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: 8414075" data-attributes="member: 6801228"><p>No, I don't think they "outweigh" them. I think that if you have a bunch of rules that say they are the same, and a bunch of rules that say they are different, then they are likely so similar that it is fine to say they are pretty much the same. Yes, you can make them more different, but if you don't go out of your way to make them more different, they are basically the same.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Gods can absolutely use those sort of contracts though. So again, this is a story you can tell with a god. And gnolls are intelligent humanoids that he deals with. They even have souls.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>You are joking right? Like, I can't believe you seriously posted this with a straight face. </p><p></p><p>It is out of character for gods to act like they would in mythology? You know that mythology is just religions from the past that don't have as many adherents as they used to, right? Norse <strong>Mythology </strong>is focused on the gods. Egyptian <strong>Mythology </strong>is focused on gods. </p><p></p><p>The events in these mythologies were actual religions, actual events that the people believed happened in the realms of the gods. But acting like they would in literally their own stories would be out of character for gods? </p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>And yet he is a god. So, since I wasn't saying "we should only discuss gods that follow the forgotten realms rules" then the fact that he doesn't care about his worshipers puts a fairly large hole in your theory that all gods care about their worshipers but all demons and devils don't.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>No, they also have mortal lackeys. Not sure how you count cambions, but they have a lot of warlocks and high priests who are definitely not fiends.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>So, has it occured to you yet that in this particular part of the discussion, over what stories are possible to tell, that I'm NOT excluding Eberron?</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Only because you insist on reading every single thing in the worst possible light, so you can tell me how terrible of a person/communicator I am. Maybe stop doing that? I've never said that you should never pick both. I've literally said, multiple times "you shouldn't pick both <u><strong>without a good reason.</strong></u>" I said that <strong><u>I MYSELF</u></strong> originally felt obligated to include everything, and that I can imagine others feel that way. </p><p></p><p>I also have never once said "don't bother trying" </p><p></p><p>So, again, stop reading the worst possible intentions into everything I post. You've done it since the first post you made in this thread, and frankly I'm getting sick of it. Every single response to you I've made for the past few days has included a section like this, where I tell you you are reading my intentions wrong, and you aren't listening to what I am saying, in favor of your own interpretion of what a terrible person like me must actually be saying.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Hi, now you know someone like that. I'm not special. I'm sure other people were like me.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>You are half right. Let me show you that part</p><p></p><p>"<strong>You have been fighting for <em>ages </em>for people to accept your claim, that they're redundant</strong><s> and there's absolutely no reason to have both together</s>"</p><p></p><p>I have only, as I have stated again and again and again and again and again and again and again have been arguing that they are redundant. I have never once said that there is absolutely no reason to have both together. </p><p></p><p>Yes, it is a choice. In part it is a choice because the two categories are fairly redundant. If they weren't redundant, you really wouldn't have much of a choice, you would need to include both. Just like you kind of need to have elves and dwarves, because they aren't redundant, they cover different things, and so you sort of need both to cover both things.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>He was originally, but why let things like that stop you from continuing to ignore my point in favor of your own version.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Yes, really. </p><p></p><p>Let me try this again. Only this time I'm going to make up beings to make the example more clear, that way you stop getting confused. </p><p></p><p>There is confusion that can be introduced by having DX the God of Candy and FO the Demon Lord of Candy. See, they both cover candy, and they are both concerned about candy, and pretty much their main defining traits are candy. </p><p></p><p>Now, if you wanted to tell a story where FO is the Demon Lord of Candy, but you decided you wanted DX to be focused more on being the God of Ice Cream, then you can eliminate this problem, but that is sort of just avoiding the question of how do you handle it when DX is the God of Candy, because you are deciding to stop really focusing on the candy part, by adding more things too him. </p><p></p><p>See, my problem is I wanted to show an actual example of this using real parts of DnD, but instead of addressing the issue of "hey, there is a demon lord and a god who have the exact same job and powers, so that can be confusing" you decided to instead focus on literally anything else. So, now that I've removed that, do you see the issue I was talking about originally, about how if you have a god and a demon lord who have the same focus and the same powers, that that can be kind of confusing? Or are you going to say that it isn't confusing, because you are going to make one of them have a different focus, again, just like you keep doing.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Because you could, which again, was the actual question I was addressing. I even made sure to clarify it THREE TIMES in the post itself.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Very possibly. But the thing is, my point was that people probably wouldn't use the two of them together, because there is little point in using the two of them together. More than likely people just pick the characters and plot lines they like the most, but you seem to not understand that they could easily do that and switch the titles. </p><p></p><p>There is no reason Bane can't be an Archdevil. There is no reason Orcus can't be a god. The titles don't actuallly make that much, if any, difference.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I have never once said "don't bother". I'm saying you don't need to bother if you don't want to. </p><p></p><p>You know, you could take a 16th century sailing ship from England to America. But you don't need to. There are easier ways, and if you don't want to have the experience that taking and sailing a 16th century sailing vessel would entail... why would you do it? I'm not saying you should never do it, if that's what you want to do, then go ahead, but it isn't required to do it that way.</p><p></p><p>You seem to think that unless I'm actively encouraging someone to do something, then by pointing out that it is hard and not necessary that I am instead telling them to give up and never do it. Again, you read every word I write in the worst possible light. For no reason I can fathom except that you don't like me and you can't think that I have anything except malicious intentions.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>And different properties can be bad for different reasons. You do realize that right? That if I say "this movie is bad because it had bad actors" that isn't saying all bad movies are because of bad actors, or that all movies have bad actors.</p><p></p><p>The pacing in Suicide Squad (the first one, I haven't seen the remake) was atrocious, and part of that was because they spent something like 15 minutes flashing through a dozen character's backstories with little to no context. They were trying to fit too many characters, who were too similar, in too small of a space.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>They are all DnD properties though, so they are all part of this discussion of "what stories are possible to be told in DnD"</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Chaosmancer, post: 8414075, member: 6801228"] No, I don't think they "outweigh" them. I think that if you have a bunch of rules that say they are the same, and a bunch of rules that say they are different, then they are likely so similar that it is fine to say they are pretty much the same. Yes, you can make them more different, but if you don't go out of your way to make them more different, they are basically the same. Gods can absolutely use those sort of contracts though. So again, this is a story you can tell with a god. And gnolls are intelligent humanoids that he deals with. They even have souls. You are joking right? Like, I can't believe you seriously posted this with a straight face. It is out of character for gods to act like they would in mythology? You know that mythology is just religions from the past that don't have as many adherents as they used to, right? Norse [B]Mythology [/B]is focused on the gods. Egyptian [B]Mythology [/B]is focused on gods. The events in these mythologies were actual religions, actual events that the people believed happened in the realms of the gods. But acting like they would in literally their own stories would be out of character for gods? And yet he is a god. So, since I wasn't saying "we should only discuss gods that follow the forgotten realms rules" then the fact that he doesn't care about his worshipers puts a fairly large hole in your theory that all gods care about their worshipers but all demons and devils don't. No, they also have mortal lackeys. Not sure how you count cambions, but they have a lot of warlocks and high priests who are definitely not fiends. So, has it occured to you yet that in this particular part of the discussion, over what stories are possible to tell, that I'm NOT excluding Eberron? Only because you insist on reading every single thing in the worst possible light, so you can tell me how terrible of a person/communicator I am. Maybe stop doing that? I've never said that you should never pick both. I've literally said, multiple times "you shouldn't pick both [U][B]without a good reason.[/B][/U]" I said that [B][U]I MYSELF[/U][/B] originally felt obligated to include everything, and that I can imagine others feel that way. I also have never once said "don't bother trying" So, again, stop reading the worst possible intentions into everything I post. You've done it since the first post you made in this thread, and frankly I'm getting sick of it. Every single response to you I've made for the past few days has included a section like this, where I tell you you are reading my intentions wrong, and you aren't listening to what I am saying, in favor of your own interpretion of what a terrible person like me must actually be saying. Hi, now you know someone like that. I'm not special. I'm sure other people were like me. You are half right. Let me show you that part "[B]You have been fighting for [I]ages [/I]for people to accept your claim, that they're redundant[/B][S] and there's absolutely no reason to have both together[/S]" I have only, as I have stated again and again and again and again and again and again and again have been arguing that they are redundant. I have never once said that there is absolutely no reason to have both together. Yes, it is a choice. In part it is a choice because the two categories are fairly redundant. If they weren't redundant, you really wouldn't have much of a choice, you would need to include both. Just like you kind of need to have elves and dwarves, because they aren't redundant, they cover different things, and so you sort of need both to cover both things. [I][/I] He was originally, but why let things like that stop you from continuing to ignore my point in favor of your own version. Yes, really. Let me try this again. Only this time I'm going to make up beings to make the example more clear, that way you stop getting confused. There is confusion that can be introduced by having DX the God of Candy and FO the Demon Lord of Candy. See, they both cover candy, and they are both concerned about candy, and pretty much their main defining traits are candy. Now, if you wanted to tell a story where FO is the Demon Lord of Candy, but you decided you wanted DX to be focused more on being the God of Ice Cream, then you can eliminate this problem, but that is sort of just avoiding the question of how do you handle it when DX is the God of Candy, because you are deciding to stop really focusing on the candy part, by adding more things too him. See, my problem is I wanted to show an actual example of this using real parts of DnD, but instead of addressing the issue of "hey, there is a demon lord and a god who have the exact same job and powers, so that can be confusing" you decided to instead focus on literally anything else. So, now that I've removed that, do you see the issue I was talking about originally, about how if you have a god and a demon lord who have the same focus and the same powers, that that can be kind of confusing? Or are you going to say that it isn't confusing, because you are going to make one of them have a different focus, again, just like you keep doing. Because you could, which again, was the actual question I was addressing. I even made sure to clarify it THREE TIMES in the post itself. Very possibly. But the thing is, my point was that people probably wouldn't use the two of them together, because there is little point in using the two of them together. More than likely people just pick the characters and plot lines they like the most, but you seem to not understand that they could easily do that and switch the titles. There is no reason Bane can't be an Archdevil. There is no reason Orcus can't be a god. The titles don't actuallly make that much, if any, difference. I have never once said "don't bother". I'm saying you don't need to bother if you don't want to. You know, you could take a 16th century sailing ship from England to America. But you don't need to. There are easier ways, and if you don't want to have the experience that taking and sailing a 16th century sailing vessel would entail... why would you do it? I'm not saying you should never do it, if that's what you want to do, then go ahead, but it isn't required to do it that way. You seem to think that unless I'm actively encouraging someone to do something, then by pointing out that it is hard and not necessary that I am instead telling them to give up and never do it. Again, you read every word I write in the worst possible light. For no reason I can fathom except that you don't like me and you can't think that I have anything except malicious intentions. And different properties can be bad for different reasons. You do realize that right? That if I say "this movie is bad because it had bad actors" that isn't saying all bad movies are because of bad actors, or that all movies have bad actors. The pacing in Suicide Squad (the first one, I haven't seen the remake) was atrocious, and part of that was because they spent something like 15 minutes flashing through a dozen character's backstories with little to no context. They were trying to fit too many characters, who were too similar, in too small of a space. They are all DnD properties though, so they are all part of this discussion of "what stories are possible to be told in DnD" [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
The Role and Purpose of Evil Gods
Top