The_Gneech
Explorer
Depends on what's in it; Defenders of the Faith was something of a wash. -TG
Would you buy a Book of Exalted Deeds?
- Thread starter Enkhidu
- Start date
I'd be interested. I'd be even more interested in contributing to such a book (I need to engage in some serious budgeting).
CRGreathouse
Community Supporter
Would I buy a Book of Exaulted Deeds? That depends on what's in it, who wrote it, the previews, the reviews... etc.
In general, though, I think I'd be more excited about it than a Book of Vile Darkness - monolithic good and good being 'flat' are less cliché than their evil counterparts, but at least as much of a problem for me.
In general, though, I think I'd be more excited about it than a Book of Vile Darkness - monolithic good and good being 'flat' are less cliché than their evil counterparts, but at least as much of a problem for me.
Knight Otu
First Post
I would propably buy it if it came out. It propably will come out, too. As a little reminder, Monte Cook did propose both books.
WotC has quite often aimed at completeness, for an availability of all options for everyone to pick and choose. It would be rather surprising if the Book of Exalted Deeds did not come out.
Of course, that is just my opinion.
WotC has quite often aimed at completeness, for an availability of all options for everyone to pick and choose. It would be rather surprising if the Book of Exalted Deeds did not come out.
Of course, that is just my opinion.
Elder-Basilisk
First Post
Well, this is a bit too much philosophy for a thread that's just would you buy a book of Exalted Deeds so I'll try to keep it brief.
MeepotheMighty wrote:
Well, leaving relativism out of the picture, evil done in the name of good is, I think, a clear case. What makes it interesting is not the evil that is done but rather the good that it is attempting to accomplish. In this case, as in many others, what makes a villain interesting is not how vile he is but his good qualities that were corrupted.
Darth Vader wouldn't be a very interesting villain if he didn't care about Luke. If he had died in the final Star Wars movie without redemption, he would have most likely been a boring and one dimensional character. What made him interesting was not the evil that he wallowed in but the good that was still inside of him.
True but all of them committed atrocities. The differences and the subjects for interesting books don't lie there. Sure, the Aztecs sacrificed thousands to their gods and the Romans crucified thousands as warnings against the price of rebellion. Those aren't the interesting things about Roman or Aztec civilization though. Again, the interesting bits are not the evil of the civilizations.
Well, I think I made poor choices by including both Socrates, and Confucius. They are usually admired for the same thing--their teaching. But that aside, the points I was making with the examples are first that in the people we consider good, that good is what we find interesting about them. And second that, unlike the evil of villains which tends to be the same, there is a great variety in the "goods" we admire.
Well, the news media actually goes a long way to cover up the wickedness of some people--when was the last time you heard about the torture of prisoners in China, for instance. But I certainly agree with you that the media does not portray an accurate picture of humanity.
Still, the point I was trying to make is that contemporary evil is very similar to simply drag and drop into a D&D game. That's much harder to do with contemporary heroism. That is partially because we do not live in a society that ordinarily honors heroism. It is also partially because the character of modern heroism is tied more closely to the circumstances of modern life than is modern villainy. Consequently, it's more difficult to execute the "drag and drop" that can be done with villains.
MeepotheMighty wrote:
Well, leaving relativism out of the picture, evil done in the name of good is, I think, a clear case. What makes it interesting is not the evil that is done but rather the good that it is attempting to accomplish. In this case, as in many others, what makes a villain interesting is not how vile he is but his good qualities that were corrupted.
Darth Vader wouldn't be a very interesting villain if he didn't care about Luke. If he had died in the final Star Wars movie without redemption, he would have most likely been a boring and one dimensional character. What made him interesting was not the evil that he wallowed in but the good that was still inside of him.
True but all of them committed atrocities. The differences and the subjects for interesting books don't lie there. Sure, the Aztecs sacrificed thousands to their gods and the Romans crucified thousands as warnings against the price of rebellion. Those aren't the interesting things about Roman or Aztec civilization though. Again, the interesting bits are not the evil of the civilizations.
Well, I think I made poor choices by including both Socrates, and Confucius. They are usually admired for the same thing--their teaching. But that aside, the points I was making with the examples are first that in the people we consider good, that good is what we find interesting about them. And second that, unlike the evil of villains which tends to be the same, there is a great variety in the "goods" we admire.
Well, the news media actually goes a long way to cover up the wickedness of some people--when was the last time you heard about the torture of prisoners in China, for instance. But I certainly agree with you that the media does not portray an accurate picture of humanity.
Still, the point I was trying to make is that contemporary evil is very similar to simply drag and drop into a D&D game. That's much harder to do with contemporary heroism. That is partially because we do not live in a society that ordinarily honors heroism. It is also partially because the character of modern heroism is tied more closely to the circumstances of modern life than is modern villainy. Consequently, it's more difficult to execute the "drag and drop" that can be done with villains.
dpdx
Explorer
No, I wouldn't, for the same reason I wouldn't buy a book of Vile Darkness:
"Good" and "Evil" are concepts best left to the general agreement of the DM and his players in a particular game. I don't need Monte Cook, Tracy Hickman, or any of the wingnuts on this board to proscribe rules to my party's morality any more than Wizards has in the CRBs.
I really just need the basics: stats, abilities, how many hit-points I've got, encumbrance limits, and anything else that is morality-neutral and essential to the game itself. The rest can be up to us.
"Good" and "Evil" are concepts best left to the general agreement of the DM and his players in a particular game. I don't need Monte Cook, Tracy Hickman, or any of the wingnuts on this board to proscribe rules to my party's morality any more than Wizards has in the CRBs.
I really just need the basics: stats, abilities, how many hit-points I've got, encumbrance limits, and anything else that is morality-neutral and essential to the game itself. The rest can be up to us.
Last edited:
Nifft
Penguin Herder
I'd really like to see rules governing the relations of non-priest characters to the various gods.
For example, my Fighter venerates Helm. Does Helm give a rat's tail? If so, how? What kind of deeds will get him in good with the priesthood, and what benefit will his church status have?
On the other hand, my Rogue just stole the diamond from the Great Statue of Malar in the High Temple of Nasty Animals. What gods should she pray to to avert -- or at least avoid -- the beastlord's wrath? Do good gods & churches routinely interfere with the wrath of evil gods? Again, if so, how?
-- Nifft
For example, my Fighter venerates Helm. Does Helm give a rat's tail? If so, how? What kind of deeds will get him in good with the priesthood, and what benefit will his church status have?
On the other hand, my Rogue just stole the diamond from the Great Statue of Malar in the High Temple of Nasty Animals. What gods should she pray to to avert -- or at least avoid -- the beastlord's wrath? Do good gods & churches routinely interfere with the wrath of evil gods? Again, if so, how?
-- Nifft
Zaruthustran
The tingling means it’s working!
dpdx said:
Agreed. Making up campaign worlds, organizations, rules for stuff like drugs and whatnot, prestige classes, and spells is part of the fun of the hobby. A "good" book is just as useless as an "evil" book.
The huge response to the setting search proved that there are many thousands of creative gamers out there. So why do these same supposedly creative gamers buy fluff books like the BoVD?
Similar Threads
