D&D 5E Why the heck does D&D have Hecate as Chaotic Evil

Parmandur

Book-Friend
Hecate is listed in the Astral Drifter background as one of several gods that your character had a "Divine Contact" with and learned some secret or cosmic lore. The options given are as follows (and I added their alignment and source pantheon):
  • Corellon (CG, elves)
  • Tymora (CG, Forgotten Realms)
  • Fharlanghn (NG, Greyhawk)
  • Istus (N, Greyhawk)
  • Nuada (N, Celtic)
  • Zivilyn (N, Dragonlance)
  • Arawn (NE, Celtic)
  • Hecate (CE, Greek)
  • Celestian (N, Greyhawk)
  • Ptah (LN, Egyptian)
  • "or work with your DM to identify a more suitable choice"
That's all.just from the PHB.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

dave2008

Legend
Kali has been listed as CE, something I completely disagree with, and it's a good thing 2e was the last edition to even bother with having the Hindu deities in.
It is a strange thing. A lot of "good" gods would be considered "evil" or at least with some "evil" behaviors from contemporary perspectives . Whether that makes them evil or not :unsure:
 

dave2008

Legend
The beginning of 5e is no longer in line with (imo) Wizards outlook on the game.

I thought a few years ago Wizards had been sidelining gods, and we wouldn't see their 'modern' take until planescape.
We have seen gods in Theros (7/20), Rime (9/20), and Fizban's (10/21). What do you mean be sidelining them?
 

Scribe

Legend
We have seen gods in Theros (7/20), Rime (9/20), and Fizban's (10/21). What do you mean be sidelining them?
I don't count Theros, mostly what I'm looking for is how they would be represented in a book centered on the FR/GH/Planescape cosmology.
 


dave2008

Legend
I don't count Theros, mostly what I'm looking for is how they would be represented in a book centered on the FR/GH/Planescape cosmology.
You may not count Theros, but I think that is the model they will use if they make gods for those settings. At least that is what I would do.
 

Jer

Legend
Supporter
It is a strange thing. A lot of "good" gods would be considered "evil" or at least with some "evil" behaviors from contemporary perspectives . Whether that makes them evil or not :unsure:
D&D alignments work even less well for classical mythological figures than they do for normal humans. Was Zeus good or evil? Hell, even Athena did some mean, mean things and Apollo, that cherub, was a plague bringer.
The idea of an absolute good and evil run aground when you're trying to come up with an alignment for Zeus and decide that "Chaotic good" is the appropriate one given the stories.

Unless it's the Zeus that appears in Disney's Hercules movie. That guy I buy as Chaotic Good.
 

Hecate is listed in the Astral Drifter background as one of several gods that your character had a "Divine Contact" with and learned some secret or cosmic lore. The options given are as follows (and I added their alignment and source pantheon):
  • Corellon (CG, elves)
  • Tymora (CG, Forgotten Realms)
  • Fharlanghn (NG, Greyhawk)
  • Istus (N, Greyhawk)
  • Nuada (N, Celtic)
  • Zivilyn (N, Dragonlance)
  • Arawn (NE, Celtic)
  • Hecate (CE, Greek)
  • Celestian (N, Greyhawk)
  • Ptah (LN, Egyptian)
  • "or work with your DM to identify a more suitable choice"
Arawn is Neutral Evil? Nuada is Neutral? Does this guy just have it in for Celtic and Greek gods or something? Ptah is LN and Arawn is NE? I mean, who came up with this gibberish?

God it's like a bad day in 2nd Edition. Absolute massacre.

If Ptah is LN, Arawn should be LN, frankly, and Nuada is basically the same guy as Tyr, who this dude would NO DOUBT characterise as LN or LG. Awful. I genuinely haven't seen something this outright ignorant with historical deities since 2E, though I probably missed something (guessing there may be a similar list I'm forgotten in one of the core books).

I mean, how about don't assign them alignments, for god's sake? If you're going to be this ignorant...
 

It is a strange thing. A lot of "good" gods would be considered "evil" or at least with some "evil" behaviors from contemporary perspectives . Whether that makes them evil or not :unsure:
The interpretation of Kali they had back then was that of Kali as a Goddess of Destruction, but as a mother Goddess she is much more than just that and it's a simplistic and biased Western outlook for her.

I'd give her at least a Neutral or CN alignment, and that's probably another inaccurate view.
 

The interpretation of Kali they had back then was that of Kali as a Goddess of Destruction, but as a mother Goddess she is much more than just that and it's a simplistic and biased Western outlook for her.

I'd give her at least a Neutral or CN alignment, and that's probably another inaccurate view.
I think with real-world/historical gods, they shouldn't ever give them alignments, at this point. Like, if we look at 1E/2E, they got obviously wrong far more often than right, and from this little list, there's been ZERO improvement since 2E. I mean, don't they have anyone who did classics? Or Welsh/Irish mythology? Come on. They must.

In fact, I'd go further.

No gods, in any setting, should have alignments.

Instead, describe their ethos and how they act, and what their values are. Then the players and the DM can decide what alignments are compatible with them.

This would be huge for the Forgetten Realms, which in classist D&D polytheism fashion, has plenty of AWFUL-sounding "technically Good" gods, who just really don't sound good from their behaviour or beliefs like our good buddy Clangeddin, who believes genocide isn't a dirty word, it's a necessity (hey take it up with him not me!), who is, and I quote "Lawful Good". And you have people like Mask, who, frankly, is nicer and less horrible than a lot of the "Good" gods who (when not mysteriously dead), usually "Neutral Evil" (admittedly 5E did fix this to CN, that's interesting).

But just ditch the alignments, outline their values and beliefs.
 

Remove ads

Top