D&D 5E 5e: Stat the Lady of Pain...so we can overthrow her

[Maxperson]

Beings thousands of years old wiped out in a weekend by a bunch of mortals with an inflated self-worth? No thanks. Statting out these sort of beings is an exercise in killing my immersion.

There was a reason I clung to my old "If it has stats, we can kill it" quote for so long. These sort of entities have no business being statted out.

I don't mind giving them stats, but the stats and powers should be such that it's just interesting to see just how they would stomp any mortals in existence who raised their weapons/spells towards them.

 

[Maxperson]

Literally falling at the first hurdle and smacking his face into the asphalt. Pretty sad.

But it does take me back to the internet in 1990s when so many weird dudes had incredible one-sided rage-beefs with the entire concept of the Lady of Pain (not at all connected to her gender of course, mmmm definitely not lol) and just wrote elaborate and definitely not at all troubling fantasies about how they were going to kill her.

This isn't as bad at that but it's definitely taking me back.

Kinda of makes me glad I wasn't looking at the internet for D&D discussion then.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

In fairness to Sam Haight, according to Phil Brucato, he started as a joke that perhaps went too far.

Interesting. He seemed to be played very straight initially, despite being wildly over the top.

Kinda of makes me glad I wasn't looking at the internet for D&D discussion then.

It was a weird time. Across a lot of RPGs, people took a lot of NPCs and setting elements very personally. Like as challenges or insults. I can't claim to be entirely innocent of it (I was pretty mad about Sam Haight), but I was a teenager! And a lot of the other people were in their thirties or later!

The most consistently annoying problem of the era was a big bloc of people who literally refused to accept that systems had any impact on play, i.e. total blanket denial that systems shaped gameplay and player decisions. It was pretty weird. But even by the 2000s those people had largely died out, as common as they were in say, 1994.

 

[Maxperson]

Exactly.

The LoP doesn't have opinions. Doesn't really have feelings. Doesn't have name. Doesn't have a face. Doesn't take sides. Doesn't have an agenda beyond "do her job and protect the integrity of Sigil". She's basically a traffic bollard (errr not sure what the American term for that would be), that stops the NPCs driving their cars onto the sidewalk, as it were, and people are so SO GODDAMN MAD with that traffic bollard. Like outraged. Throwing things. When they're often simultaneously claiming they'd never drive onto the sidewalk, and it's like, well why are you so mad then?

EDIT - Also who is Ka the Immortal Dinosaur? They sound amazing but the internet has no record of them!

Google Ka the Preserver.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

Google Ka the Preserver.

Oh wow awesome, I dunno how I missed this guy before, but he rocks.

 

[Vaalingrade]

Exactly.

The LoP doesn't have opinions. Doesn't really have feelings. Doesn't have name. Doesn't have a face. Doesn't take sides. Doesn't have an agenda beyond "do her job and protect the integrity of Sigil". She's basically a traffic bollard (errr not sure what the American term for that would be), that stops the NPCs driving their cars onto the sidewalk, as it were, and people are so SO GODDAMN MAD with that traffic bollard. Like outraged. Throwing things. When they're often simultaneously claiming they'd never drive onto the sidewalk, and it's like, well why are you so mad then?

EDIT - Also who is Ka the Immortal Dinosaur? They sound amazing but the internet has no record of them!

If she doesn't do anything, then where is the fannish fervor for her coming from?

Who defends a traffic cone? Albeit a traffic cone that is literally the face of the franchise that is directly described as being beyond the gods. Because it's a special traffic cone that kicks everyone's butts and doesn't afraid of anything.

 

[ersatzphil]

If she doesn't do anything, then where is the fannish fervor for her coming from?

Who defends a traffic cone? Albeit a traffic cone that is literally the face of the franchise that is directly described as being beyond the gods. Because it's a special traffic cone that kicks everyone's butts and doesn't afraid of anything.

If you have a DM who knows the old 2e lore for the Lady of Pain, she isn't going to show up and kick your butt; unless you do something directly in her purview like try to resurrect Aoskar or something.

 

[Jefe Bergenstein]

She's floating around tossing people into mazes for trying to play in the campaign setting and there's no agency in dealing with her. She's basically the avatar of the worse impulses of a bad DM.

That sounds like a take born of an experience by a bad DM. The LOP exists to explain why the setting exists as it stands. Why Sigil isn't overrun by gods, who ARE the petty, interfering tyrants you describe. She's WHY even low level characters have agency. It's handwavium personified for when the players go "why doesnt the god of X do it?"

Or like paradox in Mage. It's why the world isn't one full of blatant magic the PC's would otherwise throw out, completely disrupting the point of the setting (ie, a hidden world of magic/supernatural).

 

[Vaalingrade]

Don't get me started on Paradox.

The late 80's and 90's style of design and writing as so hamfisted it was practically honeybaked.

 

[Sword of Spirit]

So, let me explain the reason I see for the different opinions here.

For some, there is a basic premise of D&D that the PCs can accomplish anything, including ascend to godhead and defeat other gods. Not only is "if it has stats, we can kill it" taken as an axiom, but "if we try to kill it, the DM will give it stats" is expected as part of the social contract.

I will admit that I absolutely fall into that category. My first products were in the BECMI line, and the idea that divine ascension is a valid (often even expected) PC goal is ingrained in me as part of the D&D experience. I haven't been involved in a game that got there yet, but the possibility is always there (and I tell my players as much).

Those who had no such initial exposure, or for whom the unlimited exploration play style was less compelling than a tighter story-based style, might not be able to appreciate it. But there is quite a lot of good game play reason for the philosophy.