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

[DEFCON 1]

Wouldn't / Couldn't these powerful demons and devils that gain the ability to grant spells to worshippers become de facto gods themselves? And once they become gods, they are no longer just a demon or devil. I mean human gods are not just powerful humans or even powerful angels- they are something more. I can see Orcus being more like the other gods than a demon anymore.

I guess it depends probably on whether the DM considers 'god' to be a title or a creature type?

Myself, I've always considered it the former. And the way I've looked at it goes along with how the gods are portrayed in Mythic Odysseys of Theros... where it comes down to worshippers and its their belief and faith is what generates the power to ascend a being to that status.

In 4E Asmodeus is both the lord of the Archdevils and is one of the gods of the Dawn War pantheon because he has the amount of believers necessary to make him such. Likewise it seems to be how normal humans ascend to divinity in places like the Realms, when their status and renown reaches a point where they gain followers and worshippers. At some point, if enough people treat you like a god, then you are one. Basically the same premise of the Pharaohs in Ancient Egypt, yes? "Living gods" and all that?

So with that in mind... from a world-building perspective it could basically comes down to the equitable balance between mortals and divine beings. Divine beings need worshippers because their faith generates the power necessary for the being to ascend to godhood and become all-powerful / immortal... and mortals are granted power and stability from their gods in order to help facilitate their faith and belief. It's a two-way street-- faith creates divine power and divine power generates faith. And as soon as either side stop in the transaction, the divine being loses their power and falls down the ranks.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

It indeed matters what we define "gods" to be. Is any powerful being that is worshipped a god, or are gods a category of a being in their own right?

If one would want to make a distinction, one could argue that the gods are aspects of the world they're gods of. They're intrinsically linked to the world and how and what that world is. They have relationship with the beings of that world. They might be inscrutable, but they're not alien. As gods would be aspects of the world, they would never wish to destroy the world, though they might wish to change it.

Then again, according to that logic, perhaps Asmodeus is god to the Hell, but not to the Material Plane...

I certainly find the standard D&D (or is it just Forgotten Realms?) cosmology to be a convoluted mess, and for my own world I prefer far more streamlined systems.

 

[Raiztt]

I mean, the Italian Mafia was Catholic.

I don't want to use real world examples, but this would not end up being a counter example to my argument.

Because they're less than fully rational?

I don't think anyone is that irrational. For example, if someone said "Would you like to exist in eternal bliss for all eternity, or suffer unimaginable torment for all eternity" literally no one (and I am using the word literally literally) would choose the latter if they had perfect comprehension of these terms.

 

[Raiztt]

Well, if good and evil are contextual, then these premises don't really work.

My argument assumes that good and evil are contextual (i.e.: "evil" gods champion "evil" behavior, so it's not really "evil" to them, so to speak). The problem has to do with what happens if you still have objective knowledge of moral facts, gods, and consequences and no evil gods to protect evil people.

 

[Maxperson]

I don't want to use real world examples, but this would not end up being a counter example to my argument.

I can't get into the specifics for obvious reasons, but if you understand the organizations I mentioned, the former believed #1 and #3, and believed #2 doesn't exist, yet still chose to do evil things. My example is quite literally a counter example to your statement. It would be hard to be more counter.

 

[Voadam]

In 4E Asmodeus is both the lord of the Archdevils and is one of the gods of the Dawn War pantheon because he has the amount of believers necessary to make him such.

I'm not super deep on the 4e nature of godhood, but my understanding is that 4e core Asmodeus the then arch-angel fighting the Abyss and demons took part of the Shard of Evil to create his Ruby Rod, power himself up, and then betrayed the God of Humanity he worked for and took his divine power, not that he developed cults that gave him divine power.

I don't remember core discussion about 4e gods being tied to worship or cults as the path to ascension. It has been over a decade since I read the 4e PH and DMG though.

Forgotten Realms since 2e with Ao in the Time of Troubles wrap up tied gods' powers to their worshipers so for 4e Realms Asmodeus turning devil cults into a critical mass of worship to get to divinity works, but I thought that was separate from 4e Dawn War cosmology defaults.

 

[Raiztt]

I can't get into the specifics for obvious reasons, but if you understand the organizations I mentioned, the former believed #1 and #3, and believed #2 doesn't exist, yet still chose to do evil things. My example is quite literally a counter example to your statement. It would be hard to be more counter.

No, it's not, because mafioso's still participate in their religion, which specifically includes unilateral forgiveness for anything. Meaning even though they commit evil acts, they do not reject their god (which would be the most evil act).

For you to give a counter example, you'd need to make the argument that someone could plausibly want/choose to go to hell - which is what I am saying is so irrational it would violate the PSR.

 

[Voadam]

I don't think anyone is that irrational. For example, if someone said "Would you like to exist in eternal bliss for all eternity, or suffer unimaginable torment for all eternity" literally no one (and I am using the word literally literally) would choose the latter if they had perfect comprehension of these terms.

It is a jump to go from the general "I don't want eternal torment" to the specific "I believe to100% that to avoid eternal torment I must do X"

 

[Cadence]

I can't get into the specifics for obvious reasons, but if you understand the organizations I mentioned, the former believed #1 and #3, and believed #2 doesn't exist, yet still chose to do evil things. My example is quite literally a counter example to your statement. It would be hard to be more counter.

Is it useful to consider the combination of (a) example of where someone believes that following medical suggestion (diet alteration, specific exercise, a medication, quitting a harmful habit) is much better for their health and will prevent a long term painful condition and decreased quality of life for years and years, but finds it something they just can't do now and (b) humans being really bad with the concept of forever.

 

[Raiztt]

It is a jump to go from the general "I don't want eternal torment" to the specific "I believe to100% that to avoid eternal torment I must do X"

It's a premise that that knowledge is had.