Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="DEFCON 1" data-source="post: 8018394" data-attributes="member: 7006">What about the idea instead that "Evil Devils and Evil Demons are necessary to explain why evil stuff happens in a universe where Gods are good?"  Why does it have to be other Gods, instead of just devils and demons?There's no right or wrong with either view and quite frankly I'm not telling other people they are wrong... but it does highlight my thoughts a bit.  On the good side of default D&D and most of the settings, we have Gods that rules over all the Good aspects of the morality game in D&D.  There really isn't a list of other defined and named "good" entities underneath them in most settings.  There aren't lists of Angels for example that we have as the alternate embodiments of good (expect in rare supplements you can find in editions past).  So when we need uber-entities that embody goodness... we use the setting's Gods.  There isn't any redundancy.But we do have entire lists of bad guys and bad girls... named entities with defined personalities, defined wants and needs, defined places in the multiverse.  Entire lists of known Devils, and known Demons. And thus adding Evil Gods on top of those lists seems to me to be redundant.  What is gained by doing that and having that overlap?  To me... I feel like it lessens the importance of Archdevils and Archdemons when you have Evil Gods above them in terms of their place in most settings (especially considering that the Cleric has a much higher place of prominence in the game than the Warlock does.)Obviously people have and continue to make use of both sets-- evil gods and evil fiends.  Which is great... if it works it works.  But for me... I just wonder if having one means no longer needing the other?</blockquote>

Verification