Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
The Role and Purpose of Evil Gods
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Chaosmancer" data-source="post: 8413960" data-attributes="member: 6801228"><p>And many, mnay, rules have been posted from the various editions shwoing how they are the same. Yes, there is inconsistency. That's the point. There is not a single, consistent rule, and Archfiends have danced back and forth over the line multiple times. That's because there is no issue with them crossing that line, no differences in how the game functions. It doesn't actually matter one way or the other, so it has been done both ways.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Again, huh? </p><p></p><p>The difference between a god and an archfiend is that an archfiend is going to require a contract signed in blood on a crossroads on a moonless night? What if... they don't? Yeenoghu isn't well known for his contract writing skills. </p><p></p><p>And, your point wasn't "what are the baseline expectations people have" (which still doesn't have all archfiends doing this one incredibly specific thing) but was "what stories can be told". So, actually, in regard to the question "can this story be told" being able to imagine something DOES provide the answer. And, for example, I can think of Murmur, a god from the Wraith's Haunt novels who is very well known as a god of contract and deal making. Though again, no blood-signed contracts on a crossroads on a moonless night, which you seemed to insist had to be the only way to do these contracts. </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Okay? But neither of these prevents a god from doing the thing. Yes, a god could be affected by human belief and shifted, perhaps merged with another god. This could be true, but like I said, it isn't going to be true for all settings. Maybe they start starving and dying and a new god bursts out of their chest, fully formed from the new religious beliefs. </p><p></p><p>The point is, you presented "Being X impersonating or corrupting the religion of a god" as a story that you can only tell with Archfiends, but that is wrong, you can tell that story with other gods, and the risks, if they even exist in the world you are using, may not prevent that story from still making sense. Doubly so since you once again admit this is a story that HAS been told with gods.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Well, first of all, Nerull is "The Foe of All Life" and does want everything including his own worshipers to die. </p><p></p><p>Secondly, if we are talking about "care about them as a source of income" or "care about them as food" then... yes, Archfiends also care about their worshippers. Much like a mob boss cares about his lackeys, kill them if they get out of line, but they have uses and can further his plans, so he doesn't want them to just all keel over and die for no reason. </p><p></p><p>So, by your own definition, then yes, Archfiends care just as much about their worshipers as some evil gods.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Then universally applying Planescape and telling me that certain stories are actually impossible because the rules of planescape state "X" is kind of misplaced, isn't it? After all, we have at least one setting you acknowledge doesn't follow those rules.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>No, you just aren't reading me with an open mind. That quote? I'm not saying you must pick red or yellow, but can never pick orange. Pick orange if you like, I'm just saying that you don't have to pick orange. Red, Yellow, or Blue are all valid other options. Yet you seem to get inscensed when I say that Red and Yellow are interchangeable, telling me I am wrong and that I should stop pushing my preferences on people.</p><p></p><p>I'm not looking down on people who try and do both, but I am speaking from experience when I say that is harder to do well. Do you think it is looking down on someone to say that it is harder to play ‘The Last Rose Of Summer’ by Heinrich Wilhelm Ernst than it is to play the Third Violin Concerto KV216 (Movement 1) by Mozart? No, it is acknowledging difficulty. Writing a good story with two highly similar factions is hard. Unless you have a good reason to do so, why make your life more difficult? If the only reason you keep a Demon Lord of Ooze and a God of Ooze is because both were written... well, that doesn't sound like a good reason to me. That sounds like you just feel obligated to include everything that exists.</p><p></p><p>Do you want to do it anyway? Okay, go ahead. I'm not going to judge you for it. But, I would hope that by pointing out that you don't have to, people see that it is a choice. Because until I really started thinking about it, I didn't think it was supposed to be a choice. I thought I was supposed to include all these things and make all of them work together. But you don't. You can choose, and you can swap gods and demons with no consequences.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Like, oozes, the only part I was referencing? And Ghaunadaur only got rebels and outcasts because he was working with Lolth, and those were his drow aspects. If you don't have him part of the drow pantheon, then those don't make sense.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>How is "this demon Lord is an aspect of a god" solve anything? Though that is a bizarre wrench to throw into cosmologies if Demon Lords can just be reflections of gods.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Yes, you can make them more different, I never said you couldn't. But if you focus on Ghaunadaur as the god of rebels and outcasts... then he isn't really the God of Oozes any more, is he? And while Jubilex is described as simple, he is also described as completely alien and not potentially having other plots, just that no one understands them. So he could easily have a personality, just not a human one. </p><p></p><p>But, all you seem to really be doing here is making them different, but not addressing them being used as the Demon Lord of Oozes and the God of Oozes in the same story about oozes. Which indicates to me that you at least acknowledge that that scenario would be difficult, because everything you posted was about ignoring them both being focused on oozes and highlighting their other aspects to prevent that overlap.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>So, you are trying to tell me that a long-time professional in the writing field has an easier time dealing with a difficult writing challenge? Is that supposed to shock me? </p><p></p><p>Side Note: It is really cool that your dad does comics, and that sounds like a fascinating thing to discuss in normal circumstances.</p><p></p><p>But, yeah, if you do something difficult long enough, then it gets easier. That doesn't make it less difficult to begin with though.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Because those are examples of the thing being done well, and you seem to understand it can be done well. I wanted to point out that it can be done badly, so I pointed to two different recent movies where it was done badly, and the major critiques were leveled at "trying to do too much". </p><p></p><p>Again, you seem to take me saying "this is hard to do well" to mean "this is impossible and no one has ever succeeded". That isn't what I am saying, I am saying it is hard to do well. World's Finest is a great episode where two completely different characters work well together. But something like Suicide squad had nearly a dozen fairly similar characters, all with the same story, and it diffused the interest.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>The fact that you believed I didn't understand that is your problem, it has nothing to do with anything I actually said.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Yes, I did read what you wrote "It's universal<strong><u> as of </u></strong>every setting published in 2e." The term "as of" is "used to indicate the time or date from which something starts."</p><p></p><p>So, your post read that way says "it is universal from the time of every setting published in 2e", which indicates it would be universal for all future settings as well. If you only meant to say that it is universal for most settings in 2e, that is a very different statement, and one that I don't see the point in. I said "it isn't universal" meaning for all settings now. Responding "but it was for some of them back in the day" doesn't really make my statement wrong.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I'm sorry, you've never stated what rule in the books prevents me from making a Demon Lord a fundamental cosmic force of the universe. To me, it seems like they can quite easily fill that role, being tied to dark impulses like murder, wrath, undeath, envy, lust, ect.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Chaosmancer, post: 8413960, member: 6801228"] And many, mnay, rules have been posted from the various editions shwoing how they are the same. Yes, there is inconsistency. That's the point. There is not a single, consistent rule, and Archfiends have danced back and forth over the line multiple times. That's because there is no issue with them crossing that line, no differences in how the game functions. It doesn't actually matter one way or the other, so it has been done both ways. Again, huh? The difference between a god and an archfiend is that an archfiend is going to require a contract signed in blood on a crossroads on a moonless night? What if... they don't? Yeenoghu isn't well known for his contract writing skills. And, your point wasn't "what are the baseline expectations people have" (which still doesn't have all archfiends doing this one incredibly specific thing) but was "what stories can be told". So, actually, in regard to the question "can this story be told" being able to imagine something DOES provide the answer. And, for example, I can think of Murmur, a god from the Wraith's Haunt novels who is very well known as a god of contract and deal making. Though again, no blood-signed contracts on a crossroads on a moonless night, which you seemed to insist had to be the only way to do these contracts. Okay? But neither of these prevents a god from doing the thing. Yes, a god could be affected by human belief and shifted, perhaps merged with another god. This could be true, but like I said, it isn't going to be true for all settings. Maybe they start starving and dying and a new god bursts out of their chest, fully formed from the new religious beliefs. The point is, you presented "Being X impersonating or corrupting the religion of a god" as a story that you can only tell with Archfiends, but that is wrong, you can tell that story with other gods, and the risks, if they even exist in the world you are using, may not prevent that story from still making sense. Doubly so since you once again admit this is a story that HAS been told with gods. Well, first of all, Nerull is "The Foe of All Life" and does want everything including his own worshipers to die. Secondly, if we are talking about "care about them as a source of income" or "care about them as food" then... yes, Archfiends also care about their worshippers. Much like a mob boss cares about his lackeys, kill them if they get out of line, but they have uses and can further his plans, so he doesn't want them to just all keel over and die for no reason. So, by your own definition, then yes, Archfiends care just as much about their worshipers as some evil gods. Then universally applying Planescape and telling me that certain stories are actually impossible because the rules of planescape state "X" is kind of misplaced, isn't it? After all, we have at least one setting you acknowledge doesn't follow those rules. No, you just aren't reading me with an open mind. That quote? I'm not saying you must pick red or yellow, but can never pick orange. Pick orange if you like, I'm just saying that you don't have to pick orange. Red, Yellow, or Blue are all valid other options. Yet you seem to get inscensed when I say that Red and Yellow are interchangeable, telling me I am wrong and that I should stop pushing my preferences on people. I'm not looking down on people who try and do both, but I am speaking from experience when I say that is harder to do well. Do you think it is looking down on someone to say that it is harder to play ‘The Last Rose Of Summer’ by Heinrich Wilhelm Ernst than it is to play the Third Violin Concerto KV216 (Movement 1) by Mozart? No, it is acknowledging difficulty. Writing a good story with two highly similar factions is hard. Unless you have a good reason to do so, why make your life more difficult? If the only reason you keep a Demon Lord of Ooze and a God of Ooze is because both were written... well, that doesn't sound like a good reason to me. That sounds like you just feel obligated to include everything that exists. Do you want to do it anyway? Okay, go ahead. I'm not going to judge you for it. But, I would hope that by pointing out that you don't have to, people see that it is a choice. Because until I really started thinking about it, I didn't think it was supposed to be a choice. I thought I was supposed to include all these things and make all of them work together. But you don't. You can choose, and you can swap gods and demons with no consequences. Like, oozes, the only part I was referencing? And Ghaunadaur only got rebels and outcasts because he was working with Lolth, and those were his drow aspects. If you don't have him part of the drow pantheon, then those don't make sense. How is "this demon Lord is an aspect of a god" solve anything? Though that is a bizarre wrench to throw into cosmologies if Demon Lords can just be reflections of gods. Yes, you can make them more different, I never said you couldn't. But if you focus on Ghaunadaur as the god of rebels and outcasts... then he isn't really the God of Oozes any more, is he? And while Jubilex is described as simple, he is also described as completely alien and not potentially having other plots, just that no one understands them. So he could easily have a personality, just not a human one. But, all you seem to really be doing here is making them different, but not addressing them being used as the Demon Lord of Oozes and the God of Oozes in the same story about oozes. Which indicates to me that you at least acknowledge that that scenario would be difficult, because everything you posted was about ignoring them both being focused on oozes and highlighting their other aspects to prevent that overlap. So, you are trying to tell me that a long-time professional in the writing field has an easier time dealing with a difficult writing challenge? Is that supposed to shock me? Side Note: It is really cool that your dad does comics, and that sounds like a fascinating thing to discuss in normal circumstances. But, yeah, if you do something difficult long enough, then it gets easier. That doesn't make it less difficult to begin with though. Because those are examples of the thing being done well, and you seem to understand it can be done well. I wanted to point out that it can be done badly, so I pointed to two different recent movies where it was done badly, and the major critiques were leveled at "trying to do too much". Again, you seem to take me saying "this is hard to do well" to mean "this is impossible and no one has ever succeeded". That isn't what I am saying, I am saying it is hard to do well. World's Finest is a great episode where two completely different characters work well together. But something like Suicide squad had nearly a dozen fairly similar characters, all with the same story, and it diffused the interest. The fact that you believed I didn't understand that is your problem, it has nothing to do with anything I actually said. Yes, I did read what you wrote "It's universal[B][U] as of [/U][/B]every setting published in 2e." The term "as of" is "used to indicate the time or date from which something starts." So, your post read that way says "it is universal from the time of every setting published in 2e", which indicates it would be universal for all future settings as well. If you only meant to say that it is universal for most settings in 2e, that is a very different statement, and one that I don't see the point in. I said "it isn't universal" meaning for all settings now. Responding "but it was for some of them back in the day" doesn't really make my statement wrong. I'm sorry, you've never stated what rule in the books prevents me from making a Demon Lord a fundamental cosmic force of the universe. To me, it seems like they can quite easily fill that role, being tied to dark impulses like murder, wrath, undeath, envy, lust, ect. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
The Role and Purpose of Evil Gods
Top