[D&D history/development] I wonder why...

[Kae'Yoss]

I guess it's because she wants to enslave the world, not destroy it.

 

[Shemeska]

The one that I have never understood is why tanar'ri are immune to electricity. A corollary of that is why the balor is shrouded with fire (and was only made immune to fire in 3.5E) when it is supposed to lead the tanar'ri against the baatezu which are immune to fire but have no immunity or resistance to electricity. Perhaps a balor should be a living electrical storm instead?

Because when one of the obyriths made the first balor, they didn't take out their crystal ball and say, "You know, a million years from now when the Blood War starts and the tanar'ri are fighting the baatezu who haven't even been created yet, we really should make balors shrouded in something that harms these hypothetical and currently nonexistant enemies of theirs. Right?"

In-game they didn't have a copy of the monster manual to design themselves with. And technically, Balors were fighting one another, obyriths and even eladrin well before the first baatezu called itself by that name. They aren't defined by only one of their enemies that's their current nemesis, but hardly their first.

 

[Mouseferatu]

I guess it's because she wants to enslave the world, not destroy it.

The problem there, though, is that "conquering" and "enslaving" are perfectly viable goals for chaotic evil, as well as lawful (or neutral). "Chaotic" doesn't have to mean "mindlessly destructive," and there are plenty of examples (both in-game and out) of governments and rulers that are chaotic rather than lawful.

 

[Tonguez]

I'm with Merric: Tiamat's CE in my game

Tiamat is the cruel tyrant who crushes all over evil beneath her sharp and terrible claw. She gains power through her schemes and by always being one step ahead of those who 'follow' her - as such she us Lawful.

 

[grodog]

Tiamat is the cruel tyrant who crushes all over evil beneath her sharp and terrible claw. She gains power through her schemes and by always being one step ahead of those who 'follow' her - as such she us Lawful.

Of course she is, in your game; in mine, she's a demonic queen of dragon breeding with way more than 5 heads; she spawns dragons, demons, and half-breeds with highly-magical capabilities; and she is the antithesis of weal and good. If you're curious, see http://www.canonfire.com/cfhtml/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=215 for more on my version of Tiamat.

 

[TerraDave]

Oddly enough, in Babylonian mythology (as according to wikipedia), she's the embodiment of Chaos (and not really a dragon, either).

Tiamet is often considered equivelent to Leviathon (as mentioned in the Bible?) as a primordial, chaotic force.

But D&D is all about taking things from folklore and twisting, twisting, twisting...A recent one I learned about was the Barghest. The "black dog of yorkshire" and possible insperation for the Grimm in the Harry Potter books...EGG got a hold of it, and in an early Dragon made it the Gehena inhabiting shapeshifting sould drinker you may not know or love. (As an aside, if used correctly you can really surprise and beat down your players with it.)

But there are lots of examples like that, because so many D&D monsters do at least share a name with something from myth or folklore.

 

[BiggusGeekus]

So have you ever begun to think of an aspect of D&D, something you've always accepted without question, and suddenly wondered why it is the way it is?

(I'm talking about historical aspects, flavor, and design, not so much rules mechanics.)

We don't have firearms because the universe/gods don't let us or the materials aren't there. OK.

But ....

We have dwarves who can make an adamantite sword cut through volcanoes but they can't muster up the metallurgy to make a decent steam engine railroad.

We can build roads, but not dig a trench for canals.

We have gods of healing and knowledge, but they never get together to work on germ theory.

We have the ability to cut 10,000gp crystals and minerals, but we don't have the optics to make a decent magnifying glass to look at cells.

It is more important to a city to magic up a +2 longsword than it is to feed thousands of people. This applies even to lawful good areas.

People worship evil gods and commit evil deeds knowing that there exists a literal hell. Anywhere that has so much as a 1st level cleric can get daily confirmation of this. The level of communication between deity and worshiper could only be improved with instant text messaging, yet almost every lawful good church in D&D has at least one person, if not a sub-organization, that operates with malignant motivations.

 

[Varianor Abroad]

It is more important to a city to magic up a +2 longsword than it is to feed thousands of people. This applies even to lawful good areas.

Given the real world of falling bridges and money spent on strange things that do not feed people, I'm comfortable with this sort of fantasy trope. It's not so unbelievable.

I do however have a CE Tiamat when it matters.

 

[Particle_Man]

People worship evil gods and commit evil deeds knowing that there exists a literal hell. Anywhere that has so much as a 1st level cleric can get daily confirmation of this.

That is one that I have trouble with, too.

 

[Delta]

People worship evil gods and commit evil deeds knowing that there exists a literal hell.

There are plenty of stories about people selling their souls for something they desire sufficiently in their normal life.

Or, look at it this way: There are clearly leader-beings in Hell, as well as underling-sufferers in Hell, right? Well, knowing evil people are picking up both temporal power, and if they're sufficiently evil, betting that they'll become one of the domineering leader overlords when they get to Hell.

So, it's a lot like the lottery. People play the lottery knowing that there exist mathematics showing that it's definitely a losing proposition.