Crimson Longinus
Legend
I think the concept of "evil gods" is stupid and sooner we get rid of it the better. Cruel gods? Sure. Destructive gods? Absolutely! But people tend not to think gods they worship as evil.
I think the concept of "evil gods" is stupid and sooner we get rid of it the better. Cruel gods? Sure. Destructive gods? Absolutely! But people tend not to think gods they worship as evil.
It is unnecessarily dumbing things down and disincentivices assigning these creatures proper motives and trying to understand their point of view.It's just a reference for us DMs. I agree that people worshipping them will not label them evil, after all, apart from a few psychopaths, no-one will admit to being evil. That being said, using the definitions of good and evil of the game, we can, as DMs, label some gods as good and others as evil. It's a convenient shortcut label just a kind of tag, but at least it helps us categorise.
It is unnecessarily dumbing things down and disincentivices assigning these creatures proper motives and trying to understand their point of view.
Thank you. Interesting.It's only an internet post, but considering the depth of analysis, I would consider it truthful, see here. I found it very interesting.
It helps if you take my arguments with Helldritch in context.Well, this might be news for you, but everything here is not about your little squabbles,
The bit about the cleric being a supplentary class was an (clerical) error from going off memory (of the "core four", it was the thief that was supplentary). I should have looked at the OD&D books before posting. The history of the cleric class is interesting. Another interesting note of clerical history is that the gods for clerics were originally left nebulous during Gygax's playtesting of OD&D, though—it was only after some bugging from Gygax's players for something more than "the gods" that he introduced St. Cuthbert and Pholtus and any hint of organized religion.I only came in when you started posting outrageous and easy to prove false claims, here. If you want to have a private argument, just don't do it on the forums.
Thank you. Interesting.
It helps if you take my arguments with Helldritch in context.
The bit about the cleric being a supplentary class was an (clerical) error from going off memory (of the "core four", it was the thief that was supplentary). I should have looked at the OD&D books before posting. The history of the cleric class is interesting. Another interesting note of clerical history is that the gods for clerics were originally left nebulous during Gygax's playtesting of OD&D, though—it was only after some bugging from Gygax's players for something more than "the gods" that he introduced St. Cuthbert and Pholtus and any hint of organized religion.
I think that entirely depends on how you have your cosmology set up. If good and evil are fundamental forces, then it doesn't matter what people's opinions of them are. And in my opinion, alignment makes way more sense when there's something to be aligned with. Also, "evil doesn't exist" sounds very much like the kind of thing an evil god would try to convince a potential follower of. It would be very The Devil's Advocate for an evil god to sway someone with convincing, possibly even truthful arguments of how they're being unjustly excluded from the prosperity of more established gods and their followers, pushing them to claim power by degrees, all the while swaying them deeper and deeper into the god's way of thinking.I think the concept of "evil gods" is stupid and sooner we get rid of it the better. Cruel gods? Sure. Destructive gods? Absolutely! But people tend not to think gods they worship as evil.
Jeebus, you're just tripping over yourself to be wrong, aren't you?