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: 8415583" data-attributes="member: 6801228">Because there have not been listed any canonical "arch-fiend" powers or "god-powers" that are any different. The best I have seen is that many "god-powers" seem to be bigger versions of the same. And yes, I'm sure that you can make up some powers that gods get, but that doesn't exactly mean much because I can just make up those same powers going to Archfiends. As for the warlock powers, I was referring to cultists getting clerical powers, as discussed involving the MM, and the additional powers they get in Mordenkainen's. Undead creatures can't give those powers, and if they can... well then, wouldn't they be gods as well?Okay, stop here for a second. Why is he pretending to be Pistil? And how are people worshiping "Gloopy-as-Pistil"? This is the point where you are losing me, because this process matters. Did he pretend to be Pistil to be worshiped twice over? Did he pretend to be Pistil to prevent her from being worshiped properly? These are different goals.And if everyone is directing prayers to Pistil, but they are just warped, how does this end up affecting Gloopy? He isn't being prayed towards, she is.How is it being split? There are no prayers going to Gloopy, they are going to Pistil, they are just warped because he is teaching the followers the wrong rituals. Now, if we want to say that the rituals matter... then we have a bit of a problem, because that means that every god/goddess has specific rituals that must be performed to worship them, but that isn't how DnD has portrayed these things. DnD has long had splinter groups within a religion and other things that would make this not true.But all of this is assuming that this process even works, and I don't understand how it would work. And, I don't see how a more powerful god is going to be able to do anything. Assuming that this all worked as you explained, then to any observer Pistil's worship never ceased, and she just died for no reason. Maybe they investigate, but since you said "spike is his boyfriend now" then the other gods are not going to see anything wrong, because the universe rewrote itself. And at worst, you have him getting the stink-eye, but you can't just smite a god for being clever. Other gods are going to rally and defend him and his methods, which may lead to drafting of rules to prevent this.I see a lot of problems, mostly in the assumption that Worshiping Pistil somehow leads to worshiping Gloopy, but no explanation for why that is the case. Or, if this is something that warps gods, why does it kill Pistil to be worshiped in a new way instead of warping her? And finally... you just told a really good and interesting story using this method and gods... proving exactly what I said, that you can do this with gods. The fact that their are ramifications doesn't change that, besides a god killing a god is somewhat expected in certain corners, an Archfiend doing it is going to get a different reaction. Or not, maybe they will react the exact same way.I won't argue that, but "bad writing" on their part doesn't mean Eberron is doing something fundamentally different. It just means they are doing "good writing"I never said "you do gods wrong" I don't care if you accept having both evil gods and archfiends of similar concepts is more difficult to write well. It is true. Just like I'll say that writing a fantasy world is harder than writing for the "real world" because there are fewer things you have to explain. I also don't understand why you are so offended that I'm saying something is hard to do well. If you've been doing it well... isn't that a compliment to you? Carving an ice sculpture is hard to do well, does that mean there are not absolutely gorgeous ice sculptures made by people with high levels of skill in that field? No. It means I'm really frickin' impressed when I see those sculptures, because that isn't easy to do. I never said that having only one makes for "better stories." I said it is easier to write better stories with only one. It is, to give another example, incredibly hard to write a compelling story with multiple POV characters. One of the reasons authors who do so get respect is because of the difficulty. It is easier to write good stories with only a single POV character. Does that mean that only good stories come from a single POV character? Obviously not. One is just easier to do well compared to the other. I hear a lot of "well, I could do something similar", but it seems that it is much harder to actually find or write dwarves to emulate elves.So, if you look up her history, it is FAR more complicated than that. She was able to leave until... 5e maybe 4e. <a href="https://forgottenrealms.fandom.com/wiki/Tiamat" target="_blank">According to her history</a> she was only "imprisoned" after betraying Bane (she was forced to serve him in 4e) to Asmodeus, but when she offered to be his Champion instead of the Lord of the First, she was bound to serve Bel, the Lord of the First and be imprisoned in her divine domain. But, when you fight Tiamat at the end of that adventure... you fight an avatar, not her full bodily self. At least, that is what has always been described to me. So, the ritual wasn't pulling her through bodily like it claims as far as I have ever been told. And looking at her statblock in the adventure, she is listed as a fiend. So, no, I really don't see the difference. Tiamat doesn't send an avatar after all to defend the ritual site or really to do anything. She seems to need the ritual to get out of her agreement with Asmodeus to act without restraint on the material world. Something that every Demon Lord needs as well.  Okay, I'll own up to it, this time I am telling you you are doing it wrong. You want to prove he isn't a god, and you start with the claim "he isn't a god" then defend that claim using evidence based on the fact that he isn't a god, and follow that up by removing the structures that exist because you have decided that he isn't a god, and therefore can't have the structures that he actually does have. Yes, this is entirely backwards, and you could literally prove anything if you start from the assumption that you are right and change evidence to support that assumption. Instead, don't claim that he is a god or not a god. Look at the evidence. Does he have a coherent religion around him, similiar to known and accepted CE gods? Yes. Does he have clerics and other faithful who he has granted powers? Yes. Does he answer prayers? Yes. These all point to him being a god.And it is in no way compelling, because you are literally just making it up. You can't say "Yeenoghu isn't a god in DnD because I made up rules that for my home campaign he can't be a god". I can literally do the exact same thing for the accepted gods and make them all "not gods" as well. So, yes, if you want me to accept that Yeenoghu can't be a god, because his temples corrupt the land and god temples don't do that, then you need proof. If it is just you making it up then I'm going to continue running his temples and shrines as not corrupting the lands, because there is no proof that they do.You seem to have a fundamental disconnect about the nature of this discussion. If every option is valid, then you can't say the rules prevent you from having Archfiends and Evil Gods being the same. They don't, every option is valid. You know what you can say if every option is valid? That they are interchangeable. Because every option is valid, and therefore they can be interchanged or not interchanged as per your choice of option. If you want to make up rules to make them not interchangeable, that is fine, but as soon as you stop using made-up rules that only apply to your own table, then they are back to being interchangeable.Thank you for the baking lessen, but as someone who doesn't know any of that information, those differences don't really play into my viewpoint. Learning more, I could learn those differences. But, countering that with the gods and archfiends, the more you learn, THE FEWER DIFFERENCES THERE ARE. Because everything a god can do, an archfiend has done, at some point. The distinction seems to exist just to exist.</blockquote>

Verification