Deitys and Apologies

[Dozen]

but it seems you agree with me about everything except that being arrogant is part of a gods job description (and I accept that not everyone will agree with me but my players always have) which is an interesting point, in your campaigns Gods act like parents to trillions of souls through out the world?

Sort of, though it depends on the deity. I'm sure there are not-so-Good but still Good-aligned deities out there who are more or less pricks, at least for a while, before they settle with one or the other or carefully balance the two out(a la Dr. House). And there are several ways you can be nice to mortals as a god.

As an example, when I roll up a char, I usually choose one of the Exalted gods as a patron('Exalted' as in a group of D&D gods, not the roleplaying game). They are literally as Good as you can get in their respective fields and liked worldwide(but not worshipped worldwide; Poor shmucks are all Demigods). Everything considered, they are quite the bunch. Take my favs, the siblings, Chaav and Lastai.
Chaav, Smiling God of Happiness and Laughter, is stuck as a kid; you can't really expect him to act responsible, or fill in the role of a fatherly figure. He doesn't even have temples, because he rather plays around like someone a his age is supposed to instead of gathering more idiots he'd have to care about, which you can understand to some level. I play him out as a nice and simplistic child who cares for his followers, while not capable of any mayor plot or trickery. He isn't all fluffy though; He hates when people laugh at another's expense, and if that happens in his relative vicnity, there is retribution imminent, worthy of any god.
Lastai is a goddess of Pleasure and Passion(yes, really). Let your imagination expand on the concept for a second.
Got it? Right. She's almost the exact opposite of that.(You perv.)
Still, with a background like this, and taking her respect for the 'importance of equality in all kinds of relationships' into account, she can be anything but arrogant, or distant from her followers. I usually have her command, talk with, and simply chit-chat with mid-level worshippers on a first name basis, or at least casually; she's not all that powerful compared to them, for one, and she'd have to remember a mere handful of people, since she only has a few thousand followers at any given time. That's due to her temples being frequently mistaken for brothels and promptly thrown out of better towns if they were to operate openly(again, yes, really, and yes, it's canon). As such, she's twitchy about procastrination, prudes and people who ruin her reputation or look down on her without ever opening her prayerbook. It's a little sad, actually.

 

[Drowbane]

Typically not. Even the good gods view you as their toys. One does not apologize to their G.I. Joe if they happen to snap its leg off (of shoot at it with a BB gun, like I did as a kid).

I don't know who Zagyg is (I assume he is from a campaign setting) but I thought Demi-God was part Human as Vecna is but I don't know how D&D uses those terms.

Well Vecna is a God of Secrets maybe he secretly has both his eyes and hands and their are several of each artefact

but it seems you agree with me about everything except that being arrogant is part of a gods job description (and I accept that not everyone will agree with me but my players always have) which is an interesting point, in your campaigns Gods act like parents to trillions of souls through out the world?

EDIT: after doing research (typing it into Google) I do remember Zagyg...

Vecna wasn't even a Demi-God (in D&D that tends to mean "diet god") before 3e. He was a Lich.

In my campaigns, he is still a Lich - an Epic Lich, but still just a Lich.

 

[Dozen]

Heh. Diet god. Wish I could give you xp for that one.

Typically not. Even the good gods view you as their toys. One does not apologize to their G.I. Joe if they happen to snap its leg off (of shoot at it with a BB gun, like I did as a kid).

Why is everyone so fuzzy about what Good means? If you have no concern for people other than your peeps, you are only Neutral at best. Good guys may play around with their pawns, sure, but they take care of them when they do so.
Unlike you. Get a checkup. Don't cripple toys on purpose, that's sick. Your metaphor doesn't help it either. And what kind of idiot lets a kid hold a loaded BB gun?

 

[Omegaxicor]

Well the idiot giving a kid a BB gun, his parents obviously

Seriously though, You are the one who misunderstands, Good is relative, Good people care for each other and sacrifice themselves for others, Good gods grants spells to Good people...they may not care for them but they reward Sacrifice and Honour or Healing or whatever their Good portfolio is. For a God being Good is NOT the same as for a mortal.

 

[RUMBLETiGER]

The DM usually does not appoligize for all the troubles he put's the PC's through.

 

[Dozen]

Seriously though, You are the one who misunderstands, Good is relative, Good people care for each other and sacrifice themselves for others, Good gods grants spells to Good people...they may not care for them but they reward Sacrifice and Honour or Healing or whatever their Good portfolio is. For a God being Good is NOT the same as for a mortal.

Then, what you're saying is, Good gods can commit deeds that would otherwise qualify as Neutral or Evi with no the change in alignment because... why exactly? Because you said so? You can play however you want, but unless you intend to insult me, stop phrasing your sentences like your twisted take on morality was a written fact without backing it up, will you? Acting like that is essentally saying 'poor wittle Dozen misunderstood everything, let's put him in his place without providing him with actual information since he's too dumb to comprehend it anyway'! So far, I'm yet to see any book that said gods to get away with everything or the rules for alignments apply to them differently, and I bought up a couple of rules which contradict your ideas. You may have heard of this, it's called argument. All you have been doing is telling me the D&D world is the way you imagine it. Prove you're right instead of repeating the same thing over and over, I'm losing my patience.

 

[Omegaxicor]

1) I never said they could commit deeds that would qualify as Neutral or Evil without a change in alignment, I said that believing your followers are honoured to be sacrificed by you because you see the big picture and you have only killed them a short time earlier than they would have died of old age (from the perspective of a god 100 years is a short time) is not evil or neutral as you claim (and I don't remember you bringing up any rules contradicting that, I will review the conversation in case I missed something)

2) I never said my "twisted take on morality" was fact, written or otherwise. I started by saying that Gods are played differently by different DMs but that gods who care about every single person beneath them are 2d and naively played (which is fine if all the players are OK with that, I have played them like in my early campaigns). You seem to be the one who is claiming your opinion of 2d gods is written fact...

EDIT: 3) You are yet to raise any rules to contradict my points in any post up to this one (except that you said Vecna was once Human and ascended to Lesser Godhood which I concede) and the reason for that, I think, is that there are no rules siding with me or against me...

 

[Dozen]

I never said my "twisted take on morality" was fact.

Then would you be so kind and explain to me what in the Nine Hells I was 'misunderstanding'? Let me quote you again:

You are the one who misunderstands, Good is relative, Good people care for each other and sacrifice themselves for others, Good gods grants spells to Good people...they may not care for them but they reward Sacrifice and Honour or Healing or whatever their Good portfolio is. For a God being Good is NOT the same as for a mortal.

Maybe if you squeezed in the phrase 'In my campaigns' somewhere, then you wouldn't have indirectly said it was.

EDIT: You are yet to raise any rules to contradict my points in any post up to this one (except that you said Vecna was once Human and ascended to Lesser Godhood which I concede.

Well gee, it's not my fault you don't read my posts. But let's assume that's not enough for you, fine!
The rules on morality, as they stand now, apply to all characters; there are no exceptions. Thus, if they applied to anyone in another way or not at all, it should be at least mentioned in an entry somewhere. Let us look: Dungeon Master's Guide? Silent on the topic. The Divine Rules Index? Not a word. Player's Handbook? I don't even have to open it. Complete Champion? Doesn't say. Deities and Demigods? Nope.
So where did your idea come from?

 

[Omegaxicor]

Then would you be so kind and explain to me what in the Nine Hells I was 'misunderstanding'?

You said "Why is everyone so fuzzy about what Good means" that is what you were misunderstanding

The rules on morality, as they stand now, apply to all characters; there are no exceptions. Thus, if they applied to anyone in another way, it should be mentioned in an entry somewhere.

Your "rules" raised against my ideas are that there are no rules??? Where does it say that gods have alignments based on their actions? Nowhere, so they aren't, by your logic???

So where did your idea come from?

My idea came from the same place as yours, "the Gods don't involve themselves directly in the affairs of mortals" (I don't know where that is quoted from but somewhere in either the DMG or the PHB but I am away from my books at the moment). Now you take that to mean that they still care about the mortals but they choose not to interfere and I (and most of the people who have posted in this thread) take that to mean that Gods consider themselves above mortals and since they manipulate mortals on a daily basis they see them as expendable unless they have a purpose, once they have completed that purpose they become expendable

 

[Dozen]

Your "rules" raised against my ideas are that there are no rules??? Where does it say that gods have alignments based on their actions? Nowhere, so they aren't, by your logic???

Hell, no. That'd be stupid. My point is that there are rules; For alignments, which apply to everyone. If it's not said they do not apply to something, then they do.

My idea came from the same place as yours, "the Gods don't involve themselves directly in the affairs of mortals" (I don't know where that is quoted from but somewhere in either the DMG or the PHB but I am away from my books at the moment).

Ah, I see! Now I understand what's going on! That's from the entry for Overdeities! Those guys are so powerful they don't even need to (and most of the time don't) have worshippers, never grant spells or do anything related to the mortal realms. An entirely different category. So if your argument was based on that, this is just a misunderstanding.