PDA

View Full Version : "Don't be ridiculous. The gods aren't real." (Eberron question)



Cyclone231
2010-02-08, 08:49 PM
I was thinking about an atheist character in D&D. While most of the time, it would take bland denial to be a true atheist rather than a misotheist (although that would be pretty fun to do), it's pretty possible to play an atheist in Eberron.

My question is: how would an atheist in Eberron (at least in 3.5) explain the fact that no matter what his alignment is, a cleric of (for example) the Blood of Vol always taps into a Lawful Evil power source? I know simple ignorance can explain this alright, or calling the various divine powers just some random clump of divine magical energy, but what would be another justification?

As a corollary, does a cleric in 4e Eberron have this happen? That is, could you determine that a worshiper of the Silver Flame is calling upon a Lawful Good power source?

Mongoose87
2010-02-08, 08:53 PM
I think, as the nature of the Gods is, in Eberron, somewhat undefined, an atheist would believe that the power comes from pure belief/will. But, I think, as that's a belief, it would make him not an atheist. :smalltongue:

Cyclone231
2010-02-08, 08:56 PM
I think, as the nature of the Gods is, in Eberron, somewhat undefined, an atheist would believe that the power comes from pure belief/will. But, I think, as that's a belief, it would make him not an atheist. :smalltongue:Right, I get that, and the idea that clerical powers come from a person's will makes sense (since it is, at least sometimes, true), but why would a fine, upstanding Cleric who is always kind to others and treats people with respect tap into a Lawful Evil power source just because he believes in the Blood of Vol instead of the Silver Flame, since neither of them actually exist?

JoshuaZ
2010-02-08, 08:56 PM
I was thinking about an atheist character in D&D. While most of the time, it would take bland denial to be a true atheist rather than a misotheist (although that would be pretty fun to do), it's pretty possible to play an atheist in Eberron.

My question is: how would an atheist in Eberron (at least in 3.5) explain the fact that no matter what his alignment is, a cleric of (for example) the Blood of Vol always taps into a Lawful Evil power source? I know simple ignorance can explain this alright, or calling the various divine powers just some random clump of divine magical energy, but what would be another justification?

As a corollary, does a cleric in 4e Eberron have this happen? That is, could you determine that a worshiper of the Silver Flame is calling upon a Lawful Good power source?

Say that the power sources change nature to reflect what most of the believers are. If most of the Vol worshippers became neutral evil, then the source would be neutral evil. (Incidentally Eberron works for this really well for other reasons. For example, Vol herself is obviously not divine even though her followers/worshipers get divine magic).

vicente408
2010-02-08, 09:03 PM
I think, as the nature of the Gods is, in Eberron, somewhat undefined, an atheist would believe that the power comes from pure belief/will. But, I think, as that's a belief, it would make him not an atheist. :smalltongue:

Atheism just means you don't believe there is a god/gods. It doesn't mean you can't believe in other supernatural stuff.

LurkerInPlayground
2010-02-08, 09:07 PM
I think, as the nature of the Gods is, in Eberron, somewhat undefined, an atheist would believe that the power comes from pure belief/will. But, I think, as that's a belief, it would make him not an atheist. :smalltongue:
*facepalm*

Atheists aren't the same thing as nihilists.

And I'm not even sure the latter is anything other than a fabled creature.

JoshuaZ
2010-02-08, 09:09 PM
Atheism just means you don't believe there is a god/gods. It doesn't mean you can't believe in other supernatural stuff.

Moreover, what does one mean by "supernatural"? In a world where magic is common, supernatural loses a lot of its meaning. In D&D, the laws of nature just happen to involve something we call "magic." That doesn't make it less natural.

Tackyhillbillu
2010-02-08, 09:11 PM
An Atheist could believe anything. He could think of the gods as artificial constructs through which lesser minds (read: Clerics) tap into the bountiful power of the Cosmos that those with more powerful minds can face unaided (Read: Wizards, Artificers.) (My DM created a character like that. Twas funny.) The Cleric taps into that Power Source because it is the only way he can come to grips with the power.

(And don't get started on Nihilism. People who think they are Nihilists are morons, for a number of reasons.)

Bibliomancer
2010-02-08, 09:14 PM
Right, I get that, and the idea that clerical powers come from a person's will makes sense (since it is, at least sometimes, true), but why would a fine, upstanding Cleric who is always kind to others and treats people with respect tap into a Lawful Evil power source just because he believes in the Blood of Vol instead of the Silver Flame, since neither of them actually exist?

Both represent outdated and ingrained belief systems that are relics of the primitive pre-industrialartificer past. As a result, being raised in such a system results in a specific power signature from all the bias of said primitive religion. An enlightened person can draw power from wherever they wish,

The_Snark
2010-02-08, 09:22 PM
My question is: how would an atheist in Eberron (at least in 3.5) explain the fact that no matter what his alignment is, a cleric of (for example) the Blood of Vol always taps into a Lawful Evil power source?

Corollary question- how can you tell that someone's tapping into a Lawful Evil power source? As opposed to a Neutral Good power source, or an ethics-neutral power source? I don't know of any spells that reveal the alignment of someone's deity, but I could be missing something.

As far as I can tell, the alignments given for Eberron's deities are meant to represent the alignment of that deity's core faith (not counting alternative sects or dupes who don't know the truth about their religion). If the deity turns out to exist, that'd be their personal alignment, too, unless the standard religion got it wrong. I don't picture the alignment as flavoring every divine spell they grant.

JoshuaZ
2010-02-08, 09:27 PM
Corollary question- how can you tell that someone's tapping into a Lawful Evil power source? As opposed to a Neutral Good power source, or an ethics-neutral power source? I don't know of any spells that reveal the alignment of someone's deity, but I could be missing something.



I don't know if Eberron changes this at all, but according to the SRD:



Aura (Ex)

A cleric of a chaotic, evil, good, or lawful deity has a particularly powerful aura corresponding to the deity’s alignment (see the detect evil spell for details). Clerics who don’t worship a specific deity but choose the Chaos, Evil, Good, or Law domain have a similarly powerful aura of the corresponding alignment.



So there's a pretty easy way to tell the nature of the power source.

Fishy
2010-02-08, 10:04 PM
Eberron actually changes that. Page 35 of the ECS spells it out: Clerics don't have to be of similar alignment as their deity, and they aren't restricted to casting spells that match their alignment descriptor, and they are never in danger of Falling.

So whatever it is that a cleric is doing when he casts a spell, it has nothing to do with his own personal morality. You can have CG clerics of the Blood of Vol, and there's nothing necessarily 'evil-flavored' about their magic.

RebelRogue
2010-02-08, 10:26 PM
Eberron actually changes that. Page 35 of the ECS spells it out: Clerics don't have to be of similar alignment as their deity, and they aren't restricted to casting spells that match their alignment descriptor, and they are never in danger of Falling.

So whatever it is that a cleric is doing when he casts a spell, it has nothing to do with his own personal morality. You can have CG clerics of the Blood of Vol, and there's nothing necessarily 'evil-flavored' about their magic.
All that is true, but it should still reveal the alignment of the deity (or power source).

FishAreWet
2010-02-08, 10:29 PM
The character could view magic as something inherent to the universe, akin to gravity or electromagnetism. Clerics and wizards are those who have trained to harness that energy.

taltamir
2010-02-08, 10:35 PM
in a world where there is tangible scientifically verifiable proof of the existence of the gods, souls, magic, and the afterlife. Being a non believer in such a world is very very different and difficult to do. Don't model such atheism after IRL atheism as the two are completely different. Instead try for something unique...

Does he believe that the gods are not really gods but massive cooperative illusion spells (or just living spells) maintained by their believers?

If he believe that pure faith powers divine magic instead of the gods; then what does he think about souls, the very real afterlife, angels, demons, etc?

Is such a person even sane?

JoshuaZ
2010-02-08, 10:36 PM
Eberron actually changes that. Page 35 of the ECS spells it out: Clerics don't have to be of similar alignment as their deity, and they aren't restricted to casting spells that match their alignment descriptor, and they are never in danger of Falling.

So whatever it is that a cleric is doing when he casts a spell, it has nothing to do with his own personal morality. You can have CG clerics of the Blood of Vol, and there's nothing necessarily 'evil-flavored' about their magic.

Yes, but see my remark. Clerics still have the relevant aura types? I don't recall that being removed.

FishAreWet
2010-02-08, 10:53 PM
in a world where there is tangible scientifically verifiable proof of the existence of the gods, souls, magic, and the afterlife. Being a non believer in such a world is very very different and difficult to do. Don't model such atheism after IRL atheism as the two are completely different. Instead try for something unique...

Not in Eberron there isn't. Souls and magic and the afterlife can all be natural aspects of the universe. But gods just aren't a part of it.

The_Snark
2010-02-08, 11:11 PM
in a world where there is tangible scientifically verifiable proof of the existence of the gods, souls, magic, and the afterlife. Being a non believer in such a world is very very different and difficult to do. Don't model such atheism after IRL atheism as the two are completely different. Instead try for something unique...

Does he believe that the gods are not really gods but massive cooperative illusion spells (or just living spells) maintained by their believers?

If he believe that pure faith powers divine magic instead of the gods; then what does he think about souls, the very real afterlife, angels, demons, etc?

Is such a person even sane?

In a normal D&D setting, these would be good questions, but in Eberron all these subjects are a little more ambiguous. There isn't any verifiable proof of most gods. The Sovereign Host and Dark Six lack physical manifestations completely; there are legends of them acting like people, but no proof that these are anything more than legends. The Silver Flame exists as a column of silver fire, and supposedly it speaks—but never to anyone but its chosen Speaker. Other faiths tend to be non-anthropomorphized (the Blood of Vol) or worship beings that exist but aren't actually divine (the Path of Inspiration, the Aereni ancestors, dragons, Vol).

Magic definitely exists, but arcane magic doesn't have to come from a god (although some religions certainly claim it does); it just is. There's no code of conduct, you just have to know how it works. It's the same for divine magic (clerics in Eberron cannot fall). Souls... exist, pretty much everyone agrees on that, but good luck getting any two religions to agree about what they're like. They probably exist but they're hard to study; if it were easy, someone would have already settled the question of whether warforged have souls.

The afterlife exists. It's a dreary grey wasteland that has nothing to do with any deity or established faith. Everyone goes there, regardless of morality. Not very pleasant, and no religion claims to be responsible for it.

Angels and demons and devils exist, but they don't have anything to do with gods; they're simply the native inhabitants of certain other planes. You might as well claim that the existence of faeries or mind flayers implies gods.

Eberron is set up so that its religions are motivated more by faith than by obvious divine miracles. People don't believe in the gods because they appeared in the sky last year to smite their foes, they believe in the gods for the same reasons people in the real world do. (Which we should not go into.) An atheist in the setting would have to acknowledge the existence of divine magic (unless he was delusional), but I could easily see, say, a wizard scoffing at the church of the Host for anthropomorphizing perfectly natural magical phenomena.


Yes, but see my remark. Clerics still have the relevant aura types? I don't recall that being removed.
Interesting—for some reason I'd always thought they had an aura that matched their own alignment. I don't know how Eberron handles that.

Parra
2010-02-09, 03:52 AM
In the Planescape Campagin setting (2nd ed) there was a Faction called the Athar who had similar anti-gods feelings.

They basically believed that the Gods were not actually 'Gods' (Gods in the all-seeing, all-knowing, all-powerful sense). Powerful beings sure, but ultimatly just as flawed as any 'mortal'

Maybe you could follow a similar line of thinking in Eberron?

Kol Korran
2010-02-09, 03:53 AM
Yes, but see my remark. Clerics still have the relevant aura types? I don't recall that being removed.

indeed it is not written, but that is most likely an oversight. Eberron was written with the intent of making the gods, beliefs, and everything about them ambiguos. if you could tell the alignement of the power source of the gods, then the entire "cleric of his/ her own belief" would have become ridiculous. nor would the corrupt hierarchy of the silver flame be able to function, or the few goodly and deluded clerics of blood of vol be able to live with themselves.

as the amiguity of gods is one of the core aspects of the Eberron setting, and since most rules written there imply so, i conclude this must have been an oversight. i have never known a DM in Eberron (i know about 3 more) who have played with the rule unchanged. (actually to this point we haven't even thought otherwise)

Kol.

grautry
2010-02-09, 04:48 AM
In the Planescape Campagin setting (2nd ed) there was a Faction called the Athar who had similar anti-gods feelings.

They basically believed that the Gods were not actually 'Gods' (Gods in the all-seeing, all-knowing, all-powerful sense). Powerful beings sure, but ultimatly just as flawed as any 'mortal'

Maybe you could follow a similar line of thinking in Eberron?

Well, it's pretty easy to define what a god is in a D&D setting. It's an entity that has Divine Ranks.

Of course, then we fall into another discussion - why are divine ranks special anyway? If you compare, say, a 20th level character with one divine rank and a 300th level character with no divine ranks then the second one is certainly more "godlike" than the first one.

Even powers available to fairly low levelled mortals(low levelled in comparison to statted gods anyway) - can be far more powerful than just about any power derived from Divine Ranks. Like, Epic Spellcasting.

So, yeah, you can pretty easily be an atheist in virtually any D&D setting simply by being strict about the definition of the word "god". Define god as any entity that has one of the following qualities: omniscience, omnipotence, omnipresence, being truly eternal(as far as I remember, no entities statted in D&D possess any of those qualities) or other qualities assigned to monotheistic gods of real-world religions and presto, you're an atheist in a setting with "gods".

Zergrusheddie
2010-02-09, 05:17 AM
It would be best to fully grasp what you are aiming for: someone who thinks there are no Gods or someone who is looking to actively prove there are no Gods. A character paralleling Nietzsche's "Gods are dead" statement would work quite nicely:

"There were Gods, but they have been wiped out millenia ago. So called Clerics get their power from the same place that Sorcerers do; sheer mental talent. You may ask why a Paladin or Cleric 'falls' but that is easy to explain. The person feels that they have committed a vast 'sin', so they are shaken and are unable to fully focus themselves in preparing their magic. I'm sure if you told a Wizard from a young age that alcohol would rob him of his spellcasting, he would be unable to focus on the complex text written within his tome until he has atoned for but one sip of ale. It is guilt, not Gods!"

I have not played Eberron, so changing the worldview is probably necessary.

hamishspence
2010-02-09, 05:20 AM
Actually, this worldview works far better in Eberron than anywhere else.

"dramatic divine intervention" exists in other settings, but not Eberron.

In this case, it would be more Druids and paladins falling for "breaking their vows" since Eberron clerics are incapable of falling.

The problem with "its guilt that does it" is that even if the paladin does not know they are committing an evil act, they still Fall, according to the Atonement spell- but the caster of the spell does not have to spend XP to cast it.

Yora
2010-02-09, 05:38 AM
The great thing about Eberron is, that you can just make up any metaphysical believe system for your character or NPCs, and it fits the setting just fine. No problems like "why would a person born in such a world believe that?" :smallbiggrin:

hamishspence
2010-02-09, 05:44 AM
Pretty much, yes.

The Blood of Vol, despite the name, don't so much draw from Vol, as draw "from within".

it might be the dogma that is Lawful Evil- a cleric who believes it strongly enough to draw power from it, even if they don't actually act as severely as the dogma expects, will radiate Law and Evil.

This is also why fallen clerics of Good forces don't get detected in Eberron- and don't need to take precautions- because, they still draw power from a Good source.

Getting into the organization of a group while worshipping an Evil force requires precautions- undetectable alignment and the like. But when a follower of a Good force become evil due to extremism and the like, nobody can find out through Detect spells alone.

Jayabalard
2010-02-09, 07:23 AM
But, I think, as that's a belief, it would make him not an atheist. :smalltongue:No, that particular belief is consistent with atheism. Atheists have belief's, the belief is just in the absence of something rather than the presence of something.

TricksyAndFalse
2010-02-09, 10:08 AM
As a corollary, does a cleric in 4e Eberron have this happen? That is, could you determine that a worshiper of the Silver Flame is calling upon a Lawful Good power source?

There are no alignment detection powers or rituals in 4E. Alignment in 4E has almost no mechanical bearing on the game at all except for the divine classes (avenger, cleric, invoker, paladin). Even for those classes, it's only a fluff restriction that you worship a deity somewhat in line with your own alignment.

So in 4E, a worshipper of the Silver Flame or Blood of Vol can never have certainty that the entity they worship is in line with their own personal moral code--they just take it on faith.

PairO'Dice Lost
2010-02-09, 12:51 PM
No, that particular belief is consistent with atheism. Atheists have belief's, the belief is just in the absence of something rather than the presence of something.

Not quite; belief in the absence of something =/= absence of belief in something, and atheists of both sorts exist in real life and in fiction. A character who says "The Sovereign Host does not exist" has a different opinion than one that says "I don't believe in the Sovereign Host"--the former definitively doesn't believe the Sovereign Host exists, the latter may just disagree with the interpretation of the Sovereign Host as presented in its mythos. In Eberron, though both cases can be roleplayed, the latter case is slightly more tenable ("You're not actually getting power from the Silver Flame" is much easier to argue than "There is no Silver Flame").

Ormur
2010-02-09, 04:51 PM
I think most atheists would object to it being a belief since without evidence to the contrary the null hypothesis would be more logical. Not believing in something for which there is no evidence isn't equivalent to religious belief. However in a world where the evidence of deities is stronger it might be considered a belief, divine magic being the most obvious example.

Doppelganger
2010-02-09, 05:18 PM
Its realy realy easy to see how Atheists arrise in D and D.

There is rule saying that you can't worship yourself. And get magic from it.

In fact, it even says that it's possible (not just a poor interpritation of RAW) in Elder Evils.

As such, if you can worship your house, your cat, your food, etc... its sort of irrational to claim that gods do anything for clerics other than inspire faith and save the DM work. (So, let me get this strait. Your character wants to worship his cat, and you want to know what domains that gives you?
Yep.
Let me get back to you. (Quits D and D then and there.))

Mongoose87
2010-02-09, 05:29 PM
People seem to have misunderstood my comment about having a belief being inconsistent with Atheism. I know that atheists have beliefs, however, to be an atheist one has to not hold to any particular system of religious beliefs. Since i said that the cleric's power could come from pure belief, that would make him not an atheist, as he would have to have a religious belief.

Inyssius Tor
2010-02-09, 05:33 PM
People seem to have misunderstood my comment about having a belief being inconsistent with Atheism. I know that atheists have beliefs, however, to be an atheist one has to not hold to any particular system of religious beliefs. Since i said that the cleric's power could come from pure belief, that would make him not an atheist, as he would have to have a religious belief.

You don't know what "religious" means, do you.

Listen. You can have faith in something while also being an atheist. There is a difference--a VAST difference--between "atheist (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atheism)" and "nihilist (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nihilism)".

Mongoose87
2010-02-09, 05:42 PM
You don't know what "religious" means, do you.

Listen. You can have faith in something while also being an atheist. There is a difference--a VAST difference--between "atheist (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atheism)" and "nihilist (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nihilism)".

Calm down.

I had simply confused the definition of atheism - I thought it covered any sort of belief for reasons beyond personal opinion, and was not just rejection of deities' existence.

I know that Nihilists believe in absolutely nothing.

Inyssius Tor
2010-02-09, 06:08 PM
Calm down.

I had simply confused the definition of atheism - I thought it covered any sort of belief for reasons beyond personal opinion, and was not just rejection of deities' existence.

Ah, sorry. Having been questioned by altogether too many well-meaning religious folk, I tend to get annoyed when people mess up my beliefs and the beliefs of my family and friends.

Anyway. On topic--actually, here's a refresher to on what the topic actually is, as we seem to have drifted quite a lot: it seems as if clerics of the Blood might perceptibly radiate Law and Evil even if neither they nor their beliefs are either lawful or evil. Why would that be, if clerics don't worship some sort of external entity?

I would say that clerics who identify as Seekers of the Blood of Vol but who don't believe in a lawful evil doctrine don't radiate Lawful Evil, because if they don't believe in a lawful evil doctrine they don't believe in what the actual setting rulebook calls the Blood of Vol. They might call themselves Seekers of the Blood; their whole congregation, or the average Seeker on the street of Karrnath, might agree (and probably would, based on what Keith Baker has said about what the people of Karrnath believe); they might convince you of it if asked, without any deceit whatsoever.

But the Blood of Vol they believe in is not the Lawful Evil Blood of Vol described by the rulebook.

Teron
2010-02-09, 09:22 PM
A couple points:

First, clerics do have an aura in Eberron. From this article (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/ebds/20041122a)


Unfortunately, dealing with corruption is a tricky business. The Church does not define evil as "that which can be detected with detect evil"; as noted earlier, someone with an evil alignment may serve the greater good. Furthermore, a cleric of a good deity always possesses a good aura, regardless of her personal alignment.

I can think of a couple ways to explain it off the top of my head. It could be that, regardless of whether there's a real deity behind it or not, a religion's philosophy has an inherent moral value. For instance, the main tenets of the Church of the Silver Flame are that its worshipers should strive to destroy fiends and undead and reform evil mortals to the best of their capabilities. If a cleric's mere belief in the Flame as a divine entity is enough to let him cast spells, it's not much of a stretch to assume that his adherence to the attendant philosophy makes him glow to detect good (even if he doesn't follow it well enough in practice to be LG; see the next point). Alternately, it could be that divine magic is fuelled by the faithful's collective belief, and the aura of a given religion's clerics is essentially determined by unconscious consensus. Or, maybe their alignments and beliefs about their deity "contaminate" their real power source (commonly suggested to be the ring of Siberys).

Second, clerics in Eberron can indeed fall. Alignment change won't do it on its own, but the cleric needs to maintain a sincere and ardent faith. So a LE knight templar (in both the literal and trope sense) who honestly believes his draconian actions are condoned by the Silver Flame might be able to cast divine spells, but he'll fall if he's confronted with proof of the disconnect between his methods and the will of the Flame, and refuses to change. Of course, what constitutes sufficient proof will vary from one person to the next; even a cleric chastised by the Keeper of the Flame herself can keep his powers if he convinces himself that the Keeper is mistaken or lying about the Flame's true commands.

Finally, as to why the Blood of Vol is evil despite most of its adherents not even knowing there's an actual being named Vol, let alone worshiping her, Keith Baker once said (though I'm afraid I can't find the source now; it was probably somewhere in the old Ask Keith Baker threads on the WotC forums) something to the effect that it's because the religion is at its base a grim, selfish one, with an "us against the world" attitude; however decent its adherents might be in day to day life, ultimately they believe that any sacrifice is justified if it might contribute to their ultimate goal of abolishing death, and Eberron is a world where the ends don't justify the means (at least when it comes to avoiding an evil alignment). If you asked them, though, they'd probably either say that what you perceive as evil is merely the strength to deal with a fundamentally unjust world, or that the aura detected by spells is another divine curse (as they believe death to be) meant to discredit those who understand the truth.

Worira
2010-02-09, 11:07 PM
Not quite; belief in the absence of something =/= absence of belief in something, and atheists of both sorts exist in real life and in fiction. A character who says "The Sovereign Host does not exist" has a different opinion than one that says "I don't believe in the Sovereign Host"--the former definitively doesn't believe the Sovereign Host exists, the latter may just disagree with the interpretation of the Sovereign Host as presented in its mythos. In Eberron, though both cases can be roleplayed, the latter case is slightly more tenable ("You're not actually getting power from the Silver Flame" is much easier to argue than "There is no Silver Flame").

Nitpick: The Silver Flame and the Sovereign Hosts are two different things. Saying "There is no Silver Flame" is unreasonable, since there is, objectively, a giant pillar of silver fire in the middle of Flamekeep. Saying "There is no Sovereign Host", on the other hand, is more reasonable.

PairO'Dice Lost
2010-02-09, 11:23 PM
Nitpick: The Silver Flame and the Sovereign Hosts are two different things. Saying "There is no Silver Flame" is unreasonable, since there is, objectively, a giant pillar of silver fire in the middle of Flamekeep. Saying "There is no Sovereign Host", on the other hand, is more reasonable.

I know they're different; I used the Silver Flame for the second point because it demonstrably exists, hence why the "it doesn't exist" atheist is on less firm ground than the "I don't agree with your beliefs" atheist--all of the gods are a bit doctrinally vague, but the Flame, Vol, and I think one or two others at least have some physical evidence to back them up.

kpenguin
2010-02-09, 11:27 PM
Well, the Undying Court also literally exists. You can even talk to them, if you have the right feat.

Vol being a real lich unliving on an island in the Principalities is a secret, though.

Foryn Gilnith
2010-02-09, 11:34 PM
This is a previous thread with similar ideas and about as much drama. (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=141119)

PairO'Dice Lost
2010-02-09, 11:49 PM
Well, the Undying Court also literally exists. You can even talk to them, if you have the right feat.

Yeah, that was the other one, thanks. Certainly gives credence to your religion when you can say, "Yeah, Grampa gives me my spells; here, let me introduce you to him."