Evil Deities: Who needs em?

[rounser]

With the threads around recently about Archdevils and Demon Lords, it made me wonder whether evil gods were redundant. Archfiends have far more "hands on" adventure potential, since they're not as untouchable as gods, and can lead to entertaining high level romps in the Nine Hells and the Abyss. Likewise, Cthulhu mythos style Great Old Ones (or equivalent, like Tharizdun) taking the place of campaign world evil deities seem to have a lot more adventure potential than evil gods, with cultists and the threat of them being summoned or awakened from slumber in the depths of the ocean...

So I ask you - evil deities, what good are they?

 

[diaglo]

So I ask you - evil deities, what good are they?

well strictly speaking by the rulz... they provide spells for evil clerics.

most of the others you mentioned don't.

 

[Psion]

I find the discinction between "evil deity" and "archfiend" somewhat artificial. If I wanted an evil deity to be confrontable, I would do it. If I wanted an archfiend to grant spell I would (er, do) allow it.

 

[rounser]

Exactly Psion. To be clear, Diaglo, I was assuming that both Archfiends and Cthulu Mythos horrors would be granting spells to their cults, have domains etc.

If I wanted an evil deity to be confrontable, I would do it.

Oh aye. However, there seems to be much less of a culture of confronting gods than Archfiends and Great Old Ones. Whooping Orcus's behind is a time honoured tradition, and at a pinch Iuz (who's a demigod, but a manifested, prime dweller, fiendish one and therefore open to some confrontation too)...and confronting and dying in droves to Cthulu Mythos Great Old Ones is a laugh and a half too...whereas with evil deities, it often doesn't seem to be on the menu...unless they manifest in a Time of Troubles-like event.

 

[diaglo]

I find the discinction between "evil deity" and "archfiend" somewhat artificial. If I wanted an evil deity to be confrontable, I would do it. If I wanted an archfiend to grant spell I would (er, do) allow it.

sounds like you want to play another edition

 

[DaveMage]

I find the discinction between "evil deity" and "archfiend" somewhat artificial. If I wanted an evil deity to be confrontable, I would do it. If I wanted an archfiend to grant spell I would (er, do) allow it.

Yep - this is pretty much how I think about it as well.

 

[diaglo]

Oh aye. However, there seems to be much less of a culture of confronting gods than archfiends. Whooping Orcus's behind is a time honoured tradition, and at a pinch Iuz (who's a demigod, but a manifested, prime dweller, fiendish one and therefore open to some confrontation too) whereas with evil deities, it often doesn't seem to be on the menu...

altho, there are a whole legion of 2edADnDers who did just this... with the FR and the Time of Troubles.

and the Greyhawk Wars.

edit: and the Bloodstone series H 1-4

 

[rounser]

with the FR and the Time of Troubles. and the Greyhawk Wars.

Ah, I was editing my reply to that effect just as you posted this! (By the way, which gods manifested during the Greyhawk Wars? I don't recall any.)

Apart from the Time of Troubles, I can recall Bhaal and an avatar of that FR Beastlord god manifesting on the Moonshaes. Apart from Dragonlance, and Takhisis occasionally making an appearance, the opportunities seem to be slim, and counter to D&D culture. I think my original points still stands to a large extent though...in general, you don't seek out and beat up a god on their home plane as naturally as you might an archfiend, and cthulhu horrors want to be summoned a looooot more than gods, as a general rule...

 

[Wolffenjugend]

Are evil gods still needed? ABSOLUTELY! Especially in Dragonlance campaigns.

But really, what difference is the question: are arch-fiends and super demons really necessary since there are evil gods that fill the same role...

 

[Ibram]

I tend to go for a more fluid definition... that is that cultests usualy refer to their otherworldly lord as a god while those opposing them call it a daemon/fiend/devil.