This thread has begun elsewhere but as Sir Eldaen, I think it deserve a thread in itself.



As I have already said, I think also that the Harn religions arre very good.

Ilvir : a kind of Shub-Niggurath (evil interpretation)
Peoni : early christianism
Larani : the christianism of crusades, inquisition and of the nobility
Save-K'Nor : how a church can underule a country by careful manipulations.. I use to see the church of SKN as thinking that humanity can progresse only if evil and good leave room for the men to decide
Agrik : easy to understand ; I love the differents orders fighting each other - I have made many interesting connections with demons as the book suggest. Really, you can easily imagine the cohorts of demons - barely contro ig not uncontrolled by Agrik- waiting the time to invade Kethira...
Naveh : I love this one. God of thieves and assassin. Truly elitist, my navehen chuch is by far the most dangerous and cunning evil church
Morgath : when fear overcome your humanity... I need such a god for the darkest men of my world.
Sarajin : a truly viking god ; one is sufficient for me
Siem : distant god of sindarins and khuzduls but I dislike elves ; I think that khuzduls and the sindarins have the same god is interesting for the play.

This my own interpretation and it is by no way the right one... But in general, I don't see what is wrong with Harn religion.

This is how I see the Harnic Pantheon.

Ilvir, Peoni and Larani are all ancient Jarind gods - but over time their worship has drifted.

Ilvir is by far the most complex of the Harnic gods. He is mystical, primal, unknowable, cyclical, and both generative and degenerative. He is the Ancient Father.

Peoni is the Earth goddess. In ancient times she may have been equally as complex as Ilvir, but her modern manifestation is much more passive.

Larani is also complex - although like Peoni less so in her modern form. She was the ancient active force, possibly even the Spring Daughter. But later conflict with other (Pharic) peoples hightened her martial aspect.

Both Peoni and Larani have been adopted by Pharic peoples, although both retain Emela as their liturgical languages.

Save K'nor has a very complex background. The god's liturgical language is Azeri, but the Primacy is located in Berema. It is possible that Save K'nor has replaced Ilvir, or was a fourth original element in the mix (2 male / 2 female).

The origins of Siem, Sarajin, Halea and Agrik are pretty clear. Naveh appears to be Dalkeshi, and Morgath is Azeri in origin.

The Harnic Pantheon is definitely syncretic - it is an amalgam of varying cultural influences - as were most pre-monotheistic religions, particularly the Roman 'religions'. Its not all neat and tidy - because frankly non-monotheistic religions don't tend to be. That's what *I* like most about it.

For what it is worth, I would see *elements* of these deities being worshiped in Eastern Lythia. These might simply be very similar (probably with different names), but they might be quite different. My personal view of the divine entities of Kethira is that they are not 'unitary' - they are composed of a range of elements, which can wax and wane in importance, and even move between dieties, or disappear altogether from the pantheon (eg. the Sea element). So while in my p-Harn there are 'deities' they are not exactly as their worshipers perceive them. But that fits with canon about the Gods being ultimately 'unknowable'.

Cheers

Jeremy

Has anyone rewritten the gods from an eastern Lythian perspective?
It'd be kind of interesting to see what kind of shifts would occur, and what other gods there might be. Another thing for me to think about along with Kethiran palentology and Harnic neanderthals.

Sarajin could lose his martial aspect (heaven forbid) and take on more sea-faring qualities. Agrik and Larani becoming some sort of husband and wife consorts. Ilvir becoming Ilvir except more so...

Course this would screw up everything in Yashain, all those demons and poor Laranians locked in desperate struggle over nothing more than a domestic dispute.

I do wish the gods as written had more gray areas. They seem too distinct, and like a party of multidimensional adventurers with clear cut personalities. Even Athena had her evil counterpart in the Medusa. And even then the 'evil' was subjective as one conquoring people rewrote another peoples mythology.

Hi! I thought I would ignite a religious/holy flame war. No, that's OK, you're welcome.
The gods of Harn are more consistent because they are real. On Kethira, the priests can, and do, perform miracles. This does wonders in bucking up the faithful.
I know that the GM can play it as if the gods are shadowy, maybe they're there, maybe not. Most of the peasants believe in them, but what do they know. Etcetera. But the way the canon is written, the gods are real, the priests can perform rituals and even summon divine intervention, and hence the gods are more consistent. Peoni is worshipped across Lythia and beyond, because she delivers the bacon. Save Knor is acknowledged, and sometimes even worshipped, because to do otherwise might not be wise. Ilvir is worshipped quite creatively.
The churches are separate (Peonian worshippers from Kamerand do not answer to Perna, for example). So there may be several Primates. The gods don't care about these trifles. There may be variations in the manner of worshipping the gods, the names they are called (stupid bugger, etc), but the gods will be the same throughout, because they are real.

_________________
Laboro diem, carpe noctem.

I suppose that's one way to look at it.
Kind of miss the Kethiran equivalent to 5 million Hindu dieties.

_________________
Oh Crap!?! I'm starting to look like my Avatar!

Why do you have such rigid worship? In my p-Hârn, people primarily worship a single god, but may call on other gods if appropriate. This may or may not attract attention, and it may or may not be the god or a demi-servant of that god.

_________________
Cheers

Leitchy
List & Forum Admin
Admin FAQs
[Updated 25-FEB-2011]

Yes, I handle it just the same. One major deity, but still occasional worship of others. What would a laranian do if he wanted to pray for a good harvest?

_________________
Steer me straight, O German one.
O flamer of mail, O Carver in Stone...

Spartan on HârnChat

I may have misunderstood something. Please set me straight.



Priests and miracles are not the problem. The Churches are fine as to how they are established. To me the inconsistency lies in the Good and Evil.

1. Masses can be ruled by fear and terror for a period of time. I still have hard time swallowing the idea of a society that is fundamentally an anti-thesis to life. How does one motivate masses to adopt this fierce hunger for sadistic chaos and destruction? Although rulers can have peculiar personal traits and there are sects of all kinds, a nation of Sadism or a planetwide well-established Church of Chaos is slightly too much.
Many of the revolutions in the past have eventually failed, because the idealists want radical changes the everyday life of the common folks. There is something common to most people that could be characterized as common sense. You can challenge it, you can strecth it, but only so much. As Abraham Lincoln put it: "You can fool all of the people some time and some of the people all the time, but you cannot fool all of the people all the time.". Fundamentally evil societies and mainstream Satanism, if you like, do not really cultivate the values of a durable society. I find it hard to swallow the idea that masses take on this quest for Primal Chaos or of Murder-Death-Kill because they are directed against all life.

2. All these religious matters would be an academic problem, if the Good and Evil were not hardcoded into the system. One cannot say, for instance, that Agrikans or Morgathians are really nice people, it just that Laranians have misinterpreted their doctrine and therefore Agrikans are persecuted for no good reason. The air of cultural relativism dies out as soon as you take a look at the agenda of these Churches. I am not very comfortable with the idea that Evil puts on this kind of flashy costume because it sort of puts out a good deal of the moral dilemmas and political intrigue. It is too black and white. For a ruler, it might be nice to have arhetorical Enemy to blaim. But the conflict between Rethem and Kanday, for example, is not of political kind: it is the very battle of the Good and Evil -- not of who is right, who has a 'legitimate claim', but Good and Evil themselves. A knight from Kanday is always morally on the safe side, because the enemy is so blatantly evil and its goals are so malign that there can never be any doubt of who is right and who is wrong. Evil even carries flags just to make sure.

3. There seems to be an evil God for each type of wickedness. A person has type G32 of distortion in moral judgements <=> he worships God A5.
The Gods are very different for each other without any overlap, and there is a danger of the followers being all-out one thing stereotypes. Because the Gods ARE, it not so much a question of belief as it is of support.

4. Similarly, Larani stands for order and the order that they impose is Good, and the way in which this order is maintained is Good. But ethics is supposed to be universalizable and Good cannot depend on one's social status. Because the Gods ARE and they provide different kinds of palettes for desired behaviour and Good, there cannot be any common basis for ethics and morality.

Laranian: "Uh, that kind of slaughtering people just for the feel of it is frowned upon back-home where I live. I resent that.".
Morgathian: "Oh really? Around here, not slaughtering people and not practising impulsive violence would be wrong. 'Wanna give it a go?"

5. The role of Save-K'Nor is unclear to me. Are they like empirical scientists, like dogmatic scholastics or just plain librarians? The idea of worshipping knowledge and at the same time producing it seems problematic.

I would like to make some answer to Uthris.

I agree with you that in the real, the dominant religion cannot be against life and birth. So, it is hard to believe that Morgath could have a whole people as worshipper. One should however recall that the religion of summerians and babylonians was very unpleasant for the common. They thougt after dying that the common went in dust while the king and happy few became immortals, living with the gods. I think that Morgatheism is even more democratic that this very dark perspective.

So in my p-Kethira, evils gods are gods of the leaders. If it has worhipers in the common people, it is always by fear or those reasons which make someone to follow a dictator (no, no, I don't want to start that thread again). So, in my p-Harn, most peasants worship Peonie ; it is tolerated in Rethem because Agrikians can't imagine they are a threat for them - they are too concern with Larani.
The cult of Naveh is the most elitist. Naveh don't bother to have a lot of worshippers, he only want to have the "best".

Uthris has mentionned that in Harn, Dieties are an evidence and the question is not to believe but to support or not. For me, this not a pb as I play fantaisy RPG. And in my p-Harn, one can calculate and try the advantages of one god to another ; of course it is more risky than conjuring a demon if one has some importance.

If the evil side is well known in Harn (Morgath-Agrik-Naveh with a question for Ilvir), the only good human god is Peoni. Larani is not in the good side, it is on the side of the leaders and land-owners ; of course, those think they fight for the Good but in fact, they are very conservative and have litle concerns for the poors and non-nobles. So, I see the opposition between Kanday and Rethem as a political one with some religion coloration. In my p-Harn, they are good and evil Laranians ; the first are the real chivlaric knights, the 2th are those dictators like who know too well where Good is. These are the 2 sides of Goodness.

For me S-K'N is also an elitist god but is the only god who really care of humans because he wants them to progress in the whole.

I don't think canon Hârnworld requires gods to be manifestly real. Sure, HMR, HM1 & HMG have rules for priestly rituals and divine intervention, but Gods of Hârn clearly states that the existence of gods is the GM's decision, but for purposes of suspension of disbelief, it is a good idea to preent the gods to players as real.

I do have a beef concerning the HMR invocations, which to me are too powerful and flashy. I much prefer the more low-key approach of HMG.

zak

_________________
skiorht

I see what you mean but I don't think that the Good-Evil thing is as deeply written into the canon as you say. I tend to agree that Gods of Harn is written from the perspective of the Laranian Peonian view and that one has to give the text an creative interpretation from time to time. After all the divine truths among men have been given by the gods themselves, but have been understood and written down by men. Who knows where the truth lies. (And the truth about whose truth?) Good and evil have always in my Hârn been relative to ones believes. And the worshipping of one god over another is based on this belief of the world.

Ofcourse a religion based on murder, pillage, maiming and killing has hard time becoming as widespread as that of Agrik. On the other hand we have the religions of the Mesoamerican civilizations where wars were started to gain enough slaves to feed to the gods. The key is that the mesoamericans had a good reason to do what they did. They knew more gentle gods but those gods didn't keep the world going. After all they HAD to give blood to the gods so thet they would be reborn to sustain the world. I mean surely if and since that is true it is better for some people to be sacrificed so that others may go on. The important thing is to see what the motives are for a person to worship a deity.

Let's see:

An Agrikan could say for instace just that:

1. Only Agrik is strong enough to feed Manrasusha and if he is not fed he will devour the whole world. Surely it is better that the world exists as long as possible. Therefore we must help Agrik in his grim task of weeding out the unworthy and to sacrifice them for the salvation of the rest of us. (Agrik could even be portrayed as a tragic hero, if so inclined.)

2. Agrik has with his unsurpassed strenght and courage gained the lordship of All by facing Manrasusha. He keeps Manrasusha away from the world and feeds him sacrifices to keep him pacified. Because of this we all own our lives to Agrik and our duty is to obey him.

3. Ethics and strenght are to see what needs to be done and to do it. Agrik by his actions has proven to have the wisdom to see and the will to do what needs to be done. No other god helps him in his task. The despised coward Larani covers her eyes from the truth of what needs to be done and has betrayed Agrik. She must pay for she destracts Lord Agrik from his work.

A Morgathian might say that:

1. All other gods are fools. Only Morgath and Siem know the truth but Siem is a waekling and trys to run away from it. The truth is that Bukrai is the power that will destroy All. Resistance is futile. Morgath has had the strenght and wisdom to learn from Bukrai.

2. Morgath is to be feared for he can not be understood. This is because his understanding has expanded beyond that of all the other gods. Even if Morgath is to be feared, a wise man with discipline and courage might learn many truths from him. A man that will give his faith to Morgath will receive great power from him and the one that gives his soul to Morgath will receive an eternal life in the coming world of Bukrai.

3. All wise men will embrace the changing of the world and at least obey Morgath if not give him their souls. This is the only way that you can avoid death for only Morgath holds the knowledge that can save one from its grip.

A Navehan might say:

1. The world will be destroyed when the concordat will be broken in the end. Only Naveh will survive and with him those who have his discipline.

2. We must follow Naveh blindly for his plan is unfolding constantly. Every failure to cary out his commands will endanger all the faithfull. It is better pass away from this world than to fail again.


There, now we have some relativistic explanations why some people might follow the "evil" gods. I'm not sure whether anybody would agree with my point but it has worked as a guideline into the believers of the evil churches for me quite well. I hope this helps someone else as well.

Invocations are only taught to priests I'm sure any god would be concerned if a priest, rather than a lay worshipper, was worshipping another god. But this has been accepted (DoW). I'm not sure that the rules are rigid, unclear, certainly, but not rigid.

Whatever happened to the HRT? anyone of them here & prepared to comment.

We have a reasonable amount of detail on the individual churches, but we need more detail on the over-arching principals as laids down in the Concordant. Pantheistic and multi-pantheistic games can work & work well. Look at Glorantha, where the great and enlightened saviour Red Moon goddess a force for good, order and reason within the Empire, but is regarded as 'the wound in Orlanths (The Storm-king god of the Sartarite barbarians) side by the enemies of the empire. What I love about this is that no matter which side you are on you know that your god(dess) is better than theirs. And that right is on your side. The Orlanthi are freedom fighters, the Lunars are commited to bringing enlightenment to the unbelievers. Both can be seen as being right.

Imagine the extra dimensions available if Agrik & Larani were seen in this way. OK some people do, but for many Larani=Good, Agrik=Evil. There lies the problem, alignment, morality, call it what you want. It is the curse of DnD and makes the Harnic gods too DnD like.

Neil

_________________
Uxbridge English Dictionary:
Iconography: Filthy Byzantine pictures

The problem with the pantheistic approach on Hârn is that, as a potential worshipper, you have a choice betwen good and evil. You can coose between Agrik and Larani if you want to worship a warrior deity. So why would you choose an evil god? Because you're evil yourself, and that's what what makes the thing so flat and DnDish.

Would Agrik call himself evil? Do Agrikans say "let's be evil, boys"?

I agree that GoH and HMR are probably written from a Larani/Peoni perspective as this is the most likely on Hârn. After all, Agrikans are a minority on the misty island.

Perhabs a comparison to the conflict between catholic and protestant churches would be suitable. Both believe in the same principles, but have different interpretations.

"Yes, I do believe in Larani, but I say she is wrong. She encourages weakness and, thus, disturbs the natural order of things given to us by our lord Agrik."

Whos good, and whos evil? Whos justice and which rationality? Thats what I tried to highlight in my post. The choise isn't really about wanting to worship a warrior deity, but about what kind of a person are you and what you believe to be true. Which deity represents the truth as you know it? Whos vision of the world do you think is right? Which of them helps you when you need it? After all they all exist, don't they. (At least 99,9 % of Lythians believe that.) Who would one want to worship and why? There are lots of motives, good and bad for worshipping any of the deities.

I really don't see what I'm trying to say anymore? Do I make any sense to anybody?

_________________
Victory, Destiny!

Yes

Neil

_________________
Uxbridge English Dictionary:
Iconography: Filthy Byzantine pictures

Hi, All,

I started out trying to formulate replies to posts here, but there is just too much scope and I failed to get anything coherent, so here are a few scattered thoughts/my views:

The Kethiran gods definitely seem to be a polytheism - by which I mean they all exist or are believed to exist by most folk. I therefore strongly support allowing anyone to call upon/pray to any god, though they may hold one god above the others. As a piece of heresy ( ) I also am beginning to view PPs as 'non-denominational' indicators of the amount of attention a character gives to things mystical. This would mean that PPs can be used to call upon any god - in fact, gods may well have some motivation to compete for their offerings - hoping for a miracle or to 'power' an invocation that the character knows how to perform.

Re. 'evil gods' - I don't think the problem is that bad, despite the fact that (as old fogeys into Harn in the early days may attest) Harn was originally influenced by the "Great Satan" of D&D. Taking the three 'evil' gods in turn:

Morgath plays the 'satan' role - basically a hidden cult based around baser impulses of gaining hidden knowledge and secret power. It is an 'underground' cult more than a religion, except for one very nicely done (IMO) aberration - a heretical one, naturally. By peddling the idea that the world was damned and all in it were damned so it is best to get as much and as comfortable a life as possible Balsha generated one of those 'mass hysteria' events that happen from time to time - this was then used by a few selfish and ruthless individuals to take power and hold on to it in the manner of dictators everywhere.

Naveh is another hidden cult - but this time focussed on hidden power and influence. Power over others of this sort is like a drug - as some have claimed of religions - and adherents are attracted on this basis. Note that the priesthood 'elite' will not have any truck with the common 'junkies'...

Agrik is possibly the most interesting in my opinion. In Rethem he is seen as strong and ruthless - as is only right for the deity of the rulers and defenders of the land. Agrikans see merit in facing up to challenges and defeating them - if you lose you were not fit to succeed and putting off the problem would not fix that. They see 'chivalry' as immoral - pretending that war is somehow amenable to moderation and 'cleanness' is just encouraging everlasting strife. The only good way is to face your enemies and crush them utterly, ending the suffering (for your own people) for ever. It is the survival of the fittest - the weak should rightly serve the strong, that is how Kethira is ordered. Any other approach is just messing with the minds of weak and strong alike - how dare those Laranians deceive people so! Any ruler who does not crush opposition and smother dissent is only increasing the chance of disorder and strife - and who suffers then?

_________________
Balesir
___________________
- Eschew Obfuscation!

I could have said what Tuomo have said before. He gives very good explanations of the worship of Agtik, Naveh and Morgath.

Some of us here don't like ADD and its gods. It is their very right but I think their are wrong. What I do believe that most RPG player, stereotype is necessary for playing a caracter truly different from his own personnality. I have seen too often heroes forgetting their achetype and become just an average men with average goal with average moral and wich cannot ne distinguished from poor other average PCs... It is like cinema ; heroes are most often archetype. Now, good players can perform complex, original and interesting caracters but such players are very rare indeed.

Now, I think that evil - good is not so clear in Harn religion. I don't see why many of you assume thet Larani is Good. She pretends to be but she may be not. Crusades, exploitation of serves, overtaxing people, struggle for the leadership etc, all in name of Larani. Where is Goodness in all that ? No, definitevely no, Larani is an insidious evil god which wants only to preserve Oder to confort his leadership. Most of her worshippers care only of their position, of their holy war against their preferred ennemi (Agrik). Some Good people do worship her but they are just misled by Larani and human chiefs war leaders such like knights, baron, kings etc...

If you see think like this, then you will discover that the distinction of Evil Good in Harn religion is a complex matter and far away from the ADD point view. You may come to the point that most, if not all, of the gods can have Good/Evil worshippers, Good/Evil sides.

To my point of view, the only god which is definitevely Good is Peoni but she is mainly the good of the poors. All other Gods except perhaps S-K'N and Siem tend to be on the Evil side.

But the Canon is written (or I am reading it) as if players are Valiant Knights and Agrikans is a bunch of manic bullies with wild staring eyes. The Evil is out there: go and get it. There are the Save-K'norians who are neutral, yet who work for the good and well-being of mankind. They are presented as if they hold the Objective Truth and they are biased towards the Larani order. IMHO, this Good-Evil setting seems hardcoded in the Canon, because the evilness of the Troika is not relative despite Agrik's attempts to 'save the world'. Larani does not have a sort of alternative that would lend itself to moderate common sense. Agrik, the Breeder of the Plague, seems too far off to be taken seriously.

Clearly, HarnReligion needs a certain 'reading' and as I am quite new to Harn, there is plenty of wrestling to do. Your interpretation seems elaborate, and after 5 readings, I begin to see it: RESISTANCE IS FUTILE.



A point taken. This is the kind of depth I was after.

/Uthris
"The road to hell is paved with good intentions."

Yes. Gods of Harn (or HMR) takes a lot of reading. The beauty of it is that by creative acts of theology you can make a whole lot of variations of the Hârnic gods. The best thing is that after a while one can see that all of them are right and that the worshippers of all other gods but X are greatly mislead.

Still my favourites are Larani, the Reluctant Warrior and Ilvir, The Serpent that Dwells Below. When well played the feling of being in Araka-Kalai is truely Awesome. On the other hand who can resist The Grey Slayer...

_________________
Victory, Destiny!

Not only reading but also re-writing. You have come forward with juicy alternatives to the Canon. Does this involve changes to the rituals?

Anyway, I have coordinates. I just need think this through.

Just on this one point...while what you say is true, I think you can look at the real world for examples of societies based around, for example, appeasement of dangerous and grotesque Gods. Look at the Aztecs, who ruled a blood-soaked empire for several centuries and who attacked nearby kingdoms for human sacrifices. Why? Because the Gods needed blood, else the Sun would die.

I see the evil Gods as being similar - religions premised on appeasement. You sacrifice to Agrik and pray to Him for strength to protect yourself - a weird counterpoint to Peoni, for instance, to whom you pray to protect you. Morgath is really only strong in Golotha, which I see as an accident of history...because of the Balshan Jihad, the Morgathan Church is very powerful there, and rules through fear and Machiavellian manouvering; it is not beloved by the common folk. Naveh is a much more limited Church, and I see Naveh as existing "within the cracks"; ruthless bastards who want an edge might join the Navehan Church, sort of like allying yourself with the Mafia.

Of the three evil Gods, Agrik is I think the easiest to explain in social terms - a fire god who you appease and who might help you out if you're strong enough. Yeah, he's probably not popular among the peasantry, but they mostly worship that snivelling weakling Peoni anyway. In some ways I'd almost compare the Agrikan state religion to German Nazism - a state ideology based on conquest, hate and propaganda.

So, I guess, I think the evil Gods are manageable, if you remember that the common folk probably don't worship 'em to any great extent (except perhaps the occasional sacrifice in appeasement) and that, humans being human, the Gods' wishes are relayed through fallible human emissaries - hence, Morgath's primal chaos ironically becomes a monolithic and repressive Church.

This may not be canon, but it's how I tend to approach the evil gods, both in Harn and in other gameworlds.

E.

_________________
Blessed is the Father, his coming and his going,
all the turns of the Cycle, down the endless ages.

While I agree with Erstwhile as regards Morgath and Naveh, my take on Agrik is different - I don't think the 'appeasement' mode is necessary. For the nobles of Rethem (and some in Tharda), you bow down to Agrik in fealty as you would to your lord. And you do it for the same (Agrikan) reason - to make sure you are part of the right (i.e. dominant) group. My earlier post explained why the Agrikan way is a 'better' way to be dominant than Laranianism - and why it is 'more moral' on its own terms - so it is 'obviously' the right choice.

That the evidence in much of Harn flies in the face of Agrikan 'natural dominance' is irrelevant - as are facts flying in the face of dogma for many real world religions...

All in all, I find Agrikanism quite a believable 'religion' as it is.

_________________
Balesir
___________________
- Eschew Obfuscation!