D&D 5E Are "evil gods" necessary? [THREAD NECRO]

[Voadam]

Defcon, a little word of warning on Book of Exalted Deeds, I consider the morality aspects and discussion fairly poor, I enjoy the mechanical aspects (stripped of their morality restrictions as written) of the book and the lore on outsiders but even the Hebdomad and such have not been particularly sticky in D&D cosmology and I find their lore sparser than I would have wished. I find Paizo's Chronicle of the Righteous superior and even stuff from 3.5 Fast Forward Entertainment's Encyclopedia of Angels, Kult's archangels and the Archangels from In Nomine have more appeal for me in my D&D games.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

But it's when you have two things that appear to serve the same purpose that I've been questioning the need.

There doesn't need to be a "need" for something in order for something to exist. There are no false gods in the Forgotten Realms. If people believe in something it exists. It may be that some people believe in beings that are very similar to each other.

Nor do evil gods "serve the same purpose" as demons. A demon exists for the players to fight. Umberlee exists for superstitious sailors to make sacrifices to.

I guess I'm just trying to use others opinions on the subject to challenge my own to see if perhaps I'm just missing something.

I think what you are missing is that "evil" in D&D is not the same as "the villain".

 

[DEFCON 1]

There doesn't need to be a "need" for something in order for something to exist. There are no false gods in the Forgotten Realms. If people believe in something it exists. It may be that some people believe in beings that are very similar to each other.

Nor do evil gods "serve the same purpose" as demons. A demon exists for the players to fight. Umberlee exists for superstitious sailors to make sacrifices to.

I think what you are missing is that "evil" in D&D is not the same as "the villain".

Then my next question is why the Umberlee is "evil" in the first place? What's the point of assigning an alignment to a goddess of the sea? If your response is "just because"... then that's fine. I understand that perfectly well. Someone said at one point (Ed Greenwood perhaps) that this particular god is "evil". Okay, that's cool. Not gonna argue with that.

But it just means at this point I'm trying to see if her being "evil" actually means something tangible to anyone in the game world? Do people within the Realms care that Umberlee is "evil"? Are there prejudices against people who pray to Umberlee because she is "evil", or is that an expected part of life for everyone? Does the god's alignment actually serve a purpose within the narrative of the peoples in the game, or is it merely there for... "flavor text" (nothing more than a descriptor like saying what the god wears for clothing or their preferred weapon is?)

If that's the case... if people worship gods of all types regardless of the god's "alignment" because their domain necessitates prayer for health and success... then having an alignment isn't a necessity. And it's safe if so desired to remove all deities from the morality line of the peoples of the setting and the pantheon over and above it. Which is also cool. So thank you for the discussion!

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Then my next question is why the Umberlee is "evil" in the first place?

Because the sea is cruel. People go out to sea and don't come back. In polytheistic religions people try to find meaning in natural misfortune by blaming cruel gods. And they try to avert misfortune by appeasing the god with sacrifices.

If the god of the sea was good no one would ever drown.

But it just means at this point I'm trying to see if her being "evil" actually means something tangible to anyone in the game world? Do people within the Realms care that Umberlee is "evil"? Are there prejudices against people who pray to Umberlee because she is "evil", or is that an expected part of life for everyone? Does the god's alignment actually serve a purpose within the narrative of the peoples in the game, or is it merely there for... "flavor text" (nothing more than a descriptor like saying what the god wears for clothing or their preferred weapon is?)

It's established that prestesses of Umberlee are seen as a necessary evil. They are not popular but it would be stupid to go to sea without making a sacrifice to Umberlee first. But in terms of the narrative Umberlee is more usually background colour than antagonist.

If that's the case... if people worship gods of all types regardless of the god's "alignment" because their domain necessitates prayer for health and success... then having an alignment isn't a necessity. And it's safe if so desired to remove all deities from the morality line of the peoples of the setting and the pantheon over and above it. Which is also cool. So thank you for the discussion!

You certainly could say all gods are unaligned, but that's pretty much the Eberron solution - you are saying the gods are impersonal forces, not beings with personal volition.

What you decide for your own setting is up to you, but it's already established that the gods of FR are not impersonal forces, just like PCs they are individuals who can make moral decisions, so they have to have alignments. And those alignments are symbolic of what they represent: the Sun is good, storms are chaotic, judges are lawful, etc.

D&D certainly isn't going to make a universal ruling that "gods cannot be good" because there are an awful lot of real life religions that would take exception to that, and WotC do not want a rerun of the satanic panic.

 

[Fanaelialae]

Because the sea is cruel. People go out to sea and don't come back. In polytheistic religions people try to find meaning in natural misfortune by blaming cruel gods. And they try to avert misfortune by appeasing the god with sacrifices.

If the god of the sea was good no one would ever drown.


It's established that prestesses of Umberlee are seen as a necessary evil. They are not popular but it would be stupid to go to sea without making a sacrifice to Umberlee first. But in terms of the narrative Umberlee is more usually background colour than antagonist.

You certainly could say all gods are unaligned, but that's pretty much the Eberron solution - you are saying the gods are impersonal forces, not beings with personal volition.

What you decide for your own setting is up to you, but it's already established that the gods of FR are not impersonal forces, just like PCs they are individuals who can make moral decisions, so they have to have alignments. And those alignments are symbolic of what they represent: the Sun is good, storms are chaotic, judges are lawful, etc.

D&D certainly isn't going to make a universal ruling that "gods cannot be good" because there are an awful lot of real life religions that would take exception to that, and WotC do not want a rerun of the satanic panic.

I disagree that a deity who is unaligned must be an impersonal force. While that's certainly one way to go with it, my preference is for gods that aren't human in outlook.

For example, a god of fire encompasses the totality of fire. They are both the presence of the hearth that warms and cooks, as well as the raging inferno that burns a home to the ground, leaving its inhabitants to freeze and starve.

Taking a similar approach to Umberlee, she might encompass both the storm that sinks ships, and also the lost treasures washed onto shore for others to find.

That doesn't mean that they're impersonal forces, although they are arguably somewhat alien to a human perspective. That's simply because they're not necessarily about human morality. To the fire god, fire is good. They may have priests dedicated to the hearth, and those priests may be enemies of another sect who believes in cleansing civilization through the purity of fire. To the fire deity both are good, though from a human perspective one sect is good and the other is evil. Though humans see a contradiction in these sects, the fire god does not. They're simply emphasizing different aspects of the deity. The deity is both good and evil (from a narrow perspective), and neither (from a broader perspective).

 

[Voadam]

Because the sea is cruel. People go out to sea and don't come back. In polytheistic religions people try to find meaning in natural misfortune by blaming cruel gods. And they try to avert misfortune by appeasing the god with sacrifices.

If the god of the sea was good no one would ever drown.


It's established that prestesses of Umberlee are seen as a necessary evil. They are not popular but it would be stupid to go to sea without making a sacrifice to Umberlee first. But in terms of the narrative Umberlee is more usually background colour than antagonist.

You certainly could say all gods are unaligned, but that's pretty much the Eberron solution - you are saying the gods are impersonal forces, not beings with personal volition.

What you decide for your own setting is up to you, but it's already established that the gods of FR are not impersonal forces, just like PCs they are individuals who can make moral decisions, so they have to have alignments. And those alignments are symbolic of what they represent: the Sun is good, storms are chaotic, judges are lawful, etc.

D&D certainly isn't going to make a universal ruling that "gods cannot be good" because there are an awful lot of real life religions that would take exception to that, and WotC do not want a rerun of the satanic panic.

Eh, I think some gods' alignment is symbolic of their domains, others it is reflective of the individual god and a choice that could be different. The sun is Lathander the Neutral Good Morninglord in the Forgotten Realms. It is also the LN Amanautor in the Realms. Death is LN Kelemvor. It used to be NE Myrkhul, and before that Jergal. Mystra is NG, the last incarnation was Neutral I believe.

Umberlee is evil and part of the Gods of Fury, evil gods of nature subject to Talos's leadership, Poseidon (Non-FR I know) in D&D is generally tagged with CN in Deities and Demigods throughout the editions. To bring it back to Forgotten Realms there are also neutral gods of Nature like Silvanus and Chauntea is NG. Silvanus could conceptually have been evil and a lord of the dark forest. Chauntea the earth mother could conceptually have been a cthonic dark mother goddess. Nobanion the good lion god could have been a dark predator like the evil Malar the beast lord whom he fought in the Time of Troubles.

 

[Maxperson]

Eh, I think some gods' alignment is symbolic of their domains, others it is reflective of the individual god and a choice that could be different. The sun is Lathander the Neutral Good Morninglord in the Forgotten Realms. It is also the LN Amanautor in the Realms. Death is LN Kelemvor. It used to be NE Myrkhul, and before that Jergal. Mystra is NG, the last incarnation was Neutral I believe.

Umberlee is evil and part of the Gods of Fury, evil gods of nature subject to Talos's leadership, Poseidon (Non-FR I know) in D&D is generally tagged with CN in Deities and Demigods throughout the editions. To bring it back to Forgotten Realms there are also neutral gods of Nature like Silvanus and Chauntea is NG. Silvanus could conceptually have been evil and a lord of the dark forest. Chauntea the earth mother could conceptually have been a cthonic dark mother goddess. Nobanion the good lion god could have been a dark predator like the evil Malar the beast lord whom he fought in the Time of Troubles.

I've never seen those variations as reflective of the individual god. There are a number of different aspects to most portfolios. Nature has most alignments represented in some part, so a god of nature can be anything from neutral, to the good lion god and the evil beast lord. Death can encompass the evil of wanting beings to die and come to you(ne) or the impartial judge of those who die(LN).

Perhaps some of the individual comes in if the god was once mortal, or in case where the portfolio really doesn't lend itself to alignment, like magic.

 

[Weiley31]

Well ya can't have Chaotic Evil Drow without Lolth. She completely ruined em once she took em from Corrlleon.

Likewise, Tiamat is mandatory for Chromatic Dragons.

So yes they are necessary for things.

 

[Bohandas]

That is essentially Call of Cthulhu. Except you might be trying to hide from them as much as get favors from them.

or Warhammer 40000

 

[Bohandas]

Because the sea is cruel. People go out to sea and don't come back. In polytheistic religions people try to find meaning in natural misfortune by blaming cruel gods. And they try to avert misfortune by appeasing the god with sacrifices.

If the god of the sea was good no one would ever drown.

That explanation doesn't really work in-setting. Inside the world of Faerun the causality would work the other way around; umberlee is evil and that's why the sea is treacherous. Which still leaves us with the question of why Umberlee is evil