Archdevils and Demon Princes as deities.

[The Traveler]

Faiths and Pantheons lists Orcus, Baphomet, and Pazrael as demons who achieved Lesser Deity status, and Gargauth as an Archdevil who became a demigod.

This directly contradicts the statements in Deities and Demigods, as well as what Monte has said.

Discuss.

 

[Kaptain_Kantrip]

These beings were lesser gods and demigods in 1e and always will be, as far as I am concerned. I don't hold with switching their status for no reason than to appease angry moms and the religious right (an impossibility in any event), which is what happened with 2e's lame Blood War (renaming the fiends Baatezu, Tana-ri and Yogoloths).

3e makes the mistake of trying to have its cake and eat it too, by restoring their names but retaining some of 2e's dubious revisions. I really dislike the way WoTC has attempted to build from TSR's (under Lorraine Williams, not Gary Gygax) mistakes rather than simply eradicating them and restoring them to their full 1e dignity.

 

[UD]

The Realms is different to Greyhawk.

 

[The Traveler]

I just find it odd that D&DG and Monte both say they can never rise above Quasideity status, yet here we have canonical statements contradicting that.

Given, I think it's fitting that Orcus is a god, considering even 2E granted him that and had him land in the Astral when he died, but having this sort of conflict is just weird.

The Realms is different to Greyhawk.

Er, that's somewhat of a cop-out, isn't it?

 

[Darkness]

Sean K. Reynolds addresses (part of) this issue in this thread here in EN World.

 

[I'm A Banana]

Yeah, but it's also true.

Monte said that the archfiends were "somewhere in between" gods and mortals...it's not contradictory to think that, eventually, they could go on to become divine and achieve worshippers and such, just that they don't quite have the divine power yet.

A) I fail to see this as contradictory. I don't remember seeing anything that said that archfiends *can't* be gods, just that the ones in the Book of Vile Darkness *aren't*.

B) FR is different than everyplace else. If Orcus rose to godhood there, whoop-dee-doo-bee-doo-bee-doo. It doesn't mean that anyone (even WotC themselves) is under any sort of agreement to take this as anything other than cannon FOR FR. I mean, after all, it doesn't seem like mortals can often raise to godhood status in GH, and they're doin' it daily in Faerun.

C) I think Wizards is over the whole "appease the people who don't give us money" stage. I seriously doubt if that had any real effect on Monte deciding that the archfiends weren't quite gods. IMHO, there's no reason they *have* to be. I'm pretty sure I'm not the only one who's pretty comfy with divinity being an exclusive right of the divine, or with eternal, unchanging deities. Archfiends don't need to be deities any more than high-ranking celestials do.

 

[The Traveler]

Sean K. Reynolds addresses (part of) this issue in this thread here in EN World.

Yes, but just after he posted it, someone cited that the book gave them lesser deity status, and if they're not gods with a DR of higher than zero, one wonders what the hell they are.

B) FR is different than everyplace else. If Orcus rose to godhood there, whoop-dee-doo-bee-doo-bee-doo. It doesn't mean that anyone (even WotC themselves) is under any sort of agreement to take this as anything other than cannon FOR FR. I mean, after all, it doesn't seem like mortals can often raise to godhood status in GH, and they're doin' it daily in Faerun.

Well, my main gripe is that these have been given deity status in past editions, even 2E. Orcus is a Lesser God of Undeath. He pretty much always has been. Yeenoghu's been a deity in 2E as well, right up until Defenders of the Faith downgraded him to a "mere" Demon Prince.

Also, I think it's downright asinine to say that two different D&D settings have completely divergent versions of the exact same beings (IE the Archdevils and Demon Princes). It invalidates the idea that settings like Forgotten Realms actually operate under D&D canon. I mean, the D&D corebooks and supplements aren't intended just for Greyhawk.

 

[Darkness]

Yes, but just after he posted it, someone cited that the book gave them lesser deity status, and if they're not gods with a DR of higher than zero, one wonders what the hell they are.

I know...

 

[I'm A Banana]

Also, I think it's downright asinine to say that two different D&D settings have completely divergent versions of the exact same beings (IE the Archdevils and Demon Princes).

Dude, they're not the same beings, any more than Lolth is the same for both worlds. I mean...Ehlonna...Mielilkelioiljeljka (I can never spell that name right. )....a woodland goddess by any other name...

That's what having a campaign setting different from the norm is all about. If the makers of FR thought it would be more fun to have fiends worshiped, they made it possible. It really doesn't matter what any other book says, if you're playing in FR.

At the same time, I like the idea of cults and such, and no matter what any other book says, I can make demon cults and stuff.

This is the way campaign settings are *supposed* to break the rules. I see nothing "overpowering" about letting demons and devils be worshipped, so go for it. Just like there's nothing wrong with them moving around Lolth's abilities for their own amusement/pleasure, just like there's nothing worng with me saying that mortals can't become gods because they don't have the divine spark.

It's campaign flavor...less even than a house rule, because it doesn't matter what rule is in place. It doesn't unbalance anything.

 

[The Traveler]

I'm fully aware I can house-rule it. That's not the problem I have with it. The problem I have is that there's literally no reason not to have it in core D&D canon, and even less reason to contradict and retcon the past canon that allowed it (1E, 2E).