Is Imperial polytheism realistic?

[Orin J.]

Not sure I buy Hashut being a god of law even within homebrew stuff. Kad'ai fire demons, Bull centaurs, fangs and mass human sacrifice all seem pretty Chaotic to me. Seems like you'd have to write out so much official material there's not much point keeping the name.

fractulis is probably not using the later stuff introduced by the forgeworld releases and trying to stick to earlier material, although even then, there's some mentions of the chaotic mutations they undergo only being retrained by their natrual dwarfen nature. it also doesn't really align with his canonical title "father of darkness" but i guess you could argue that the soot their engines constantly pump out is the real reason the dwarfs favor industry and hashut is a chaos god of pollution......hm.... EDIT: checking the books to see if i'm wrong, they mention his spells showing hashut as the form of a smoking bull with a firey hide in the spells, and claim that the great taurus is a mutation of chaos dwarfs, which lines up with the existence of the bull centaurs.

[Dustman]

Earlier, I mentioned the idea of Sigmarism as an aggressive monotheism, actively attempting to supplant other faiths. Not the official lore but that view doesn't strike me as quite plausible, as discussed earlier. Nor is it particularly interesting. I don't feel Manaan, Verana, Taal, Rhya and the others add much. They're mostly window-dressing. Signs of Sigmar, in contrast, are everywhere: comets, hammers, chanting fanatics, flagellants scourging their own flesh. You immediately see he's important in the world. However, monotheistic Sigmarism would still have obvious polytheistic roots in a way that monotheism in the real world does not. Wrote this Sigmarite sermon to express the idea.

Sigmar watches

Brethren!

We walk today in the light but the night draws nigh! Even the mightiest man must taste of death for this wicked world harbors many perils. Orcs, beastmen, disease, famine, the undead, sorcerers and even dread chaos plot our ruination. Howling daemons stalk our very dreams. Woe to the man whose piety does not shield his thoughts. And should you strive all these things, still your flesh shall grow weak and still ye must die.

But be ye not afraid! The Lord Sigmar shelters his people.

Long ago, the world was not as now. Many gods ruled earth, sky and sea. When the Lord Sigmar, champion of man, set down his hammer, Ghal Maraz, the great splitter of souls, and went into the east, the gods prepared a stair before him. He ascended a high mountain and found the gods enthroned under lofty arches of gold. They lauded him and crowned him and sounded many trumpets. Then they set down their own crowns and laid them down their scepters and their power did enter into the Lord Sigmar as in the form of many roaring winds. Where before there many gods, now there is one. Where before they were far, now he is near and his face shines upon the fullness of man; upon the Empire.

Therefore, they who persist in the worship of old gods; Ulric, Morr, Manaan, and such-like; do commit grave heresy, for such things have passed away. Some keep these customs from ignorance but many make a pretense of honoring elder gods, while in truth they bow to dread chaos. Let not the servants of the great enemy hide behind a shield of false-piety. Let not the deluded and the ignorant persist in the worship of former things. The one correct, my brethren, but the other burn without mercy, for they must suffer the torment unending!

Yea, death is no escape for the wicked. When a soul passes from the body, it lingers in the mortal world as a shadow. Some persist more strongly and these we call ghosts but most are altogether unseen. Sigmar’s priests lay the body of the dead in his holy churches that their spirits may pass to the next realm. Those unfortunates whose flesh rots in the field or under the roots of trees instead pass wailing through the shadow realm until found by the divine spirits sent of Lord Sigmar to escort them unto judgment.

Before the door to Sigmar’s high hall sit three rings of judges: firstly, the nine pious judges, secondly, the seven righteous judges, thirdly, the three godly judges. These three are Johann Helsturm the first Theogonist and Great Prophet, Magnus the Savior, who delivered the Empire, and Fritz-Rommel the Wise. The souls of the dead go before whatsoever ring befits their station in life and face the awful judgment of one who sits upon the throne. Those who were lords and leaders of men in life must face one of the three. Those who were of middling condition; burghers, captains of war, engineers, artisans, and other such; must go before one of the seven. The common and the vulgar submit themselves to one of the nine. A soul guided by the prayers of the priests may choose which judge will weigh his case.

Those found worthy enter through the bright door unto Sigmar’s light. There forevermore they feast and rejoice in unending bliss. Blessed are they!

Those found unworthy pass wailing through the grim door unto eternal hellfire. There go murderers, traitors, heathens, adulterous women, mutants, rebellious children, wizards, blasphemers and worshippers of chaos. There the orcs cry in agony forever and ever as righteous punishment for their depredations. There do the vampires writhe in the flame. There is Mannfred Von Carsteins spitted alive upon a stake while bathed in showers of molten silver. There does Asavar Kul groan, up to his neck in icy acidic waters, while fiends gnaw upon his frostbitten skin.

The Lord Sigmar often leads the souls of the faithful to wage war upon the realm of chaos. They take daemons captive and toss them screaming into the hellfire to burn forever with the unrighteous. One day he shall conquer all of long night.

So take heed, brethren, and repent while the day lasts! Take not solace in gods who have passed away, nor crawl to the doomed power of the north, nor commit common wickedness, but seek ye rather the glory of Sigmar, the god who is yet man!

— Dietrich Stottz, Sermon

[Capitaneus Fractus]

Not sure I buy Hashut being a god of law even within homebrew stuff. Kad'ai fire demons, Bull centaurs, fangs and mass human sacrifice all seem pretty Chaotic to me. Seems like you'd have to write out so much official material there's not much point keeping the name.

fractulis is probably not using the later stuff introduced by the forgeworld releases and trying to stick to earlier material, although even then, there's some mentions of the chaotic mutations they undergo only being retrained by their natrual dwarfen nature. it also doesn't really align with his canonical title "father of darkness" but i guess you could argue that the soot their engines constantly pump out is the real reason the dwarfs favor industry and hashut is a chaos god of pollution......hm....

Indeed... albeit I might add relevant later material. In case of Forgeworld release, the main reason I not use them is, however, that I am not aware of them. Still, I am not sure, yet, which "official material" should I write out so much...


My feeling on "natural dwarve nature" is that it can be kept as such: that is part of a resistance of chaos that Dwarves naturally have, and that Law cultist might get... At higher levels, it even strike on the natural tendency of life to evolve, to mutate... Or it can be changed so Hashut cultists rather gets these immutations as a reward of their chaotic god of law (gods of laws being an aspect of the plain Chaos).


On Hashut's canonical title of "father of Darkness" I don't see how it doesn't align with law... It could be a form of address for a god of all religion. Darkness is neither the Chaos, the Cosmos nor the "Balance": darkness is simply the lack of light. A pure space, without any photon to degrade the matier is in a state of darkness. That is something that can, arguably, go as much well with Law than with other religious ideologies.
His aspect as god of Greed might be a little more problematic, but nothing that would be unexplainable, in my humble opinion... As used to state Montesquieu, frugality is sometime perceived as greed:

Les politiques Grecs qui vivoient dans le gouvernement populaire, ne reconnoiſſoient d’autre force qui pût le ſoutenir, que celle de la vertu. Ceux d’aujourd'hui ne nous parlent que de manufactures, de commerce, de finances, de richeſſes & de luxe même.
Lorſque cette vertu ceſſe, l’ambition entre dans les cœurs qui peuvent la recevoir, & l’avarice entre dans tous. Les déſirs changent d’objets ; ce qu’on aimoit, on ne l’aime plus ; on étoit libre avec les lois, on veut être libre contr’elles ; chaque citoyen eſt comme un eſclave échappé de la maisſn de son maître ; ce qui étoit maxime, on l’appelle rigueur ; ce qui étoit regle, on l’appelle gêne ; ce qui étoit attention, on l’appelle crainte. C’eſt la frugalité qui y eſt l’avarice, & non pas le désir d’avoir. Autrefois le bien des particuliers faiſoit le tréſor public, mais pour lors le tréſor public devient le patrimoine des particuliers. La république est une dépouille ; & la force n’eſt plus que le pouvoir de quelques citoyens & la licence de tous.

"The politic Greeks who lived under a popular government, knew no other support but virtue. The modern inhabitants of that country are intirely taken up with manufactures, commerce, finances, riches and luxury.
When virtue is banished, ambition invades the hearts of those who are disposed to receive it, and avarice possesses the whole community. The desires now change their objects; what they were fond of before, becomes indifferent; they were free, while under the restraint of laws, they will now be free to act against law; and as every citizen is like a slave escaped from his master's house, what was a maxim of equity, they call rigour; what was a rule of action, they call constraint; and to precaution they give the name of fear. Frugality, and not the thirst of gain, now passes for avarice. Formerly the wealth of individuals constituted the public treasure; but now the public treasure is become the patrimony of private persons. The members of the commonwealth riot on the public spoils, and its strength is only the power of some citizens, and the licentiousness of the whole community." (Montesqieu, L'eſprit des loix, III, iii.)

---
Mass human sacrifices are obviously neither Chaotic, nor Lawful: they are violent and might happen in the frame of a Chaotic or a Lawful cult, just like it might happen in the frame of other cults. Human sacrifices were quite widespread in our History which isn't related, by any means, to Warhammer's Chaos Gods... (are Aztec "pretty Chaotic" to Q?).
To quote Wikipedia: "Human sacrifice may be a ritual practiced in a stable society, and may even be conducive to enhance societal unity (see: Sociology of religion), both by creating a bond unifying the sacrificing community, and in combining human sacrifice and capital punishment, by removing individuals that have a negative effect on societal stability (criminals, religious heretics, foreign slaves or prisoners of war)."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_sacrifice


---
On K'daai fire demons, I've just checked on Internet and they just seem to be daemons whose description might indistinctly make them Chaos daemons or Law daemons... They even are fire daemons, which means they are elemental daemons, which, arguably, might link them to the previously detailed idea of immutations to mineral forms or elemental matier (here as fire). What is elemental matier, if not something that rise after Chaos leave?

... Ante mare et terras et quod tegit omnia caelum
unus erat toto naturae vultus in orbe,
quem dixere chaos: rudis indigestaque moles
nec quicquam nisi pondus iners congestaque eodem
non bene iunctarum discordia semina rerum.
nullus adhuc mundo praebebat lumina Titan,
nec nova crescendo reparabat cornua Phoebe,
nec circumfuso pendebat in aere tellus
ponderibus librata suis, nec bracchia longo
margine terrarum porrexerat Amphitrite;
utque erat et tellus illic et pontus et aer,
sic erat instabilis tellus, innabilis unda,
lucis egens aer; nulli sua forma manebat,
obstabatque aliis aliud, quia corpore in uno
frigida pugnabant calidis, umentia siccis,
mollia cum duris, sine pondere, habentia pondus.
Hanc deus et melior litem natura diremit.
nam caelo terras et terris abscidit undas
et liquidum spisso secrevit ab aere caelum.
quae postquam evolvit caecoque exemit acervo,
dissociata locis concordi pace ligavit:
ignea convexi vis et sine pondere caeli
emicuit summaque locum sibi fecit in arce;
proximus est aer illi levitate locoque;
densior his tellus elementaque grandia traxit
et pressa est gravitate sua; circumfluus umor
ultima possedit solidumque coercuit orbem...

"Before the Sea and Lande were made, and Heaven that all doth hide,
In all the worlde one onely face of nature did abide,
Which Chaos hight, a huge rude heape, and nothing else but even
A heavie lump and clottred clod of seedes togither driven,
Of things at strife among themselves, for want of order due.
No sunne as yet with lightsome beames the shapelesse world did vew.
No Moone in growing did repayre hir hornes with borowed light.
Nor yet the earth amiddes the ayre did hang by wondrous slight
Just peysed by hir proper weight. Nor winding in and out
Did Amphitrytee with hir armes embrace the earth about.
For where was earth, was sea and ayre, so was the earth unstable.
The ayre all darke, the sea likewise to beare a ship unable.
No kinde of thing had proper shape, but ech confounded other.
For in one selfesame bodie strove the hote and colde togither,
The moist with drie, the soft with hard, the light with things of weight.
This strife did God and Nature breake, and set in order streight.
The earth from heaven, the sea from earth, he parted orderly,
And from the thicke and foggie ayre, he tooke the lightsome skie.
Which when he once unfolded had, and severed from the blinde
And clodded heape, he setting eche from other did them binde
In endlesse friendship to agree. The fire most pure and bright,
The substance of the heaven it selfe, bicause it was so light
Did mount aloft, and set it selfe in highest place of all.
The second roume of right to ayre, for lightnesse did befall.
The earth more grosse drew down with it eche weighty kinde of matter,
And set it selfe in lowest place. Againe, the waving water
Did lastly chalenge for his place, the utmost coast and bound,
Of all the compasse of the earth, to close the stedfast ground."
(Ovidius, Metamorphoses, I, v. 5-31).

For me, K'daai might easily fit as Law daemons.


---
On Bull centaurs, they might stay chaotic creatures (mutants) serving a chaotic god of Law. They weren't created by Hashut, they were created by the collapse of Warp Gates, in the time of the chaotic flood on the Warhammer World: "Many centuries ago, during the Time of Chaos, a fraction of those [dwarrows] that survived the onslaught became horrifically mutated, their stubborn Dwarf resistance to the warping taint overwhelmed utterly by the awful energies to which they were subjected, and so the first Bull Centaurs were born."
One might even replace (or combine) this "stubborn dwarf resistance to the warping taint" by a grace from Hashut.
https://warhammerfantasy.fandom.com/wik ... ur_Renders

[Orin J.]

His [Hashut's] aspect as god of Greed might be a little more problematic, but nothing that would be unexplainable, in my humble opinion...

i mean given that the chaos dwarfs are engaged in an absurd rush of strip-mining to the point they're just digging huge pits for all the tar they're extracting for their oil and enslaving everyone they can can gather including each other when they falter for the sake of running their factories up to produce as much as possible without forthought i'd say the greed aspect of hashut is one of the more solid parts of the the god's detailing. even their choice to sacrifice captured slaved by throwing them in a big iron statue of hashut that's been heated until it glows red speaks of consumption as a conspicuous sign of self-importance.

i mean, i figure your whole "law god" angle is scuttled regardless what with the old lore describing the chaos dwarf sorcerer/priests sacrificing people for entertainment but the greed angle seems to be a fairly straightforward "manifest destiny of the chosen people" sort of thing taken to an extreme and applied to an evil steampunk city.

[Visitor Q]

(are Aztec "pretty Chaotic" to Q?).

Unironic answer to that?

Yes.

[Capitaneus Fractus]

Thank you for your unironic answer.

So are you thinking that Aztec gods are Chaotic Gods or are aspects of the gods of Chaos? Do you believe that such Gods really exist in our real world or do you think that Chaos would in fact be unrelated to Chaos gods? If so, is being "Chaotic" not a fantastic aspect but simply a very common behaviour?
Still, Chaos being Chaos, were, according to you, Spaniards morally right to utterly destruct the Aztec Chaotic Civilization and to eliminate many of those who were heavily corrupted by the Aztec culture?

Do you think that Aztecs received mutations, which seems to be a chaotic fate for most chaotic cultists in Warhammer? If so, is this thinking corroborated by archaeological sources? Do you think, on the contrary, that it is plausible for whole societies of "pretty Chaotic" cultists to not receive mutation?

[Visitor Q]

Thank you for your unironic answer.

So are you thinking that Aztec gods are Chaotic Gods or are aspects of the gods of Chaos? Do you believe that such Gods really exist in our real world or do you think that Chaos would in fact be unrelated to Chaos gods? If so, is being "Chaotic" not a fantastic aspect but simply a very common behaviour?
Still, Chaos being Chaos, were, according to you, Spaniards morally right to utterly destruct the Aztec Chaotic Civilization and to eliminate many of those who were heavily corrupted by the Aztec culture?

Do you think that Aztecs received mutations, which seems to be a chaotic fate for most chaotic cultists in Warhammer? If so, is this thinking corroborated by archaeological sources? Do you think, on the contrary, that it is plausible for whole societies of "pretty Chaotic" cultists to not receive mutation?

What I mean is that if you transplanted the Aztec religion wholesale, filed off the serial numbers (changed a few names) into the Old World and called it a Chaos cult no one I have played with would bat an eyelid. If I did the same and called it a Cult of Law that would break verisimilitude for any player I have played with over 25 years.

Likewise if I tried to present Chaos Dwarfs as a Cult of Law....

[Capitaneus Fractus]

That seems to just displace the source of thinking, but can we say that all those who've played with you would confuse the Aztec culture with Warhammer Chaos, provided you just avoid to use names normally used to describe the Aztec culture?

However, if I understand you correctly, as it seems you need to change the names, they might not necessary considerate the Aztec culture being Chaotic if the names normally used to describe the Aztec culture are used, albeit the culture stay exactly the same. I am understanding you correctly?

If so... it seems to me that those who've played with you do not considerate the substance when analysing things, nor even the form, but only the label...

[Orin J.]

i believe he's claiming that an aztec-like belief system would be presumed to be a chaos cult by the existing peoples of the empire and we have to admit they're not exactly the most reasonable and thoughtful country around.

i also believe this entire mental exercise about the aztec is kinda silly.

[Overlord]

i also believe this entire mental exercise about the aztec is kinda silly.

People dont hate me but i think this entire conversation in silly and pointless. Having a fantasy game religion converted in real world? The Dungeons and Dragons have more common to every real religion and I would enter that kind of debate is it possible to become a God... ect. and with Warhammer religion... its like bashing head on concrete wall.

[Orin J.]

i also believe this entire mental exercise about the aztec is kinda silly.

People dont hate me but i think this entire conversation in silly and pointless. Having a fantasy game religion converted in real world? The Dungeons and Dragons have more common to every real religion and I would enter that kind of debate is it possible to become a God... ect. and with Warhammer religion... its like bashing head on concrete wall.

no, i think it's silly because at no point in the conversation has anyone given a single detail about the aztec culture so they're literally arguing about a strawman until they explain what about the aztec backs up their opinion.

[Capitaneus Fractus]

i believe he's claiming that an aztec-like belief system would be presumed to be a chaos cult by the existing peoples of the empire and we have to admit they're not exactly the most reasonable and thoughtful country around.

i also believe this entire mental exercise about the aztec is kinda silly.

I obviously may be wrong, but Q most probably not, because
1. Q talks about those with whom he plays, which, in itself, appears to contradict your belief;
2. "the existing peoples of the Empire", who do not exist beyond our imagination, probably do not need to have filed off the serial numbers (changed a few names) in order to not get the direct reference to Earth's Aztecs. It is enough to assume that they do not know Earth's Aztecs to have them reasonably ignore them.

no, i think it's silly because at no point in the conversation has anyone given a single detail about the aztec culture so they're literally arguing about a strawman until they explain what about the aztec backs up their opinion.

Well, it happens that we did, and argue at last on one specific point:

Not sure I buy Hashut being a god of law even within homebrew stuff. Kad'ai fire demons, Bull centaurs, fangs and mass human sacrifice all seem pretty Chaotic to me. Seems like you'd have to write out so much official material there's not much point keeping the name.

Mass human sacrifices are obviously neither Chaotic, nor Lawful: they are violent and might happen in the frame of a Chaotic or a Lawful cult, just like it might happen in the frame of other cults. Human sacrifices were quite widespread in our History which isn't related, by any means, to Warhammer's Chaos Gods... (are Aztec "pretty Chaotic" to Q?).
To quote Wikipedia: "Human sacrifice may be a ritual practiced in a stable society, and may even be conducive to enhance societal unity (see: Sociology of religion), both by creating a bond unifying the sacrificing community, and in combining human sacrifice and capital punishment, by removing individuals that have a negative effect on societal stability (criminals, religious heretics, foreign slaves or prisoners of war)."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_sacrifice

Unironic answer to that?

Yes [Aztec are "petty Chaotic" to me].

Albeit it is true that Q also generalize his thought on "the Aztec religion wholesale", your fallacious allegation that "no point in the conversation has anyone given a single detail about the aztec culture" lead you to be the one who argue against a straw-man, aren't you?
And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?

[Orin J.]

listen, the claims of "mass sacrifices" are based on the exaggerated claims of the spanish priests and are largely considered wildly inaccurate at best or falsified for justifying conquest at worst. which is my point, your arguing is revolving around something that hasn't actually considered a part of aztec culture for some time, just an old cliche.

honestly given the empire's love of torturing "heretics" (they use the word wrong, but that's the result of the game being written by a buncha stoner metalheads back in the 80s) to death, they'd probably be at least a little willing to accept the aztec's ritual sacrifices what with them to cleanse the victim of sin.

[Capitaneus Fractus]

listen, the claims of "mass sacrifices" are based on the exaggerated claims of the spanish priests and are largely considered wildly inaccurate at best or falsified for justifying conquest at worst. which is my point, your arguing is revolving around something that hasn't actually considered a part of aztec culture for some time, just an old cliche.

The content of your text is, simply, inexact, and I have to say, is surprisingly way too inexact compared to the tone of inopportune certitude of the fallacious allegation that constitute your "point". There is an article from Wikipedia on this subject that I linked from my previous message. It might perhaps interest you...

That Spaniards took opportunity of Aztec mass sacrifices to justify their conquest, the enslavement of local populations and their Christianisation cannot mean that mass sacrifices didn't existed, especially when it isn't only supported by historical sources, but also by archælogical sources...

Some conquistadors wrote about the tzompantli[, an enormous rack of skulls built in front of the Templo Mayor—a pyramid with two temples on top. One was dedicated to the war god, Huitzilopochtli, and the other to the rain god, Tlaloc] and its towers, estimating that the rack alone contained 130,000 skulls. But historians and archaeologists knew the conquistadors were prone to exaggerating the horrors of human sacrifice to demonize the Mexica culture. As the centuries passed, scholars began to wonder whether the tzompantli had ever existed.

Archaeologists at the National Institute of Anthropology and History (INAH) here can now say with certainty that it did. Beginning in 2015, they discovered and excavated the remains of the skull rack and one of the towers underneath a colonial period house on the street that runs behind Mexico City's cathedral. (The other tower, they suspect, lies under the cathedral's back courtyard.) The scale of the rack and tower suggests they held thousands of skulls, testimony to an industry of human sacrifice unlike any other in the world.

WADE, Lizzie, "Feeding the gods: Hundreds of skulls reveal massive scale of human sacrifice in Aztec capital", Science, American Association for the Advancement of Science, Washington, 21st of June, 2018.
https://www.sciencemag.org/news/2018/06 ... ec-capital

Not only Aztecs did practised mass human sacrifices, but those mass sacrifices were also more important than those of their neighbours:

Other Mesoamerican cultures also engaged in human sacrifice and built tzompantlis. But, "The Mexica certainly brought this to an extreme," says Vera Tiesler, a bioarchaeologist at the Autonomous University of Yucatán in Mérida, Mexico. In her work at the Mayan city of Chichen Itza, founded some 700 years before Tenochtitlan and more than 1000 kilometers away, she found six skulls with holes in their sides that she suspects were once displayed on the posts of a tzompantli. However, the holes in each skull were less regular and uniform than those in the Tenochtitlan skulls. "That makes me think it was not a standardized practice yet," she says. "Tenochtitlan was the maximum expression [of the tzompantli tradition]."

Ibidem

***

The point of the exchange between Q and I can be summarized there:

Human sacrifice occupied a particularly important place in Mesoamerica. Many of the region's cultures, including the Maya and the Mexica, believed that human sacrifice nourished the gods. Without it, the sun would cease to rise and the world would end. And sacrificial victims earned a special, honored place in the afterlife.

Ibidem

For the Aztecs—the larger cultural group to which the Mexica belonged—those skulls were the seeds that would ensure the continued existence of humanity. They were a sign of life and regeneration, like the first flowers of spring.

But the Spanish conquistadors who marched into Tenochtitlan in 1519 saw them differently. For them, the skulls—and the entire practice of human sacrifice—evinced the Mexica's barbarism and justified laying waste to the city in 1521.

Ibidem

If I understood Q correctly, for him, mass sacrifices are characteristic to Warhammer's Chaos and as, contrary to your fallacious allegations, Aztec did ritually accomplished mass human sacrifices, Q perceive them, unironically, as being petty chaotic and all the players with whom he plays wouldn't bat an eyelid if Aztec were presented in his plays as being chaotic creatures, provided the serial numbers would be filled-off (provided few names would be changed).
That is a bit like that, for Spanish conquerors, mass sacrifices are characteristic to barbarism and Aztecs were barbarians that had to be crushed and Christianized.
And those two points are in total opposition to how Aztecs themselves saw those sacrifices as the source to preserve the cosmic order.

For me, on the contrary, mass human sacrifices are obviously neither Chaotic, nor Lawful: they are violent (which is different than being chaotic) and might happen in the frame of a Chaotic or a Lawful cult, just like it might happen in the frame of other cults as it did in our real world's cults. Human sacrifices were quite widespread in our History which isn't related, by any means, to Warhammer's Chaos Gods... nor with Warhammer's Law Gods, by the way, albeit the Aztec justifications for mass sacrifices (like most social justifications for mass sacrifices by the way) are closer to Warhammer's Law than to Warhammer's Chaos.

Human sacrifices are too human and too common among the "normal" state of mankind (that is to say, among our historical reality) to be associated with Law or with Chaos who are the fantastic aspects of Warhammer Fantasy, that is to say, the aspects that lead to makes the fictional world function differently to our real observable world.

It could be argued that, provided that Chaos is the sea of souls -including of human souls- Chaos is also the fruit of humanity, hence that what does humanity can be found in Chaos too, and that is correct, but that logically do not make it specifically "Chaotic", because even if it also become a chaotic thing, it stay more generally a human thing.


***

So my position was and still is close to the one that you, Orin, seem to suggest here:

honestly given the empire's love of torturing "heretics" (they use the word wrong, but that's the result of the game being written by a buncha stoner metalheads back in the 80s) to death, they'd probably be at least a little willing to accept the aztec's ritual sacrifices what with them to cleanse the victim of sin.

Sacrifices aren't an ideological objective, they are a mean. So sacrifices might fit the Empire (which instituted pit fighting as a public practice, which can be seen as the rest of human sacrifices if considered as was the gladiatorship), just like it might fit any other society that feels its aims could be legitimately reached through this mean. Including chaotic societies, certainly, but including law societies too and, obviously, including human societies -as we can see in our real world.

So, to go back to the original point, mass sacrifices are not in contradiction with a law cult. Would Hashut be a law god that mass sacrifices could be kept as they are.

[Visitor Q]

Leaving aside real world history this all started with idea that the Chaos Dwarfs and Hashut could be a cult of law. I think this is preposterous. The example of using Aztecs didn't convince me.

So my question would be in warhammer lore are there any examples of Cults of Law conducting bonde fide, balls to the wall, human sacrifice?. I'm not talking about burning heretics as some kind of proxy but straight out stone alter, virgin, knife, to summon or appease a diety stuff.

I don't think there are. Because that isn't how Law works in warhammer. Other fantasy settings, knock yourself out but Warhammer World isn't how it works.

It's your game though, you can put in whatever want.

[Capitaneus Fractus]

Leaving aside real world history this all started with idea that the Chaos Dwarfs and Hashut could be a cult of law. I think this is preposterous. The example of using Aztecs didn't convince me.

Regardless of how it might convince or not convince you (which I feel do not matter at all in itself and is here not argued) the case of the Aztec logically shows a possible (and, in my humble opinion, obvious) weakness of your argument:

mass human sacrifice all seem pretty Chaotic to me.

This argument only have value if mass human sacrifices are characteristic of Chaos...
(If mass human sacrifices can be either Chaotic or not, but happen to be, among other cases, Chaotic, it is pointless in our exchange).

The fact is that mass human sacrifices were practised by a lot of civilisations (Aztec being one of the many, albeit far from being the least and one of the most famous) that it seems -in my humble opinion- absurd to consider being "Chaotic"... If indeed absurd, it invalidate in itself your point (by simple logics).

The sole case where it would not invalidate your argument is if Aztecs and those others civilizations are Chaotic (as it stop from being a counter-example to become a simple example). Interestingly, it happens that you do not share my feeling on the absurdity of such position, and even think, unironically, that they are indeed Chaotic:

(are Aztec "pretty Chaotic" to Q?).

Unironic answer to that?

Yes [Aztec are "petty Chaotic" to me].

You then alas stop short of approving the logical consequence of your unironic opinion, by avoiding answering to my questions:

So are you thinking that Aztec gods are Chaotic Gods or are aspects of the gods of Chaos? Do you believe that such Gods really exist in our real world or do you think that Chaos would in fact be unrelated to Chaos gods? If so, is being "Chaotic" not a fantastic aspect but simply a very common behaviour?
Still, Chaos being Chaos, were, according to you, Spaniards morally right to utterly destruct the Aztec Chaotic Civilization and to eliminate many of those who were heavily corrupted by the Aztec culture?

Do you think that Aztecs received mutations, which seems to be a chaotic fate for most chaotic cultists in Warhammer? If so, is this thinking corroborated by archaeological sources? Do you think, on the contrary, that it is plausible for whole societies of "pretty Chaotic" cultists to not receive mutation?

The logical consequences of your claim, is:

• either that Aztecs were a threat to mankind. So, everyone sane, here, should approve and justify the utter destruction and acculturation of the Aztec civilization and the colonization of their lands by Spanish conquerors. And if that is the case, you do not face the contradiction of your statement with its logical implication...
• or that, in fact, Chaos isn't really a threat and the extermination of individuals just because they are Chaotic is foolish and morally reprehensible and should be unacceptable.

Alas, you avoid to structure your answer. That is a pity as it would be something that would have some interest to our exchange...:

• Either that you defend and argue that Aztecs are indeed Chaotic just like every civilization that practice massive human sacrifices...
  (which is something that could be argued, especially since Aztecs existed in the Warhammer universe... as the Warhammer Fantasy World is a planet within the Warhammer 40,000 Galaxy which is our Milky Way, at the dawn of the 41th Millenary after Jesus Christ);
• or that you recognize that your argument do not stand, so that we might search on other grounds if Hashut could or couldn't be a chaotic god of Law rather than a chaotic god of Chaos.

The sole complement we had was that:

if you transplanted the Aztec religion wholesale, filed off the serial numbers (changed a few names) into the Old World and called it a Chaos cult no one I have played with would bat an eyelid. If I did the same and called it a Cult of Law that would break verisimilitude for any player I have played with over 25 years.

But that only underline that those who've played with you do not considerate the substance when analysing things, nor even the form, but only the label, hence aren't reliable intelligences on that subject. Still, as even a broken clock might reveal the good hour one or two time per day, it do not help us much... Their perception is silly, but it still might (or might not) be correct.


---

So my question would be in warhammer lore are there any examples of Cults of Law conducting bonde fide, balls to the wall, human sacrifice?. I'm not talking about burning heretics as some kind of proxy

Burning heretics is an human sacrifice: it is an expiatory sacrifice of the culprits, which happen to be an human being, in our case, in order to appease a god or a community of gods and to not let the fault of the culprit soil the whole community.

So it appears to me that you aren't really asking if they conduct human sacrifices. If I read you correctly, you in fact wonder if they conduct human sacrifice according to a quite specific fashion, which is:

straight out stone alter, virgin, knife, to summon or appease a diety stuff.

It is my turn to wonder... Why have you this specific fashion in mind? Do Hashut cultists tend to specifically sacrifice virgins with a knife on a stone alter?
Might you please share a source that would enlighten me? Thanks in advance.

Because that isn't how Law works in warhammer.

That is, alas, a groundless allegation...
Might you care to eventually start arguing rather than claiming while trying to support your claims with at last some sources too, as I've done since the beginning? It would help our exchanges (or help me, at last).

It's your game though, you can put in whatever want.

Correcting the official setting, rather than just stating how is the current setting, is even the main point and the main purpose of this thread...
You should certainly reading again the first post if you've forget the frame of our exchanges.

[Orin J.]

as much as fract enjoys expounding on why he'd like to believe the chaos dwarf god could be lawful, i remain entirely unsupportive. there's nothing to his very long posts but extended arguments to consider his interest without any material to encourage it, and the chaos dwarfs are noted as having mutated, with their sorcerer priests being the most prone to mutation (page forty-seven of the old chaos dwarf army book), and the sacrifices being done for the entertainment of the selfsame sorcerer priests (page four of same) who don't even have any form of formal hierarchy (page fifteen of same)

he's welcome to play it however he likes in hi game as homebrew, and i'd love to hear how that works out, but simply put the argument for a lawful hashut doesn't have a leg to stand on and no amount to picking other people's disagreements will change that.

[Capitaneus Fractus]

as much as fract enjoys expounding on why he'd like to believe the chaos dwarf god could be lawful, i remain entirely unsupportive. there's nothing to his very long posts but extended arguments to consider his interest without any material to encourage it, and the chaos dwarfs are noted as having mutated, with their sorcerer priests being the most prone to mutation (page forty-seven of the old chaos dwarf army book), and the sacrifices being done for the entertainment of the selfsame sorcerer priests (page four of same) who don't even have any form of formal hierarchy (page fifteen of same)

Your post is the very first one to happen to use precise sources in order to try to oppose my points... (and one of the first to use precise sources on this thread, beside my posts) Thank you very much for that. That is sincerely appreciated

You are right that I only used sources and (a lot of) material to enlighten how logically weak or fallacious were counter-arguments, while I didn't had the opportunity to argue, to source or to present material to enrich my suggestion on Law, because there were no clearly pertinent nor clearly logical counter-argument to lead me to such presentations. Simple questions asking to develop one aspect might had been enough for that, but I've not spotted ones neither. It sadden me as much as it might sadden you.

On material supporting an unofficial suggestion of innovation about a fantastic fictionous aspect which was quasi not developed in the game, however, I am not sure what you'll want to have... Might you care to explain?


Anyway...
Your first point, p. 47, appears to me to be quite weak, in that it isn't characteristic to Chaos cults:

• sorcerers and priests are always the most prone to mutations, they even have specific tables of mutation, including for gods like Shallya or Mannan... (see the tables in WFRP2's rulebook, Realm of Sorcery and Tome of Salvation). Rat catchers, baillifs and pitfighters do not. That is explained by the very nature of magic (sorcerous or divine) in Warhammer, which is a manifestation of Chaos.
• I've suggested series of immutations for Law cultists (that could be part of five categories: devolutions, mineralization, fongization, vegetalization and stoicization, albeit other ideas might enrich it). Body should also change with the Law.

I do not yet get your second point, p. 4, can you clarify it?
I can't neither find your reference on the page four. It is late and I might not read good enough... Might you please check the page and quote it?

On your last point, p. 15:

• The sentence contradict itself... it start to say that there are, specifically among the organized conclaves -not overaly in their society-, no leader nor formal hierarchy, and then by a statement, in the same sentence, it establish an absolute principle on who always have the strongest voice in this organized conclave, which happens to be the oldest and most powerful of their members... respect being granted to age and to knowledge. It happens to be a very clear principle of leadership and of hierarchy.
• I am not sure to get your point: are you suggesting that not having any form of formal hierarchy in a specific organized conclave (while still having it, in fact, in favour of the oldest and the most powerful one because of a respect of age and knowledge) is a characteristic of Chaos or that it is antithetic of Law?

[Orin J.]

okay. your argument for a lawful hashut amounts to "can we ignore they call hashut a chaos god and the chaos dwarfs chaos dwarfs?" and has no merit. regardless of how much you want to nitpick other people pointing out flaws in your position, you continue to have provided no merit to your argument and an argument without merit can be discarded without discussion. your posts are just massive textwalls with nothing useful in them and you're just keeping the argument going in the hopes you'll somehow blunder into a win through happenstance.

if you want to have a discussion about the concept of a lawful hashut as homebrew, go start that, but the argument that it could be read into as canon is dead before it even leaves the runway.

[Capitaneus Fractus]

So, here we are, here is the way you argue on your own points...

the chaos dwarfs are noted as having mutated, with their sorcerer priests being the most prone to mutation (page forty-seven of the old chaos dwarf army book), and the sacrifices being done for the entertainment of the selfsame sorcerer priests (page four of same) who don't even have any form of formal hierarchy (page fifteen of same)

Your first point, p. 47, appears to me to be quite weak, in that it isn't characteristic to Chaos cults:

• sorcerers and priests are always the most prone to mutations, they even have specific tables of mutation, including for gods like Shallya or Mannan... (see the tables in WFRP2's rulebook, Realm of Sorcery and Tome of Salvation). Rat catchers, baillifs and pitfighters do not. That is explained by the very nature of magic (sorcerous or divine) in Warhammer, which is a manifestation of Chaos.
• I've suggested series of immutations for Law cultists (that could be part of five categories: devolutions, mineralization, fongization, vegetalization and stoicization, albeit other ideas might enrich it). Body should also change with the Law.

I do not yet get your second point, p. 4, can you clarify it?
I can't neither find your reference on the page four. It is late and I might not read good enough... Might you please check the page and quote it?

On your last point, p. 15:

• The sentence contradict itself... it start to say that there are, specifically among the organized conclaves -not overaly in their society-, no leader nor formal hierarchy, and then by a statement, in the same sentence, it establish an absolute principle on who always have the strongest voice in this organized conclave, which happens to be the oldest and most powerful of their members... respect being granted to age and to knowledge. It happens to be a very clear principle of leadership and of hierarchy.
• I am not sure to get your point: are you suggesting that not having any form of formal hierarchy in a specific organized conclave (while still having it, in fact, in favour of the oldest and the most powerful one because of a respect of age and knowledge) is a characteristic of Chaos or that it is antithetic of Law?

okay. your argument for a lawful hashut amounts to "can we ignore they call hashut a chaos god and the chaos dwarfs chaos dwarfs?" and has no merit. regardless of how much you want to nitpick other people pointing out flaws in your position, you continue to have provided no merit to your argument and an argument without merit can be discarded without discussion. your posts are just massive textwalls with nothing useful in them and you're just keeping the argument going in the hopes you'll somehow blunder into a win through happenstance.

if you want to have a discussion about the concept of a lawful hashut as homebrew, go start that, but the argument that it could be read into as canon is dead before it even leaves the runway.

One have to admit that even for someone that, by experience, wouldn't expect anything from your capacity to propose a thought arguing, such an answer is disappointing...

Just three points, to underline the fallacious aspects of your post, which are not discordant with the rest of your literature, in this thread and elsewhere, so you should try to be attentive, if you wish to correct that:

1. Those two sentences are your customary strawmen:

okay. your argument for a lawful hashut amounts to "can we ignore they call hashut a chaos god and the chaos dwarfs chaos dwarfs?" and has no merit.
[...]
the argument that it could be read into as canon is dead before it even leaves the runway.

The messages that you write, for many reasons that were already underlined in our previous exchanges, are intellectually too limited to lead to argue on points that are made, hence you invent the points of those with whom you exchange. It might be convenient for your own feelings, as it is ready-to-think and ready-to-vrite but it disconnect too much your interventions to the real exchange and regardless of all my goodwill, it start to be... boring.

In our case, no-one had the arguments that you just invent from the scratch...


---
2. This fallacious sentence, confuse induction with deduction.

regardless of how much you want to nitpick other people pointing out flaws in your position, you continue to have provided no merit to your argument and an argument without merit can be discarded without discussion. your posts are just massive textwalls with nothing useful in them and you're just keeping the argument going in the hopes you'll somehow blunder into a win through happenstance.

If Orin J bangs his head against a jug and it rings hollow, he wrongly assumes that the emptiness of the jug could be deducted... That is an simple induction as other options, sometime quite more probable, are possible too.

For the same reason, your inability to intellectually understand the point of something doesn't necessary mean that this thing is pointless... It is one possibility. It isn't the sole one. That you aren't intellectually able to get something should be seriously considered. There is no shame in that and that might perhaps explain why you seem to be such unable to argue on your own ideas and stop before even structuring them. Reading again the quote in the beginning of my post, it appears quite clearly that you failed to either question the logics of my questions or to precise the logics of your remarks...


---
3. you are either not even in capacity to read correctly simple answers to your own questions or intellectually dishonest...

if you want to have a discussion about the concept of a lawful hashut as homebrew, go start that

That's what we do since two pages...

is the hashut thing homebrew or is there a source on that?...

[the] understanding [of Hashut] as a chaotic god of Law is, however, homebrew.

So... to conclude: From the lack of intellectual rigour of your posts; from your ease to employ fallacies, fakes informations or sophisms in them, and from yours difficulties to structure them with logical thought, I'm afraid that your posts do not contribute to the intelligence of the debate nor help to create the base for a reasonable exchange... That is sad, but that is it. Its no big deal: such is life.