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.
Okay, you misunderstood my claim and I misunderstood your question. That’s why I asked first in response to your “evidence please” “of what?”. I should have left it there I suppose, but I followed up with a theory of what you were asking for evidence of.
I was claiming that the only times gods have gotten new portfolios was during times of incredibly crisis. Not that necessarily those new portfolio’s caused the crisis. However, despite it only happening during incredible moments (the death of gods, major upheavals, ect) the gods are constantly struggling to obtain more power and take more portfolio’s from each other, at least especially in Faerun.
I hope you can see how these are very different claims, and that the constant struggle to succeed isn’t negated by the fact that the successes are few and far between, and usually under extreme circumstances.
You could link those posts.
Right now, because I didn’t have time before, I am typing up responses to your post in a word doc, because I am working from my workplace’s wi-fi, and they block the site so I can only read the post as I saved the webpage and type responses in a separate place. I can’t currently search for anything.
And sure, if I had an extra hour or two, I could use the find function to find every single post I’ve made over the past week, and link every single post where I presented evidence. But firstly, I don’t have a spare hour or two to do that. And secondly, you seem to mostly agree with my position. The thing you seem to have a problem with is how I’ve phrased things.
And, frankly, I’m not sure why I should bother to carve out that hour when your very first post to me in this thread was you lecturing me about how I post, “warning” me about my “ah ha” moments, that seem to be you taking offense at the fact that I try and prevent people from shifting their argument mid-way through a discussion. So frankly, if you are actually interested in seeing the evidence I have presented, go back and find it yourself. I have little interest in trying to force myself to be online more, to provide evidence to someone who agrees with me already, just so they can tell me how I’m a terrible communicator and my arguments are bad. I’m already neglecting things I NEED to get done at home to try and keep up with this thread, and it isn’t my problem that you couldn’t be bothered to read my posts before.
And, I’m sorry if I’m coming across as rude and brusque, but you have been attacking me continuously in this thread, not for what I’ve been saying, but for what you think I’ve been saying, and I’m getting exhausted trying to correct the record.
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.
I don’t know if it actually exists. I find it unlikely. However, I didn’t see a point in arguing with Max that his entire baseline of his argument was likely false, when instead I could accept his premise and still demonstrate that his conclusion was erroneous.
Again, my argument has never been that the cosmic balance existed. My argument is that even if we assume it exists, the arrival of new gods would disrupt and change it. Therefore stating that the very nature of gods is to keep and not disrupt the cosmic balance is erroneous. Thinking about it more, I should have used the Die Vecna Die series of adventures where Vecna tries to take over Sigil and rewrite all of the multiverse as my example, but I didn’t think about that adventure until just now.
I'd see that more as "prevent the yuan-ti from gaining tremendous power" not "protect the balance of the universe".
They are often presented as apocalypses, and again, if the cosmic balance wasn’t shifting, then how could the arrival of an evil god be anything except a mild curiosity? Because we have evil gods, we have a lot of evil gods and Archfiends and GOO and all sorts of things trying to end or enslave all life. For this to be “bad” it has to in some way be disruptive to the current order.
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.
You want to tell me I told you your preference was wrong, because you suddenly out of nowhere for no discernible reason wanted to talk about the creative process of creating new dieties. And AGAIN, for the third time, I wasn’t responding to that idea, because I had no conception that was what you were talking about. I was talking about how to have the discussion on the issue that is the title of this thread. And, in that context, your method WAS backwards. You can’t discuss what the books say role and purpose of evil gods is by first determining what role and purpose you want them to have.
Reading your post as actually being about the discussion, it appeared like you basically said “agree on the conclusion, then debate the question” which is backwards. If you want to instead talk about the creative process involved In writing a divine character… then obviously there is no wrong way to do it. IT is a creative process. If you need to go for a polar dip in winter to get your creativity flowing then that’s what’s right for you.
And yes, I’m trying very hard not to get drawn into tangents like “how do you create a new evil god for your homebrew campaign” because it isn’t relevant to the discussion of “what is the role and purpose of evil gods and how are they different from archfiends, as presented by the text of Dungeons and Dragons”. If you want to talk about a completely different topic, make a new thread, invite me to it, we can discuss writing techniques. But that isn’t the focus of this thread.
Because you're not talking to Max at the moment.
But this discussion you have inserted yourself into is based off Max’s premise. IF you disagree with that premise, then fine, say you disagree with the premise and we can have a different discussion. But demanding I prove a premise that isn’t mine, that I simply accepted out of ease because disproving it wasn’t necessary is quite audacious.
And to repeat, I don’t truly believe that the Cosmic Balance exists like Maxperson has claimed, that doesn’t seem to be a realistic take on the state of a DnD setting, it isn’t balanced, it is more like a stalemate in a multi-fronted siege. However, I didn’t see value in attacking his premise, when even by accepting it, I could prove his relevant point to be erroneous.
If there was a cosmic balance, and if that balance is changed when new portfolios are created or claimed.
Exactly. If I accept the premise, then is the new portfolio being created or claimed changing the balance. I propose that it must, especially considering part of Max’s argument (which by the way, have you noticed that since you started hammering on me about this, he’s quietly abandoned this line of discussion?) was that Overgod’s, such as AO, would prevent Demon Lords and Archfiends from getting certain portfolio’s to maintain that balance.
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.
That they can grant spells. That there is no canonical, hardline distinction between them in the rules. Ect.
But let’s talk about that disagreement, because that would actually be a productive conversation. What story can you tell with an Evil God that you cannot tell with an Archfiend? I haven’t been able to determine any, so what do you think I’m missing? That seems like a far better use of our time than this constant parade of accusations.
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.
Well, there is a fundamental difference, isn’t there? I think it is fair to say we have established that all food must contain some number of calories. You cannot remove all calories from a product and still have food. But let us look at Garl and gemstones. Do gemstones need pressure? No. Actually they don’t. They don’t need magma or water either. If I am holding a gemstone in my hand, there is no water or magma for me to remove. There are plenty of ways to form a gemstone, all you need is for the molecules to form a crystalline structure. Magma, water, and pressure are ways that can happen, but they aren’t fundamental to the reality of a gemstone.
Is Bane the god of Barracks? Well, obviously not, because we is War and he is Tyranny, and you don’t need barracks for either of those. You can commit war from tents, or from other people’s homes that you conquered. Is Gond the God of paper and pencils? No, because you can have invention without those things, proven by the fact that those things are themselves inventions.
