D&D General Idea for a cosmos eons after an "inverse apocalypse" and an unusual deity that rises as a result.

[Son of the Serpent]

I was wondering whether any cosmos, campaign, and/or deity had ever been published for d&d that resembles this.

What does a "savior" type figure really look like in a world where "good" has prevailed so supremely for so long that apathy is rotting people's hearts and making them not feel strongly enough about anything to really question anything or feel fullfulled beyond superficial satisfied contentedness? A world where people are petty because nit picking and pearl clutching has been resorted to to feel as if they contribute to the greater good as so little is wrong in the world that those are the table scraps glory left behind? (Perhaps some good aligned gods who toward the beginning of this supremacy hoarded and glutted themselves on what glory there was to be had have essentially caused the "fields of glory to become a beautiful wasteland due to not ever letting those fields go fallow" so to speak metaphorically and most good aligned gods as a result grew weak and aged to death over eons as a result).

Perhaps the "savior" figure (the unusual deity im asking about) of such a world would have to be a horrid evil...

[or at least seemingly evil as its at least dedicated to producing everything evil it can think of. Could or could not be for good aligned motivations. If it is for good aligned motivations it would be a being who knows they must never let anyone know its actions do not align to its nature. If it was good aligned though (and it wouldnt have to be) it would be hilarious if a cleric in the party for some bizarre reason met it one time, cast detect good/evil on it and became incredibly confused as he saw an aura of holy goodness, so bright that it melted his eyes out of his sockets and made him blind for a decade until somehow he was gifted with "second sight" and could see again, though he would permenantly be missing his eyes and he would maybe have been gifted knowledge of just a couple true names too from the encounter. Like maybe some combination (not sure how many) of the true names of order, chaos, evil, good, neutrality, salvation, and or ruin perhaps.]

...abomination that spilled wretched beings into the world and corrupted all it touched.

It just popped in my head at one point and im curious if this has been done and published?

 

[not-so-newguy]

Not a D&D setting, but you might find something useful. This reminds me of The Black Company book series; specifically the Plain of Fear and Father Tree.

From what I can recall, Father Tree is an other-dimensional being comparable to a deity that was summoned to protect the world from an ancient evil. The evil is trapped under Father Tree. The Plain of Fear is a dangerous place that surrounds Father Tree that includes bizarre monsters and environmental effects: Talking Menhirs, giant flying whales with tentacles, and Change Storms to name a few. Plain of Fear

 

[Quartz]

Wasn't the Catacylsm in Dragonlance something along those lines? Good had won and was getting corrupted.

 

[Son of the Serpent]

Wasn't the Catacylsm in Dragonlance something along those lines? Good had won and was getting corrupted.

Not sure. Was there a rising star deity that fixed things by intentionally becoming this awful figurehead for evil so that good could have aomething to fight and revitalize?

 

[WayOfTheFourElements]

Interesting idea. Very fitting for our own modernity. I agree, that the deity might have to bring evil into the world, but chaos and surprise might be enough. If the deity does bring evil, it would be of a controlled kind. I don't think it would kill randomly.

 

[Paul Farquhar]

Wasn't the Catacylsm in Dragonlance something along those lines? Good had won and was getting corrupted.

Yeah, I'm pretty sure I'd seen the idea before, it could have been that.

It's pretty close to ideas in the Law/Chaos morality scale (e.g. Moorcock, Babylon 5). Chaos brings war and destruction, but Law brings stagnation, boredom, and the death of creativity. Maintaining the balance is what heroes should strive for.

The classic Doctor Who story "Genesis of the Daleks" touches on these issues.

 

[Fanaelialae]

Wasn't the Catacylsm in Dragonlance something along those lines? Good had won and was getting corrupted.

Kind of but not really. Good was arguably strong in the world at the time, but it was hardly as though evil had been eradicated. It's more that the world was in balance but "good" chose to try and destroy that balance.

It has been a while, but iirc the Cataclysm began because the Kingpriest became too fanatical in his "good" beliefs. He tried to eradicate evil from the world, but his definition of evil encompassed anyone who did not think as he did.

Lord Soth was given an opportunity to avert the Cataclysm, but put his own selfish interests ahead of the world. However, he was already arguably evil by this point, having not only been unfaithful to his wife but also murdering her and their child. Averting the Cataclysm (at the cost of his life) was a last chance at redemption, which he failed at.

Edit
Will Wight's Traveler's Gate Trilogy is the closest example I can think of like this, although it doesn't really fit.

Spoiler

In it, mages draw upon other planes of existence for magic. One of those planes is essentially the plane of goodness. The issue is that any mage who overuses that power risks being possessed by that plane, essentially becoming a powerful incarnation of that plane. However, even the good plane is so fanatical that anything that doesn't fit its narrow definition of good is branded as evil.

 

[dave2008]

No idea, but personally i would argue the doing evil things simply to provide a release from boredom and stagnation would in fact make that hero/deity evil not good. In my view, that is not enough of a reason to manifest evil.

 

[Fanaelialae]

No idea, but personally i would argue the doing evil things simply to provide a release from boredom and stagnation would in fact make that hero/deity evil not good. In my view, that is not enough of a reason to manifest evil.

I agree.

That said, I've been thinking about what a world like this might look like. I don't think you can have a world of good without evil while still preserving individuality.

Evil (barring cartoon evil for the sake of evil) is motivated by selfishness. So a world without evil could only be if no one ever made selfish decisions, which I can only conceive of if everyone is motivated by the greater good, without any capacity for selfish motivation.

An individual who retains the capacity for individual thought might view such a society as a dystopia. Everyone might be happy, but was it worth the cost? If that person were to work toward restoring individuality, they would almost certainly be perceived by this society as evil, since achieving that goal would reintroduce evil to that society. However, whether they were actually evil would depend upon the means they went about their plan with. I think it begs an interesting question about morality, at the very least.

 

[dave2008]

I agree.

That said, I've been thinking about what a world like this might look like. I don't think you can have a world of good without evil while still preserving individuality.

Evil (barring cartoon evil for the sake of evil) is motivated by selfishness. So a world without evil could only be if no one ever made selfish decisions, which I can only conceive of if everyone is motivated by the greater good, without any capacity for selfish motivation.

An individual who retains the capacity for individual thought might view such a society as a dystopia. Everyone might be happy, but was it worth the cost? If that person were to work toward restoring individuality, they would almost certainly be perceived by this society as evil, since achieving that goal would reintroduce evil to that society. However, whether they were actually evil would depend upon the means they went about their plan with. I think it begs an interesting question about morality, at the very least.

Yes, there a lots study and stories a long those lines, it is practically its own genre. I can definitely see multiple perspectives to explore and that is what can make an interesting adventure!

 

[Son of the Serpent]

No idea, but personally i would argue the doing evil things simply to provide a release from boredom and stagnation would in fact make that hero/deity evil not good. In my view, that is not enough of a reason to manifest evil.

"Release from boredom and stagnation" is quite the understatement and quite tye oversimplification.

Its basically to save the world from an eternal fate worse than death, but to make that clearer than in just a general sense id have to type up page after page after page to explain it with examples.

It would be pretty bad though. You have to remember, in d&d good, evil, law (arguably order), and chaos are mor than just morals. They are underlying physics on a cosmic level. If good is literally starving to death it will do more than cause stagnation and boredom.

 

[dave2008]

"Release from boredom and stagnation" is quite the understatement and quite tye oversimplification.

Its basically to save the world from an eternal fate worse than death, but to make that clearer than in just a general sense id have to type up page after page after page to explain it with examples.

OK, that is what I took from the discussion so far. If is something more, than is the society truly "good?" Personally, I prefer the evil creature doing evil things that actually makes things "better." But they are both old and tried concepts. There are lots of examples if your looking for inspiration.

It would be pretty bad though. You have to remember, in d&d good, evil, law (arguably order), and chaos are mor than just morals. They are underlying physics on a cosmic level. If good is literally starving to death it will do more than cause stagnation and boredom.

No that is not how it works in D&D, maybe that is how it works in your D&D.

EDIT. Just realized your concept is basically Thanos from the MCU

 

[Umbran]

Not sure. Was there a rising star deity that fixed things by intentionally becoming this awful figurehead for evil so that good could have aomething to fight and revitalize?

No. But a group of adventurers do it in Villains By Necessity by Eve Forward. And the group is totally a bunch of D&D characters, like, down to having recognizable classes.

 

[Son of the Serpent]

OK, that is what I took from the discussion so far. If is something more, than is the society truly "good?" Personally, I prefer the evil creature doing evil things that actually makes things "better." But they are both old and tried concepts. There are lots of examples if your looking for inspiration.

No that is not how it works in D&D, maybe that is how it works in your D&D.

EDIT. Just realized your concept is basically Thanos from the MCU

Good evil law and chaos are actually physically real in d&d.

This dates back a ways.

It has to do with platonic philosophy and the concepts like the "realm of forms".

So its not my d&d. Its the writers standard for many editions. Where there are differences either in editions or campaigns is actually the departure from standard. Im reciting this directly from what a lot of basic cosmology was based on.

Look at the great wheel (and a few other planar cosmologies. Not just that one). Their base form was derived from the ancient greek notions im talking about which were very old atomist and platonic notions.

So no. Not my d&d. That is actually the default inspiration until u so choose to deviate. Which you are welcome to do. Nothing wrong with that. But its not just my d&d. Its been typical cosmology for a long while at this point. Not every edition of course.

 

[Son of the Serpent]

No. But a group of adventurers do it in Villains By Necessity by Eve Forward. And the group is totally a bunch of D&D characters, like, down to having recognizable classes.

Thankyou for the info. Most appreciated.

 

[Son of the Serpent]

OK, that is what I took from the discussion so far. If is something more, than is the society truly "good?" Personally, I prefer the evil creature doing evil things that actually makes things "better." But they are both old and tried concepts. There are lots of examples if your looking for inspiration.

No that is not how it works in D&D, maybe that is how it works in your D&D.

EDIT. Just realized your concept is basically Thanos from the MCU

Also facepalm youre right. Thanos did a similar thing. Thankyou.

 

[dave2008]

Good evil law and chaos are actually physically real in d&d.

This dates back a ways.

It has to do with platonic philosophy and the concepts like the "realm of forms".

So its not my d&d. Its the writers standard for many editions. Where there are differences either in editions or campaigns is actually the departure from standard. Im reciting this directly from what a lot of basic cosmology was based on.

Look at the great wheel (and a few other planar cosmologies. Not just that one). Their base form was derived from the ancient greek notions im talking about which were very old atomist and platonic notions.

So no. Not my d&d. That is actually the default inspiration until u so choose to deviate. Which you are welcome to do. Nothing wrong with that. But its not just my d&d. Its been typical cosmology for a long while at this point. Not every edition of course.

That is completely irrelevant to actually playing D&D though. The fiction created by the writers has little to no effect on how you actually play the game (unless you want it to of course). I played D&D for 20+ years with just the 1e PHB, DMG, MM 1 & 2, and the BECMI boxes. We used none of the concepts of good, evil, and chaos as physically real or anything more than vague anthropocentric morality. We didn't even use the great wheel or any cosmos really. You don't need those things to play D&D, the game works 100% without them (even more so now). The closest thing you get to having it baked in is alignment. Which we never used and it had no effect on our games! I don't know why we didn't use it in the beginning (to long ago to remember), but even when it was a part of the game in a real way it was so easy to ignore that when we started playing 4e it didn't even register that they removed the mechanics behind alignment.

Many writers may have written about it over the years, it may be a part of TSR or WotC lore, but that doesn't make it real or true in the actual game, and definitely not true at our table or any table I've played at. I will always argue D&D is not some fiction written in a book, but the fiction we create with friends from the rules and guidelines written in a book. The rules, like a rock, don't care, and neither do I.

Sorry for the rant, I'm procrastinating actually working.

EDIT: To clarify, I personally don't believe in good & evil, so that colors my perception and how I play games.

 

[Umbran]

Good evil law and chaos are actually physically real in d&d.

They were in the past, but not in 5e. Alignment has no longer mechanical impact in the system. It is now merely a sort of role-playing guideline - you cannot detect alignment (you can detect celestials and other off-plane entities) you can't protect against it. Magic no longer interacts with alignment, and it is no longer "real" in any meaningful way.

 

[Son of the Serpent]

This thread is not particularly intended for 5e so thats fine. Besides, in 5e i agree

They were in the past, but not in 5e. Alignment has no longer mechanical impact in the system. It is now merely a sort of role-playing guideline - you cannot detect alignment (you can detect celestials and other off-plane entities) you can't protect against it. Magic no longer interacts with alignment, and it is no longer "real" in any meaningful way.