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="Faolyn" data-source="post: 8414039" data-attributes="member: 6915329">Yes, I've said repeatedly that there isn't a single consistent rule. You, however, seem to think that the rules that show that they're the same outweigh the rules that show they're different.No, that's a difference between the two. Gods don't require those sort of contracts. Many fiends use them, especially when dealing with intelligent humanoids. Yeenoghu doesn't deal with intelligent humanoids, except for those who become mad enough to worship him. Instead, he actively makes gnolls out of animals. He's not trying to win souls for himself through contract. He may not even care about souls; Yeenoghu isn't the type to have any grand plans that need them.So go ahead. I bet that you'll get players going "Huh? But why?" more often when you use gods than if you use fiends.I mean, seriously, why would one god want to pretend to be another god? If they want to take over the religion, it should just kill that other god, or arrange for its death, or plan a massive coup of all of its temples, or something like that. Actual god behavior. Sneaking around pretending to be other gods is a thing of mythology--oh, that rascal Mask, he's pretending to be Yondalla again so he can steal her divine pumpkins of life!--but aren't the kind of thing that gods really do to gain worshipers. It's out of character.Yup, that's one god. Who, being from Greyhawk, doesn't use Forgotten Realms rules. Nerull doesn't even want worshipers in the first place.The lackeys of archfiends are lesser fiends, not mortals.Because it is specifically cut off from the rest of the D&D Cosmos. And I also was specifically not including Eberron in these discussions because of that.No, that's not what you said. You said one or the other. This entire thread is about you saying that people shouldn't pick both. You are literally saying "Its too hard for you because you're just not good enough to pull it off, and clearly you're only doing it because you feel obligated to, so don't even bother trying. Don't feel bad, though. Most people aren't good enough."Maybe this seems odd to you, but at no point did I ever think that you had to include everything. When I first got into D&D and started worldbuilding, I would start by figuring out what stuff I definitely did not want to include in the world and what I definitely did want.Maybe lots of people think you have to pick everything. I've never known anyone like that.But this goes beyond you pointing out that there's a choice, especially since this is the first time you brought it up. You have been fighting for ages for people to accept your claim, that they're redundant and there's absolutely no reason to have both together--to the point that you are arguing with people who are telling you that they have plenty of reasons to use both. Or to put it in other words: if there's a choice, between using one or the other or both or neither, then using both is their choice.Which is another problem--there's a bigger picture. Ghaunadaur is not just the god of oozes.Or you can tack him onto someone else's pantheon. Any other pantheon for a race that lives in dark, dank places. Make him another bullywug god. Heck, attach him to the dwarf pantheon, say he was created by accident from the mold that grew under Moradin's forge or something.Or you can say that oozes are the "outcasts" of the monsters--they're gross and so dangerous to handle not even other gross monsters want them around. That's why Ghaunadaur accepts other outcasts as his worshipers. Especially if the reason they were outcast is because they were really awful people--you know, real slimebags.Or, you know, you can stop moving goalposts. You wanted to know how to use them both. You can't suddenly decide to include more variables.Of course he is. Why would he lose that trait? And why wouldn't you combine these traits? The rebel outcast worshipers sacrifice people by throwing them into pits of ooze. They have trained oozes as watchdogs. Their leader is actually an ooze-creature. By pledging service, they got a half-ooze template slapped on their stats. Any of his worshipers who casts spells has an oozy flavor to all of their magic."They're the same, but all you're doing is making them different." Really?Does it matter? I showed you a huge list of adventure ideas for differentiating gods and demons and all you did was say "Nuh-uh! You can use the plots interchangeably."And the thing you don't get is that people probably wouldn't use Ghaunadaur and Juiblex together (especially if they're not playing in the Realms). They'd use some evil gods and some archfiends and pick and choose which ones they liked the best.Right, but you're not telling people "hey, you might not get it done exactly right, but keep trying." You're literally telling people not to bother.Also, it's a game, not a book that needs to be published. Nobody but the players are going to care if the factions aren't perfect.Because of the characters? Or because of the writing? I haven't seen the movie, but from everything I've heard it's the writing. And poor writing makes for poor characters. The last Superman movie I saw--which was ages ago, the one where he came back to Earth and Luthor was trying to turn the entire world into crystals or something so he could sell real estate and it turns out Superman and Lois had a kid--was pretty awful, and that had a single super.Then I likely wrote it badly. Although again, only one of the settings you picked is really part of the D&D cosmos, and that's specifically shut off from it. Eberron, Theros, and Nerath all have their own cosmos (although with Nerath, it's more that 4e rewrote the cosmos that setting used). I have no idea about Ravnica, but since that wasn't created for D&D, it could be anything.</blockquote>

Verification