Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="doctorbadwolf" data-source="post: 9385769" data-attributes="member: 6704184">Get rid of Zehir, probably, because I literally forget he exists to begin with. Bahamut doesn’t need to cover protection to begin with, it’s just grid filling to even call “go out and kick evil’s butt” protection. I mean, if I was gonna write a whole detailed writeup about it I would have done that. Eh I’m only a fan of that dynamic when the three deities are still fully realized individual deities that share aspects of a role in addition to their other stuff. So, sure, add that onto what else they’re doing, but not as an “instead”. Not really? And I can’t imagine her being associated with the day in any way. I’m not interested in doing even more of the “in this context this primary god is called that and it’s just a different aspect of the same guy” with the gods than 4e already does. I prefer less of that. Okay. Nah. No gods allowed that aren’t in some way possessed of traits that real people might potentially worship or revere. I also refuse to have a pure good/pure evil dichotomy like that where the male figure associated with a particular set of species is pure good and the female figure associated with a different particular set of species is pure evil. No. Complexity and nuance. MeeeehhhhhhTbh Batman isn’t that interesting, either.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="doctorbadwolf, post: 9385769, member: 6704184"] Get rid of Zehir, probably, because I literally forget he exists to begin with. Bahamut doesn’t need to cover protection to begin with, it’s just grid filling to even call “go out and kick evil’s butt” protection. I mean, if I was gonna write a whole detailed writeup about it I would have done that. Eh I’m only a fan of that dynamic when the three deities are still fully realized individual deities that share aspects of a role in addition to their other stuff. So, sure, add that onto what else they’re doing, but not as an “instead”. Not really? And I can’t imagine her being associated with the day in any way. I’m not interested in doing even more of the “in this context this primary god is called that and it’s just a different aspect of the same guy” with the gods than 4e already does. I prefer less of that. Okay. Nah. No gods allowed that aren’t in some way possessed of traits that real people might potentially worship or revere. I also refuse to have a pure good/pure evil dichotomy like that where the male figure associated with a particular set of species is pure good and the female figure associated with a different particular set of species is pure evil. No. Complexity and nuance. Meeeehhhhhh Tbh Batman isn’t that interesting, either. [/QUOTE]

Verification