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

[Lanefan]

Even if we accept that posit, I think then the real question is whether all cultures will necessarily have those as domains represented in their pantheons.

I'm not suggesting they all would; but odds are very high of at least one or two showing up somewhere in any given pantheon.

 

[MGibster]

The god of the sea is evil? Why? Just because some designer assigned the god that way? And now every water priest has to be evil too? That's just dumb in my opinion. God of fire is evil because fire can burn things down, and now ever fire priest has to be evil too? There's absolute zero reason why that should be the case, especially when the decision to make these gods evil was completely arbitrary by some book designer.

I'm with you on this one. In my own setting, the god of the sea and storms is evil because he has a habit of losing his temper and taking it out on mortals. But pretty anyone starting a voyage by sea is going to pray to him because, like him or not, he's still the god of the sea. And there are priests in his temples who aren't evil, they just want to placate the god to keep people safe.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

The point is, the Greeks clearly recognised a bad "war" god and non-bad "strategy/victory/discipline" god.

The latter is still war.

Absolutely not, and that's not a reasonable position, nor supported by history. Indeed I would go so far as to say it is illustrative of a profound misunderstand of ancient and classical Greek culture.

Simply no. Athene was a war god, seen as such by the Greeks. Yes, she was different than Ares, no one is disputing that. But you're literally trying here to rewrite Greek history. This is really not a matter that should be debated. You can open any encyclopaedia on the matter, and it will tell you that Athene was a goddess of war. Yes, she has other roles too, but doesn't change the fact that war is a big part of her domain.

 

[Minigiant]

I understand your way of thinking, but believe it to be silly when the "evil god" is the god of a domain that has nothing whatsoever to being evil and the god was just assigned the "evil" tag just to get more evil gods in the pantheon. At that point having all the priests be evil too just seems ridiculous.

The god of the sea is evil? Why? Just because some designer assigned the god that way? And now every water priest has to be evil too? That's just dumb in my opinion. God of fire is evil because fire can burn things down, and now ever fire priest has to be evil too? There's absolute zero reason why that should be the case, especially when the decision to make these gods evil was completely arbitrary by some book designer.

God of murder is evil... okay, fine. God of fury is evil? So be it. And those people who become priests of fury and murder are considered evil too... understandable. But darkness? The sea? Storms? Fire? Death? All things that has positives and negatives to them (along with almost every other domain-- the sun can cause just as many problems as darkness can)... but the people who care about those things are evil too?

Nope. Makes no sense and I would never design a world like that.

The God(dess) of the Sea and God of the Storms in my setting are both Good and Evil as a representation of the chaotic changes of each.

The Aqua Fundamentalists are the pirates and scallywags so celebrate the Sea Goddess's violence and how the chaos and death make to increased prices via rarity and dangerous passing

The Aqua Reformists are the merchants and traders who worship the safe voyages at sea and give sacrifices to ensure safe trade economy.

So you have evil pirate priests praying to the Sea Goddess to push ships to pirate ambushes and good pirates praying for the opposite. And both praying for their ship to not be sunk.

Other gods like the sun gods and moon goddess are culturally seen as Good or Evil depending on where you live and how reliant your nation is on sunlight and heat.

 

[QuentinGeorge]

I mean you're just making a different oversimplification to me, you're not really shedding any additional light.

The point is, the Greeks clearly recognised a bad "war" god and non-bad "strategy/victory/discipline" god.

Absolutely not, and that's not a reasonable position, nor supported by history. Indeed I would go so far as to say it is illustrative of a profound misunderstanding of ancient and classical Greek culture. This isn't about "PR". This was about different concepts, ideas, and ideals being associated with each.

Good thing I didn't say that, eh?

I said the a lot of cultures recognised that war was not a good thing, or certainly high-intensity war.

EDIT - I will add that the few cultures I can think of which did have positive "war gods" were ones which rather troubling cultures which engaged in large-scale and frequent acts of "Evil" by D&D's standards. By D&D's standards for, example, most eras of Rome's existence are of a very clearly Evil-with-a-capital-e society. Your objection seems to be more that D&D has/had capital-e Evil and capital-g Good at all.

The Greeks hated Ares and thought of him as a thug (and enjoyed stories that made him look like an idiot and a cuckold).

However the Romans genuinely loved Mars. He was as close as possible to a state god, especially in the early days. However I think Mars was more a patron of glorious conquest than being like the mindless violence of Ares.

 

[Crimson Longinus]

Ares was the brutality of war.
Athena was the strategic aspects of warfare.

From Wikipedia:

As Athena Promachos, she was believed to lead soldiers into battle. Athena represented the disciplined, strategic side of war, in contrast to her brother Ares, the patron of violence, bloodlust, and slaughter—"the raw force of war".

I combined these in my setting. "The General" and "the Destroyer" are the two main aspects of Khalit Kamada, the Red Maiden of War.

 

[Voadam]

I mean you're just making a different oversimplification to me, you're not really shedding any additional light.

This is in the context of the D&D war domain, right?

For 5e:

WAR DOMAIN
War has many manifestations. It can make heroes of ordinary people. It can be desperate and horrific, with acts of cruelty and cowardice eclipsing instances of excellence and courage. In either case, the gods of war watch over warriors and reward them for their great deeds. The clerics of such gods excel in battle, inspiring others to fight the good fight or offering acts of violence as prayers. Gods of war include champions of honor and chivalry (such as Torm, Heironeous, and KiriJolith) as well as gods of destruction and pillage (such as Erythnul, the Fury, Gruumsh, and Ares) and gods of conquest and domination (such as Bane, Hextor, and Maglubiyet). Other war gods (such as Tempus, Nike, and Nuada) take a more neutral stance, promoting war in all its manifestations and supporting warriors in any circumstance.

The 5e PH suggests the domains of Knowledge and War for Athena.

The point is, the Greeks clearly recognised a bad "war" god and non-bad "strategy/victory/discipline" god.

Are you suggesting those aspects of Athena are not war related, or that in a D&D domains context war is an inappropriate domain for Athena?

 

[Ruin Explorer]

This is in the context of the D&D war domain, right?

No this is talking more generally about war gods, not D&D's weird-ass take on war domain specifically. Hence the list a while back of "evil" areas. That'd explain the disconnect though.

Are you suggesting those aspects of Athena are not war related, or that in a D&D domains context war is an inappropriate domain for Athena?

Oh I'd suggest the entire 5E implementation of domains is fundamentally incompatible with historical takes on gods, even being really generous/broad, D&D 5E just has absolutely wack-ass lunatic ideas about what domains should exist (as compared to historical human cultures).

EDIT - Honestly, if there was one bit of D&D I could redo, well, I'd struggle to pick one, but Domains would be high on my list. Because they're awful. They don't reflect things people really care about, and they're not even that cool or thematic!

 

[Lanefan]

This is in the context of the D&D war domain, right?

Gods of war include champions of honor and chivalry (such as Torm, Heironeous, and KiriJolith)

I see those more as Gods of Tournament Jousting. War as sport, with breaks for tea at four o'clock.

as well as gods of destruction and pillage (such as Erythnul, the Fury, Gruumsh, and Ares)

In other words, Gods of War-Just-For-The-Hell-Of-It.

and gods of conquest and domination (such as Bane, Hextor, and Maglubiyet). Other war gods (such as Tempus, Nike, and Nuada) take a more neutral stance, promoting war in all its manifestations and supporting warriors in any circumstance.

Some of these may well be Gods of War-As-Necessity; fair enough.

The 5e PH suggests the domains of Knowledge and War for Athena.

Which suggests maybe the game sees her more as the Goddess of Strategy, Tactics, and Spying? She's the one the generals and tacticians behind the lines pray to; while the actual soldiers bleeding in the field look to Ares and curse his name.

 

[Alzrius]

The god of the sea is evil? Why? Just because some designer assigned the god that way? And now every water priest has to be evil too?

This is where you lose me; there have been multiple editions of D&D where worshipers of a god don't have to have an alignment that matches that of their deity, sometimes wildly so. Yes, in the Forgotten Realms, Umberlee (the goddess of the sea) is Chaotic Evil. But Faiths & Avatars (AD&D 2E) says she accepts worshipers of any alignment, and that her clergy can be Lawful Evil, Neutral Evil, Chaotic Evil, Chaotic Neutral, or True Neutral. In 3E's Faiths and Pantheons, she can have clerics that are CN, CE, or NE. It's not like the game mandates that the gods' worshipers match their alignments exactly.