D&D General The Role and Purpose of Evil Gods

[Chaosmancer]

Yeah, but as I showed, there's already tons of redundancies in D&D. If you want to get rid of the redundancies, then honestly the best thing to do would be to make a brand new setting that doesn't include them. If people are saying that gods and arch-fiends aren't redundant, it's because in their games, they're not. But in D&D as a whole, they're no more (or less) redundant than anything else.

Pause. My entire argument is about whether or not they are redundant in the official game. I personally have done other things, but my argument is not about what I have done. My argument is solely to demonstrate the redundancy.

So let's say we get rid of either arch-fiends or evil gods. What are we losing? From a purely mechanical standpoint, not much, by RAW.

This is my argument.

But from a storytelling perspective, there's a lot that could be lost. Whether you homebrew a mechanical difference or just say it's purely a social issue, there's interesting stories that can be told. What if Asmodeus wants to be considered a god because that's more "legitimate" (in some beings' eyes) than being an arch-fiend? I can see mortal societies tolerating or even accepting temples to Bane but being against an arch-fiend's cult. The stories of the gods tend to play out more on the Prime than those of arch-things, which means that there are more hooks for players who don't have plane-hopping abilities. In earlier posts, you said it was bizarre to have a god of murder, a god of envy, and a god of sin. But there's stories to be told there, where one of those gods (or arch-fiends) wants to have its portfolio expand to encompass additional concepts. I

If those aren't stories you want to explore, that's totally fine. But it shows that what looks like redundancy doesn't have to be.

But from a storytelling perspective we can also have stories where the Demon Lords are older and more powerful than the Gods, and the universe is a dark place where the light is under constant threat. Or any number of other things that rely on not being redundant.

The storytelling works both ways.

As for the my earlier point about sin, yes it is bizarre and I don't think that "additional concepts" is the way to even begin understanding my point.

The idea of Sin is that a sin is breaking a divine law, going against the will of the gods. Murder is a sin, right? Well, if you have a god of Murder, whose Divine Law is "commit murder" then murder cannot be a sin, because it is not against divine law. And considering how many gods of various "sins" or who can be easily attached to various "sins" exist in the setting of FR where supposedly Asmodeus is the God of Sin... it is a fairly empty title. You cannot sin if there exists a god who says that action is divinely supported.

 

[Helldritch]

Sorry, I got lost in this thread, but @Helldritch I believe you posted something about Spell Levels, and Hierarchy of Outsiders granting those Spells.

Can you point me to where that is all defined?

DMG 1ed P.38. A clarification in the L&L 1ed p.9
Some of the fiends, as an option can be considered lesser deities. P.105. The conditionnal is used though...
It says: "These "should" be considered."
This is leaving the choice opened for each individual DMs. If it would have been written: "The following are now considered lesser deities" would have leave no choice at all.
In essence:
1st -2nd level spells are acquired by the cleric through sheer knowledge and devotion.
3rd-5th level spells are given by agent of the Deity, (Solar or whatever) with spells of 5th level given by a demi-god.
A demi-god can grant spells at a maximum of 5th level.
6th & 7th level spells are given by the Deity itself, with 7th level spells being given only by Greater gods.

 

[Chaosmancer]

I don't agree with that. Orcs are core, but they aren't linked to a particular setting. Same with the races, classes, spells(other than named spells), virtually every monster in the MM, and so on. Being in a setting isn't the same as being tied to a setting. Very little of core is tied to any particular setting.

Really?

"Orcs worship Gruumsh" is one of the first things you read about them, and that limits them to settings already. In fact, most of the first page about orcs is about their creation myth and the war with the elves, all of which is a setting detail. In fact, it is only true in two official DnD settings.

Setting details are everywhere in the "core". Generally multiple setting details.

I'm not sure what he meant by winning pantheon wars, but as soon as you become a god, you become part of the cosmic order and are tied to it. A mortal ascending to godhood and taking on a portfolio becomes tied to the natural order of things and has to run that portfolio indefinitely. Disrupting the balance runs you the risk of an Ao killing you or stripping away your godhood.

Did the cosmic order exist before you ascended to godhood? Did the natural order exist before you ascended to godhood?

The answer to both of these is yes, so you actually altered the natural and cosmic order to become a god. Disrupting the balance.

Can you prove that as a fact, or is this one of those, "Sages believe that archfiends...." things.

You mean other than

Gnolls
Chimera
Ettins
Gargoyles (Ogremoch is a Elemental Prince, but still)
Ghouls/Ghasts (you might argue the "mortal races" angle, but I said "such as" meaning, "as an example" not as an exclusive category)
Jackalweres
Lamias
Merrow
Minotaurs
Oozes of all types
Bodaks
Leucrotta
Spawn of Kyuss larva
Yeth Hounds


I'm sure you'll find some excuse to dismiss all of these, because you always do, but there ya go.

 

[Helldritch]

Exactly. Only the character creation rules (which reference settings anyways with things like the various dieties for the Domains, the difference between cleric and druid, warlocks, and the various races and the details about them) are not tied to some setting.

But the moment you want monsters or extraplanar powers, or heck other planes fo existence, you start referencing settings.

So, if you want to say that you are only going to reference the non-setting gods... there aren't any. They are all tied to settings. Same with the Abyss and ect ect ect.

Hahem...
Bolded part 1
PHB. 300. Corebook. Planes of existence briefly explained in two pages.
So the planes are core. No argument to the contrary is possible. No setting is refered.

Bolded part 2
If you don't want setting specific deities, you can fall back on the Norse, Celtic, Greek and Egyptian deities. Or even create your own. This falls on homebrew or a simple option selection. At least some non specific setting gods are in the PHB. So yep, you could reference non-setting gods.

 

[Maxperson]

Really?

"Orcs worship Gruumsh" is one of the first things you read about them, and that limits them to settings already. In fact, most of the first page about orcs is about their creation myth and the war with the elves, all of which is a setting detail. In fact, it is only true in two official DnD settings.

Yes, really. The default setting(since you can't play anything in core without a setting) is Forgotten Realms, but there's literally nothing tying core to the Realms. Read the PHB and you'll see references to many campaign settings in the core, because the core everything is pretty darned setting neutral, even with the default being Realms.

Setting details are everywhere in the "core". Generally multiple setting details.

Yes. Details about many different settings, indicating that core is pretty setting neutral.

Did the cosmic order exist before you ascended to godhood? Did the natural order exist before you ascended to godhood?

Of course. You get tied to it when you become a god. Gods are tied to the cosmic order.

The answer to both of these is yes, so you actually altered the natural and cosmic order to become a god. Disrupting the balance.

Nope! Not all portfolios have gods and so there's room for demigods to step into those shoes. For the major portfolios like death and tyranny, it takes the death of the current god for a new one to be made.

There is no disruption to the balance.

You mean other than

Gnolls
Chimera
Ettins
Gargoyles (Ogremoch is a Elemental Prince, but still)
Ghouls/Ghasts (you might argue the "mortal races" angle, but I said "such as" meaning, "as an example" not as an exclusive category)
Jackalweres
Lamias
Merrow
Minotaurs
Oozes of all types
Bodaks
Leucrotta
Spawn of Kyuss larva
Yeth Hounds

Gnolls were not created by Yeenoghu. They sprung up near him as he travelled.
Chimera are not an example of a created race. Demogorgon transformed(some sort of polymorph) some people into them.
Ettins are the same. Transformed(not created) by the Demogorgon.
Gargoyles - Hell, the lore says Ogremoch doesn't create them deliberately. Much like Yeenogho, they just kind of spring up in his wake. They are not his creation.
ghouls/ghasts - Undead are not a race. Any dwarf, elf or goblin can be one of those.
Jackleweres - despite Graz'zt "creating them" it's clear from the lore that it was just a transformation like Chimera and Ettins, not any sort of true creation.

I'm done now. I'm not going to waste my time looking at the second half when none of the first half are real creations of races.

I'm sure you'll find some excuse to dismiss all of these, because you always do, but there ya go.

If you have to pre-empt reasons with a dismissal like this, you understand the weakness of your argument.

 

[Lanefan]

Really?

"Orcs worship Gruumsh" is one of the first things you read about them, and that limits them to settings already.

Only if one assumes that Gruumsh is setting-tied. I make no such assumption with deities like him; as his portfolio is the same race on all worlds he can be considered as a universal default to all settings unless homebrewed out. Yeenoghu is another such; Moradin another, one could argue Corellon is another, and so forth.

Gruumsh's creation myth isn't part of this. Sure he was created at some place at some long-ago point in time and a big fight with Elves was involved, but in the here-and-now he's expanded to become universal.

Further, deities based on real-Earth pantheons e.g. ancient Greeks, Romans, Norse etc., can also be considered universal rather than setting-tied.

 

[Helldritch]

Yes, really. The default setting(since you can't play anything in core without a setting) is Forgotten Realms, but there's literally nothing tying core to the Realms. Read the PHB and you'll see references to many campaign settings in the core, because the core everything is pretty darned setting neutral, even with the default being Realms.

Yes. Details about many different settings, indicating that core is pretty setting neutral.

Of course. You get tied to it when you become a god. Gods are tied to the cosmic order.

Nope! Not all portfolios have gods and so there's room for demigods to step into those shoes. For the major portfolios like death and tyranny, it takes the death of the current god for a new one to be made.

There is no disruption to the balance.

Gnolls were not created by Yeenoghu. They sprung up near him as he travelled.
Chimera are not an example of a created race. Demogorgon transformed(some sort of polymorph) some people into them.
Ettins are the same. Transformed(not created) by the Demogorgon.
Gargoyles - Hell, the lore says Ogremoch doesn't create them deliberately. Much like Yeenogho, they just kind of spring up in his wake. They are not his creation.
ghouls/ghasts - Undead are not a race. Any dwarf, elf or goblin can be one of those.
Jackleweres - despite Graz'zt "creating them" it's clear from the lore that it was just a transformation like Chimera and Ettins, not any sort of true creation.

I'm done now. I'm not going to waste my time looking at the second half when none of the first half are real creations of races.

If you have to pre-empt reasons with a dismissal like this, you understand the weakness of your argument.

Could not have better answer that myself.

Only if one assumes that Gruumsh is setting-tied. I make no such assumption with deities like him; as his portfolio is the same race on all worlds he can be considered as a universal default to all settings unless homebrewed out. Yeenoghu is another such; Moradin another, one could argue Corellon is another, and so forth.

Gruumsh's creation myth isn't part of this. Sure he was created at some place at some long-ago point in time and a big fight with Elves was involved, but in the here-and-now he's expanded to become universal.

Further, deities based on real-Earth pantheons e.g. ancient Greeks, Romans, Norse etc., can also be considered universal rather than setting-tied.

And that sir, is the final nail on the proverbial coffin. I did say the last part myself.

I too, would not consider demi-humans deities setting depend either. Of course, one can always opt them out of a setting (as you pointed out). There are in fact, some settings that do it such as Dragonlance.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Hahem...
Bolded part 1
PHB. 300. Corebook. Planes of existence briefly explained in two pages.
So the planes are core. No argument to the contrary is possible. No setting is refered.

Just because something is in the Core Books doesn't mean it isn't setting specific. After all, that section includes a discussion of Sigil, the City of Doors, and the Outlands, along with Gate Towns. And aren't those all details specific to the Planescape setting? And the Great Wheel certainly seems like a setting detail that references specific settings. So does the Elemental Chaos.

Sure, they don't come out and say "in the land of Greyhawk" but that doesn't mean these aren't setting details that are being told to us in the Core Book

Bolded part 2
If you don't want setting specific deities, you can fall back on the Norse, Celtic, Greek and Egyptian deities. Or even create your own. This falls on homebrew or a simple option selection. At least some non specific setting gods are in the PHB. So yep, you could reference non-setting gods.

Really? Isn't the Egyptian Pantheon specifically in the Forgotten Realms? I know Tyr from the Norse Pantheon is, and that part of the existence of Oerth in Greyhawk was predicated on the existence of Earth in the DnD world, explaining how these Deities from our history show up in DnD

Plus they all showed up in Planescape, another setting.

Finally, "you can reference the real world or make up your own" isn't exactly a ringing endorsement for non-setting specific things. Yeah, I know I can homebrew, but the book doesn't provide my homebrewed gods. And I know I can pull things from the real world, so the book providing them doesn't exactly give me anything "non-setting specific" as much as it translates things from the real-world into the DnD world. I could do the same thing with other religions too.

So, I think between explicitly referencing other settings or referencing the real world, calling one homebrew and the other "core" is a bit of a stretch. Loki isn't "core" to DnD. Loki is a Norse god that gets called up in dozen of fantasy works, because people like to reference Norse Mythology.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Yes, really. The default setting(since you can't play anything in core without a setting) is Forgotten Realms, but there's literally nothing tying core to the Realms. Read the PHB and you'll see references to many campaign settings in the core, because the core everything is pretty darned setting neutral, even with the default being Realms.

So wait. The Core is setting agnostic, but the default is the Realms, because you can't play the core without a setting... and all settings are homebrew, except the core, which defaults to a homebrew setting...

And this is supposed to make sense?

Yes. Details about many different settings, indicating that core is pretty setting neutral.

And so the core is full of homebrew, according to the argument I'm saying is "extreme", which is that every setting is homebrew.

Of course. You get tied to it when you become a god. Gods are tied to the cosmic order.

Nope! Not all portfolios have gods and so there's room for demigods to step into those shoes. For the major portfolios like death and tyranny, it takes the death of the current god for a new one to be made.

There is no disruption to the balance.

I'm sorry, isn't one of the big things the gods do is fight each other over getting more portfolios? Why would there be easily accessed new portfolios? Wouldn't those have been snapped up?

And, what was Vecna's Portfolio? "Evil and Destructive Secrets" which... is part of the knowledge portfolio, right? Maybe magic as well? He does get Domains of Magic and Knowledge, so these would have logically been part of the Portfolio's of Boccob (Magic, Arcane Knowledge, Balance, Foresight ), Wee Jas (Death, Magic, Vanity (Love), Law) and others.

What about St. Cuthbert? What minor portfolio's did he get? Common Sense, Wisdom, Zeal, Honesty, Truth, Discipline. Huh, don't those last three sound like things Heironous (Chivalry, Justice, Honor, War, Daring, Valor ) would cover? Or Rao (Peace, Reason, Serenity )?


So, sorry, I don't really buy that Apotheosis is occuring because people are just picking up minor unused portfolio's lying around the cosmos. Unless you have some proof of that claim?

Gnolls were not created by Yeenoghu. They sprung up near him as he travelled.

And elves and orcs came from spilled blood. We still say they were created by Corellon and Gruumsh respectively.

Chimera are not an example of a created race. Demogorgon transformed(some sort of polymorph) some people into them.

Which then bred true and remained a race of monsters. He doesn't make a new one when old ones die, they breed and lay eggs. That is literally a definition of a "created race".

Ettins are the same. Transformed(not created) by the Demogorgon.

And then bred true and became their own race.

Gargoyles - Hell, the lore says Ogremoch doesn't create them deliberately. Much like Yeenogho, they just kind of spring up in his wake. They are not his creation.

And just like gnolls I point you to elves and orcs coming from blood spilled in a battle. Yet we still say they were created. Heck, you literally say "doesn't create them deliberately" but then turn around and say he doesn't create them at all. No one claimed that creation had to be intentional to be creation.

ghouls/ghasts - Undead are not a race. Any dwarf, elf or goblin can be one of those.

And I literally pointed out why this has nothing to do with them being a creation of Orcus, even referencing the fact that you were going to try this exact tactic. Could you bother to read my posts at least?

Jackleweres - despite Graz'zt "creating them" it's clear from the lore that it was just a transformation like Chimera and Ettins, not any sort of true creation.

What the heck is "true creation"? Only Creation Ex Nihlo counts as creating something? That is not what creation even means, that's why it has the descriptor "ex nihlo" attached, to seperate it from other forms of creation.

I'm done now. I'm not going to waste my time looking at the second half when none of the first half are real creations of races.

If you have to pre-empt reasons with a dismissal like this, you understand the weakness of your argument.

So, exactly like I predicted, you not only dismissed them out of hand, but you also completely ignored my explanation that races were simply one example, not an exclusive category. But, good to know that two of the most famous gods for creating races (corellon and Gruumsh) also didn't create their races, they didn't do it intentionally after all.

That leaves Moradin at least... oh, wait, no. Moradin "breathed life" into the dwarves, meaning that he transformed non-living material into living dwarves. That's not "true creation" so that doesn't count.

But at least Garl Glittergold... oh, wait, did the exact same thing. No creation there, just transformation.

Drow? Transformed. Dragons? Made by spilled blood, not creation. Goblinoids? No idea, their gods are only known for being killed. Lizardfolk? Actually their god divided, that isn't creation.

Huh, using your definitions it seems like no one ever created anything. So, maybe you should re-evaluate some of that.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Only if one assumes that Gruumsh is setting-tied. I make no such assumption with deities like him; as his portfolio is the same race on all worlds he can be considered as a universal default to all settings unless homebrewed out. Yeenoghu is another such; Moradin another, one could argue Corellon is another, and so forth.

Gruumsh's creation myth isn't part of this. Sure he was created at some place at some long-ago point in time and a big fight with Elves was involved, but in the here-and-now he's expanded to become universal.

Further, deities based on real-Earth pantheons e.g. ancient Greeks, Romans, Norse etc., can also be considered universal rather than setting-tied.

One could potentially try and make that argument, but "universal" is more "tied to the real world" in the case of real-life pantheons. I don't think that really should count as "core DnD"

And, again, since the claim is that every single setting is homebrew, well, "gruumsh" is tied to settings. Which makes him homebrew. Specifically he is tied to Greyhawk and the Forgotten Realsm, he doesn't really exist outside of those, and as Max pointed out, the core books seem to assume a lot of Forgotten Realms and Greyhawk as the "default" of the core. Which makes them homebrew under the argument, which again I am saying is just highly extreme.

Edit: After all, let us say that those dieties are non-setting specific and therefore not homebrew. What do we know about them? Well, that depends on the setting. Where do they live? That references the settings. You have to then make those things non-setting specific, and at that point, you are basically just making whichever settings story you want to go with the core, which makes it non-homebrew, which then defeats the argument that I am saying is not a good argument.