Gods being empowered by belief or prayer in some fashion seems to be one of those incestuous tropes that persists mostly because copypasta fantasy authors are cribbing it from each other repeatedly (and maybe from the SRD in particular) despite it making no fucking sense. So I ask you, /tg/:
1) How did it start?
2) Why is it not dead yet?
I'm asking #1 both because I'm curious about where it first appeared as an academic matter, and because it might be that there's a good original take on it that's just been turned to shit like the billion Drizzt Drou'Clones.
I'm asking #2 because it's so fucking stupid almost every time I've seen it, e.g.
> personal sincerity does matter, Purity Sue is powering the single strongest goddess by herself
> personal sincerity doesn't matter, gods conspicuously refraining from doing anything that would get more worshipers
> one-off buddhist expy ancient tribe has prayer wheels that also empower gods, prayer wheels somehow not spammed by every priesthood
> present day urban fantasy, mortals can ascend to godhood this way, pantheon is not clogged with televangelists/celebrities/internet memes
> children of gods still being born gods despite the fact nobody could have heard of them, let alone prayed to them
So many of these authors seem to have taken "gods are powered by belief" as their background assumption and never thought about it any more than they thought about their setting having a sun, they just ran with it. And yes, I realize that most of these could be fixed in theory if you writefag at them, but the writers hadn't done that when I read them.
Most of the non-stupid instances of this I've seen are the ones deliberately playing it for laughs: Oolon Colluphid in H2G2, Banjo in OOTS, or Discworld in general. Apart from comedies, I find that 40K of all things does it best, and while 40K certainly isn't a comedy, it's still not exactly serious. So are there any instances of this concept that are both serious and not shit?
>>47270229
Gods don't just need prayer, the nature of gods is changed by prayer. What is believed by the majority of a god's worshipers to be true about a god will become true. Godly personalities can be entirely rewritten this way.
>>47270229
All I can say is that in regards to point 2 I really can't see any other good reason than for nurishment that a god would care about people worshipping him.
The only other reasons I can come up with is that they want people to worship them because they are extremely insecure or two or more gods are having a competition about gaining the most followers/praise for some reason or other. Both of those seems a bit silly tho.
>>47270355
I think you're kinda proving the point, because your "fix" has just made it worse.
Step 1: convince majority of your followers that you're the most powerful god
Step 2: convince majority of your followers that your nature is now fixed and not changed by majority belief anymore
Step 3: profit
(optional step 0 preparation: reduce your followers to the most gullible)
>>47270229
So this thread is bitching about a choice in a setting and that just makes you angry?
Does it make you angry because a lot of authors made this choice? Or because you generally don't like it? Or is it because you over-analyzed an idea that can largely be forgotten and now you've peeked behind the curtain what you saw caused your testicles to tighten so hard that you just can't let it go?
>>47270632
>mad because a fa/tg/up made a thread to complain against something
>made a post to complain about a fa/tg/uy's thread complaining about thing.
This is how fa/tg/uys are born.
>>47270463
>All I can say is that in regards to point 2 I really can't see any other good reason than for nurishment that a god would care about people worshipping him.
Well, most recorded gods, AFAICT *don't* care about this. I almost said "most religions" but that might be wrong as "religion" is a weird category when it comes to this sort of question.
The word "Religion" as we use it today is to a large extent a Christianity-derived word: it's not far off from meaning basically Christianity and whatever Christianity was competing against. To see example of this in use, consider how Hinduism and Confucianism are dubbed "religions" because Christianity competed with them for mindshare, while Libertarianism is "not religion" because Christianity does not compete with Libertarianism. This despite the fact that Confucianism, being mostly a way of social order with shit to say about supernatural creatures, by all rights belongs in a category of things with Libertarianism and not with Hinduism.
Then there's all the other misc shit that got lumped into "religion", such as Buddhism, which is Metaphysical Escape Strategy From A Hell Dimension, and Shintoism, which is Guide To Customs And Etiquette For Interacting With Genius Loci, both of which at their roots have pretty much shit in common either with each other or with Christianity, which is Here Are The Creator's Instructions For How Creation Should Work.
So. The /kami/ of a mountain, or Ox-Head the jailer of the underworld, or Yama, or Hercules, or Crom, or umpteen other gods and godlike beings and spirits, generally don't/didn't care about worship. Some thought it was nice being appreciated, but there was no metaphysical significance attached.
And even in Christianity, YHWH doesn't care that much for worship in itself. "What is the blood of sacrifices, what is the smoke of offerings to me? What do I care for the many prayers you say at your convocations?" (Isaiah 1)
>>47270229
You calling Pratchett shit, boy?
>>47270807
No, I'm calling Pratchett comedy.
Whenever I see Gods Need Prayer Badly, it's usually stupid if taken seriously. Pratchett does not take anything seriously.
I think it comes from a metaphor for the literal beliefs of its followers. Look at how much the Christian God has influenced our world. Real or not, the beliefs of his followers have given him power and changedo the world. Zeus doesn't affect the world as much because practically no one believes anymore, but back in ancient Greece, he had lots of power.
its a fairly decent way of explaining why a god would actually care in any way about having followers
>>47270898
Why does this need an explanation? Why wouldn't gods simply care because they want followers as followers? I would certainly like some followers despite getting no mana from their worship.
>>47270960
>>47270898
I woudln't. Maybe a tribe to use as pets but nothing more.
Fuck my favorite god is Crom from Conan books.
"Conan would never pray Crom for help, for Crom may consider it a weakness and smite the unworthy."
Despite affection why would gods need followers?
>>47270229
Can confirm, there seems to be something about the idea that makes people's brains rot. Adding to the list of bad examples:
> Gods can pick up a new domain of things to also be empowered by when humans do that or think about that. Somehow the head god is still something like Thunder rather than something like Argument.
> There exists a second class of "real" gods that created the world and otherwise meddle in the plot to keep the belief-powered gods in line. Almost nobody gives a fuck about these gods for some reason.
> The setting is a fantasy kitchen sink where all gods from every pantheon are created by belief and so is every other mythical creature and spirit ever recorded. These are all running around existing simultaneously having wacky hijinks crossover adventures. Even Nilly the Pillow Fairy that the protagonist's children were told about at age six still appears. Yet there's a convenient lack of all the continent-destroying, world-ending, humanity-hating gods and monsters that should appear from a hundred cultures. Except for the villain of the week/issue/whatever, naturally.
> Similar to above, but specifically set on Earth with a "magic comes back" plot that makes gods and monsters start appearing from people's belief in the present day. Only no mention is ever made of the elephants in the room that are Christianity and Islam despite those being the two largest religions. Particularly stupid when the author confirms Christianity to exist by having the Greek-Norse scuffle break through a church window and smash a cross.
>>47270792
I'd say that YHWH according to the abrahamic faiths cares extremely much about people worshipping him, but that's really beside the point.
What I tried to illustrate with my first post was that there are, atleast not what I'm aware of, any good reasons for a god wanting to be worshipped if it isn't due to him beeing "fed" by it.
The obvious answer, atleast to me, to why worship is seen as such a vital thing for a god is because we humans are extremely self centered to the extent that we simply cannot fathom our own general unimportance. By giving importance to our worship of the divine we assure ourself that we are significant in the eyes of the deity.
This tail wagging the dog scenario might not be particulary interesting for the writers in question which is why they went with the idea of worship=nurishment.
>>47271148
Crom best god. "Better to be silent than to call his attention to you; he will send you dooms, not fortune! He is grim and loveless, but at birth he breathes power to strive and slay into a man's soul. What else shall men ask of the gods?"
>>47271213
>Yet there's a convenient lack of all the continent-destroying, world-ending, humanity-hating gods and monsters that should appear from a hundred cultures. Except for the villain of the week/issue/whatever, naturally.
They're all biding their time because the amount of prayer they get isn't enough for them to actually destroy the world. That, or they all took a Bolt of Divine Retribution to the face from the good gods, who are more powerful in practice despite being weaker in concept, because they have just as much if not more belief powering them than their enemies who are part of the same myth.
>>47271238
>I'd say that YHWH according to the abrahamic faiths cares extremely much about people worshipping him, but that's really beside the point.
It's actually quite important, because he has reasons for wanting worship that have nothing to do with gaining power from it. Namely, he's concerned with the affairs of humans.
>>47270229
>1) How did it start?
Possibly Terry Pratchett's Discworld novels, especially Small Gods.
2) Why is it not dead yet?
It has an obvious link to reality. Gods stop being worshipped and 500 years later, every educated person knows that those gods were all bullshit and is worshipping a different god or gods.
It also easily leads into a plotline in which the god or one of his followers raises faith by travelling around and convincing people.
>>47271552
>Namely, he's concerned with the affairs of humans.
I don't see how this have anything to do with the topic.
Why does it matter to him that we give him praise and worship?
An omnipotent being shouldn't need to have his ego boosted so it would be silly if that was the purpose.
His "need" for us to worship him cannot possible be just for the purpose of him holding back punishment if we do as that is circular and also an impossibility for a omnibenevolent being (leaving aside the fact that a omnipotent being cannot be omnibenevolent or vice versa).
As YHWH is omnibenevolent the purpose of worship most be for something positive, as otherwise it would be better if we spent the time and effort doing other things such as tending to the sick and making macaroni pudding to the hungry.
In YHWH case worship etc. cannot be necessitated for his own empowerment which he then can use to better help humanity either as he is already omnipotent.
>>47270229
Neil Gaiman
Also, that is a cute demiurge.
I always thought it was something that came out of D&D when TSR switched over to the 2nd edition in Forgotten Realms - there, it was explained as AO, the Highgod, punishing the other gods for generally neglecting their followers and forcing them to take more of an interest in their faithful.
Even then, it wasn't strictly speaking universal throughout D&D; the Dragonlance setting's gods quite notably got away with just ignoring their followers for hundreds of years after they were called out for the Cataclysm... which they were supposedly in the right for, but that's because of the bullshit Mormonism of the setting's writers, so that's another matter.
>>47270229
>1) How did it start?
In older traditions (ancient greek, mesoamerican, korean ancestor-worship, etc), a sacrifice was at times supposed to literally nourish the entity receiving the sacrifice. Like if you made some nice steaks and burned them for Zeus, then Zeus would actually eat the steak. Or if you killed someone for a mayan or aztec god, the god could eat the blood and be enriched by it.
So the idea of human worship sustaining divine figures is a far older than you'd think.
>>47271238
You're sort of hitting the nail on the head - the moment Judaism and similar Sun god worshipping religions switched from Henotheism to outright monotheism is when the whole "god needs worship" thing really makes any sense - even henotheism, while being exclusive worship of one god, allows the occasional "mitigating" sacrifice or nod of respect to other gods when appropriate, as worship and sacrifice was more akin to begging or bribing a ruler or judge for leniency or favor than what monotheistic religions consider worship, where the regular act of worship is taken as a form of ongoing sacrifice on the part of the worshipper.
Sort of like one of those programs that uses a load of networked spare processing power to do DDOSes or work out values of pi or search for ETs.
>>47272416
>I don't see how this have anything to do with the topic.
Some (including you, I believe) have claimed that the concept of gods living on prayer is still around because there's basically no other reason why they'd be concerned with human religions. The fact that the Judeo-Christian god has his own, very different reason for concern is quite relevant.
>>47270229
>persists mostly because copypasta fantasy authors are cribbing it from each other repeatedly
Sorry "an idea persists because it is prolific" is too hard for you to swallow.
>despite it making no fucking sense
Honestly, you just seem obstinately thick.
The topic could even be fun to discuss with you, but "thinks he's clever (but isn't)" and "can't help being a dick about it" is a bad combination.
>>47270229
40K is serious in tone, but not mood. Do they not teach the difference in schools anymore?
You're complaining about bad authors, not a bad idea. It's Guilt by Association logic, which should not really be used by someone who wants to present as a person who cares about intellectual integrity.
>>47270499
>Who is Jesus
/S
>>47273769
You are correct. See the epic of gilgamesh
>>47270229
1.) Because it makes sense
2.) Because it makes sense
This is one of those things that most people actually come up with independently only to find out it's long been a thing. It's a natural conclusion for anyone trying to figure out a logical system of Gods and why they'd desire worship. Do you actually have any sort of alternative in mind or are you just complaining about things you don't understand?
It's not prayer, necessarily, but belief. That there lies power in worship is an extension of the power of human consciousness and it's influence on reality, a borderline necessary trope in a thought-out fantasy setting.
>>47270499
>Step 1: convince majority of your followers that you're the most powerful god
>Step 2: convince majority of your followers that your nature is now fixed and not changed by majority belief anymore
This is what every believer already believes. It doesn't change the nature of gods.
>>47274386
There are lots of different reasons for why a god might be interested in the religions of mankind. However in regards to worship there doesn't seem to be as many. The answer that god cares about us worshipping him aswell as how we go about doing it doesn't seem to have any necessary connection with his interest in us. As such we are left to ask what reason there is for him wanting our worship.
