D&D 4E Tropes of the Nentir Vale

[Neonchameleon]

Honestly Dragonlance has the best usage of gods in all these settings... I love how even the good gods agreed throwing a meteor at the planet was a good idea.

I couldn't disagree more and you've just given an example as to why,

The fundamental problem with the Dragonlance (and Realms) Gods is that they've got this stupid "The balance between good and evil must be maintained" thing going on. Making goodness effectively impossible and even the supposedly good gods Lawful Evil as they strive to maintain the amount of evil in the world.

Meanwhile I'll happily take the gods of Eberron (who don't manifest and are exemplars) and the gods of the Nentir Vale (who are actual poletheistic Gods who behave like people writ large the way they did in mythology) or even the Lady of Pain from Sigil.

 

[Urriak Uruk]

I couldn't disagree more and you've just given an example as to why,

The fundamental problem with the Dragonlance (and Realms) Gods is that they've got this stupid "The balance between good and evil must be maintained" thing going on. Making goodness effectively impossible and even the supposedly good gods Lawful Evil as they strive to maintain the amount of evil in the world.

Meanwhile I'll happily take the gods of Eberron (who don't manifest and are exemplars) and the gods of the Nentir Vale (who are actual poletheistic Gods who behave like people writ large the way they did in mythology) or even the Lady of Pain from Sigil.

I'd agree with this criticism if it was actually true... sure a plurality of gods in both settings likely take balance as important, but one of the primary conflicts in Dragonlance is that Takhisis doesn't care about balance at all and even subverts the very rules the gods create.

And I find this true even less for the realms, when during the Time of Troubles a whole bunch of gods got themselves killed for trying to break Ao's new rules.

No, I was complimenting Dragonlance's deities because of their inherent contradictions.

 

[Neonchameleon]

I'd agree with this criticism if it was actually true... sure a plurality of gods in both settings likely take balance as important, but one of the primary conflicts in Dragonlance is that Takhisis doesn't care about balance at all and even subverts the very rules the gods create.

Indeed. But Palatine thinks "Balance between good and evil" is that way. Balance between hospitals and child rapists. And most of the gods of good agree.

And I find this true even less for the realms, when during the Time of Troubles a whole bunch of gods got themselves killed for trying to break Ao's new rules.

A large part of which were because Ao is lawful evil.

Balance between law and chaos is a philosophically defensible thing. That evil can't be wiped out without wiping out our ability to satisfy our needs is a philosophically defensible thing. Redemption is philosphically defensible. Balance between good and evil is itself an evil concept.

 

[wingsandsword]

And I find this true even less for the realms, when during the Time of Troubles a whole bunch of gods got themselves killed for trying to break Ao's new rules.

Yeah, the idea that somehow the Gods of the Forgotten Realms care one bit about balance is nonsense.

I'm pretty dang sure that Helm and Tyr and Lathander would scour Faerun of all evil if they could. . .and that Bane and Beshaba and Loviatar would kill every good-aligned God and torture and enslave their followers if they had the chance.

Ao has some kind of cosmic balance or order he's striving for, but that's it, and even then it's not necessarily a strict balance of alignments as it is the harmonious functioning of the pantheon and that Realmspace works normally.

 

[Zeromaru X]

I can definitely add the Twisting Halls to the map in the same style as the rest, but if anyone else notices something missing, it would be great to know.

I have a LOT of sites to add to that map from some adventures. Just let me check my documents.

Has anyone taken the time to modify the Conquest map to incorporate the various extra bits from the Dragon magazine articles?

I have, but the map is still unfinished, I have limited my efforts just to the Nerathan League area.

 

[Urriak Uruk]

Indeed. But Palatine thinks "Balance between good and evil" is that way. Balance between hospitals and child rapists. And most of the gods of good agree.



A large part of which were because Ao is lawful evil.

Balance between law and chaos is a philosophically defensible thing. That evil can't be wiped out without wiping out our ability to satisfy our needs is a philosophically defensible thing. Redemption is philosphically defensible. Balance between good and evil is itself an evil concept.

This is a pretty black-and-white view of morality in general so I don't want to get too deep in the weeds here, but D&D alignment (and the Great Wheel) largely functions on the premise that if one aligment (or alignment of gods) becomes too powerful, that ideology dominates. So if Good overpowers evil, then Lawful Good will try to enforce the laws on Chaotic Good, who in turn try to smash the laws.

Essentially, the idea behind Ao (and Palatine to a certain extent) is that the world can't actually function without evil. If evil was destroyed, the forces of good would turn on each other and possibly destroy the multiverse.

I'll be clear that this has no bearing on morality in real life moral decisions, so don't argue with me there (I agree that actually destroying of evil in the real world is always right, and ignoring it always wrong).

 

[Zeromaru X]

If anything, Exandria is a better fleshed out explanation of the relationships of the gods from the 4E core cosmology.

I don't think so... in the Nentir Vale, the gods need to stand together, even the evil ones, because the forces of the primordials outnumber them by a wide margin. I remember some sourcebook that states that the gods, even the evil ones, grudgingly accept each others because that god that you kill today, is the one who may have saved your life when the primordials return (and they will return, or something even worse may take their place). So, the betrayal of the evil gods is really a dumbed down version of the gods of the Dawn War.

But I may say that because I'm a bit tired of the bored cliche of good vs evil that's so integrated to D&D.

Had Mearls’ weird offshoot not gone off and been taken over by Kenreck, who is great but man taking over someone else’s game is hard, then maybe that weird offshoot would have seen print.

I'm glad we never saw Mearls' Nentir Vale. Too many unnecessary changes for my tastes.

 

[Campbell]

What made the Dawn War compelling to me personally is that it was not over. That as you reached epic tier you would be pulled towards the conflict and have to pick a side. You had all these ongoing conflicts in the cosmology that had a direct impact on the setting that players could eventually engage with directly.

 

[Aldarc]

This conflict was written into the fabric of 4e itself. Becoming a demigod as part of a character’s epic destiny is in many ways about the character refilling the lost ranks of the gods from the Dawn War and tacitly signing up with the gods in the conflict against the primordials and demon lords.

 

[Marandahir]

This conflict was written into the fabric of 4e itself. Becoming a demigod as part of a character’s epic destiny is in many ways about the character refilling the lost ranks of the gods from the Dawn War and tacitly signing up with the gods in the conflict against the primordials and demon lords.

Or you could become a Darklord of a Domain of Dread of the Shadowfell or something. That was an ED too. I think Archfey was as well.

Point being, you can take on a role as one of the POWERS of the cosmos, but it didn't have to be Astral vs Elemental.