D&D General The Role and Purpose of Evil Gods

[Henadic Theologian]

And again, "Generations later, the gnolls returned to Idyllglen, this time with demons in their ranks and Yeenoghu himself leading the war band. Zariel and the Hellriders came to the Idyllglen’s aid, but not before the town was mostly destroyed."

So she is clearly the counterpart to Yeenoghu, a Demon Prince, both in personal might but also in leadership.

So maybe not Orcus, who was also a god at some point in time, but certainly a cut above deva/planetar/solar, and on par with named powers of the lower planes who rule their own plane.



4e mythology and history are as far as possible from the usual D&D elements, and the FR is only one of the settings, but it's still the standard setting for 5e, in which he is a god.

Solar

Solars (pronounced: /ˈsoʊlɑːr/ SO-lar[3][11]) were the most powerful of all the angels[2][3][4][12] and indeed of most celestials.[3][4][5][6][12][13] Described by some as truly godlike,[1][3][4] only a celestial paragon could be more powerful.[13] Solars never took their own...

forgottenrealms.fandom.com

This has Zariel listed among noted Angels, although more importantly it has twin Solars of Corellon Larethian listed as well who were so powerful they were worshipped as Demigods.

Remember the Solar in the MM is just the generic Solar stat, there are more powerful and more unique Solars then that.

 

[Helldritch]

This is a sequal to my post just upthread.

The statblock for Lolth in D3 was published in 1979. The DDG was published in 1980. It wasn't an oversighit to not refer to a rules concept that hadn't been invented yet!

And as far as your claim that the 1st ed core books don't list Archdevils as possible agents for clerical spells, you are ignoring both the MM - and its entry for Sahuagin - and the PHB and MM together on devils and the Nine Hells.

As @Voadam says, the rules said nothing explicit on this issue, but were easily read as implying or at least allowing that Asmodeus had clerics. That's how I read them! That's how Ed Greenwood seems to have read them! That's how whoever wrote the To Slay a Hierarch scenario in the City of GH boxed set seems to have read them!

Sahuagins worship Sekolah, the Devil Shark... So yeah... they are "devil" worshipers.
Same with Ixic.. Ixichat... Devil Manta Rays that worship Demogorgon.
Not that none of these races can have clerics higher than 8th level (in the MM. 5th for the Sahuagins in DDG, inconsistencies again). Barring them from the 5th level spells that only gods could give...

Also, a rule might not have been printed yet, but it was used way before that as it was known that they were playtesting their rules back in the old days... Some of them were appearing in the Dragon Magazines way before being official. That is why there was a clarification in the DDG for who could get 5th level spells and up.

As for the City of Greyhawk boxed set.
1 exception! Only one exception and all of a sudden, it becomes the norm? And may I remind you that this Box Set was published under 2nd edition. (Had to check mine to be sure. The 2nd Edition logo is right there).

The only true exception in 1ed was Banak a priest of Orcus... And again, this was printed in the FR. In Greyhawk, as of 1ed, no exceptions in any of the adventures published.

2nd edition rose the power level of NPC to the skies and it had to "shake" the box to do it. And well it did, using the FR as a flagship to all these powerful NPCs...

And as for rule interpretations...
That is possible to do it the way you do. I gave you that. What I contest is that the power level of these cleric are nowhere near that of even a single demi-god. (at least in 1ed). And yet, exceptions were made. Damn that Banak. This one always bothered me to no end.

 

[Maxperson]

Just to make sure we are on the same page before I begin. These are "stories you can do with gods, but not archfiends"



Coming to the prime and being killed by adventurers is a story you can possibly tell with both evil gods and archfiends. This seems incredibly interchangeable so it doesn't fulfill the point.

Now, I can already feel your accusations, so let me clarify, again. I am not saying this is a bad idea. I'm not saying you are wrong that gods rarely come to the prime. I'm not saying this is a bad story. I'm not saying you must bow down before my "one true way" story. I'm saying, and only saying, that I could use an evil god in the exact same plot of coming to the mortal realms, of players hunting down an artifact needed to truly kill the god, and doing so. I could also tell the story of archfiends being completely unable to form upon this mortal coil. these stories are interchangeable. So they do not support your claim.



No, again, these are easily interchangeable. I can easily imagine an evil god who is not widely worshipped, whose followers are secretive members of a cult and the adventure is about unveiling them. I've even got a DnD example in Vecna from Exandria and Critical Role.

Reversing that again to archfiends being openly and even proudly worshipped... I've actually done that in my campaign already. Do to some inter-party shenanigans, alliances between party members, and some major plot points, a potential future for my homebrew world involved elves openly worshiping the new Lady of the Fifth, The Fallen Huntress Tana. She offered them bloody vengeance against the mindflayers for horrific crimes against the elven people, and was friends with the party member who was basically an elven Arthur, rebuilding the empire and bringing it back to glory... and openly stating that they would allow legal worship of the devils.

So, again, secretive cult worship of an evil being, or open to the public worship of an evil being. I can do that with either Archfiends or Evil gods, so these are not stories that can only be told with one or the other.




Sorry, I can easily picture an Evil God of contracts, who treats his worshippers in a Pax Romana style of transactional worship. I can only grab part of the article (I heard about this in a video) but to give this context from the Britannica "Yet Roman religion was based not on divine grace but instead on mutual trust (fides) between god and man. The object of Roman religion was to secure the cooperation, benevolence, and “peace” of the gods (pax deorum)."

So, under this style of religion, a contract between man and god is expected.



This isn't a difference at all. There is no difference between a preist of a god or a cultist of a demon, and gods have sent angels plenty of times to give quests, so sending a fiend is the exact same.



They don't typically, but is there any reason they can't? I can easily imagine an evil god attempting to spread their influence and weaken their rivals by putting their own influences and iconography into the worship of another god. And mocking other god's beliefs and practices is easily done as well. In a way, we do it all the time.

And, flipping it, I see no reason that Demonic Cultists can't do forced conversions or murder. They are pretty good at both, actually. So, again, I don't see this as a story that is impossible to tell with the opposite type of being. It isn't typical, I will give you that, but an atypical story doesn't mean it can't be done or that it can't be done well.

And, since I've gone through a few of these, I'll go ahead and clarify again. I'm not saying your ideas are bad. I'm not saying these ideas are wrong. I'm not trying to convert you to the "one true way". I'm not trying to "gotcha". I'm honestly looking at each of these examples and asking "is it possible for me to tell this story with the opposite type of being" and each time so far... yes, it is.



Not sure if this is meant to be a seperate example but "lesser of two evils" is also possible to do with both Archfiends and with Gods. You don't need to pit them against each other to pull that off. Internal conflicts between the two can lead to the same story.



So, you can easily tell a story where the gods are not a natural part of the world. Where they come from beyond our realm to play their games with us mortals like chess pieces and an evil god is disruptive and harmful to the very fabric of reality in the same way as your archfiend example. I've actually seen it done, though the name of the work escapes me at the moment.

You can also have it where the fiends ARE part of the natural order. Japanese Yokai embody this entirely. They are evil spirits, but they are a natural part of the world. A part of the world that desires to harm you, that enjoys harming you, but the world isn't a kind place.

In fact, one of your earlier ideas in this thread (I think it was you) inspired a dark gothic world in my head where the fiends are natural and the gods are unnatural, and the natural state of the world is one of darkness, blood and terror, and the unnatural gods are preventing this state of primal darkness.

So, once more, I find this unconvincing. I can do either story with either type of being.




Which has always been a bizarre story to me. I would have to admit though, the "archfiend is trying to become a god" story is one that can't be swapped like I've been doing...

Except, the larger archetype of the story is "powerful evil being is trying to become more powerful, and we must stop them". I bring this up, because the famous 2e Vecna three-part adventure involves Vecna (a god) tricking Iuz (a demigod/god) to entering his domain, so that he could consume his power and become an even greater and more terrifying god in his bid for the control of all of reality by conquering Sigil.

So, while I fully acknowledge that the specific story of "non-god being trying to become a god" isn't able to work without one side being a god and the other not, the larger trope of "evil power-up ritual we must stop" does still work with either case.

But hey, we got one.



All of this can be done with Evil Gods. Endless war between Magbuliyet and Gruumsh is very similar in style to the Blood War. Coups can happen to gods. Happens pretty regularly in various fictions.



Wow, a lot to unpack here.

Petionersin a god's domain want to be there? Okay. But they are an evil god right, so it is still terrible and likely torturous place. And Archfiends can have the same story. I actually had a player recently who was playing a Hell Knight, they wanted to go to the Nine Hells when they died, so they could become an eternal soldier fighting for the cause of proctecting (conquering) the multiverse. Many cultists want to go to the hells or abyss because they think they will come out on top, and they are often proven wrong... but there is no reason that same thing can't be true for an evil god's domain.

Souls that don't belong in the evil realm of the evil god/Archfiend? Yep, that story can and has been told with both types of beings. That is the entire trope behind unwilling human sacrifices after all. And adventurers can go to rescue from either place.

Also, I don't even agree with your final point. Gods also have a lot of use for living beings and use them as proxies all the time. And living beings can be held captive or in enforced servitude by evil gods or by archfiends. No difference in that story.



And "far more often" tells us that these stories can be told with either archfiends or Evil Gods. So, no difference here.




These are all excellent plots. But all of them could be switched and told from the other side. So, again, to reiterate, the question asked was "What story can you tell with an Evil God that you cannot tell with an Archfiend?" and the only one you provided is an archfiend trying to become an evil god.

Again, I'm not saying these are bad plots. I'm not saying that they are terrible ideas. I'm not saying you are a bad person for having come up with them, or that there is a "one true way" to tell these stories. I'm saying that I can take every single one of these stories and make it work with the other type of being. Except, specifically, the "Archfiend trying to become an Evil God". Which, technically, I could do "Evil god tries to become an Archfiend" but due to the re-defining that would need to happen, it would likely not work out as well, and I am willing to concede that plot. All the others were interchangeable.

What I'm seeing here is that you homebrew things to be different and so in your game there's more redundancy. In the default game what @Faolyn pointed out with her ideas is true. Fiends are not worshipped widely and are shunned by the populace at large, so you could not run those scenarios interchangeably between fiends and gods.

The redundancy issue is one of your own making.

 

[Maxperson]

Sahuagins worship Sekolah, the Devil Shark... So yeah... they are "devil" worshipers.
Same with Ixic.. Ixichat... Devil Manta Rays that worship Demogorgon.
Not that none of these races can have clerics higher than 8th level (in the MM. 5th for the Sahuagins in DDG, inconsistencies again). Barring them from the 5th level spells that only gods could give...

Also, a rule might not have been printed yet, but it was used way before that as it was known that they were playtesting their rules back in the old days... Some of them were appearing in the Dragon Magazines way before being official. That is why there was a clarification in the DDG for who could get 5th level spells and up.

As for the City of Greyhawk boxed set.
1 exception! Only one exception and all of a sudden, it becomes the norm? And may I remind you that this Box Set was published under 2nd edition. (Had to check mine to be sure. The 2nd Edition logo is right there).

The only true exception in 1ed was Banak a priest of Orcus... And again, this was printed in the FR. In Greyhawk, as of 1ed, no exceptions in any of the adventures published.

2nd edition rose the power level of NPC to the skies and it had to "shake" the box to do it. And well it did, using the FR as a flagship to all these powerful NPCs...

And as for rule interpretations...
That is possible to do it the way you do. I gave you that. What I contest is that the power level of these cleric are nowhere near that of even a single demi-god. (at least in 1ed). And yet, exceptions were made. Damn that Banak. This one always bothered me to no end.

Yeah. This is what has really been getting me in this discussion. D&D is an exceptions based game. It creates a general rule and then immediately sets about creating some exceptions to it. We have a general rule for demons and devils, either explicit(2e, 3e, and 5e) or implied through the lack of lots of demon/devil clerics, but somehow a very small handful of exceptions, mostly(or maybe entirely) in non-core book products, creates some sort of equivalency between archfiends and gods.

 

[pemerton]

Sahuagins worship Sekolah, the Devil Shark... So yeah... they are "devil" worshipers.

Read the MM. They are said to be devil-worshippers. Sekolah is not invented until DDG, as best I know. Sahuagin are published in Blackmoor but in that version are not devil-worshippers. That seems to be original to the MM, which is 1977.

I don't want to speak too harshly, but you seem very careless with publication dates, and with which works have which content. Which makes your claims about that content less credible than it might otherwise be.

Same with Ixic.. Ixichat... Devil Manta Rays that worship Demogorgon.

To the best of my knowledge, this is also invented in DDG. It is not mentioned in the MM.

Not that none of these races can have clerics higher than 8th level (in the MM. 5th for the Sahuagins in DDG, inconsistencies again). Barring them from the 5th level spells that only gods could give...

Again, that claim that only gods can give 5th level spells is something that you have made up. It is not stated in the DMG. Nor in DDG. @Voadam and I have posted the relevant rules text upthread. (DDG states that demigods have no minions to grant clerics 3rd to 5th level spells, and must do it themselves; and that clerics of demigods therefore cannot have 6th or 7th level spells. You seem to have transmuted this into a rule that only gods can grant 5th level spells.)

Also, a rule might not have been printed yet, but it was used way before that as it was known that they were playtesting their rules back in the old days

I am 90% confident that the rules about gods and spell levels in DDG were not playtested. They were just made up!

Likewise, as I have posted upthread but you seem to have ignored, the rules about how clerics get spells changed between the PHB and the DMG: the PHB says 1st to 4th from prayer and meditation, and 5th to 7th from the god directly. Why did Gygax change things? Who knows! But not because of playtesting. Perhaps he wanted to give minions a role. Perhaps he thought it made less sense to make 5th level spells so precarious to acquire. Or something else.

As for the City of Greyhawk boxed set.
1 exception! Only one exception and all of a sudden, it becomes the norm? And may I remind you that this Box Set was published under 2nd edition. (Had to check mine to be sure. The 2nd Edition logo is right there).

I don't need reminding that it is 2nd ed AD&D. I've made that point every time I've mentioned it. that drives home my sense that you are not reading my posts very carefully.

And what are you saying it is an exception to? There is no other published example of a Hierarch that I'm aware of.

It is different from a rule that has no existence outside of the DDG, and that there's no particular reason to think anyone ever implemented.

 

[pemerton]

Yeah. This is what has really been getting me in this discussion. D&D is an exceptions based game. It creates a general rule and then immediately sets about creating some exceptions to it. We have a general rule for demons and devils, either explicit(2e, 3e, and 5e) or implied through the lack of lots of demon/devil clerics, but somehow a very small handful of exceptions, mostly(or maybe entirely) in non-core book products, creates some sort of equivalency between archfiends and gods.

When T1 and D3 are in print (1979) how many NPC priests have been published. Lareth the Beautiful? All of the Drow? Any others? - none that I can recall. And nearly all those priests get their power from a Demon Queen! Who is "retconned" as a lesser god once that concept is invented in 1980 as part of the DDG.

The most detailed religious hierarchy in the MM, and the only evil one, is that of the Sahuagin - and they are devil worshippers.

The worship of fiends and their empowering of clerics is not a "small handful of exceptions" - exceptions to what? In this early period of AD&D it is the norm!

 

[Maxperson]

When T1 and D3 are in print (1979) how many NPC priests have been published. Lareth the Beautiful? All of the Drow? Any others? - none that I can recall. And nearly all those priests get their power from a Demon Queen! Who is "retconned" as a lesser god once that concept is invented in 1980 as part of the DDG.

The most detailed religious hierarchy in the MM, and the only evil one, is that of the Sahuagin - and they are devil worshippers.

The worship of fiends and their empowering of clerics is not a "small handful of exceptions" - exceptions to what? In this early period of AD&D it is the norm!

If we go through all the modules from early D&D, how many instances of devil clerics will we find vs the number of clerics of deities? I'll wager the vast majority of clerics do not worship devils. Devil/Demon clerics are the exception. And it's still early in D&D's history and D&D has been coming out gradually over years, so the ruleset was just incomplete prior to the Deities & Demigods, still resulting in demon/devil clerics being the exception to the implied rule.

 

[pemerton]

If we go through all the modules from early D&D, how many instances of devil clerics will we find vs the number of clerics of deities? I'll wager the vast majority of clerics do not worship devils. Devil/Demon clerics are the exception. And it's still early in D&D's history and D&D has been coming out gradually over years, so the ruleset was just incomplete prior to the Deities & Demigods, still resulting in demon/devil clerics being the exception to the implied rule.

I went through them all up to 1980. And identified all the NPC clerics! There is the cleric in B2, whom @Doug McCrae already identified as likely a demon worshipper.

The 1980 GH folio does not list who the NPC rulers worship. But I've already noted that it describes the Horned Society as devil-worshippers.

I don't have an original copy of A1, but in my version (in the Scourge of the Slavelords compilatioin) there are evil clerics and multi-class clerics, and the implication is that they worship Gruumsh.

 

[Maxperson]

I went through them all up to 1980. And identified all the NPC clerics! There is the cleric in B2, whom @Doug McCrae already identified as likely a demon worshipper.

The 1980 GH folio does not list who the NPC rulers worship. But I've already noted that it describes the Horned Society as devil-worshippers.

I don't have an original copy of A1, but in my version (in the Scourge of the Slavelords compilatioin) there are evil clerics and multi-class clerics, and the implication is that they worship Gruumsh.

It's not just evil, though. You also have the powerful upper planar equivalents and good gods to consider when thinking about redundancy. The Solars and such don't have many clerics, either. The good gods do, though. We need to compare like to like. Archfiend/angels to evil/neutral/good gods.

 

[pemerton]

It's not just evil, though. You also have the powerful upper planar equivalents and good gods to consider when thinking about redundancy.

What are you talking about? In 1979 and 1980 there are no such "upper plane equivalents".

In case it's not clear: I am not arguing that there is some abstract universal "ideal" of D&D that can be created by generalising from all the published material and trying to render it consistent.

I am talking about the actual publication history. In 1979 and 1980 nearly all the published evil cleric NPCs worship either devils or demons. The MM tells us that Asmodeus rules the Nine Hells and the PHB (p 120) tells us that the Outer Planes, including the Nine Hells, are "the homes of powerful beings, the source of alignment (religious/ philosophical/ ethical ideals), the deities." There is nothing to suggest any meaningful demarcation between evil gods (whoever those might be) and the archdevils, demon lords and the like.

And DDG drives this message home even more clearly by telling us that those beings should be treated as lesser gods, and by having a race of clerical vampires - Ixitxatchitl - worshipping Demogorgon!

Ed Greenwood clearly got the memo, because in an article published in 1984 (Dragon Magazine #91) he referred to clerics of archdevils without the least hint that such a thing might be controversial.

Nowhere in the AD&D corpus all the way through the 1980s (City of GH is one of the earliest 2nd ed AD&D products, in 1989, and it has a cleric of Asmodeus) is the distinction that you are arguing for actually drawn. Maybe Gygax thought that it mattered, in some fashion, that Nerull is an evil "god" and Demogorgon a demon prince, but he never told us how or why - my best guess is that he associated gods like Nerull and Hextor with a particular setting (GH) whereas he saw Asmodeus and Demogorgon as portable across the whole range of possible D&D settings.