

Yes. There is The Void (or what I like to call the great multi-cosmic vagina) that gave birth to the bubbles who allow space to exist and then the ZieglÃ« (major god) GrospÃ«s who allows time to exist. In one of the universes created by the bubbles there is born a being to control and guide the progression of that universe. One such universe had its being split in two: Ã‹glagor and KÃ«ingi who were called GlÃ«di (gods). The two were lovers and settled on a world during the first Von Grosp (basically several billion years) from there KÃ«ingi started to play with the animals that evolved on that world which was called MÃ«nt (living). Ã‹glagor became jealous and killed all the animals so KÃ«ingi became angry and said she never wanted to see him again. Ã‹glagor became even more enraged and made the entire solar system of MnÃ«nt into UmnmÃ«nt (unliving or dead), traping KÃ«ingi inside. With the creation of UmnmÃ«nt, most of Ã‹glagor's powers were sapped and absorbed by KÃ«ingi, which, in turn, allowed her to escape UmnmÃ«nt and trap Ã‹glagor there. After that she created the twenty QÃ«hoglÃ«di (lesser gods). After the release of Ã‹glagor from UmnmÃ«nt for trying to corrupt the souls that gathered to the dead place, eight betrayed KÃ«ingi and joined Ã‹glagor, while the other twelve stayed loyal. there names are: GrÃ¯sm, Alzi, Hophna (sometimes spelled Hofna), MÃ¯sÃ«ros, Bakra, LardÃ«rkom, Haula, ArÃ«kno, Hodkova, SotÃ«po, Grospi and Yienaq (later renamed herself AmnfradÃ¯n). The ones who left were named HÃ«mishnie, PhraftÃ«n (sometimes spelled FraftÃ«n), Malie, Ã‹throk, JroksÃ«, QÃ«thnir, OndiÃ« and FÃ«sÃ¯mkÃ«nt. Collectively KÃ«ingi and her people are called UthmnglÃ«di. For Ã‹glagor and his people, they are KÃ«thmnglÃ«di. On top of that each of the QÃ«hoglÃ«di can make helpers to do things, but they are not very powerful and in such a large number that few if any are named.
questions? comments?


----------



## Peutra (Aug 17, 2011)

In my fantasy story, there's a place called the "Godlands", with seven gods (subject to change, though, since the names are rather hard to come up with ). They are the ones who created my entire fantasy world, and as time went by, people became more and more aware of their presence. Of course, then there are the "Guardians", who are omnipotent and aren't allowed (by their own rules) to interfere with the flowing time stream. Of course, this is all STC (subject to change) as my story goes by.


----------



## Kevlar (Aug 17, 2011)

Peutra, I have one thing to say, and this goes for anyone creating gods. Don't heed me if you don't want to. Omnipotence is impossible. Not just physically: logically. Say Phil (to avoid religious specification) is 'omnipotent.' Can Phil create a stone that Phil can not lift? If he can, than he can't lift the stone, and therefore isn't omnipotent. If Phil can't create this stone, he is obviously not omnipotent. Just something to think about when creating omnipotent beings. It can backfire.


----------



## Donny Bruso (Aug 17, 2011)

Unless you are intentionally writing about paradoxes, this is unlikely to come up. Anything worthy of the title 'God' or even 'Demi-god' possesses power so far beyond human capabilities, that actual omnipotence is irrelevant. This is the sort of thing that is likely to come up in either A) philosophy class, of B) discussions about the relative power of the gods, which unless you are out to destroy one a la _Elenium_, is rather a moot point, as the chosen God, if he has one iota of sense will look down and obliterate you, you ancestors, your wife's ancestors, your children, your family pets, and probably give you a good godly raspberry at the same time, just to prove he can multi-task.


----------



## Kevlar (Aug 17, 2011)

I agree with you, its not likely to come up in most stories. In mine, however, one of my characters is a cynical, angry young man, bitter about the rape and death of his family nine years past and totally rejects gods. He is likely to bring up the argument with confrontational devouts. (Though I'm not sure if that would be a good idea for the story itself, as people might think I'm out to corrupt them. Meanwhile I don't care what you worship, so long as you're not going around killing for it.) If he were to find out a god existed he might even go so far as to plot its death (or do something else) to prove it isn't omnipotent or immortal. As far as being out to kill a god you've given me some ideas for an unrelated project.

And, sorry if my views on the subject have offended anyone, it was not my intention.

Now back to the original topic:

For me, because my world doesn't actually have a greater power, I look not at the current culture, but at its roots. What would hve been important - not necessarily good - to them? What would they have associated with other things, therefore being the province of one god? Would they consider these things feminine or masculine? (This one doesn't always need asking. Look at Athena. War, not arts or wisdom.) What would the development of the culture change in these gods? For example, a civilization that 'upgraded' from bows to blackpowder would probably start associating the making of said boomdust and guns with their god of the forge.


----------



## HÃ«radÃ¯n (Aug 17, 2011)

Kevlar said:


> Peutra, I have one thing to say, and this goes for anyone creating gods. Don't heed me if you don't want to. Omnipotence is impossible. Not just physically: logically. Say Phil (to avoid religious specification) is 'omnipotent.' Can Phil create a stone that Phil can not lift? If he can, than he can't lift the stone, and therefore isn't omnipotent. If Phil can't create this stone, he is obviously not omnipotent. Just something to think about when creating omnipotent beings. It can backfire.


you can get around that by saying non-logically contradictory omnipotence.


----------



## Ravana (Aug 17, 2011)

RhÃ«adÃ¯n said:


> you can get around that by saying non-logically contradictory omnipotence.



No, you can't—because it isn't possible. If you want something to be omnipotent, it must be logically self-contradictory. The only way out is to say that omnipotent beings aren't subject to the constraints of logic… which, to me, is a cop-out, though it works for others. There are many other problems associated with omnipotence, too—all of which can be avoided simply by changing "all"-powerful to _most_ powerful. If there's nothing else in the universe that's of greater power, does it really matter that the being in question is missing an attribute or two? Especially if nothing else in the universe possesses those attributes either?

Donny's right, though: for your characters, the difference may be irrelevant. On the other hand, mythology gives plenty of examples of gods who, while they were more powerful than mortals, weren't so much more powerful that the occasional mortal couldn't contend with them (often, admittedly, with divine assistance). So there's no reason your deities have to be "omnipotent"—or that the people in your setting have to believe they are, even if they're mistaken about this. And, let's face it, it shouldn't be too hard for a deity to convince the average peasant schmuck that he's "all-powerful."


----------



## sashamerideth (Aug 18, 2011)

You are assuming that a deity must be logical, and that is a restriction you are trying to impose.  Thought experiments are useless when it comes to gods.


----------



## Telcontar (Aug 18, 2011)

I'd agree with that. I'm the first to say that any proposed God has to follow the constraints of logic - but that's through examples given. To use one of the most common constraints, we mere mortals cannot conceive of a square that is ALSO a circle. Our definitions of the two would seem to completely disallow this phenomenon.

Yet, suppose we want to say in a story that a God creates such a thing. Maybe for no other reason than to demonstrate his omnipotence. The reader simply needs to accept that it exists. Hopefully the story is good enough to make the reader _want_ to do this, but that is besides the point. Paradoxes are posed in fiction all the time in order to give a sense of wonder. This is no different. Just because it is impossible in the 'real world' doesn't mean it needs to be impossible in our fictional one.


----------



## Ravana (Aug 18, 2011)

sashamerideth said:


> You are assuming that a deity must be logical, and that is a restriction you are trying to impose.  Thought experiments are useless when it comes to gods.



No, I'm not. You may be, but I'm not. I'm assuming _logic_ must be logical. "Logic" is not something subjective: it is a rigorously defined discipline, with its own well-established rules. Whether these rules apply to deities is more than I could say (and you don't have to have them apply in your writings anyway)… but if or where they do not apply, the deities fall outside of logic. So it is _not_ possible to have "non-logically contradictory omnipotence"–because omnipotence will _always_ lead to logical contradictions. Whether or not such contradictions bother you has nothing to do with whether they exist… and as I already mentioned, there are many people who do not view this with concern: if they do bother you, I'd recommend giving up on the omnipotence part, because otherwise you're stuck with them. 

As for thought experiments being "useless when it comes to gods"–if you believe that, why are you discussing the topic? Thought experiments are precisely what discussions like this are about. Are you saying that gods cannot be imagined? I can certainly imagine mine… I can even imagine them having abilities that inherently violate the rules of logic. So I'm not quite sure what you're trying to say here.…


----------



## fcbkid15 (Aug 18, 2011)

I haven't come up with mine just yet, but I'm going through a few possibilities. I'm stuck between several guardians that keep watch over the world, one all powerful elemental, or, my favorite, four gods, one from each element. The water one watches over the seas, the earth watches over the lands, the air one watches over the skies, and the fire one rules them all. I'll probably go for the last one, but anyone else have any ideas?


----------



## sashamerideth (Aug 18, 2011)

Ravana said:
			
		

> No, I'm not. You may be, but I'm not. I'm assuming logic must be logical. "Logic" is not something subjective: it is a rigorously defined discipline, with its own well-established rules. Whether these rules apply to deities is more than I could say (and you don't have to have them apply in your writings anyway) but if or where they do not apply, the deities fall outside of logic. So it is not possible to have "non-logically contradictory omnipotence"because omnipotence will always lead to logical contradictions. Whether or not such contradictions bother you has nothing to do with whether they exist and as I already mentioned, there are many people who do not view this with concern: if they do bother you, I'd recommend giving up on the omnipotence part, because otherwise you're stuck with them.
> 
> As for thought experiments being "useless when it comes to gods"if you believe that, why are you discussing the topic? Thought experiments are precisely what discussions like this are about. Are you saying that gods cannot be imagined? I can certainly imagine mine I can even imagine them having abilities that inherently violate the rules of logic. So I'm not quite sure what you're trying to say here.



You are confused? How do you think I feel?


----------



## Kevlar (Aug 18, 2011)

Did I start a war?

Anyway, fcbkid15 I personally find the elemental god thing doesn't work if its bare elements, or if, like in yours, they're imbalanced. For instance, I always think of it like each element is weak against another, strong against another, and neutral to the last. They also have a celestial body associated with them, though earth is a little hard sometimes. Also, in my opinion, each is either masculine or feminine, in generality but not exclusively. (If you know what I mean.) Here's an example of what I'd do, though its not well thought out, and simply saying those opposite on the spectrum are hostile doesn' t work for me, because wwater almost always beats fire and earth can't touch air, though its not some sort of governing rule: 

- Fire - Masculine
       Celestial body: the Sun (possibly the stars too, for obvious reasons)
       Compass direction: South
       Strong against: Air. Just cuz it needs to be strong against something, and oxygen is fuel.
       Weak against: Water. No explenation needed.
       Neutral against: Earth. Because dirt can put out fire and fire can melt stone.

- Water - Feminine
       Celestial body: the Moon. It effects the tides after all.
       Compass direction: North
       Strong against: Fire. For obvious reasons.
       Weak against: Earth, for some reason or another. Maybe cuz earth absorbs it, or is too stable? Who knows.
       Neutral against: Air. Just cuz, it makes sense to me.

- Earth - Masculine
       Celestial body: Planets? Earth? Stars? (I know, the last one makes little sense)
       Compass direction: West. Cuz the tradewinds come from the east. And just cuz it seems more right.
       Strong against: Earth
       Weak against: Air. Cuz it can't touch it. Or something.
       Neutral against: Water. Cuz.

- Air - Feminine
       Celestial body: the stars or the black/blue parts of the sky.
       Compass direction: East
       Strong against: Earth. (Erosion?)
       Weak against: Fire
       Neutral against: Water

I'd also add other things, like war and the forge to fire, though forging to earth, as well as healing, and to water maybe organisms and cold/ice. To air perhaps weather... etc. Etc.

Plus, fire can be put out by any of the other elements ,so to me it seems strange to have it as the boss.


----------



## Ravana (Aug 18, 2011)

sashamerideth said:


> You are confused? How do you think I feel?



For the sake of sparing everybody else, I'm willing to continue the conversation in PMs, if you want me to try to clarify further. Otherwise, we probably ought to just drop it.


----------



## Antaus (Aug 18, 2011)

I'm in the process of working out the pantheon in my story, mostly because I'm trying to figure out the gods themselves, and what aspects of reality they cover. War, honor, life, death, ect, ect, without going overboard. The process I go with is fairly simple, figure out the god(dess), what their main focus is, and what other things may be associated with that. Mind you this is subject to change as I flesh things out.


----------



## myrddin173 (Aug 23, 2011)

In my world I have beings that depending on the race/religion are anything from gods to great spirits to angelic beings.  Whether any of these are true is another matter.  Things that are known about the creatures called Winds include that there are seven of them.  Four of them take the appearance of males, three females.  The Four correspond to the four cardinal directions (North, South, East, and West), the Three to the three temporal states (Past, Present, and Future).  Each also corresponds to a theme such as death, the arts, or the unknown.


----------



## Codey Amprim (Aug 24, 2011)

Of course! What created it all then? What created us, now that I think about it? Good question.

Our ancient mythologies from around the globe, whether they be Norse, Greek, Roman, Oriental, Central American, yadda yadda, are ALL fantastic sources for inspiration for your Higher Powers. Godly powers explain and help elements within your story, and might even be the basis of them!

There are many uses for Gods and Goddesses in your world, and they come in particular usefullness for decribing reasons behind events, nature and its bounties, and life upon your world. In the Greek mythologies, the Gods were depicted as having human-like traits, because, after all, we were created in their image. These qualities include personalities, emotion, and ambition. These ambitions and emotions have led to many things in our world like the seasons. Your Gods can have these same qualities instead of being completely perfect, but each has their own benefits and attributes.


My Gods, and there are four. Three males, one female. The female, Amlura, Goddess of Nature, falls in love with and weds Tyr, God of Judgment and Justice. This makes Netharn ( havent really decided his function yet, although it doesn't matter. Read on.) jealous since he had a burning passion for the beautiful Amlura. He then decieves their titan child, Helaran, and kills him. Tyr and Oudan, the God of Wisdom/The Watcher God, imprision Netharn for all of eternity. Netharn destroys himself, but only physically. He divides his being into three different entities; Desranith, Nethilaz, and Behezan - all to even the odds. A battle ensues, but in itself destroys them all and sends them into their havens. Netharn's entities went into the Nether, and Tyr, Oudan, and Amlura into the Heavens.

That's a rough draft of how my God system works, it's harder to explain... you are afterall, creating a mythology and filling a whole world with lore.

Any ideas? I'd love to hear them, thanks :/


----------



## sashamerideth (Aug 24, 2011)

Why is the pantheon important anyways?  If we are going to use religion as a source of conflict then maybe... but by even having gods aren't we setting ourselves up for Deus Ex Machinima?  Using gods as a cheap plot device or a short cut to creating a facade of tension? 

Are our readers going to actually care?


----------



## grahamguitarman (Aug 24, 2011)

I'm still working on my pantheon, but the main concept is that the spread of gods should reflect the spread of needs (eg a god of war, of love, fertility, hunting ect) a good pantheon should be balanced in the same way a good society should be balance (in theory if not in practice) if you have a world with too much war then the balance is upset, same for too much fertility (overpoulation) or wisdom (too many people thinking instead of doing)

this even applies to love, an excess of love can create a society ill equipped to cope with the bad things that can happen in life (imagine a world with an excess of peace loving hippies - how would they deal effectively with crime, we need hippies but we need policemen too) while universal love may seem like a great concept how many of you would actually want to live in a world so loving that nothing exciting ever actually happens because it might upset someone! (after all you all read fantasy novels that are full of conflict)

the gods want variety and movement, they want a world that lives and evolves through the balanced tensions of all the different aspects of their world, and it is the job of the Druids in my world to maintain that equilibrium.

as for interaction there is a back story to why my gods don't physically interfere, basically in the early days when the gods were still perfecting the world their 'Loki' god, a trickster with a love of chaos tried to weave a spell that would create a world of constantly mutating and evolving species - basically evolutionary chaos, seeing the turmoil such uncontrolled and accelerated evolution would cause the other gods joined together to put a ban on the spell.  

But because the universal law of balance means all aspects of heaven & earth must be equal the spell had to include themselves too (or there would have been an imbalance between what one god could do in comparison to another) so in order to protect the world from 'loki' (name TBC) they had to curtail their own ability to interfere in the world.  

Of course if things get too bad in the world they still have the option of lifting the ban if needs be but for the most part they limit their influence to visions & dreams to guide their followers, as this would result in something not unlike armageddon where the different powers struggle to impose their own vision on the world.

in a nutshell if you allow the good gods to interfere physically in the world then you have to allow the bad ones to do the same!


----------



## Emeria (Oct 3, 2011)

The main society in the world I've been creating does not acknowledge that there is a divine presence anywhere (or any deities).  Instead, they view technological advancement as supreme and anyone with technology is considered a higher being than one with lesser technology.  People who do not live in the city often have their deities they worship, but no one knows if they are real or not.  Kind of like the tribal religions in Africa or amongst the Native Americans.  As a result, the main character is rather confused as to what to believe.

In actuality, there is a force of good and a force of evil, but I would hesitate to call them "deities".


----------



## darthbuttchin (Oct 3, 2011)

The little world that is currently being created by me basically resolves around an ancient King who has, over time, grown to become the person they basically worship. I was inspired by the Nazi's and the communists in Russia with this. I know it's not particularly original, but it's not a massive part of the story. It's more a background to what else happens. However, I am quite fond of the idea, it includes things such as huge statues of the king and a mausoleum. Propaganda works hard to keep his memory in favour, as well as mysticism surrounding him (I've made it so that his name has been replaced with a description). It works well to keep the legend alive though.

db


----------



## Helbrecht (Oct 3, 2011)

darthbuttchin said:


> The little world that is currently being created by me basically resolves around an ancient King who has, over time, grown to become the person they basically worship. I was inspired by the Nazi's and the communists in Russia with this. I know it's not particularly original, but it's not a massive part of the story. It's more a background to what else happens. However, I am quite fond of the idea, it includes things such as huge statues of the king and a mausoleum. Propaganda works hard to keep his memory in favour, as well as mysticism surrounding him (I've made it so that his name has been replaced with a description). It works well to keep the legend alive though.
> 
> db



This sounds interesting. Soviet Russia and Nazi Germany didn't go so far as to literally deify their respective dictators. Try North Korea's Eternal President. Kim Jong-Il is only technically head of the country's armed forces and communist party - the office of president is perpetually held by a dead man. It's really quite fascinating, in a morbid and frankly terrifying sort of way. I'd definitely recommend looking into the DPRK if you're writing a society with a heavy cult of personality surrounding a dead ruler. Your ancient king's descendants - the nominal heads of state - could be ruling as eternal regents in the absence of the rightful monarch.

The setting I'm writing at the moment doesn't have any gods that have any sort of power over the world - even any gods that definitely exist, for that matter. Pantheistic systems are generally untouched. A few of my cultures have distinct pantheons of their own, but most of them have trickled away into folklore, having been subsumed by one of three schismatic branches of the setting's dominant religion, which is monotheistic. It's a pretty clear parallel of Judaism, Christianity and Islam (or perhaps Catholicism, Eastern Orthodoxy and Protestantism is a better analogy) and so perhaps is more appropriate to another topic.


----------



## darthbuttchin (Oct 3, 2011)

Hi,

Cheers for your kind comments. I know they didnt go so far as to deify their dictators. I've read alot about North Korea (largely because I'm worried about them) and that is another perfect idea. My inspiration by Lenin was more things such the giant statues (which I find really impressive) and the Mausoleum where his body currently rests. As for Hitler, the inspiration from him is more when the ancient King was alive, in the way he was almost revered by his armies and subjects.

I'll definitely consider the DPRK though. I'd forgotten about them when I was designing this concept last night haha. 

Cheers again, 

db


----------



## ScipioSmith (Oct 6, 2011)

Helbrecht said:


> This sounds interesting. Soviet Russia and Nazi Germany didn't go so far as to literally deify their respective dictators. Try North Korea's Eternal President. Kim Jong-Il is only technically head of the country's armed forces and communist party - the office of president is perpetually held by a dead man. It's really quite fascinating, in a morbid and frankly terrifying sort of way. I'd definitely recommend looking into the DPRK if you're writing a society with a heavy cult of personality surrounding a dead ruler. Your ancient king's descendants - the nominal heads of state - could be ruling as eternal regents in the absence of the rightful monarch.


 
I sort of have that idea going on in my work of the moment. The founder Empress ascended to godhead rather than die, and for generations after her descendants ruled as Prince/Princess Regent, temporal ruler under the spiritual authority of the God-Empress. She anoints and appoints a champion, the First Sword, to fight for the Empire in her name; but the office has been vacant for several centuries due to lack of anyone able to pass Her rigorous moral standards. By the time of the story however the cult has waned to two named characters, though the protagonist becomes one as well over the course of the story. The God-Empress isn't entirely happy about this, nor about the fact that the Imperial dignity has been usurped by mortals, but she loves her country and her people too much to bear them real malice and concentrates on supporting those who continue to stand by her.


----------



## Elishimar (Oct 6, 2011)

I wish I could just post my prologue because my prologue is basically my pantheon... I have being that in an essence willed himself into existence with his conscience. He pondered everything that he could think of and added to himself the attributes which he saw as perfection (the basic "good" qualities). To be sure that his qualities were supreme and perfect he willed into existence a being that obtained every opposite quality (the basic "bad" qualities). He then created a planet and breathed life into it, etc, etc. And said that whoever can influence the rational beings of that planet in following their philosophies etc, etc. would then be the ultimate perfect and reign supreme over the universe.

I also added in angelic type beings, which I call "servants" who's main priority is to teach and guide humans. They can also be pulled to either side of the good vs. bad influence struggle. this is where we get demonic type beings and fatherly/motherly spirits. They are far less powerful then the good and bad gods, but are immortal.

As time went on the humans began to abandon the spirits, when those who were forgotten left the planet and became stars and other heavenly bodies to fill the void. The remaining spirits and demons are the most powerful and influential ones, and things start pick up quick. The evil god takes a physical body and starts to conquer the known world, etc, etc. and this is where the story actually beings. The story follows from a human's perspective as he deals with death, retaking his kingdom, falling in love, and facing his fears.


----------



## Ghost (Oct 7, 2011)

The gods in my world are real beings. There are currently over 40 gods and goddesses, but I'm still playing around to see which ones I can combine or get rid of altogether. They don't play major roles in my stories, but their churches are important for daily life in most countries. Whether an individual god is important, or even recognized, varies by culture. The most important influence my gods have on the stories is that their symbols have a small degree of power against supernatural beings.

I made my pantheon by looking at a few pantheons from around the world. I picked the most common, useful, or interesting domains, and immediately knew what sort of persona would govern each of those. After that, I searched long and hard for names that matched those people because names were almost as important as what someone is god of.

The customs and rituals need to be worked out for each of them since I only know the basics. It will take time because it is different for each culture and time period.


----------



## Calash (Oct 7, 2011)

At the highest levels several of my story universe share the same pantheon.  This is especially true of one of my worlds, where the main character deals with gods and demons on a regular basis.

At the highest point is Balance, who created all the conflicting aspects of the universe (Light and Dark, Order and Chaos, Life and Death, etc).  From these the ancient gods were spawned and so on until you get to the young gods who are most active in the mortal world.  To better explain it I have written in a father/son and brother/sister relationship between the, as it makes reading a bit easier.


----------



## Ravana (Oct 15, 2011)

sashamerideth said:


> Why is the pantheon important anyways?  If we are going to use religion as a source of conflict then maybe... but by even having gods aren't we setting ourselves up for Deus Ex Machinima?



Only if there's also a _machina_. 



> Using gods as a cheap plot device or a short cut to creating a facade of tension?



The problem is, religion seems to be such an utterly pervasive part of human existence that, as wiser voices have said in the past, even if gods didn't exist humans would still invent them. So the _absence_ of religion can be as jarring as its mishandled presence, in some instances. This isn't much of an issue in shorter works, but in longer ones–particularly those that stretch past a single novel–at least some readers will wonder what the religions of your world are like. Which doesn't require you to include them, only to be prepared to dissatisfy such readers with the answer "I don't know, and I don't care."

On the other hand, unless your gods are going to be active participants in the lives of your characters, there's no special reason to worry about pantheons. Everybody can worship "god"–or gods–without anything other than the barest of gestures in the direction of detail. 

If the gods _are_ going to be active participants, however, I'd strongly recommend hammering out all the details you can in advance… in order to avoid ludicrous situations such as you mention. Does having real gods set you up for _dis ex machinae_? No: having _one_ real god does. But having _two_, who are opposed to one another? Guess what happens whenever one of them feels like dropping down from his machine? Anything that one of them feels important enough to intervene in will almost certainly strike the other the same way. And the more, the scarier. Or something like that. Sort of a fantasy "mutually assured destruction": no one's willing to be the first to bring out a nuke, because once that happens, everyone will. 

(In fact, my normal approach to the issue–and by way of extending the metaphor–is that mortals are what the gods use to resolve their disputes with one another: they're the proxies, the Banana Republics, what have you. They're what allow the gods to fight safely. The gods can provide all the _indirect_ aid they're inclined to–the equivalent of military aid, selling them the guns: giving them strength, courage, whatever run-of-the-mill assistance they think to pray for; but actually stepping in personally? Big no-no.)

When I use gods–as anything other than impersonal forces–it's far from "cheap": usually, it's ghastly expensive, to all concerned. I know, that's not what you meant… but think about it: take your gods as seriously as they no doubt take themselves, and "plot devices" are about the _last_ thing they can be used as. And unless you're willing to then pull out some even cheaper plot device to save your characters (and story) from the situation you've created… the characters lose.

One alternative approach, albeit one many will not find particularly satisfying, is for the gods to be _far_ less than "all-powerful": they're _somewhat_ tougher than mortals, but not enough so that they can squish armies (let alone individuals) at a whim. This is similar to what's seen in much of mythology… and evidence of its less than satisfactory nature can be seen in the fact that most "mortals" who contend with gods, successfully or otherwise, tend to have divine ancestry of one sort or another. Probably this is a result of the ancients either (1) not wanting their gods to be _too_ weak (and thus pointless to follow), or (2) not wanting to admit their own inadequacies (being themselves unable to similarly contend with the divine)… or, more likely, both. If only demigods can strive with deities, that provides an excuse for the rest of humanity to knuckle under–and, not coincidentally, keeps the priests in business as well.


----------



## Benjamin Clayborne (Oct 15, 2011)

Ravana said:


> On the other hand, unless your gods are going to be active participants in the lives of your characters, there's no special reason to worry about pantheons. Everybody can worship "god"—or gods—without anything other than the barest of gestures in the direction of detail.



I wouldn't skimp too much on the detail, depending on how important their belief is to the characters. Highly devout characters would think about the gods a lot, and what the gods mean to them, and you may need to provide a decent amount of detail to deal with that, even if the gods are not physical participants in the story.

It doesn't have to be a big part of the story, but if you're trying to explore and detail a character, a devout character's religious belief is as important as their personality.


----------



## Ravana (Oct 18, 2011)

Benjamin Clayborne said:


> I wouldn't skimp too much on the detail, depending on how important their belief is to the characters. Highly devout characters would think about the gods a lot, and what the gods mean to them, and you may need to provide a decent amount of detail to deal with that, even if the gods are not physical participants in the story.
> 
> It doesn't have to be a big part of the story, but if you're trying to explore and detail a character, a devout character's religious belief is as important as their personality.



Assuming there are any devout characters. Or at least any you're using the PoV of. I always know how my religions affect the world and the characters… but if the answer to that is "minimally," I tend not to bother making reference to the religions, apart from the occasional swear word. (I'm in general agreement with you: I tend to have extensive detail in my own notes. It's mostly a question of whether or not any of that shows up in the stories. I've seen fantasy done successfully with little or no reference to religion–but I _also_ always notice it when it's not there, which is why I said what I did at the outset.)


----------

