D&D General The Role and Purpose of Evil Gods

[Chaosmancer]

You simply assign spells to the NPC/Monster.

So, they aren't clerics because the DM can homebrew and just give any spells to any NPC for any reason? That is flimsy.

All of the angels for starters. Not one cleric among them. Lots of cleric spells. Innate spellcasting still accesses the cleric list for those spells. And I found the following in the MM under spellcasting, so I'm tagging @Faolyn as well.

So, the literal servants of the gods. That's your proof that a mortal cultist isn't a cleric, because Celestial beings that serve the gods pull from the cleric spell list? What was the definition of cleric again? Something about serving the gods, right?

"The monster has a list of spells known or prepared from a specific class. The list might also include spells from a feature in that class, such as the Divine Domain feature of the cleric or the Druid Circle feature of the druid. The monster is considered a member of that class when attuning to or using a magic item that requires membership in the class or access to its spell list."

If you are considered to be a member, then you are not an actual member. You are only considered one under limited circumstances. Actual members of that class would not be called out as being "considered members."

So, Cultists are considered clerics. That's good enough for me. I don't need them to have the title. This is like trying to claim an evoker isn't a wizard, they are just "considered" a wizard. Needlessly splitting hairs.

 

[Faolyn]

All of the angels for starters. Not one cleric among them. Lots of cleric spells. Innate spellcasting still accesses the cleric list for those spells. And I found the following in the MM under spellcasting, so I'm tagging @Faolyn as well.

Innate spellcasting and Spellcasting are two different things. An innate spellcaster's spells are innate. A Spellcaster has to prepare their spells, and means that the DM is freer in changing them around.

"The monster has a list of spells known or prepared from a specific class. The list might also include spells from a feature in that class, such as the Divine Domain feature of the cleric or the Druid Circle feature of the druid. The monster is considered a member of that class when attuning to or using a magic item that requires membership in the class or access to its spell list."

If you are considered to be a member, then you are not an actual member. You are only considered one under limited circumstances. Actual members of that class would not be called out as being "considered members."

Looks to me that they're saying that the monster is part of that class, and letting DMs know that includes being able to attune to items restricted to that class. Which would also explain why so many spellcasting monsters and NPCs also have other abilities from those classes. Because saying things like "sure, the kobold scale sorcerer prepares sorcerer spells and has access to metamagic and is described as being a sorcerer, but it's not actually a sorcerer" makes no sense.

 

[Maxperson]

So, Cultists are considered clerics.

For the purposes of attunement and changing their spells. Per RAW. They are not considered clerics in any other regard.

This is like trying to claim an evoker isn't a wizard, they are just "considered" a wizard. Needlessly splitting hairs.

Nawp! Nothing like that. It's more like trying to claim that Divine Soul is not a cleric, even though it has spells on the cleric list, yet considering them clerics for purposes of attunement and changing spells.

 

[Maxperson]

Looks to me that they're saying that the monster is part of that class,

That's exactly what it is NOT saying. It only considers them that class under two explicit circumstances. Magic item use/attunement and changing spells.

 

[Faolyn]

Oh what? Major changes in portfolios being major events?

The Time of Troubles/ The Avatars when the gods were stripped of their powers and portfolios were up for grabs. One of the few times it happened and a major event.

You mean, when every god in the world (including gods from Kara Tur, Maztica, and presumably every other part of the world), except for Helm, was stripped of power all at once?

You were claiming that a single god obtaining a new aspect to its portfolio can cause this type of change. And that's specifically what I asked you to do: to find me a god gaining a portfolio that caused an upheaval.

Well, I'm sorry you missed it. But I'm not going to go back and repost every single piece of evidence found by myself, Pemerton and others just because you missed it the first time. I'm having a hard enough time keeping up with this thread as is.

You could link those posts.

So, you want me to prove Max's claim of the cosmic balance, then find you something somewhere that deals with the creation of a new god disrupting that cosmic balance?

Yes. Does this Cosmic Balance actually exist in D&D? Is it purely a setting element? Or something else? My quick search in the DMG only brings up a possible mention of it in duotheistic religions.

As for "the creation of a new god disrupting the cosmic balance" how about any adventure where the goal is to stop the BBEG from becoming a god? Probably one featuring a Yuan-Ti trying to ascend, since that is a major plot point of their race. I don't have every official product memorized, but it is a bog standard plot device.

I'd see that more as "prevent the yuan-ti from gaining tremendous power" not "protect the balance of the universe".

You showed that it potentially wouldn't, there were two examples.

Yes, each of which involved a much bigger event than even the Time of Troubles.

You mean when I was talking about how to have the discussion on the role and purpose of evil gods. Remember the post immediately before this one I clarified that I had zero idea you were talking about something as irrelevant to the conversation as the creation of new gods.

Ah, that's right. You don't like it when the conversation changes to anything that isn't what you want it to be.

You dismiss everything I say as irrelevant and yet called me rude.

So, you want me to dismiss the basis of someone elses argument and substitute it for yours, because that will be, what? How does dismissing Max out of hand lead to a better discussion?

Because you're not talking to Max at the moment.

So wait, now that Vecna exists, this portfolio of magic and secrets exists. Before he existed, it didn't. Or maybe it did but it was unclaimed and inactive.

So... if there was a cosmic balance before Vecna, then that balance would have changed when Vecna took his position. But this is just basic logic, it can't be proof of anything because I don't have page numbers that state this outright.

If there was a cosmic balance, and if that balance is changed when new portfolios are created or claimed.

And I've noticed you arguing one of my points. That's one of the things that makes this so frustrating. Because you seem to agree with me, but you have some chip on your shoulder about how you interpret my intentions.

Agree with you on which point? That archfiends can grant spells? Sure--but that's not your point. Your point is that somehow makes them redundant with evil gods. And I disagree with that, because even if they're mechanically the same (which they're not), they have very different stories.

So, not entirely zero calorie, which is what I said. All food must contain calories, because that's how food works.

And yet, he's not the god of calories. Any more than Gond is the god of blueprint paper, pencils, or patent offices, or Bane is the god of barracks and KP Duty, or Garl Glittergold is the god of pressure, magma, water, time, or any of the other things needed to make gemstones.

 

[pemerton]

Yes, but it does not show that they were doing so as anything other than exceptions or inconsistencies. At least not once you get past 1e(and I guess 4e).

Then there you go! It would have been there had the Deities & Demigods been out. Lolth is a lesser goddess unless you opt out of those abilities.

This is all just bizarre!

It's not inconsistent to publish something without having regard to a book you haven't published yet! It's DDG which changed things, introducing a typology of gods, linking them fairly tightly to the granting of spells, and at the very same time telling us how the archfiends and the like are to be brought into that framework (ie as lesser gods).

This doesn't show that anything is an exception, nor that it is an inconsistency.

 

[pemerton]

Ahem... the concept was already in the DMG. P.38

The DMG p 38 does not have a technical concept of lesser gods. Nor of divine abilities, which is what is spelled out for Lolth in Q1 and is the difference between the Q1 and D3 descriptions of Lolth.

 

[Lanefan]

The original discussion was me being told that "Loki" is core to DnD because he is in the 5e PHB. But, he is no more Core than Amaterasu. Sure, reading the DDG or F&A would give you general info on the pantheons... but so would reading wikipedia or Shinto Kami: Deities of Japanese Shinto.

The difference being, of course, that reading DDG or F&A gives you general info on the pantheons in a D&D context; which is useful when one is trying to run D&D.

 

[Chaosmancer]

For the purposes of attunement and changing their spells. Per RAW. They are not considered clerics in any other regard.

And what other regard matters?

Well, I can answer my own question there. Saving throws and HP and skill proficiencies. However, in a more essential manner, as in "what is the essence of this" they are clerics. They use clerical magic. They attune to clerical items. They worship like clerics.

In every way that matters, they are clerics.

Nawp! Nothing like that. It's more like trying to claim that Divine Soul is not a cleric, even though it has spells on the cleric list, yet considering them clerics for purposes of attunement and changing spells.

I had not considered the divine soul angle, but I again see that much more like angels and other celestials. They are intrinsically tied to the divine planes, and thus have innate divine magic. A divine soul sorcerer never has to worship a god, they have a sliver of god inside them.

A cultist worships, that is the source of their power. Identically to a cleric.

 

[Helldritch]

The DMG p 38 does not have a technical concept of lesser gods. Nor of divine abilities, which is what is spelled out for Lolth in Q1 and is the difference between the Q1 and D3 descriptions of Lolth.

So, when it suites you, the rule of fiends not being able to cast spells as they are not gods is debunked by the DDG, but when it does not you forget the DDG in a nice closet?

Either you use it or you do not. If you use only the DMG, archdevils are not gods but can serve as conduit for clerics. If you use the optional rule of the DDG, then you can use the option of making some of them lesser gods (and at this point, why not making them all lesser gods...) But you also must use the non optional rule of divine ranks...which makes it so that 5th level spells require at least a demigod to be granted.

The fact that Lolth was given divine ranks in the adventures just made her a goddess as it always should have been. It was the only for the game to explain how dark elves could cast 5th level spells and higher. Later in the UA, they even had unlimited advancement in cleric if they were female... And normal elves were still limited to what? 7th level (10th with 18 wisdom if I recall correctly). It was a necessity to keep Dark elves powerful. They even were more powerful wizard than Grey elves (supposedly the best wizards of the elven race) reaching higher level with the same intelligence.

This is why I usually limit myself to core books. As time goes on in any edition of D&D, inconsistencies from the core book appears more and more up to a point where a new edition is requires to start the cycle over again. And consistency is not even there from edition to edition...