Originally posted by Diovidius

Originally posted by Exilor

Originally posted by Diovidius

Originally posted by grimm6th

In tyria, gods exist.  This idea sounds like a particually badly designed enemy faction.

The gods exist, yes, but are they gods? Being an atheist in Tyria would not be doubting their existance but doubting their divinity and the need to worship them like the Charr do. We know gods can be killed, we know at least some of them are ascended mortals (Abbadon, Grenth and Kormir), we know the Elder Dragons predate the gods (at least on the world of Tyria) and we know the Elder Dragons rival the gods in power. What is to say that they aren't just powerful spellcasters?

And even doubting their existance would be feasible in the world of GW2 since the gods went even more silent after Nightfall than they were before that. I think there will be humans wondering why the gods are so silent now in a time where Elder Dragons (amongst other things) threaten humanity's very survival.

That gods in tyria do not work like god in the bible does not mean they're fakers. In egyptian mythology, Osiris died and then was resurrected by Isis. In gw2, the power of a god can't be destroyed (that's why Kormir had to contain it in her body). 

But how do we know they aren't fakers? What exactly is the difference between the Mursaat and the human gods, other than the fact that the later have more power? What makes them divine instead of mortal? What makes them worthy of worship compared to other beings (such as Mursaat and Titans)?

If you want to question the very definition of a god, there is not much others can say. Unless ArenaNet goes ahead and say that they're aliens pretending to be gods a la Stargate Goa'ulds, the most reasonable explanation is that they are what they appear to be and have always been described as: gods.

I'm sorry, but your personal beliefs or lack of them have nothing to do with this or any other game. If christians demanded that the christian god was there as an option for them, OH the drama.

And again, the gods of gw do not demand worship, do not meddle with anyone's destiny or free will, and have nothing to do with your personal peeves with any RL religion.

It seems that MMO developers shy away from religion as a major character defining aspect precisely because of some of the points raised in this thread.  People have a real problem disassociating their real-life views on religion with their views of in-game religion.  No-one wants a game to become flame-bait by design!

That said, I do believe that choice is good, and allowing your characters to be members of a religious cult/agnostic/atheist should be valid character points.  As most games do not go into this level of detail, however, it is there for you to decide and role-play as you wish.

Questions of RL religion aside (like, waaaaaayyyyy to the side  --------->>>   over there somewhere), this is an issue of game mechanics.  We are talking about a game.  And as I said, it seems the easiest way to accommodate the OP within the current mechanics is to allow a character the choice of being raised in a culture other than their own.

For example, a human raised as a Charr would see the world (from a game mechanics point of view) the way the OP asks.  Unless he just wants to RP the fact that his character grew up with posters of Rytlock on his wall.

Regardless of what you choose to call the gods of GW2,  they obviously exist on a higher level of life.

Criteria for godhood

Total or partial omnicience (having very great or seemingly unlimited knowledge )

Total or parial omnipreence (present in all places at the same time)

Divine willl (A determined path for life )

Divine power (Focus of power through followers)

All 6 deities from the original guild wars lore demonstrated each aspect of the above. This is unlike the Marsat who were just a powerful race of beings who tried to dominate the world. In fact there downfall was propagated by the GW gods.

Despite all this Tyria's inhabitents have free will that allows anyone to firmly stick their head in the sand and ignore/deny the obvious influences the gods have in the world.  You are allowed to believe as you want, without fear of worldly retribution. Unfortunately this will likely be something a player will need RP.

I don't wish this to turn into a flame war, but please don't refer to those that believe in God as sheeple. There is room for many ideas other than freely acccepting an incomplete theory of the world and life being formed through a series of random events. As a software designer I know that that writing random bits of syntax will not produce an efficent functioning program. The same is true of life on a much much more complex scale. You don't have to believe in any peticular religion to acknowledge the evidence of design.  Neither science mor religion give all the answers, and there is certianly nothing wrong with questioning both, unless you are a fanatic.

Well, if you're concerned about the behavior of the six gods in Nightfall, couldn't you simply swear allegiance to Kormir? Don't get me wrong, I think it would be awesome to have more options related to the foundational beliefs of one's character (and am not entirely sure such an attitude can't already be reflected in your choices - someone needs to ask a dev about it), but there is a god available who wasn't involved in any of the stuff you mentioned. Also, it could be argued that asking a human to denounce the gods would be like asking a charr to take up bottany.

Originally posted by semantikron

Questions of RL religion aside (like, waaaaaayyyyy to the side  --------->>>   over there somewhere), this is an issue of game mechanics.  We are talking about a game.  And as I said, it seems the easiest way to accommodate the OP within the current mechanics is to allow a character the choice of being raised in a culture other than their own.

For example, a human raised as a Charr would see the world (from a game mechanics point of view) the way the OP asks.  Unless he just wants to RP the fact that his character grew up with posters of Rytlock on his wall.

I'm pretty sure that Dream_Chaser did, at least. ;)

"Wizards don't believe in gods in the same way that most people don't find it necessary to believe in, say, tables. They know they're there, they know they're there for a purpose, they'd probably agree that they have a place in a well-organised universe, but they wouldn't see the point of believing, of going around saying "O great table, without whom we are as naught." Anyway, either the gods are there whether you believe in them or not, or exist only as a function of the belief, so either way you might as well ignore the whole business and, as it were, eat off your knees."
— Terry Pratchett (Reaper Man)

Originally posted by Loke666

"Wizards don't believe in gods in the same way that most people don't find it necessary to believe in, say, tables. They know they're there, they know they're there for a purpose, they'd probably agree that they have a place in a well-organised universe, but they wouldn't see the point of believing, of going around saying "O great table, without whom we are as naught." Anyway, either the gods are there whether you believe in them or not, or exist only as a function of the belief, so either way you might as well ignore the whole business and, as it were, eat off your knees."
— Terry Pratchett (Reaper Man)

That's more or less the way the asura see the gods.

Originally posted by ActionMMORPG

One doesn't often find religious positioning as a character option.

 

My characters?  They worship the Daedra.  Problem solved.  Now where'd I put that skooma?

Hear, hear.

Originally posted by Tekaelon

Regardless of what you choose to call the gods of GW2,  they obviously exist on a higher level of life.

Criteria for godhood

Total or partial omnicience (having very great or seemingly unlimited knowledge )

Total or parial omnipreence (present in all places at the same time)

Divine willl (A determined path for life )

Divine power (Focus of power through followers)

All 6 deities from the original guild wars lore demonstrated each aspect of the above. This is unlike the Marsat who were just a powerful race of beings who tried to dominate the world. In fact there downfall was propagated by the GW gods.

Why are those criteria for godhood? What is godhood exactly? What makes you say the human gods have total or partial omniscience and omniprescence? How is the power of the human gods tied to their followers? And what do you mean by 'a determined path for life'? You say those aspects are demonstrated in lore, demonstrate them. And in such a way that it can't be applied to powerful spellcasters.

Originally posted by Diovidius

Originally posted by Tekaelon

Regardless of what you choose to call the gods of GW2,  they obviously exist on a higher level of life.

Criteria for godhood

Total or partial omnicience (having very great or seemingly unlimited knowledge )

Total or parial omnipreence (present in all places at the same time)

Divine willl (A determined path for life )

Divine power (Focus of power through followers)

All 6 deities from the original guild wars lore demonstrated each aspect of the above. This is unlike the Marsat who were just a powerful race of beings who tried to dominate the world. In fact there downfall was propagated by the GW gods.

Why are those criteria for godhood? What is godhood exactly? What makes you say the human gods have total or partial omniscience and omniprescence? How is the power of the human gods tied to their followers? And what do you mean by 'a determined path for life'? You say those aspects are demonstrated in lore, demonstrate them. And in such a way that it can't be applied to powerful spellcasters.

It doesn't matter. Gods in a work of fiction don't have to conform to his or your criteria. ArenaNet made the gods of Tyria, and unless they reveal that it was a lie all along people can only change that in their own personal canon.

Originally posted by Exilor

Originally posted by Diovidius

Originally posted by Tekaelon

Regardless of what you choose to call the gods of GW2,  they obviously exist on a higher level of life.

Criteria for godhood

Total or partial omnicience (having very great or seemingly unlimited knowledge )

Total or parial omnipreence (present in all places at the same time)

Divine willl (A determined path for life )

Divine power (Focus of power through followers)

All 6 deities from the original guild wars lore demonstrated each aspect of the above. This is unlike the Marsat who were just a powerful race of beings who tried to dominate the world. In fact there downfall was propagated by the GW gods.

Why are those criteria for godhood? What is godhood exactly? What makes you say the human gods have total or partial omniscience and omniprescence? How is the power of the human gods tied to their followers? And what do you mean by 'a determined path for life'? You say those aspects are demonstrated in lore, demonstrate them. And in such a way that it can't be applied to powerful spellcasters.

It doesn't matter. Gods in a work of fiction don't have to conform to his or your criteria. ArenaNet made the gods of Tyria, and unless they reveal that it was a lie all along people can only change that in their own personal canon.

It does matter. Anet never stated the human gods are gods from an objective point of view, Anet only stated that the humans view them as gods (and a few other races).

Originally posted by Diovidius

Originally posted by Exilor

Originally posted by Diovidius

Originally posted by Tekaelon

Regardless of what you choose to call the gods of GW2,  they obviously exist on a higher level of life.

Criteria for godhood

Total or partial omnicience (having very great or seemingly unlimited knowledge )

Total or parial omnipreence (present in all places at the same time)

Divine willl (A determined path for life )

Divine power (Focus of power through followers)

All 6 deities from the original guild wars lore demonstrated each aspect of the above. This is unlike the Marsat who were just a powerful race of beings who tried to dominate the world. In fact there downfall was propagated by the GW gods.

Why are those criteria for godhood? What is godhood exactly? What makes you say the human gods have total or partial omniscience and omniprescence? How is the power of the human gods tied to their followers? And what do you mean by 'a determined path for life'? You say those aspects are demonstrated in lore, demonstrate them. And in such a way that it can't be applied to powerful spellcasters.

It doesn't matter. Gods in a work of fiction don't have to conform to his or your criteria. ArenaNet made the gods of Tyria, and unless they reveal that it was a lie all along people can only change that in their own personal canon.

It does matter. Anet never stated the human gods are gods from an objective point of view, Anet only stated that the humans view them as gods (and a few other races).

http://www.guildwars2.com/en/the-game/races/human/

http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Gods_of_tyria

http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Gods_of_Tyria

Look for your statement that says that "humans view them as gods". The phrase itself insinuates that they are not. But it doesn't say that, anywhere. They are described as the gods of the humans, the group of dieties worshipped by humans. Not powerful beings which humans believe to be gods.

Originally posted by Exilor

Originally posted by Diovidius

Originally posted by Exilor

It doesn't matter. Gods in a work of fiction don't have to conform to his or your criteria. ArenaNet made the gods of Tyria, and unless they reveal that it was a lie all along people can only change that in their own personal canon.

It does matter. Anet never stated the human gods are gods from an objective point of view, Anet only stated that the humans view them as gods (and a few other races).

http://www.guildwars2.com/en/the-game/races/human/

http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Gods_of_tyria

http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Gods_of_Tyria

Look for your statement that says that "humans view them as gods". The phrase itself insinuates that they are not. But it doesn't say that, anywhere. They are described as the gods of the humans, the group of dieties worshipped by humans. Not powerful beings which humans believe to be gods.

You do know that pretty much everything we know about the gods either comes from things said or written by humans or what was said by the gods (or their avatars) themselves right? Lore articles, dialogue, timelines it's all from a human point of view, GW1 in it's entirety was a human thing. As Ghosts of Ascalon shows in it's tale of the Foefire it matters a great deal who tells the story.

And do you consider the Charr to be wrong in their assumption of the non-divinity of the gods? Grenth defeated a god without being a god himself. The players in GW1 defeated a god without being gods themselves (although it was a chained and weakened god and the players were blessed by other gods). Abbadon presumebly defeated a god without being a god himself. The Elder Dragons rival the power of the gods. In fact, Abbadon thought he could harm the other gods by bringing mortals (margonites) to their realm (a similar thing to what Dhuum and Menzies are doing in GW1).

Originally posted by Tekaelon

Regardless of what you choose to call the gods of GW2,  they obviously exist on a higher level of life.

Criteria for godhood

Total or partial omnicience (having very great or seemingly unlimited knowledge )

Total or parial omnipreence (present in all places at the same time)

Divine willl (A determined path for life )

Divine power (Focus of power through followers)

All 6 deities from the original guild wars lore demonstrated each aspect of the above. This is unlike the Marsat who were just a powerful race of beings who tried to dominate the world. In fact there downfall was propagated by the GW gods.

Despite all this Tyria's inhabitents have free will that allows anyone to firmly stick their head in the sand and ignore/deny the obvious influences the gods have in the world.  You are allowed to believe as you want, without fear of worldly retribution. Unfortunately this will likely be something a player will need RP.

I don't wish this to turn into a flame war, but please don't refer to those that believe in God as sheeple. There is room for many ideas other than freely acccepting an incomplete theory of the world and life being formed through a series of random events. As a software designer I know that that writing random bits of syntax will not produce an efficent functioning program. The same is true of life on a much much more complex scale. You don't have to believe in any peticular religion to acknowledge the evidence of design.  Neither science mor religion give all the answers, and there is certianly nothing wrong with questioning both, unless you are a fanatic.

 

 

 

 

There is no such thing as partial omniscience or omnipresence. "Omni" means "all." Partial omni-anything is self-contradictory.

None of the attributes you mentioned are characteristics of, for example, the Greko-Roman or Germanic gods. The fact is that there are no universal characteristics of godhood in the polytheistic sense. The Greek and Norse gods aren't so much omniscient as well-informed. They are entirely capable of ignorance. They are in no way omnipresent, as they possess physical bodies bound by space and time. They have no divine plan. They frequently stick their nose into human affairs, but they have no overriding "endgame" in mind. They just do what they feel like doing at the time. Finally, they have great power, but it is in no way tied to their followers. They existed before human beings and had plenty of power long before the first man began worshiping them. Just as a bonus, no deity in any pantheon has been described as all-powerful. That's why there needs to be so many: to pick up the slack.

Now, if we were talking about a monotheistic deity, a list of immutable attributes would be entirely appropriate. But monotheism and polytheism are much more different than people give them credit for. The only real universal criteria for godhood is that a being is a god if it is worthy of worship, but everyone has a different idea of what attributes really grant that worthiness.

Originally posted by Diovidius

Originally posted by Exilor

Originally posted by Diovidius

Originally posted by Exilor

It doesn't matter. Gods in a work of fiction don't have to conform to his or your criteria. ArenaNet made the gods of Tyria, and unless they reveal that it was a lie all along people can only change that in their own personal canon.

It does matter. Anet never stated the human gods are gods from an objective point of view, Anet only stated that the humans view them as gods (and a few other races).

http://www.guildwars2.com/en/the-game/races/human/

http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Gods_of_tyria

http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Gods_of_Tyria

Look for your statement that says that "humans view them as gods". The phrase itself insinuates that they are not. But it doesn't say that, anywhere. They are described as the gods of the humans, the group of dieties worshipped by humans. Not powerful beings which humans believe to be gods.

You do know that pretty much everything we know about the gods either comes from things said or written by humans or what was said by the gods (or their avatars) themselves right? Lore articles, dialogue, timelines it's all from a human point of view, GW1 in it's entirety was a human thing. As Ghosts of Ascalon shows in it's tale of the Foefire it matters a great deal who tells the story.

And do you consider the Charr to be wrong in their assumption of the non-divinity of the gods? Grenth defeated a god without being a god himself. The players in GW1 defeated a god without being gods themselves (although it was a chained and weakened god and the players were blessed by other gods). Abbadon presumebly defeated a god without being a god himself. The Elder Dragons rival the power of the gods. In fact, Abbadon thought he could harm the other gods by bringing mortals (margonites) to their realm (a similar thing to what Dhuum and Menzies are doing in GW1).

1. The wikis and the official website aren't quotes from human npcs.

2. The charr do believe the human gods are gods. They want them destroyed anyway.

3. Again, osiris in egyptian mythology was killed. Not all religions, in works of fiction or otherwise, have to be abrahamic-like just because it's more prevalent in our cultures.

Originally posted by Exilor

3. Again, osiris in egyptian mythology was killed. Not all religions, in works of fiction or otherwise, have to be abrahamic-like just because it's more prevalent in our cultures.

Osiris is small pickings compared to Ragnarok. In Germanic mythology, nearly all of the gods are killed, and they don't return. On top of that, they are actually capable of dying of old age if they are deprived of their golden apples.

Originally posted by Exilor

Originally posted by Diovidius

Originally posted by Exilor

Originally posted by Diovidius

Originally posted by Exilor

It doesn't matter. Gods in a work of fiction don't have to conform to his or your criteria. ArenaNet made the gods of Tyria, and unless they reveal that it was a lie all along people can only change that in their own personal canon.

It does matter. Anet never stated the human gods are gods from an objective point of view, Anet only stated that the humans view them as gods (and a few other races).

http://www.guildwars2.com/en/the-game/races/human/

http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Gods_of_tyria

http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Gods_of_Tyria

Look for your statement that says that "humans view them as gods". The phrase itself insinuates that they are not. But it doesn't say that, anywhere. They are described as the gods of the humans, the group of dieties worshipped by humans. Not powerful beings which humans believe to be gods.

You do know that pretty much everything we know about the gods either comes from things said or written by humans or what was said by the gods (or their avatars) themselves right? Lore articles, dialogue, timelines it's all from a human point of view, GW1 in it's entirety was a human thing. As Ghosts of Ascalon shows in it's tale of the Foefire it matters a great deal who tells the story.

And do you consider the Charr to be wrong in their assumption of the non-divinity of the gods? Grenth defeated a god without being a god himself. The players in GW1 defeated a god without being gods themselves (although it was a chained and weakened god and the players were blessed by other gods). Abbadon presumebly defeated a god without being a god himself. The Elder Dragons rival the power of the gods. In fact, Abbadon thought he could harm the other gods by bringing mortals (margonites) to their realm (a similar thing to what Dhuum and Menzies are doing in GW1).

1. The wikis and the official website aren't quotes from human npcs.

2. The charr do believe the human gods are gods. They want them destroyed anyway.

3. Again, osiris in egyptian mythology was killed. Not all religions, in works of fiction or otherwise, have to be abrahamic-like just because it's more prevalent in our cultures.

1. Read again, I wasn't just talking about quotes.

2. So the charr do not consider them worthy of worship and think they can kill them but still view them as gods? As far as I know the charr always talk about the gods as the 'human gods' just like we can talk about a 'greek gods' without believing said gods exist.

3. If your definition of gods stretches that far in a fantasy world where mortals can bend the very fabric of space (Lord Odran for example), then again I ask, what is the difference between powerful spellcasters and gods?

Slightly off-topic but still related, fyi.

I find this debate interesting but won't weigh in as I didn't play GW and have not a single clue about the lore.

I plan on playing GW2 - would people advise that I read up as much as I can on GW lore before the game launches or that I go in completely blind? Do we know yet if GW2 actually introduces it all to people new to the scene or will it be assumed that everyone has a working knowledge of it already?

I'm kinda torn.

Originally posted by Xexv

Slightly off-topic but still related, fyi.

I find this debate interesting but won't weigh in as I didn't play GW and have not a single clue about the lore.

I plan on playing GW2 - would people advise that I read up as much as I can on GW lore before the game launches or that I go in completely blind? Do we know yet if GW2 actually introduces it all to people new to the scene or will it be assumed that everyone has a working knowledge of it already?

I'm kinda torn.

I think you will be fine as there is a gap of 250 years between the two games and if you find anything you like to know more about you can use the two wiki's:

http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Lore

http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Lore

If you really want to be prepared, you can read the three novels (of which two have come out at this point) which are specifically written to bridge the time between the two games:

http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Ghosts_of_ascalon

http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Edge_of_Destiny

http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Sea_of_Sorrows_%28book%29