NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Chaosmancer" data-source="post: 8020971" data-attributes="member: 6801228">I'm not 100% up on my Tolkien lore, but I'd argue that not a single thing in Middle-Earth existed "just because". I have no idea why the Balrog was in Moria. Reading the trilogy gives me no insight into this. But, I do know that in other works Tolkien actually explained the history of that Balrog and explained exactly why it was where it was. The Fall of Gondolin is never explained to us in the Hobbit, but it is still an intentional part of the world and is mentioned because of the ripple effects it had.Everything in Middle-Earth was placed with an intent. To put it another way, you don't just throw an empty pyramid into the middle of a plain, with no purpose, story or hook. Why is it there? I don't know, just because. Somethings just exist in the world for no reason. It is a massive pyramid, someone had to have built it, it had to have a purpose, it can't exist "just because" it has to have a reason. And if it truly doesn't, then why did you even bother telling us about it. It might as well be a tree, or a stone, or a cloud. It add nothing.Woo. Wonderful. And a complete cop-out. Weren't you just complementing Tolkien for his believable worlds? Do you think Sauron was evil "just because, and if you don't like that you can just make a good version of him."?We don't care about authorial intent, not in this case, because the rules have been set out for us, and we are trying to make sense of them. Umberlee is a Goddess of the SeaShe exists because people worship herShe is evil and cruelPeople only worship her out of fearThere does exist a good god of the seaIf everyone worshipped him instead, Umberlee would die and the seas would be safe. So why hasn't that happened? Why did people start worshipping Umberlee? We've been given the rules and the characters, but the story is nonsensical.Alright, but here (to tie this back to the OP) is the question. How many of those religions with explicitly evil Deities also had powerful demons that were threats to the gods that were not tied to those gods. For an example, from what I know of Norse mythology none of the Aesir were evil (barring some twisting of Loki at the end), none of the Vanir were evil. The enemy were the Jotuns and the Fire Giants. And they weren't gods, but they were as powerful as the gods. Or take Hindu Mythology (which I have an admittedly limited knowledge of) there are no evil dieties worshipped, but their are evil spirits and demons that the gods fight. DnD though has both. We have Evil Gods, we have Demons, and we have the Devil. All three are existing simultaneously as foes of the gods of good. But do we need them to? Why have redundant aspects. Especially when you start looking back at things like, who you fought if you were opposed to say Bane. You would fight clerics and cultists of Bane, and you would fight Devils. Because Bane didn't have angels, he had Devils serving him... but all Devils follow Asmodeus, so why would Bane have Devils? Because they were the Lawful Evil outsiders. Or Lolth having demons that follow her. If they are using Demons and Devils anyways... why are they not Demon Princes and Archdevils? It would fit perfectly. Or, remove the Demon Princes and Archdevils and have all the antagonists be evil gods, and the followers of evil gods are demons and devils. That also works. But both is just messy for no reason.</blockquote>

Verification