[D'rek]

RangerSG, on Apr 15 2009, 08:19 AM, said:

All gods are ascendants. Not all ascendants are gods.

The little spirit that inhabits a spring in the desert and so becomes worshipped by a couple dozen savages who live nearby, is a god, for it is worshipped, but it is not an ascendant, for it has none of the efficacy necessary to be one. In a similar manner, the Faces in the Rocks are gods, but what claims can they give to ascendancy? They're just T'lan Imass, regardless of their allegiance.

Godhood and ascension are barely related at all. You can be a god without ever knowing ascension, one can be an ascendant yet never know the burdens of godhood. Ascension is merely a slight help to godhood in that your efficacy is bound to get noticed, thereby increasing your chance of worship.


And as for the whole "giving up your old self" business, Cotillion is surely an ascendant, and he still shaves...

[RangerSG]

D'rek, on Apr 15 2009, 07:39 PM, said:

RangerSG, on Apr 15 2009, 08:19 AM, said:

All gods are ascendants. Not all ascendants are gods.

The little spirit that inhabits a spring in the desert and so becomes worshipped by a couple dozen savages who live nearby, is a god, for it is worshipped, but it is not an ascendant, for it has none of the efficacy necessary to be one. In a similar manner, the Faces in the Rocks are gods, but what claims can they give to ascendancy? They're just T'lan Imass, regardless of their allegiance.

Godhood and ascension are barely related at all. You can be a god without ever knowing ascension, one can be an ascendant yet never know the burdens of godhood. Ascension is merely a slight help to godhood in that your efficacy is bound to get noticed, thereby increasing your chance of worship.


And as for the whole "giving up your old self" business, Cotillion is surely an ascendant, and he still shaves...

What does shaving have to do with giving up your ties to mortality? Look at what Cotillion had to do to ascend, and tell me he didn't give up his mortality.

And as for your line of argument, you are mistaking the wizard of oz for a god in the cosmic sense (which was clearly the context of the conversation). And I'm not sure the faces are "just" T'lan Imass. Their abilities certainly seem to go beyond that, now maybe that's from the CG. Maybe that's from being worshiped. Remember, the CG clearly invests them with some power in HoI. So I doubt that they are simply unbound T'lan Imass.

[dawnkiller]

Regarding the Ascendant/God thing, here's some good RG quotes I came across the other day that might help with the distinction (but mostly I just liked enough to record somewhere). First, regarding the Errant's fall from power:

Quote

The Master of the Holds has walked out into the world. He is now among us. There can be no worship now-- no priests, no temples. The only blood the Errant will taste from now on is his own. . . .
And yet the whispers never went away. They echoed like ghost-winds in the god's mind. With each utterance of his name, as prayer, as curse, he could feel that tremble of power -- mocking all that he had once held in his hands, mocking the raging fires of blood sacrifice, of fervent, fearful faith. There were times, he admitted, that he knew regret. For all that he had so willingly surrendered.
Master of the Tiles, the Walker Among the Holds. But the Holds have waned, their power forgotten, buried by the passing of age upon age. And I too have faded, trapped in this fragment of land, this pathetic empire in a corner of a continent. I walked into the world...but the world has grown old. . . . Who served whom, damn you? I went out, among you, to make a difference -- so that I could deliver wisdom, whatever wisdom I possessed. I thought -- I thought you would be grateful.
But you preferred shedding blood in my name. My words just got in your way, my cries for mercy for your fellow citizens -- oh, how that enraged you. -- RG p. 238-239

The Errant talking to Fener:

Quote

"You walked into the world."
"Not by choice, Master of the Tiles. Not like you. . . . And so my followers died -- oh, how they have died. Across half the world, their blood soaked the earth. And I could do nothing. I can do nothing."
. . .
"You have survived. For so long. How?"
"Alas," said the Errant, "my advice to you would be useless. My power quickly dissipated. It had already been terribly wounded -- the Forkul Assail's pogroms against my faithful saw to that. The thought of another failure like that one was too much...so I willingly relinquished most of what remained to me. It made me ineffectual, beyond, perhaps, this city and a modest stretch of river." -- RG p.240

So . . . okay. The main distinction between ascendency and godhood seems to be worship, I think we're all cool with that reasoning. However, I think the primary distinction is that Ascendency is personal, whereas godhood could almost be described as communal. Become a god and you don't just draw convergance, you become the support of hundreds, thousands, or more -- and they in turn can influence you. In some ways, this actually limits you even more.

It does appear that you cannot be both an Ascendant (who walks the earth) and a fully effective god (whose powers seem greatest when they remain in their own realms, where one assumes they can "touch" their followers) at the same time. Mael was greatly diminished by masquerading as Bugg, it seems; enough that Mallick Rel and the other Jhistal priests could hijack his cult and a portion of his power until Mael unveiled himself again. As Keruli, K'rul's influence was also limited largely to his immediate vicinity. The Errant's entry into the physical world seems to have crippled his own religion -- Fener's certainly did.

There does appear to be a difference between the two types of gods. While the Errant was certainly an Ascendant first, and Fener likely was an animal venerated in the same was as Togg and Fanderay, Mael is an Elder God who, by all appearances, bypassed mortality completely. As he was "born" into the position, it seems like it is more difficult for him to permanently lose power/identity because he is something of an embodiment of a primal force, not an ascended individual. K'rul was similar; though his followers dwindled to almost nothing, he was somewhat restored by resanctification (and even if he hadn't been able to influence the world, he certainly didn't cease to be -- his body basically being the warrens and all). This implies that Ascendant-Gods are more vulnerable to overthrow and loss of power than Born Gods, whatever we can take that to mean . . .

So basically, what it comes down to is a trade-off. If you Ascend there is the possibility you will become a god, but in becoming a god you will lose a certain degree of personal freedom. If, however, you refuse godhood, as Rake seemed to, you remain essentially a private individual, barring the pressure of the odd convergence.

Then again, some don't get the option of refusing godhood; Itkovian was somewhat drafted, and I somehow doubt Dassem Ultor voluntarily became Dessembrae. I guess if you're going to Ascend you should make sure you don't do it while you're a beloved public figure . . .

[Grief]

beru, on Apr 14 2009, 02:10 PM, said:

i think to acend you need to cut of your "chains" mentaly and get to your races limits... kallor holds to his status as High king and thus will not acend if he is posible
to die (wilingly giving up your life so on) is the clearest way to cut the chains that bind you to mortalety.

eks
Karsa stoped thinking of the world as he did and have set himself a new purpose (destruction of civilsasion) and thus acended sice he was surch a warrior/thinker (for a teblor)
dassem: cut him from the status as knight of Hood and first sword and set a new purpose
rake: lead his people from their ancestral land and having increased lifespan and sucts overnatural powers
baruk and the rest of the cabal: stop activliy ruling darjustan (im not that shure but its all i can think of)
paran have died and he left onearms host in MoI securing his cutting of chains (i think he is ascendant)

Dassem: Was most likely ascended before giving up knight of hood.
Rake: Was almost certainly ascended before leading the andii away, or killing Tiam. If he was a normal mortal andii, how the hell would he manage that? Then again, Rake is a funny one, because he is most likely ascended simply by merits of the power he inherited due to his parent.
Baruk: Is hinted at being very old, possibly one of the cabal that brought down the CG by Hinter. He is certainly rather old, and don't think he has ever "actively" ruled darujhistan.
Paran: Could be argued he would have ascended earlier, QB says he fights against it. Had he not, he could have ascended by MoI, without having done so.

[Grief]

dawnkiller, on Apr 16 2009, 04:49 AM, said:

Regarding the Ascendant/God thing, here's some good RG quotes I came across the other day that might help with the distinction (but mostly I just liked enough to record somewhere). First, regarding the Errant's fall from power:

Quote

The Master of the Holds has walked out into the world. He is now among us. There can be no worship now-- no priests, no temples. The only blood the Errant will taste from now on is his own. . . .
And yet the whispers never went away. They echoed like ghost-winds in the god's mind. With each utterance of his name, as prayer, as curse, he could feel that tremble of power -- mocking all that he had once held in his hands, mocking the raging fires of blood sacrifice, of fervent, fearful faith. There were times, he admitted, that he knew regret. For all that he had so willingly surrendered.
Master of the Tiles, the Walker Among the Holds. But the Holds have waned, their power forgotten, buried by the passing of age upon age. And I too have faded, trapped in this fragment of land, this pathetic empire in a corner of a continent. I walked into the world...but the world has grown old. . . . Who served whom, damn you? I went out, among you, to make a difference -- so that I could deliver wisdom, whatever wisdom I possessed. I thought -- I thought you would be grateful.
But you preferred shedding blood in my name. My words just got in your way, my cries for mercy for your fellow citizens -- oh, how that enraged you. -- RG p. 238-239

The Errant talking to Fener:

Quote

"You walked into the world."
"Not by choice, Master of the Tiles. Not like you. . . . And so my followers died -- oh, how they have died. Across half the world, their blood soaked the earth. And I could do nothing. I can do nothing."
. . .
"You have survived. For so long. How?"
"Alas," said the Errant, "my advice to you would be useless. My power quickly dissipated. It had already been terribly wounded -- the Forkul Assail's pogroms against my faithful saw to that. The thought of another failure like that one was too much...so I willingly relinquished most of what remained to me. It made me ineffectual, beyond, perhaps, this city and a modest stretch of river." -- RG p.240

So . . . okay. The main distinction between ascendency and godhood seems to be worship, I think we're all cool with that reasoning. However, I think the primary distinction is that Ascendency is personal, whereas godhood could almost be described as communal. Become a god and you don't just draw convergance, you become the support of hundreds, thousands, or more -- and they in turn can influence you. In some ways, this actually limits you even more.

It does appear that you cannot be both an Ascendant (who walks the earth) and a fully effective god (whose powers seem greatest when they remain in their own realms, where one assumes they can "touch" their followers) at the same time. Mael was greatly diminished by masquerading as Bugg, it seems; enough that Mallick Rel and the other Jhistal priests could hijack his cult and a portion of his power until Mael unveiled himself again. As Keruli, K'rul's influence was also limited largely to his immediate vicinity. The Errant's entry into the physical world seems to have crippled his own religion -- Fener's certainly did.

There does appear to be a difference between the two types of gods. While the Errant was certainly an Ascendant first, and Fener likely was an animal venerated in the same was as Togg and Fanderay, Mael is an Elder God who, by all appearances, bypassed mortality completely. As he was "born" into the position, it seems like it is more difficult for him to permanently lose power/identity because he is something of an embodiment of a primal force, not an ascended individual. K'rul was similar; though his followers dwindled to almost nothing, he was somewhat restored by resanctification (and even if he hadn't been able to influence the world, he certainly didn't cease to be -- his body basically being the warrens and all). This implies that Ascendant-Gods are more vulnerable to overthrow and loss of power than Born Gods, whatever we can take that to mean . . .

So basically, what it comes down to is a trade-off. If you Ascend there is the possibility you will become a god, but in becoming a god you will lose a certain degree of personal freedom. If, however, you refuse godhood, as Rake seemed to, you remain essentially a private individual, barring the pressure of the odd convergence.

Then again, some don't get the option of refusing godhood; Itkovian was somewhat drafted, and I somehow doubt Dassem Ultor voluntarily became Dessembrae. I guess if you're going to Ascend you should make sure you don't do it while you're a beloved public figure . . .

Well, refusing godhood is tricky. Rake I think is the only one to suceed, by dismissing the idea completely. Osserc tries to argue with his worships, thus acknowledging them, and fails.
I would imagine Dassem doing the same thing.

Also, there is a difference between what you call the born gods and the Ascendant gods.

You will notice the born gods are the "elemental forces" that edgewalker names, given conciouness, they are the Elder Gods.

And Elder Gods are unkillable, or as close as is possible. They ARE that aspect.

People who have become gods are given that aspect by worship, but they are not the embodiment of the aspect itself.

So, if an Elder dies, and loses worship they fade, but never die, and when the worship comes back, they get the power form it back.

When a younger god dies or falls, the worship stops working (I imagine it's something to do with realms here, they are more powerful in the realms, as they can acess their worship) and they can't come back, whereas the Elders since they are the aspect, will always have some of the realms/aspect with them, like a seed, and when worshipped, it can grow again.

[dawnkiller]

Grief, on Apr 16 2009, 06:10 AM, said:

Well, refusing godhood is tricky. Rake I think is the only one to suceed, by dismissing the idea completely. Osserc tries to argue with his worships, thus acknowledging them, and fails.
I would imagine Dassem doing the same thing.

Yeah, I wonder how Rake managed it. --Then again, I suppose there is a big difference between Rake's potential followers and Dassem and Osserc's: the Andii are so few (and relatively well-collected) that Rake could probably just go to each enclave and say "Kindly stop, please, I feel your worship of me undercuts the worship which should be accorded only Mother Dark" or whatever. I think the only people left who worshipped him as a god were the Andii from Clip's enclave, although really, it didn't seem to do anything I could tell except give him additional smugness . . .

Quote

Also, there is a difference between what you call the born gods and the Ascendant gods.

You will notice the born gods are the "elemental forces" that edgewalker names, given conciouness, they are the Elder Gods.

And Elder Gods are unkillable, or as close as is possible. They ARE that aspect.

People who have become gods are given that aspect by worship, but they are not the embodiment of the aspect itself.

So, if an Elder dies, and loses worship they fade, but never die, and when the worship comes back, they get the power form it back.

When a younger god dies or falls, the worship stops working (I imagine it's something to do with realms here, they are more powerful in the realms, as they can acess their worship) and they can't come back, whereas the Elders since they are the aspect, will always have some of the realms/aspect with them, like a seed, and when worshipped, it can grow again.

Yepyep, no complaints there. The only puzzler is Sister of Cold Nights -- she's an odd one. An elder who, one assumes, lost power like K'rul not because of a curse, but simply because people moved away from the Elder gods -- I don't think we've ever heard anyone even referr to her former name in passing, so more than likely she's simply forgotten. She WAS killed, like a mortal, and by an un-Ascended (well, as far as we know, anyway) Tayschrenn. Then she got all bound up in Tatterfox as the first mortal Bonecaster of the Imass in an age, and god only knows how that affects her Elder god status, or vice versa. I have to wonder what would happen to Tatterfox if SoCN found a resurgence of worshippers, like K'rul . . .

[Grief]

The other thing is, the andii, if they worship him, worship him as "Son of Darkness" which is still seondary to Mother Dark, so it wouldn't be worshipping him as a god anyway...

[Grief]

dawnkiller, on Apr 16 2009, 04:22 PM, said:

Grief, on Apr 16 2009, 06:10 AM, said:

Well, refusing godhood is tricky. Rake I think is the only one to suceed, by dismissing the idea completely. Osserc tries to argue with his worships, thus acknowledging them, and fails.
I would imagine Dassem doing the same thing.

Yeah, I wonder how Rake managed it. --Then again, I suppose there is a big difference between Rake's potential followers and Dassem and Osserc's: the Andii are so few (and relatively well-collected) that Rake could probably just go to each enclave and say "Kindly stop, please, I feel your worship of me undercuts the worship which should be accorded only Mother Dark" or whatever. I think the only people left who worshipped him as a god were the Andii from Clip's enclave, although really, it didn't seem to do anything I could tell except give him additional smugness . . .

Quote

Also, there is a difference between what you call the born gods and the Ascendant gods.

You will notice the born gods are the "elemental forces" that edgewalker names, given conciouness, they are the Elder Gods.

And Elder Gods are unkillable, or as close as is possible. They ARE that aspect.

People who have become gods are given that aspect by worship, but they are not the embodiment of the aspect itself.

So, if an Elder dies, and loses worship they fade, but never die, and when the worship comes back, they get the power form it back.

When a younger god dies or falls, the worship stops working (I imagine it's something to do with realms here, they are more powerful in the realms, as they can acess their worship) and they can't come back, whereas the Elders since they are the aspect, will always have some of the realms/aspect with them, like a seed, and when worshipped, it can grow again.

Yepyep, no complaints there. The only puzzler is Sister of Cold Nights -- she's an odd one. An elder who, one assumes, lost power like K'rul not because of a curse, but simply because people moved away from the Elder gods -- I don't think we've ever heard anyone even referr to her former name in passing, so more than likely she's simply forgotten. She WAS killed, like a mortal, and by an un-Ascended (well, as far as we know, anyway) Tayschrenn. Then she got all bound up in Tatterfox as the first mortal Bonecaster of the Imass in an age, and god only knows how that affects her Elder god status, or vice versa. I have to wonder what would happen to Tatterfox if SoCN found a resurgence of worshippers, like K'rul . . .

Hmm, fairly sure I can remember people using it as a prayer, just muttering "Sister of cold nights" liek the do "Queen of dreams" so she's not entirely forgotten.

And we know ods are far more vulnerable in the mortal realm, so it's not massively surprising she died, particularly with the curse.

[Daemon_Monkey]

As far as I can see the theory goes that god who are born from worship (as opposed to the elder gods) have limited power when in world so most stay in their own respective realms. So ive gotta ask, when a new god is born where does their realm come from, perhaps they steal it form someone else but then where did they come from in the first place. Is it even a world in truth or just some kind of metaphysical place wherein that God exists, we know that at least some of them are warrens (Hood's realm) but what of Fener's etc.?

[tiam]

Daemon_Monkey, on Apr 16 2009, 07:56 PM, said:

As far as I can see the theory goes that god who are born from worship (as opposed to the elder gods) have limited power when in world so most stay in their own respective realms. So ive gotta ask, when a new god is born where does their realm come from, perhaps they steal it form someone else but then where did they come from in the first place. Is it even a world in truth or just some kind of metaphysical place wherein that God exists, we know that at least some of them are warrens (Hood's realm) but what of Fener's etc.?

Could simply be manifestatons of worship. Like the Imass fream world is the ideal world for the Imass so the warren of Hood is exactly what the worshippers would make of it.

Dawn Killer- I posted (although it was ignored) on the CG thread claiming that an EG cannot be killed but can simply have their influence limited i.e. Draconus wasnt killed but his influence was limted as was SOCN as Tatterfox

[dawnkiller]

tiam, on Apr 16 2009, 03:02 PM, said:

Dawn Killer- I posted (although it was ignored) on the CG thread claiming that an EG cannot be killed but can simply have their influence limited i.e. Draconus wasnt killed but his influence was limted as was SOCN as Tatterfox

Yeah -- I don't think we have any confirmed "kills" of Elder Gods thus far, at least not in the permanent sense (as with SoCN, who got physically torn apart and then spiritually squashed into her own personal Convergence Poorboy). I'm going to hold off on certainty that EGs are unkillable because that's basically like painting a target on my head saying "Hey Erikson, prove me wrong, doitdoitdoit!". (Although on second thought...)

I'd imagine that if an EG did get knocked off, it would merely be that aspect -- though it would unquestionably do damage, I doubt you can actually destroy an entire primal force of nature by killing the deity from which it arose. That strikes me as a lot like chopping the head off a dandelion. You get rid of that head, but the roots are still down there.

[Grief]

Edgewalker hints he is an Elder God, and he is also I believe, dead.

As for how limited/killed they can be, it's hard to tell.

Wahtever Rake did to Tiam seems to have been the longest lasting example, that we know of.

[tiam]

just reading ROTCG atm and its just mentioned that the EG and the dragons are aspects. Before everything else. Now we know Dragons can be killed but its difficult and there blood has weird aspects like in RG prologue. So maybe its possible to kill EG but not without consequences such as the death of that aspect like if Osric dies Serc will disappear. Therefore the CG represents an alien element so no one wants to kill him because no one knows what will happen

[lobo the wolfman]

tiam, on Apr 19 2009, 06:12 AM, said:

just reading ROTCG atm and its just mentioned that the EG and the dragons are aspects. Before everything else. Now we know Dragons can be killed but its difficult and there blood has weird aspects like in RG prologue. So maybe its possible to kill EG but not without consequences such as the death of that aspect like if Osric dies Serc will disappear. Therefore the CG represents an alien element so no one wants to kill him because no one knows what will happen

If someone does manage to kill Osric, i think that Serc would become dangerous to use, maybe even cut off from mages all together, but still there. The role of the dragons seem more to bring order to the system of the warrens then being the warrens themselfs.

With the Elder gods i belive they started off as spirts, personalitys fooling around in Chaos untill mortals early need to attach names and faces to things they don't under stand (fire, water darkness light etc etc) shaped these spirts into the aspect that best suited their nature.

But Ascendants are just mortals who have, or are still evolving due to magic, knowledge, circumstance, expericence or whatever in order to survive the world around them. A farmer whose is born and lives his life on a farm dies a farmer, but a person who is born on a farm but ends up having to fight in battle after battle, each time having to improve in order to survive has the potential to ascend if the circumstances are right. That some person will become faster, stronger and a better swordsman then most other people and the expericence and skills can cause thier mind and body to change due to thier need and in the end you have another Dassem.

Thats my take on it anyway.

[dawnkiller]

Following that, I just found a quote from MoI about Paran's particular brand of Ascendency from Mallet on p.191-192: "His mortal flesh has the taint of ascendant blood...and ascendant places . . . that blood, and those places, are like shoves down a corridor."

I think the key word here is "shoves" -- going to certain realms and partaking of certain blood will give you more opportunities to ascend, but that doesn't mean any guy who mainlines Essence of Tiam will necessarily become an Ascendant. I definitely recall Baudin, Stormy, Gessler and Truth going through Thyr (I think) in DG and coming out all golden-brown . . . but Felsin, who'd been right there with them, was basically unchanged, and Feather Witch didn't hit Ascendancy even though she ate the Errant's eye. Something else needs to be going on to push you all the way there.


(SHE ATE HIS EYE, PEOPLE. -- Sorry, I'm never going to get over that one.)

[Onos]

lobo the wolfman, on Apr 18 2009, 06:31 PM, said:

tiam, on Apr 19 2009, 06:12 AM, said:

just reading ROTCG atm and its just mentioned that the EG and the dragons are aspects. Before everything else. Now we know Dragons can be killed but its difficult and there blood has weird aspects like in RG prologue. So maybe its possible to kill EG but not without consequences such as the death of that aspect like if Osric dies Serc will disappear. Therefore the CG represents an alien element so no one wants to kill him because no one knows what will happen

But Ascendants are just mortals who have, or are still evolving due to magic, knowledge, circumstance, expericence or whatever in order to survive the world around them. A farmer whose is born and lives his life on a farm dies a farmer, but a person who is born on a farm but ends up having to fight in battle after battle, each time having to improve in order to survive has the potential to ascend if the circumstances are right. That some person will become faster, stronger and a better swordsman then most other people and the expericence and skills can cause thier mind and body to change due to thier need and in the end you have another Dassem.

Thats my take on it anyway.

I think that is a pretty good explanation. So many other people view ascendency as some sort of switch... like the difference of being alive or dead. Where as i view it as a continuum that starts on one end of the spectrum and continues on as long as you can stay alive. Not all ascendants are equal either. I would say pretty much everyone is 'on the path to ascendancy', just 99+% of the world will die on their farm long before they have accomplished anything. Only a few great individuals will have the appropriate time and circumstances to progress on. So in my opinion when arguing who is and an ascendant and who is not, you should really be saying X is simply MORE ascended that Y. (since any one we will be talking about will have already achieved something in their lives)

[D'rek]

dawnkiller, on Apr 20 2009, 10:20 AM, said:

I think the key word here is "shoves" -- going to certain realms and partaking of certain blood will give you more opportunities to ascend, but that doesn't mean any guy who mainlines Essence of Tiam will necessarily become an Ascendant. I definitely recall Baudin, Stormy, Gessler and Truth going through Thyr (I think) in DG and coming out all golden-brown . . . but Felsin, who'd been right there with them, was basically unchanged, and Feather Witch didn't hit Ascendancy even though she ate the Errant's eye. Something else needs to be going on to push you all the way there.


(SHE ATE HIS EYE, PEOPLE. -- Sorry, I'm never going to get over that one.)

Baudin was shielding Felision. Somehow that works. But yeah, you're still totally valid. And she ate his freaking eye (ew).