NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Chaosmancer" data-source="post: 8412979" data-attributes="member: 6801228">No. I don't think that because I homebrewed it. I think that they are interchangeable because after over a weeks worth of discussion over 5 editions of the game, there has been no consistent rule making them mechanically different. And despite nearly ten attempts, you have no actually provided a story that only works for one particular type of being. In part, because there are no mechanical distinctions that we can find. It all just depends on the setting you build. So you can build a setting that works either way.Because if you are talking about not being worshipped "outside of evil communities" which was your claim, then you are likely in an elven, dwarven, or human city. And Gruumsh's story involves bloody war upon the cities of those "civilized" races. So, sure, if you change who Gruumsh is, then you can, but typically he isn't openly worshiped outside of evil communities, because his dogma is pretty messed up for civilized society, and the majority of civilized society is his enemy.I did nothing of the sort. She isn't a god in my setting, because she is a Archdevil, and thus part of a meritocracy whose power can be taken from her if a more worthy individual shows up. God's don't work that way in my setting. Additionally, you said that gods required worship to survive, but I haven't decided that is true in my setting. In fact, many gods that wouldn't even make sense for in my setting, Just like it doesn't make sense in other settings.Um... no? Whether or not a contract is signed in blood has nothing to do with whether or not something is a fiend or a god. Where are you even getting this idea from?No they aren't. Not in all settings. Gods have impersonated each other in DnD before and never been merged into a single being. Again, you seem to be taking Planescape and applying it to all settings, whether it applies or not.Also, I did the "maybe, maybe, maybe" because you presented your point as though it was too risky, and therefore a god would never attempt it. But, there are reasons they would take that sort of risk. That's very different than "maybe the universe works like this, so the rules don't apply"Care in what way? Like, they like them? Care about them as people? You think Nerull or Erythnul cares about people? We aren't talking about all gods, and therefor we have to consider the good ones. We are talking about Evil gods. Evil people don't care about each other as a general trait, they are just looking to use each other. Evil gods include beings that will kill their own worshippers, who hate and despise them and want them to suffer, because they hate EVERYTHING. You don't need to care about a knife to make sure it stays oiled and sharp, it is just a more effective tool that way. And when a knife can choose to work for you or not, you don't present your worst side to them to recruit them.Nope, this is not true in all settings. In fact, in a few settings, where you go when you die is the exact same place regardless of your beliefs or actions. Again, you take a single setting, and apply it too broadly, and you get these inaccurate statements.Exactly! In Eberron things work differently. So you can't keep applying your model from planescape to every single setting, because it doesn't apply to every single setting. Someone running 1e Greyhawk isn't dealing with dead gods, because the only way to kill a god is to stab them with an artifact. Yes, a lot of settings have adopted this model. It is a cool model, I kind of like it sometimes, but it isn't the only model that applies.Very unlikely. Sometimes people can pull it off, but the vast majority of the time it just leads to a bloated story, because you can't give every faction the same amount of attention, and so the factions feel flatter and less interesting.Just come out and say that I am a liar and that you will never believe a word I say. Because despite the fact that I have repeatedly said that was not my intent, you have never actually believed me. Instead you keep making things up to "AHA!" me to prove what a villain I am. Am I telling you that you are doing it wrong? NO!!! I literally said, three times over, that I wasn't saying you were doing it wrong. That these were good ideas. That these would work as interesting stories. I also said that you could swap them with no consequence or loss of story. That isn't saying you are wrong. Good lord, this is like you throwing a fit over me saying that you could paint the roses yellow or red, and that both colors would work. Is that truly so insluting to you, that two things could be similar enough to be interchangeable? Can having too many of the same types of beings lead to muddled stories? Yes! Let me give a quick example. Ghaunadaur is the God of Oozes, he can control oozes from anywhere in existence and has many ooze related powers. Jubilex is the Demon Lord of Oozes and can control oozes from anywhere in existence and has many ooze related powers. If you had a game where the main enemy was secretive cult was using oozes and raising them to intelligence, forming a cabal based around the power of ooze... is there any value in having both of them? They have the same powers. Same basic attitudes (Jubilex is a little grosser) and aren't your players going to get confused when you reveal an enemy working for "The Lord of Slime" and they have to ask "which one?" Is it impossible to craft a good story and adventure using both of them? No. But it is far harder to do it right, and if you have no interest in a conflict between them, then there is no reason to have both. Pick one, move on with telling the story you want to tell. If you want to use both, because you have some ingenious design that utilizes both, knock yourself out. Go nuts and have fun. For me, personally, I find it much easier and much more enjoyable to simplify. I only need one Lord of All OozeOf course you don't. I never said that you couldn't.Yes, but I will say, it is a lot easier to tell a single coherent story when you don't need to balance psychics vs mutants vs magic-users vs technolgy vs aliens vs lab accidents. I know, because I'm writing in a universe like Marvel and DC, and it is incredibly hard. Meanwhile, I have another story where everything is just magic, and that is a lot easier.Or acknowledging that while I can use a screwdriver to carve a wooden statue, sometimes tools have limits. People can get too ambitious. Superhero stories are like that a lot. People try to make them exactly like Marvel and DC, but forget how we got Marvel and DC. And it leads to their worlds feeling like chaos, too much going on, and too easy for things to get muddled and details to be lost. It can be done. I never meant to say it couldn't be done, but it is hard. It risks making an inferior product, just look at the first suicide squad, or Batman vs Superman. Having too much going on in a single story can make a mess of it. So if you don't have a very good reason to do so... why would you?You mean planescapes rules. Which are only part of DnD's rules. You seem to forget that you can run a DnD game set in ancient Norse Mythology, using Ancient Norse cosmology and rules, instead of planescapes.No, it isn't even close to practically the same thing. If you kill everyone who worships a god under planescape rules, then even if people know about them, talk about the evil god whom they destroyed, then that god is still dead. No one is praying to them, and they are still powerless. Eventually people will forget the story, but the god was dead long before that.In Theros, even if you kill all of their worshipers, if you are still thinking about them, if people remember that there was this terrible god whose worshipers they killed and may seek vengeance? Then that god is still alive, and still powerful. And, I don't see what the point of stating "they work by MtG rules" matters, to my knowledge MtG has never had a comprehensive rule or lore set for how gods work in their various settings. It has been a case by case basis I imagine.I've never said that you can't make differences. I'm saying that it is usually pretty easy to reverse those differences and make an inverse. They are interchangeable pieces in a lot of ways.Because there is a difference between motivation and possibility.Maybe a god will do something incredibly risky because they have reasons to. But, "it is unlikely that a god will face a coup" is meaningless in the question of "can you tell a story of a god facing a coup?" Because even if it is unlikely, the answer is yes. Let me put it this way. It is incredibly dangerous to break into people's houses and steal from them, you could potentially get seriously hurt. It doesn't mean that people don't do it. And even if it is unlikely that your house will get broken into, it isn't impossible.Making a setting with no gods doesn't invalidate my claims at all. I claimed that there was a reason to have cosmic powers, whether they be gods, GOOs, fiends, or annoying chimeric dragons. Those forces have a use and a purpose if you want to use them. But that doesn't mean that every setting needs them, or that every story needs them. And just because you choose not to use a tool doesn't mean that that tool is useless. And just because you have two identical tools that doesn't mean one of them is worse than the other, or that you can't bring both anyways.And I know you believe that. And that tends to align very closely to what I see happening in the game. But that doesn't mean I'm not still discussing it with other people.No, that isn't what I am saying at all. I've repeated my intentions again and again. Obviously if you say "Only gods can enter the Jade Palace" then you can make a story of an evil god in the jade palace, and you can't do that with a demon, because you made up a rule that excluded demons. However, the game doesn't have that rule, so I could make up a different rule, and tell the same story with the evil god but make them a demon instead. It isn't that I lack the imagination to make up disctinctions between the two groups (thanks for the repeated insults by the way, makes discussing with you such a pleasant experience). It is the fact that I realized I was making up the distinctions, and therefore enforcing a redundancy in concepts that I didn't actually personally want. What is the role of an evil god? To be a powerful immortal evil beyond mortal ken. What is the Role of an Archfiend? To be a powerful immortal evil beyond mortal ken. Anything else is me adding distinctions, so I should ask myself "what value do I get for making up this distinction to support this?". And, again, for me personally and no one else, I found that I liked the idea of Gods being worshipped as a core of their interaction with the world, but that many Evil Gods wouldn't be worshipped. They were too simple and too niche. I'd have almost no one worshiping a god who advocates that all people should be strangled by their own entrails.  That doesn't offer me something I even want in my setting. So, I made them a Demon Lord. A Demon Lord who advocates that works just as well, and if they do have a small sect of crazy mortals, then that's fine, they don't have a whole religion. But, some fiends do have whole religions, because their messages resonate, but they are also fiends and that is why they have the messaging they do. And if you want to do something different? Go ahead. I won't say you are wrong for making up your own rules and deciding that you want the entrail god to stay a god, because he is fundamental to the understanding of the world. But I can say, with certainty, that the game and the cosmology wasn't harmed by me catergorizing him differently. There is nothing inherent in godhood that makes me unable to switch them. They can still make the same kinds of servants with the same sorts of powers. They live nearly identical existences. It is a change of title, nothing more.Examples of Cult Leaders of Asmodeus who were high ranking members of society, their wealth and fortune gained through the power of the Lord of Nessus.No, it isn't. Eberron. Dark Sun. Theros. Ravnica. Exandria. Nerath. None of these use Planescape straight out of the box.Or it wouldn't. I see no reason that Asmodeus couldn't turn a mortal into a devil in a single action if he so chose. Just by bleeding the guy creates pit fiends. And I have no issue with a god needing 11 days to "cleanse" a petitioner of their mortality either.It is a holy war by definition, because you only need a "religious cause" which can include supporting an immortal being who exists on a separate plane of existence.Why not?</blockquote>

Verification