Post/Author/DateTime	Post
pbs 08-10-07, 09:28 PM	I saw this debate once in the novels forum and it was just getting good when WOTC in their infinite wisdom locked the site for novels. I however though it was a good topic and should be continued until its proper conclusion. So this is my Question, who's more powerful the Gods of elves,dwarfs, and men or the Arch-devils of hell or the abyssal Lords? Personally from the novels and publications I have read and interpret (or misinterpreted) I believe the Gods could very well walk right in to hell or the abyss and take out any of the other two. change my mind.
JollyRotten 08-10-07, 10:26 PM	and end free will, then stopping the need for Gods So all disappear in a big pink 'Puff' you then enter D20 campaign mode
Shemeska the Marauder 08-11-07, 01:59 AM	So this is my Question, who's more powerful the Gods of elves,dwarfs, and men or the Arch-devils of hell or the abyssal Lords? Personally from the novels and publications I have read and interpret (or misinterpreted) I believe the Gods could very well walk right in to hell or the abyss and take out any of the other two. change my mind. It's entirely situational. If it's on the prime material or the domain of a deity, the deity has the advantage. If it's in Baator the archdevil has the advantage (see Prince Levistus causing Set's deific domain to physically shrink as he and Set stew in a conflict of wills. Set is very much on the losing end of that). If it's in the Abyss, the Abyssal Lord has the advantage. Fiends tend to avoid overtly interfering on a large scale on the worlds of the prime material, they usually act on a small scale and under the radar because they're out of their element, and likewise gods with deific domains in the lower planes tend to know their place and avoid meddling in the fiends' internal affairs because ultimately they're guests in someone else's home, so to speak (and gods can and have been literally evicted from planes before). In the long run though, any particular deity might be on the losing end of things compared to an archfiend. Gods are formed and/or sustained by their worshippers belief, and in the absence of that, they end up withered husks of rock on the Astral. The fiends have watched gods and pantheons rise and fall, they've watched entire worlds perish, they've pulled entire worlds into the Abyss or bottled them in glass as a bauble to covet. The prime material could vanish, but the most basic fiends would still exist to dance upon the graves of the gods because they're something much more primal than they are. Evil still exists regardless of if you believe in it or not (and so does Good, and the more primal celestials would likewise survive any theoretical oblivion of mortality and gods). But overall, the comparison is somewhere between impossible to make in general, or ultimately context dependant.
420 08-11-07, 02:00 AM	So this is my Question, who's more powerful the Gods of elves,dwarfs, and men or the Arch-devils of hell or the abyssal Lords? According to some accounts the deities of good perpetuate the Blood War to ensure their own safety and peace. If you go with that theory then the deities of good are obviously orchestrating and manipulating the plans of all the Demon Lords and Lords of the Nine. -420
Zousha_Omenohu 08-11-07, 02:13 AM	But remember that Asmodeus tricked the gods into signing the Pact Primeval, without telling them the full extent of what it entailed. If the deities hadn't signed it, there wouldn't be any devils, or they'd at least be much less populous.
Witch 08-11-07, 02:56 AM	If the Pact Primeval is anything more than a myth, ofcourse.
Dunamin 08-11-07, 04:54 AM	Which is particularly relevant when considering that the story given in FC2 probably comes from a baatezu perspective.
Derren S. 08-11-07, 07:36 AM	The Arch-Devils lack any divine abilities and have no divine rank. That means they are weaker than the deities themself no matter where they are.
Korone 08-11-07, 10:20 AM	The Arch-Devils lack any divine abilities and have no divine rank. That means they are weaker than the deities themself no matter where they are. Not really. Although you are free to only see stats if you want to and ignore what the arch-devils and abyssal lords are, materialisation of their element, pure evil energy. Place them in their own plane with an infinite number of guards and soldiers, whoever you are, you better be good to only reach them. Everything as an opposed counter parts in DnD, something of equal strength, something that, whoever you are, can and will threaten you. Gods are no different and if it is not only with themselves, the arch-devils and abyssal lords are there to put them back in their place. Divine ranks do not mean a lot to me if you are completely out of your elements and without your precious worshipper, which would kill you if it were not of them (wow, how powerful do gods sound right now). The arch and lords do not have this weakness. But sure, bring a whole pantheon to completely screw up the abyss of hell, they're most likely to do it, but it's not as if it wouldn't hurt them. And since evil/chaos/law existed before, exist and will always exist, what they destroyed is most likely to come back, differently at best.
ripvanwormer 08-11-07, 10:30 AM	But remember that Asmodeus tricked the gods into signing the Pact Primeval, without telling them the full extent of what it entailed. If the deities hadn't signed it, there wouldn't be any devils, or they'd at least be much less populous. The Pact Primeval seems to be real, but the myth around it is explicitly, as the FCII itself says several times, just that - a myth. Certainly the gods named in the myth, like St. Cuthbert and Heironeous, weren't around way back then. I think it's safe to say that the "gods" of that myth weren't gods in the sense that we ordinarily mean, but planar beings of the same sort that Asmodeus is. They were the progenitors of Law, like the baernaloths are the progenitors of Evil. We know this because Fiendish Codex II doesn't give the only version of the same myth. Guide to Hell gives another, while Hellbound: The Blood War gives still another. There's another in the Planescape Monstrous Compendium Appendix One. It's all the same myth, just told in different ways, using different terms. Some sources call the powers of creation "gods," while others describe them as abstract forces, or as serpents, or as beings of pure Law who predate the gods. I think, looking at all the sources, we know for sure that the "gods" had nothing to do with the creation of Asmodeus or the baatezu.
pbs 08-11-07, 10:38 AM	It is the concept of 'free will' that allows the devils and demons to exist. The lesser gods of course get knocked around, as well as those that go against the status quo. the devils were the subjects of the gods before the primevil pact and rely on souls of the damed to power their spells and abilities how s hat better than worship? The gods are not allowed to break that pact, they need it to make themselves look better. Demons are created by there environment an extension of it, if you will.Gods create the environment it is an extension of them. who more powerful in that scenario?
Shemeska the Marauder 08-11-07, 10:40 AM	The Arch-Devils lack any divine abilities and have no divine rank. That means they are weaker than the deities themself no matter where they are. Yet deities still tiptoe around the archfiends, and yet all of the things previously mentioned in the thread still happened. Plus, if you want to go with a rather misleading and unimaginative crunch based argument, the archfiends don't have an upper bound for their stats, only aspect/avatar stats. Regardless of the current crunch suggestions of a false dichotomy in power between the two groups, the fiends clearly now and in the past are the true lords of their respective native planes, rather than gods.
Derren S. 08-11-07, 10:52 AM	You can say what you want but the stats do count and nothing else. And by the stats the Arch Fiends are no match for the greater deities. Basing this duscussion on novels is totally useless as like with comic book heroes/villians the authors always give the arch-fiends the powers they want them to have in their novel so those are not representative.
pbs 08-11-07, 11:00 AM	the deities do not "Tip toe" around the fiends,if anything the gods are trying to keep from breaking the agreement with the fiends. which more than likely gave them power they were not meant to have, further more, the planes of evil may have existed before but not it inhabitants.
Shemeska the Marauder 08-11-07, 11:23 AM	Basing this duscussion on nevels is totally useless as like with comic book heroes/villians the authors always give the arch-fiends the powers they want them to have in their novel so those are not representative. Of course I haven't used any novel references in anything I've said.
Shemeska the Marauder 08-11-07, 11:28 AM	the deities do not "Tip toe" around the fiends,if anything the gods are trying to keep from breaking the agreement with the fiends. With regards to the Blood War the gods are very -very- careful about what they do. They tried, eons ago, to be directly involved and it ended in disaster. Since that time they've avoiding taking any active role. Likewise they don't involve themselves in the fiend's internal affairs and politics. which more than likely gave them power they were not meant to have, further more, the planes of evil may have existed before but not it inhabitants Actually the more primordial fiends are older than you think. Specifically the baernaloths, yugoloths, demodands, obyriths and ancient baatorians entirely predate the existance of the prime material, mortal life, and gods. Gods are relative newcomers in the history of the planes.
pbs 08-11-07, 12:44 PM	With regards to the Blood War the gods are very -very- careful about what they do. They tried, eons ago, to be directly involved and it ended in disaster. Since that time they've avoiding taking any active role. Likewise they don't involve themselves in the fiend's internal affairs and politics. Agreed, but I'm sure it is not because they are afraid of the fiends, it is mostly a cost vs gain motivation, and yes getting involved in the blood war would cost them severly. lets think about it this way no one gets the advantage of their home plane,....now the greater god is the winner every time, yes? Now lets not turn this into good vs evil, not all the god are good, and the ones that claim to be still do things that would/could be considered evil to a stricter judge.
Raymond_Luxury_Yacht 08-11-07, 01:22 PM	Agreed, but I'm sure it is not because they are afraid of the fiends, it is mostly a cost vs gain motivation, and yes getting involved in the blood war would cost them severly. Well, the last time they got involved every single involved deity was severely weakened, and one of them died, and it's implied that it was the work of the fiends, I think they are rather leery of the fiends.
ripvanwormer 08-11-07, 01:35 PM	the devils were the subjects of the gods before the primevil pact That's one myth, a very unlikely one told by younger races in order to make their gods seem to be more than they are. The older myths tell a different story. Demons are created by there environment an extension of it, if you will.Gods create the environment it is an extension of them. who more powerful in that scenario? The gods are created by their worshipers. The aboleths remember a time before any gods existed. There are fiends, however, who are older than any mortal race.
TheAnthroDM 08-11-07, 01:47 PM	The Archdevils have around 20 HD, where the gods have around 40 HD and no CR at all... I'll let common sense tell you who's more powerful.
420 08-11-07, 01:52 PM	But remember that Asmodeus tricked the gods into signing the Pact Primeval, without telling them the full extent of what it entailed. If the deities hadn't signed it, there wouldn't be any devils, or they'd at least be much less populous. Asmodeus would like to think he tricked the gods into creating the devils. However, it is much more likely they tricked him into waging the Blood War away from the Upper Planes. -420
Zousha_Omenohu 08-11-07, 01:58 PM	Don't be too proud of the respective powers of each group. Their ablilities to anihiliate each other are insignificant, next to the power of the Dungeon Master.
Witch 08-11-07, 02:07 PM	People who're judging by mechanics are dealing with a problem: flavor is generally written decently. The mechanics of the archfiends as 20HD creatures were written incompetently or not with that intention. You should never base a judgement in something that relies this much on flavor solely on badly designed mechanics.
aushlo 08-11-07, 02:15 PM	Most gods seem to outstrip the Archfiends in simple power, yes. But the lower planes themselves are extensions of heir inhabitants-or rather, vice versa. Read about The Abyss, Demogorgon and the Dreaming Gulf in the recent Dragon article. An entire EVIL pantheon destroyed, completely shredded by the plane itself like an infection. Spooky. Like someone else has said, homeground advantage means a lot in any conflict of beings this powerful. If you go with the Planescape explanation, you'll also find that the further away from home you are on the Great Wheel, the less easily you find your power flowing. It's very possible that an assault on another Power's domain would fail simply because your mighty powers are several shades removed from their source energies. While the Powers themselves aren't explicitly stated to suffer this effect, it would certainly explain the fact that the Great Wheel is set up the way it is. Sort of a magnetic/gravity pull of morality, arranged with centrifugal force if you will away from the Outlands. Otherwise, you'd see goodly crusader deities marching endless hordes across the planes, and the same with fiends, constantly. The only way the Modron March works is because of its neutrality, I suspect. Maybe the Law aspect is ignored by the Powers only because, as some have suggested, the Modron March is sort of a mechanism to wind the springs of the Wheel again, and as such is neccessary to keep things working.
pbs 08-11-07, 03:47 PM	The gods are created by their worshipers. The aboleths remember a time before any gods existed. There are fiends, however, who are older than any mortal race. how can this statement be correct? Since the gods created the mortal races.
Bob the Efreet 08-11-07, 03:55 PM	The Archdevils have around 20 HD, where the gods have around 40 HD and no CR at all... I'll let common sense tell you who's more powerful. Aspects. You're comparing the aspect of an archfiend to the true form of a deity. That makes it seem much less like an apt comparison, doesn't it?
Witch 08-11-07, 03:56 PM	how can this statement be correct? Since the gods created the mortal races. That's one version of the story. The other version of the story goes that the mortal races created the gods by their belief that the gods created the mortal races.
Adrez Nesnsid 08-11-07, 03:57 PM	The gods are much more powerful than the archfiends (except for deified archfiends like Tenebrous and Iuz (some sources also place Lolth as a former archfiend), and possibly the Baernoloths (Who are sort of like ARCH-archfiends, being a cut above the two "standard" yugoloth archfiends (the Oinoloth and the General of Gehenna)), but under the Planescape cosmology, they have been missing in action for hundreds of centuries). However, under second edition planescape, any deities that interfered with the blood war would gradually waste away into nothing (I think).
pbs 08-11-07, 04:07 PM	That's one version of the story. The other version of the story goes that the mortal races created the gods by their belief that the gods created the mortal races. so which is true? (it make the gods sound like imagery friends.) never mind i don't care, It it irrelevant to the debate, the origin of the gods devils and demons, or there age.
Witch 08-11-07, 04:12 PM	so which is true? Noone knows. There's a reason why designers wrote from an in-character point of view. It allowed people to make up their own minds.
DwarfPcfan 08-11-07, 05:16 PM	Noone knows. There's a reason why designers wrote from an in-character point of view. It allowed people to make up their own minds. Exactly, it depends on how you want you're campaign to work. In a current campaign I'm building, God's are beyond planes, fiends etc. To explain further, God's are the living sparks of the All-possiblity against the Complete Non-possibility. The ultiverse exists as the All-Possibility spilt into an infinite of possibilities that themselves split into a milion possibilites. As the All-posibility was sundered the possibility of life apeared as each spark became a different entity, independent but connected to the infinity of the All-possibility in this context. God created everything as they poured their own spark against non-existence. Greater deities in this context are closer to the All-Possibility as beings in the sense that they are a much greater spark. Examples would be Ao, God, the Great spirit, etc. Fiends in this context are but one ripple of creation as the god poured their own spark against the all-possibility. Gods of evil poured evil against the infinite Non-possibility, fiends were born. Better as new ideas appeared, the All-possibility sparked new shards that made new Gods, worlds. Why am I using this, in this campaign divinity represents creation, ideas becoming, creation, infinity. In a sense God's cannot be destroyed because whatever idea they represent could exist therefore they exist. In this context the "dead" gods of the astral plane aren't dead rather then dormant for a time until their concept expends giving more life to their own spark. But on the typical campaign world, it's hard to say. On one hand you have guys like Hades, Odin, Ra running around but on the other spectrum Asmodeus, Demogorgon etc. Seems to me like no official answer exists, only ideas for campaigns...
pratputajao 08-11-07, 05:19 PM	The Archdevils have around 20 HD, where the gods have around 40 HD and no CR at all... I'll let common sense tell you who's more powerful. Exactly! People can justify, rationalize, ignore stats all they want but in the end a greater god could walk through the abyss/hell without any real fear. The stats as written by WOTC make no sense!! They were ONLY made that way so Supper kewl players could take out Demon lords and Arch devils. It was a really bad decision. 1st ED did not encourage this ( until near the end when they came out with a Mod were you could kill orcus...however you could fight and beat quite a few legitimate gods in that one as well. Kali comes to mind) There was one Demon lord pretty much made to be taken out. guess who?..... LOLTH (now a god and could wipe out all her peers becouse, as we all know, the Drow are just too kewl!) yep she was created with 66 hp and pretty pathetic stats so that you could face her in a Mod. 3ed went way to far with the PCs able to kill arch fiends BEFORE they even become epic. Good job guys!
gojumamoru 08-11-07, 07:03 PM	I'm going to ignore stats and go by concept alone since in the end stats (especially for unique monsters should be up the the DM). So who is more powerful the firefighter or the fire? Man or nature? Gods are active and oftentimes focused creatures that reflect much of what is in thier followers. Demons and devils are raw concepts who live in a landscape made of that concept. Just like man lives among nature so do gods live among the outer planes. My guess is that if Asmodeus wanted to boot a god out of his world.. then he has all the devils in the universe at his command. Of course does he really think that way? He is focused evil working for the greater evil. But lets say a god that wasn't so evil tried to live in baator? I would guess that god wouldn't be able to last very long.
Kain Darkwind 08-11-07, 08:38 PM	Well another problem you run into is current flavor being based on the current stat setup (where gods are more powerful). The end of that six part Dark Elf series comes to mind, where a lesser (intermediate?) god pimp smacks around a supposed yugoloth archfiend, volunteering to kill the General of Gehenna. Elminster in Hell features the Simbul tearing through several outcast archdevils, who were 'on par with Dispater or Mammon, so long as the confrontation was one on one, without armies and political influence'. It then stands to reason, that the Simbul could tear through Dispater or Mammon if they didn't have their armies and faced her in person. And of course, a mortal paladin king chased Orcus across the planes. This is all Forgotten Realms setting. In the Greyhawk novels, the Justicar, who I saw statted at 11th level, killed Lolth by dropping her in holy water. The Return to the Temple of Elemental Evil saw the defeat of Imix. And in Gygax's novels, the god Nerull's aspect Infestix (or something like that) completely commanded the awe and fear of assembled archfiends including the dread Anthraxus. So....flavor wise, the planar powers get punked on a regular basis. It's like people who can't believe Hal Jordan clocked Batman in the jaw because "no one hits the Batman". Batman doesn't do anything BUT get clobbered. All the time. And it seems that the archfiends do too.
Raymond_Luxury_Yacht 08-11-07, 09:35 PM	So....flavor wise, the planar powers get punked on a regular basis. It's like people who can't believe Hal Jordan clocked Batman in the jaw because "no one hits the Batman". Batman doesn't do anything BUT get clobbered. All the time. And it seems that the archfiends do too. Just to make a point, Batman proceeded to hit Hal several issues later. Hard enough to knock him out and draw blood. Actually, this probably works well, since fiends are later depicted as visiting similar things on deities.
pbs 08-11-07, 10:05 PM	The gods are much more powerful than the archfiends (except for deified archfiends like Tenebrous and Iuz (some sources also place Lolth as a former archfiend), and possibly the Baernoloths (Who are sort of like ARCH-archfiends, being a cut above the two "standard" yugoloth archfiends (the Oinoloth and the General of Gehenna)), but under the Planescape cosmology, they have been missing in action for hundreds of centuries). However, under second edition planescape, any deities that interfered with the blood war would gradually waste away into nothing (I think). deified fiends kicking a god's butt makes way more sence to me, perhaps god-hood is just a level they have acheved over time.
setekh 08-11-07, 10:07 PM	It's entirely situational. If it's on the prime material or the domain of a deity, the deity has the advantage. If it's in Baator the archdevil has the advantage (see Prince Levistus causing Set's deific domain to physically shrink as he and Set stew in a conflict of wills. Set is very much on the losing end of that). If it's in the Abyss, the Abyssal Lord has the advantage. Speaking of which, why is a C/E deity even IN the Nine hells?! Mind you I ignored the entire Egyptian Pantheon as being based upon late Egyptian stylings and not of the true spirit of it so..
Shemeska the Marauder 08-11-07, 10:20 PM	The end of that six part Dark Elf series comes to mind, where a lesser (intermediate?) god pimp smacks around a supposed yugoloth archfiend, volunteering to kill the General of Gehenna. The same book depicts yugoloths as coming from larvae, tanar'ri being specifically harmed by lightning, etc. so I'm not going to put much weight in terms of planar lore there, because it didn't follow the body of planar lore in many cases. Elminster in Hell features the Simbul tearing through several outcast archdevils, who were 'on par with Dispater or Mammon, so long as the confrontation was one on one, without armies and political influence'. It then stands to reason, that the Simbul could tear through Dispater or Mammon if they didn't have their armies and faced her in person. The Simbul is the new Waldorf. :rolleyes: And of course, a mortal paladin king chased Orcus across the planes. Did he? Or do people labor under the delusion that those events actually happened? We shall see, I say with a glimmer in my fiendish little eyes. In the Greyhawk novels, the Justicar, who I saw statted at 11th level, killed Lolth by dropping her in holy water. Though those novels were non-canon. And in Gygax's novels, the god Nerull's aspect Infestix (or something like that) completely commanded the awe and fear of assembled archfiends including the dread Anthraxus. Gygax's novels are irrelevant to the planes unless you're in Gygax's homebrew home. His vision of the planes and their dynamics and politics has incredibly little in common with the planes as they are now.
Shemeska the Marauder 08-11-07, 10:22 PM	Speaking of which, why is a C/E deity even IN the Nine hells?! There isn't. Set is LE. 3e Deities and Demigods presented a CE version of Set in a standalone Egyptian pseudo-setting with its own cosmology. The Set in mainstream D&D through the editions (most recently in the Fiendish Codex II) living in Stygia is solidly LE.
pbs 08-11-07, 11:04 PM	So who is more powerful the firefighter or the fire? Man or nature? Gods are active and oftentimes focused creatures that reflect much of what is in their followers. Demons and devils are raw concepts who live in a landscape made of that concept. Just like man lives among nature so do gods live among the outer planes. This illustration is hardly accurate. The gods manipulate their landscapes with a merest mood swing. a more likely comparison would be wildfires to earthquakes. So far the only thing I've been convinced of is that there all related in some way and not really different creatures. perhaps God, Devil, and Demon are the wrong thing to call them.
Shemeska the Marauder 08-11-07, 11:16 PM	The gods manipulate their landscapes with a merest mood swing. Within a finite range they can, like a man carving his ideas into the stone of a canyon, manipulating a foreign environment by effort, whereas an archfiend and its ruled layer are effectively the same entity, and the archfiend can manipulate the environment across the entirety of that layer by force of will.
pbs 08-11-07, 11:55 PM	Within a finite range they can, like a man carving his ideas into the stone of a canyon, manipulating a foreign environment by effort, whereas an archfiend and its ruled layer are effectively the same entity, and the archfiend can manipulate the environment across the entirety of that layer by force of will.You have effectively said that they can both do the the same thing. In your opinion the fiends have more range. Is that what you are saying?
Shemeska the Marauder 08-12-07, 12:42 AM	You have effectively said that they can both do the the same thing. In your opinion the fiends have more range. Is that what you are saying? Archfiends control entire layers of a plane, or entire planes. Gods have a similar level of control but over a much more limited range. That's what I'm saying.
tridiak 08-12-07, 03:28 AM	My little opinion : gods are usually much more powerful, but since Devil Lords and whatnot are personifications of their plane, I believe the plane itself will support the lord if required to keep gods in check.
ChaosVirus 08-12-07, 07:23 AM	There isn't. Set is LE. 3e Deities and Demigods presented a CE version of Set in a standalone Egyptian pseudo-setting with its own cosmology. The Set in mainstream D&D through the editions (most recently in the Fiendish Codex II) living in Stygia is solidly LE. Which is why you never use D&D as a source for an essay on egyption mythology. =P Which as I remember, he was chaos based. But then again I have always cringed at why baphomet was made a minotaur. Even though the demon in the abyss by that name is quite cool.
Mirtek 08-12-07, 08:30 AM	Archfiends control entire layers of a plane, or entire planes. Gods have a similar level of control but over a much more limited range. That's what I'm saying. There are gods controlling ifinite layers and archfiends controlling limited layers. The question would be why not all choose an infinite domain over a limited domain.
Sundragon 08-12-07, 08:50 AM	I think the only real answer to this question is "It depends on the setting you are using." In Greyhawk if I am correct, the gods are not dependant on worship for continued existence. Their influence on rhe world may be dependant on this, but not whether or not they exist in their perspective realms. In this setting the Archdevils are not gods according to the newest conceits of the RAW and that's that. Gods win. Also, these gods are older than demons and devils of all kinds according to the most recent materials on the subject. In the FR setting, the gods very existance is dependant on the number of worshippers they have and perhaps can be threatened via some diabolical plot to slay their worshippers. However, there is no contest in regards to raw power, the gods win hands down. In Midnight, Dragonlance, Dawnforge, etc. and other settings these archfiends either don't exist, serve the gods or are of no consequence to the gods, if there are gods that interact with the world. In Eberron I'm not so sure. In the Planescape setting, Shemeska is correct on all points. In YOUR campaign, you decide. Trust me, no one wants a sweeping canon pronouncement on this because it will make people unhappy. Fiend fanboys will go berserk if Asmodeus is unquestioningly a planer punk compared to Nerull, Chemosh, Bane, or other evil gods. Those, like myself who see fiends as nothing more than useful and interesting horrors from the outer planes, but nothing in comparison to gods will be disappointed to see Asmodeus and Demorgorgon becoming real threats to the gods. Sundragon
ripvanwormer 08-12-07, 10:12 AM	Well another problem you run into is current flavor being based on the current stat setup (where gods are more powerful). The end of that six part Dark Elf series comes to mind, where a lesser (intermediate?) god pimp smacks around a supposed yugoloth archfiend, volunteering to kill the General of Gehenna. Well, he's a ultroloth, probably with class levels. The only reason to think of Inthracis as an "archfiend" is his equivalent in the Great Wheel. Taking the book at face value, though, it's a story about a lesser god pimp-smacking an ultroloth. This shouldn't be particularly controversial in itself. It doesn't really say anything about archfiends - a literal reading would be that the yugoloths in the FR cosmology don't have any of those. I'll grant you your point about the Simbul, however. And in Gygax's novels, the god Nerull's aspect Infestix (or something like that) completely commanded the awe and fear of assembled archfiends including the dread Anthraxus. In Gygax's novels, Infestix was himself a yugoloth (they call him a daemon regularly), so this is a poor example. It was his avatar, Nerull, who was a god. Nerull was just the way he manifested on a single world. The daemon king Infestix was his greater self. The only archfiends he commanded the awe and fear of were the Diseased Eight, and other assorted night hags and dreggals in his court - that is, the unique daemons that were his subordinates. Graz'zt certainly didn't fear him.
Sundragon 08-12-07, 10:20 AM	Isn't more interesting that each setting has its own ground rules on how to handle this issue as opposed to the flavor of the month canon thought up by a given designer whose concern is not with the internal consistancy and atmophere of any individual setting? Just note how things have changed over the years between editions of the game. It is obvious that many changes do not take into consideration previous canon or assumptions therefore it behooves each individual setting to have its own way of approaching the fiend vs. god controversy. Any canon that exists now will be contridicted in the future, often in ways that do not allow for easy retcon of previous material. Sundragon
ripvanwormer 08-12-07, 10:28 AM	how can this statement be correct? Since the gods created the mortal races. The myths say they did, but who wrote the myths? The priests of the gods wrote them, and they're, needless to say, biased. The question of who created whom isn't answered firmly in D&D, but I'd caution you against taking what priests say too literally. The dwarves would credit Moradin with the creation of the world regardless of whether he had any role in it or not, and the elves certainly don't think Moradin made the world. The kobolds claim Garl was the aggressor against Kurtulmak, while the gnomes say that Kurtulmak captured Garl first. Myths contradict each other. They aren't history. But there are D&D sources that say the various pantheons were born from the myths of their followers, rather than vice versa. The elves wondered where they came from, and Corellon came into being, evolving from a local nature spirit. Corellon is real, and powerful, but he may not have done all that his priests claim he did. Elves might well have evolved naturally from more primitive hominids, and the gods might have nothing to do with them. Or Corellon might have been created from the beliefs of an older race, and created the elves after all. It is the concept of 'free will' that allows the devils and demons to exist. You could argue that it's the same for the gods. If people couldn't choose to worship them, they wouldn't exist either. Have you read Bastion of Broken Souls? It talks about a pact that existed before the gods came into being, where they were forbidden from interfering with souls before their birth under penalty of annihilation. There are older forces, older and more powerful than the gods, who demand that mortals must have free will to choose who to worship, and allowing the deities to mold them before their first incarnation would rob them of that. the devils were the subjects of the gods before the primevil pact Most likely, this is not true. It's a myth, and you must beware of myths. There are myths in other sources that contradict this.
ripvanwormer 08-12-07, 10:31 AM	Isn't more interesting that each setting has its own ground rules on how to handle this issue No. It's not interesting to me at all, and I don't agree that you're right. Settings are just as vulnerable to "flavor of the monthism" as generic products are. It's not entirely clear that the gods of Oerth aren't affected by their worshipers, regardless of what the generic book Deities & Demigods says. The paradox of belief, the "chicken or the egg" arguments, the role of the planes and their rulers versus the role of the gods who squat in them - those issues are quite interesting enough in their own right, and any kind of definitive answer is less interesting. Trying to sew things up neatly in different settings just makes those settings more limited in their possibilities. Generally speaking, a setting where the gods did everything is boring to me, and the fact that another setting might give them a more limited role elsewhere doesn't change this.
Sundragon 08-12-07, 10:31 AM	It would be important to note here that only in the Planescape cannon are gods necessarily relative newbies on the cosmic scene reated by the beliefs of mortals. That is a new D&D conceit. In the FR for example, the Goddesses Shar and Sylune created the world prior to the existance of any mortals. It was the high god of the the setting Ao who insituted the need for worshippers as a requirement of continued existance. In other settings this is not the case unless one is going with Planescape assumptions which I and many others do not. IMC, gods are THE bad***s, archfiends are lesser creatures who serve the ultimate purposes of dark gods whether they choose to or not. When a fiend such as Asmodeus acts in a tyrannical fashion, he is unwittingly serving the purposes of the god of tyranny. The gods according to canon for Greyhawk is far older than Asmodeus as the Fiendish Codex indicates. Asmodeus served them according to canon (or the closest we have to current canon on the subject). Sundragon
Sundragon 08-12-07, 10:35 AM	No. And why on earth should each setting be beholden to one set of myths regarding the metaphysics of the planes and their inhabitants? The value of each setting having its own internal consistancy is that it allows for each to have it own uniqueness free of the whims of the newest designer hired to write up a book on the archfiends for example. Most folks play homebrew settings anyway or settings very loosely based on core assumptions and many play on excellent pre-published settings by WoTC and others that need backgrounds that speak to the world itself, its myths, legends and cultures. Sundragon
Sundragon 08-12-07, 10:41 AM	No. It's not interesting to me at all, and I don't agree that you're right. Settings are just as vulnerable to "flavor of the monthism" as generic products are. It's not entirely clear that the gods of Oerth aren't affected by their worshipers, regardless of what the generic book Deities & Demigods says. I see you added more to your post. The "generic" deities and demigods book is the RAW core for the game as is. Greyhawk is the default for what its worth and it is so vanilla that I see no need to inflict its assumptions upon all other settings in the D&D game. I never DMed Greyhawk when it was more than the vague creature it is now and have no intention on doing so now. The paradox of belief, the "chicken or the egg" arguments, the role of the planes and their rulers versus the role of the gods who squat in them - those issues are quite interesting enough in their own right, and any kind of definitive answer is less interesting. Trying to sew things up neatly in different settings just makes those settings more boring and limited in their possibilities. You are merely agreeing with me in your own words. I am arguing against universal sweeping pronouncements on this issue that attempt to bind all settings and cosmologies to it. What is in core works for core. Settings outside of core ie. Greyhawk, need their own stories and validity. If for example, Asmodeus is an elder god in core as was once assumed or he is a fallen celestial as the new core seems to indicate that's fine for core. However, it holds NO wated whatsoever in the Forgotten Realms, Eberron, Krynn, Midnight, Dawnforge, Iron Kingdoms, Arcanis, or any other non core setting for that manner. If in the Forgotten Realms Asmodeus can be bit*h slapped by Bane then cool. If on Eberron he is considered a Rakshasa Raja then cool. This is the way it should be. Sundragon
ripvanwormer 08-12-07, 11:09 AM	That is a new D&D conceit. Not really. The Lankhmar setting used that "conceit," and it was part of D&D since 1980. In the FR for example, the Goddesses Shar and Sylune created the world prior to the existance of any mortals. It was the high god of the the setting Ao who insituted the need for worshippers as a requirement of continued existance. The former is just a myth, and shouldn't necessarily be taken literally. The latter statement's been contradicted in various FR products. Amaunator died of lack of belief millennia before Ao made that "pronouncement." Millennia before that, Ghaundaur lost a lot of his power because his worshipers, the sentient oozes, died out. Moander lost most of his power with his worshiper base as well. It sounds like Ao was just describing what been happening all along anyway. IMC, gods are THE bad***s, archfiends are lesser creatures who serve the ultimate purposes of dark gods whether they choose to or not. When a fiend such as Asmodeus acts in a tyrannical fashion, he is unwittingly serving the purposes of the god of tyranny. That's silly. There are many, many gods of tyranny, and there is only one Asmodeus. If, in your campaign, there is only one god of tyranny, than I agree with you absolutely, but in "canon" D&D that concept doesn't work. The gods according to canon for Greyhawk is far older than Asmodeus as the Fiendish Codex indicates. Asmodeus served them according to canon (or the closest we have to current canon on the subject). Core D&D isn't Greyhawk. It sometimes uses Greyhawk proper nouns, but just as often it'll make things up on the spot that have no place on the world of Oerth (for example, the god Zarus from Races of Destiny, or the nation of Kaddas from Cityscape). Things thrown out in core supplements don't necessarily become "canon" for Greyhawk. The myth in Fiendish Codex II is presented as just that - a myth. It isn't intended to be and cannot be interpreted as a literal recounting of events by anyone who's aware of the background of these things. That's why they call it a myth. St. Cuthbert, for example, is expressedly an ascended mortal and could not have been around at the time portrayed in the myth - therefore, he must be a placeholder for the true, more primal entity involved. Heironeous, Hextor, and even Set really couldn't have been around at the time, either. Guide to Hell had another version of the myth that's every bit as valid, as did Hellbound: The Blood War and several other sources. "Flavor of the Monthism" is only a problem if you assume, arbitrarily, that discussion of previous works must be forever silenced when the Lastest Thing comes around, and if you insist on interpreting things that are in-character myths as if they were out-of-character rules. This is just bad reading comprehension. Trying to make Planescape out to be something separate from the other campaign worlds is awkward and futile, since it was never separated from them at the time. Things that appeared in the Planescape line are still part of the canon, to one degree or another, of every campaign world (at least those that existed in 2e, though I would argue that they're now a fundamental part of D&D in general). This is a good thing, since this sort of cross-seeding makes everything richer and more interesting. The Forgotten Realms is good, but the Forgotten Realms + Planescape + Greyhawk + Core more complex and full. The D&D monomyth is a fascinating thing that improves every setting, and the brittle limitations and divisions you're rooting for make everything more two-dimensional and monochromatic. In my opinion, of course, but then I have no motivation to champion anyone else's.
Sundragon 08-12-07, 12:46 PM	Not really. The Lankhmar setting used that "conceit," and it was part of D&D since 1980. In one setting doesn't make it universal truth for the core. That is Leiber's idea for his setting. The former is just a myth, and shouldn't necessarily be taken literally. Of course its a myth because isn't your preferred cosmology. :D That's silly. There are many, many gods of tyranny, and there is only one Asmodeus. If, in your campaign, there is only one god of tyranny, than I agree with you absolutely, but in "canon" D&D that concept doesn't work. It doesn't work in a giant unweildy metaverse where every single world is part of the same prime material plane surrounded by crystal spheres. In self contained cosmologies, there is ONLY ONE god of tyranny, In the Forgotten Realms setting Bane is the god of tyranny, the only god of tyranny and thus he is not one of many petty gods of tyranny compared to Asmodeus' gloriousness. Your conception of things is "silly" outside of the planescape and spelljammer cosmologies. Core D&D isn't Greyhawk. It sometimes uses Greyhawk proper nouns, but just as often it'll make things up on the spot that have no place on the world of Oerth (for example, the god Zarus from Races of Destiny, or the nation of Kaddas from Cityscape). Things thrown out in core supplements don't necessarily become "canon" for Greyhawk. Unless I see Greyhawk canon that supercedes the Dieties and Demigods, the Manual of the Planes, The Fiendish Codexes, etc. I'll assume, like many others do, that this stands as canon for the core world which is, at least in name, Greyhawk. The myth in Fiendish Codex II is presented as just that - a myth. It isn't intended to be and cannot be interpreted as a literal recounting of events by anyone who's aware of the background of these things. I never said it was stone hard fact, but as far as current canon goes, there isn't much else to go on. One can choose to go along with the assumptions of prior writers or go with the new myth. I prefer the new myth to the "Asmodeus is an elder god" hokum that reared its ugly head during the final death throws of 2e with the Guide to Hell travesty. Yeah, Jazarian, the coatle (sp?) god was suddenly, and I mean suddenly, an elder god as well. Talk about a canon rewrite of epic proportions. But considering that Asmodeus and his kin have been at best lesser gods and at worst glorified monsters in the earliest incarnations of D&D you seem to be choosing the canon rewrite that suits your fancy. That's why they call it a myth. St. Cuthbert, for example, is expressedly an ascended mortal and could not have been around at the time portrayed in the myth - therefore, he must be a placeholder for the true, more primal entity involved. Maybe you are right, maybe not. Maybe the new tale is just a myth. That's fine. Heironeous, Hextor, and even Set really couldn't have been around at the time, either. Guide to Hell had another version of the myth that's every bit as valid, as did Hellbound: The Blood War and several other sources. Wow, that is an assumption. How exactly do you know that these gods couldn't have been around? Is there some canon source I am not aware of. I mean canon for the core rules, not planescape. You do realize that the assumptions of Planescape hold no weight in regards to either the vanilla core setting or other settings? Guide to Hell!?!?!?! You do realize that this book is a complete and utter rewrite of everything that came before. There has never been, until that time any intimation in any source I am aware of that Asmodeus was a elder god of some kind. He was a friggin devil for god's sake. The big boss devil who the DM had the option of turning into a lesser god if he so chose. Suddenly he and Jazarian...JAZARIAN for christ's sake!!!! are both primal powers of law. I don't even recall any Planescape canon that went this far. Planescape kept both the gods and the archfiends as beings beyond stats altogether but never elevated Asmodeus to the ranks a Guide to Hell did. "Flavor of the Monthism" is only a problem if you assume, arbitrarily, that discussion of previous works must be forever silenced when the Lastest Thing comes around, and if you insist on interpreting things that are in-character myths as if they were out-of-character rules. This is just bad reading comprehension. Get over yourself there with the subtle insults. First my ideas are silly and then I cannot comprehend well enough to understand as well as you....right. We aren't analyzing sacred scripture here where it needs to be deciphered and comprehended. There are inconsistancies because there were different writers with different tastes who often failed to fact check or simply felt things needed a rewrite and did so. In looking for the holy grail of fiendish power contained in canon, you have to shoehorn divergent stories from settings with different settings, by many different authors and make them fit together by looking for clues as to the "truth" when there is none. You think the Guide to Hell is a valid myth, I think it is complete rubbish fit to line a litter box. Who is right? Neither one of us is right, the confusion created by various authors, designers and differing D&D edition assumptions makes it impossible without an "on high" pronouncement from WoTC. This will never come because fiend fan boys will loose their mind if Asmodeus is "only" a lesser god. Those who think thats where he belongs will be horrified if he is really and truly an elder god. Trying to make Planescape out to be something separate from the other campaign worlds is awkward and futile, since it was never separated from them at the time. Things that appeared in the Planescape line are still part of the canon, to one degree or another, of every campaign world (at least those that existed in 2e, though I would argue that they're now a fundamental part of D&D in general). It IS seperate. It is a metasetting that attempts to combine all settings in a kind of D&D star trek. I liked Planescape when I ran it, its cool as it is but is is only a setting. There are things in PS that are still included because some of it still works for canon, but much will never be included because WoTC really wants to keep the settings seperate. They give lip service to certain PS concepts and that is all. Certain aspects of PS are fundamental to vanilla D&D canon but have NO say over setting specific details of the planes, the gods, etc. This is a good thing, since this sort of cross-seeding makes everything richer and more interesting. The Forgotten Realms is good, but the Forgotten Realms + Planescape + Greyhawk + Core more complex and full. The D&D monomyth is a fascinating thing that improves every setting, and the brittle limitations and divisions you're rooting for make everything more two-dimensional and monochromatic. In my opinion, of course, but then I have no motivation to champion anyone else's. So says you. I think that PS needs to be where it is, placed in little bits and pieces throughout the core but having no authority over individual settings. FR is connected to PS only if the DM rules it is. Cosmologically, outside of the possibility of using the plane of shadow to traverse entire cosmologies, there is no connection to the great wheel, to sigil, or any of PS's core assumptions. This is how it is and how it should be IMO. This way I don't have to give a rat's arse if someone bites the bullet and makes Asmodeus officially an elder god for core because he is no such thing in FR, Eberron, Greyhawk (since you insist that core and GH are seperate) or any setting I care to run. He can devour the entirety of the multiverse and thankfully would only impact the Great Wheel and as far as I'm concerned he can eat it all up....yummmy.:D Sundragon
pbs 08-12-07, 01:47 PM	wow this is almost exactly how it happened before.:) rip and Shem,are a cornucopia of information. man, am i glad sundragon has the chops to head to head with them. I surly do not. My information comes from 3rd E, publications and novels both render moot early on. however I believe the relative history's of the entities are relevant only to the question, who's older? but the question is who more powerful, I hate to do this but, Imagen a one on one bout in an nonaligned plane. who wins?
Taeldrin Laesrash 08-12-07, 01:57 PM	however I believe the relative history's of the entities are relevant only to the question, who's older? but the question is who more powerful, I hate to do this but, Imagen a one on one bout in an nonaligned plane. who wins? It depends on the edition and sources. Novels and supplements have conflicting information on power levels, it seems. The god is more powerful if you interpret it one way, the planar lord the other.
Sundragon 08-12-07, 03:10 PM	wow this is almost exactly how it happened before.:) rip and Shem,are a cornucopia of information. man, am i glad sundragon has the chops to head to head with them. I surly do not. My information comes from 3rd E, publications and novels both render moot early on. however I believe the relative history's of the entities are relevant only to the question, who's older? but the question is who more powerful, I hate to do this but, Imagen a one on one bout in an nonaligned plane. who wins? As it stands right now, using the core assumptions and core stat blocks, the gods, nearly any god actually, would destroy Asmodeus and all the archfiends. There is really no contest. I am no fan of statting out gods, but all we have to go on are what is in the rulebooks and insofar as things stand rght now, the archfiends don't have a chance. Interestingly enough the book Elminster in hell has a pretty good authors rendition of what a deity can do to fiends when ******. Its not pretty though it is a Forgotten Realms book the scene in the book I am referring to seems accurate in regards to the mayhem a god could cause even in the lower planes themselves. Sundragon
Witch 08-12-07, 03:52 PM	Which is why you never use D&D as a source for an essay on egyption mythology. =P Which as I remember, he was chaos based. Back that up with references. One of the two plausible origins of his name is that it means "Pillar of Stability". Hardly sounds chaotic to me. The problem is that he wasn't evil either, for most of his existence.
ripvanwormer 08-12-07, 04:12 PM	In one setting doesn't make it universal truth for the core. I didn't say it did. I said it wasn't new. Of course its a myth because isn't your preferred cosmology. No, it's a myth because it says it is. Explicitly. If you don't believe the text when the text itself says it's a myth, why would you believe any other part of the text? You seem to be wanting to cite the official sources without citing the parts that are inconvenient to your argument. You can't have it both ways. It doesn't work in a giant unweildy metaverse where every single world is part of the same prime material plane surrounded by crystal spheres. I'm talking about what's official in some of the texts you're relying on for your argument. Since you mentioned the Fiendish Codex II, you'll note that many deities are mentioned there (Set and Hecate, and several minor divinities on the Street of Gods). Fiendish Codex I mentions many more from the Forgotten Realms, Dragonlance, and "Earth" settings. We can conclude from this that the sources you're relying on for your arguments take place in just such an "unwieldy" multiverse. Where, as I said, your idea that Asmodeus is subordinate to a god of Tyranny doesn't work. It is, in fact, silly, and it's not an insult to you (subtle or otherwise) to say so. Yes, I agree with you (and said so before) that it works fine in a tiny, closed cosmology without multiple gods sharing the same portfolio, but the "core" books we're talking about aren't set in such a cosmology. Unless I see Greyhawk canon that supercedes the Dieties and Demigods, the Manual of the Planes, The Fiendish Codexes, etc. I'll assume, like many others do, that this stands as canon for the core world which is, at least in name, Greyhawk. You're welcome to assume as you wish, and I'll continue to assume, as many others do, that unless I see Greyhawk canon that supersedes Planescape, that still stands for canon in Greyhawk as well. St. Cuthbert is young enough that living dragons still remember his mortal days (Races of Destiny). He was probably a mortal as recently as 600 years ago (Dragon #100). Since the Reckoning alone was thousands of years ago (A Paladin in Hell, Guide to Hell, Hellbound, Dragon #223), Asmodeus' fall (which was of course long before the Reckoning) was long before the birth of St. Cuthbert. Therefore, the myth that places St. Cuthbert at the fall of Asmodeus must have been the elaborations of some priest, not an accurate recounting of historical events. Since the FCII myth doesn't pretend to describe history, only a deeper ahistorical "truth," there's no conflict. Heironeous and Hextor are older than St. Cuthbert, but they're not much older than the Oeridian calendar (which is about 1200 years old). The myths associated with them are all within that threshold. Their myths (in Tome of Magic and their recent "Core Beliefs" Dragon articles) have them as childhood friends, but enemies quickly into adolescence. The myth in FCII describes very ancient, primal events - the origin of the apprehension of evil by the gods of pure Law. Heironeous and Hextor, whose discovery of evil took quite a different path, in a multiverse where the concepts were already well-known, don't fit into it. They're relatively youthful gods, sons of the demigoddess Alia. The FCII myth presents them as primal beings around at the dawn of creation, which is simply not what they are. Of course, myths are often updated for more recent times. The story in FCII is told in a way that modern people would understand, rather than containing arcane names like Primus or Zaphkiel or whatever beings were around in those long-ago days, so it uses more familiar names, aimed at a religious audience. There are other myths, like the yugoloth myths in Hellbound, the story of the Twin Serpents from Guide to Hell, and the story of the Powers of Creation in the Planescape Monstrous Compendium Appendix One that tell the same myth in different ways. Each contradicts the others. Like all myths, they're all "true," regardless of whether or not they happened. I prefer the new myth to the "Asmodeus is an elder god" hokum that reared its ugly head during the final death throws of 2e with the Guide to Hell travesty. Fair enough. Those aren't the only two myths on the subject, however. It's not the rigidly binary, either-or choice you're depicting it as. Neither of those myths - none of them - should be interpreted literally. You do realize that this book is a complete and utter rewrite of everything that came before. It's actually not that far off from any other source, if you're not imprisoned by literalism. If you keep in mind that it's just another myth among others, you can see the similarities rather than the differences. You think the Guide to Hell is a valid myth I didn't say that. It's another variation of the myth, which a skeptical reader will keep in mind. It's another in-character text, and in-character texts don't get overwritten when new ones are introduced (unless they specifically say, for example, the Elder Book of Yob was mistranslated before, and it actually says this rather than that). They continue to exist within the game universe, and none of them are more "official" than any others. I have many problems with the Guide to Hell myth, but it's certainly as valid as the Fiendish Codex II one. That doesn't mean I think it's valid in some hypothetical absolute sense, but it's as valid. It IS seperate. No, it's not. It never was separate. It continues to be inseparable. There are Planescape references in several campaign-specific 2e books (for example, For Duty & Deity and Greyhawk: The Adventure Begins) and Planescape elements such as Sigil, the factions, various monsters and so on firmly embedded today in court. You're simply wrong. Planescape is certainly part of the canon for a variety of settings, if the word "canon" means anything at all (one could argue that it doesn't, in fact, mean anything when discussing Core, but then your claims that fiends have some "canonical" power level in Core fall apart). Fiendish Codex II declined to give any stats for the archfiends' "true" forms, giving only stats for their aspects, so it's impossible to compare them to deities using the most recent materials in any case. So says you. Yes, of course. Who did you think was talking? That seems a strange thing to say, because I thought I made it clear that I was only representing myself, and my own understanding of the various texts.
pbs 08-12-07, 05:07 PM	because I thought I made it clear that I was only representing myself, and my own understanding of the various texts.thank you for saying so.
Sundragon 08-12-07, 06:06 PM	I didn't say it did. I said it wasn't new. No, it's a myth because it says it is. Explicitly. If you don't believe the text when the text itself says it's a myth, why would you believe any other part of the text? You seem to be wanting to cite the official sources without citing the parts that are inconvenient to your argument. You can't have it both ways. I said that I am not claiming to be more right than you in regards to the these myths, I am saying that these things are less an issue of myth than they are an issue of rewrites and non-fact checked design decisions. That one is inherently no better than the other but that core is core and speaks only to core and not other settings. I'll quote myself: Who is right? Neither one of us is right, the confusion created by various authors, designers and differing D&D edition assumptions makes it impossible without an "on high" pronouncement from WoTC. This will never come because fiend fan boys will loose their mind if Asmodeus is "only" a lesser god. Those who think thats where he belongs will be horrified if he is really and truly an elder god. Conversely, you seem to be arguing that the core should intrude upon all other D&D settings and that this arrangement is more sensible than discreet, self contained settings that allow for their own truths and myths without Planescape making clueless berks of all of them. I'm talking about what's official in some of the texts you're relying on for your argument. Since you mentioned the Fiendish Codex II, you'll note that many deities are mentioned there (Set and Hecate, and several minor divinities on the Street of Gods). Fiendish Codex I mentions many more from the Forgotten Realms, Dragonlance, and "Earth" settings. The gods of earth have always been part of D&D lore though I personally think that stripped from their cultural assumptions they make for a chaotic mishmash. The fact that they are mentioned in the FC II and that some of them are worshipped on the FR is irrelevant to FR. The earth deities of core are most certainly not the earth deities of the FR cosmology. None of FR's deities dwell on God Street. Each is part of the FR cosmology which is entirely seperate from that of the core ie. the Great Wheel. I don't recal seeing any Krynnish or specifically FR deities mentioned in the FC II, but I may be mistaken. However, even if they are mentioned, it is irrelevant because in regards to a given setting, setting canon trumpts generic core rulings. We can conclude from this that the sources you're relying on for your arguments take place in just such an "unwieldy" multiverse. Where, as I said, your idea that Asmodeus is subordinate to a god of Tyranny doesn't work. It is, in fact, silly, and it's not an insult to you (subtle or otherwise) to say so. My arguments are from the position of assuming, as is officially the case, that each setting is self-contained though somehow connected cosmologies. They are seperate and what is truth in one is not truth in another. Yes, this leads to the foolishness of there actually being potentially countless Asmodeuses in the various cosmological hells and countless Orcuses in the various cosmological abysses. WoTC did this to have the freedom to work with each setting seperately so that if an FR author kills off Orcus, then it won't effect core. If Lolth ends up dead on the core, it won't effect FR in any way. This leads to myriad problems in a world hopping campaign and collapses in on itself when a group of PCs encounters 2 different tiamats when they travel from Greyhawk to FR but this is what happens when designers try to appeal to everyone and alienate no one. Yes, I agree with you (and said so before) that it works fine in a tiny, closed cosmology without multiple gods sharing the same portfolio, but the "core" books we're talking about aren't set in such a cosmology. The core must assume the official stance of WoTC in regards to the fact that cosmologies are officially distinct and no longer all on one prime material plane in a bunch of crystal spheres. Only core earth dieties and core Greyhawk deities are ever mentioned. You'll notice the absence of FR deities such as Mystra, Cyric, Torm and Bane in any core material. This is because core is for core. You're welcome to assume as you wish, and I'll continue to assume, as many others do, that unless I see Greyhawk canon that supersedes Planescape, that still stands for canon in Greyhawk as well. The Manual of the Planes, Deities and Demigods, and the FC books are core and are core for Greyhawk. I don't understand how you can cavalierly dismiss the fact the GH is the assumed core world. The fact that they add cities and concepts willy nilly just indicates that WoTC wanted a generic setting for their books. The setting itself only exists in any official capacity in the core. There is no GH setting outside of that used for generic core material. Planescape materials are given lip service because it is no longer a supported metasetting for the D&D universe the same way that the prior D&D metasetting Spelljammer gets a nod once and awhile though without any real depth. WoTC isn't willing to retcon them out of existance because the fan base is strong and they have no desire to alienate their customers to that degree. There is no current comprehensive metasetting for the D&D universe that ties it all together the way these prior settings did. What is written now in core supercedes planescape material in core where it must because PS no longer has any weight in individual settings. What is written in core is assumed to be true for Greyhawk which is the ONLY setting still using the great wheel cosmology and thus the only cosmology where Greyhawk fits as it relies very heavily on great wheel assumptions. St. Cuthbert is young enough that living dragons still remember his mortal days (Complete Divine). Since the Reckoning alone was thousands of years ago, Asmodeus' fall was long before the birth of St. Cuthbert. Therefore, the myth that places St. Cuthbert at the fall of Asmodeus must have been the elaborations of some priest, not an accurate recounting of historical events. Since the FCII myth doesn't pretend to describe history, only a deeper ahistorical "truth," there's no conflict. Heironeous and Hextor are older than St. Cuthbert, but they're not much older than the Oeridian calendar (which is about 1200 years old). Their myths (in Tome of Magic and their recent Dragon articles) have them as childhood friends, but enemies quickly into adolescence. The myth in FCII describes very ancient, primal events - the origin of the apprehension of evil by the gods of pure Law. Heironeous and Hextor, whose discovery of evil took quite a different path, in a multiverse where the concepts were already well-known, don't fit into it. They're relatively youthful gods, sons of the demigoddess Alia. I concede the point. Good working knowledge of GH you have (in Yoda voice). :) There are other myths, like the yugoloth myths in Hellbound, the story of the Twin Serpents from Guide to Hell, and the story of the Powers of Creation in the Planescape Monstrous Compendium Appendix One that tell the same myth in different ways. Each contradicts the others. Like all myths, they're all "true," regardless of whether or not they happened. Again, I concede the point. You are right, I wasn't thinking along these lines. No, it's not. It never was separate. It continues to be inseparable. There are Planescape references in several campaign-specific 2e books (for example, For Duty & Deity and Greyhawk: The Adventure Begins) and Planescape elements such as Sigil, the factions, various monsters and so on firmly embedded today in court. It is no longer valid for the totality of D&D settings because they all, according to official pronouncement, are completely seperate settings with different planer layouts, different hells, abysses, gods, cosmologies. There is no assumed connection between the worlds of D&D. Even the tenuous connection allowed between FR and core Greyhawk is only a thin retcon regarding the plane of shadow. But because each setting is self contained you encounted the problem of clones of Archfiends in each setting that uses them. Better off leaving them apart. However there is nothing saying that a DM can't make it as it was. But insofar as PS being the metasetting for all D&D worlds it just isn't anymore. You're simply wrong. Planescape is certainly part of the canon for a variety of settings, if the word "canon" means anything at all (one could argue that it doesn't, in fact, mean anything when discussing Core, but then your claims that fiends have some "canonical" power level in Core fall apart). Fiends do have certain power levels in certain settings though and in the modern era this is what counts. In FR the archfiends simply are not gods in any way save for a small number who have achieved godhood by acquiring worshippers. In Eberron they certainly are powerful Rakshasa Rajas or whatnot but they are not gods. Other settings have their own places for them if they fit at all but none of tem are bound by Plansecape's understanding of the multiverse. Core may have left this ambiguous but it is not ambiguous in FR or Eberron, the only two ramaining settings with official support. Fiendish Codex II declined to give any stats for the archfiends' "true" forms, giving only stats for their aspects, so it's impossible to compare them to deities using the most recent materials in any case. Impossible in core perhaps, but not in other settings such as those I already mentioned. In FR Bane trumps Asmodeus because he is not a god. In Eberron, the gods are beyond the ken of mortals though the Rakshasa Rajas are not...again Asmo is trumped by greater powers. I mention this because if you still believe Planscape to be a valid metasetting according to core and must by default be valid for the entirety of the D&D multiverse, then you have to explain how it can be that he can potentially be an elder god if the Guide to Hell is used as a benchmark while in the completely discreet hells of the FR cosmology, he is a powerful devil and nothing more. There is core for core and there are the rules for each setting and creatures that must abide by them. This alone IMO invalidates PS's hold on D&D as a valid metasetting for anything but the core at best. Sundragon
setekh 08-12-07, 06:21 PM	There isn't. Set is LE. 3e Deities and Demigods presented a CE version of Set in a standalone Egyptian pseudo-setting with its own cosmology. The Set in mainstream D&D through the editions (most recently in the Fiendish Codex II) living in Stygia is solidly LE. So, based upon the stuff shown in FC2, Set retains elements of his Egyptian styling yes? So why is a deity of Chaos, Disorder and hostility L/E
ripvanwormer 08-12-07, 06:50 PM	Conversely, you seem to be arguing that the core should intrude upon all other D&D settings and that this arrangement is more sensible than discreet, self contained settings that allow for their own truths and myths without Planescape making clueless berks of all of them. Yes, in a nutshell. The gods of earth have always been part of D&D lore though I personally think that stripped from their cultural assumptions they make for a chaotic mishmash. The fact that they are mentioned in the FC II and that some of them are worshipped on the FR is irrelevant to FR. The earth deities of core are most certainly not the earth deities of the FR cosmology. None of FR's deities dwell on God Street. Each is part of the FR cosmology which is entirely seperate from that of the core ie. the Great Wheel. You seem to have misunderstood. I wasn't making any claims for FR. I was talking about the multiverse in which FCI and FCII were based, which is a place where there are multiple pantheons with multiple gods of war, tyranny, chaos, and so on. It's a place where the Greek and Egyptian pantheons (or Olympian and Pharoanic, if you prefer) coexist with the gods of Oerth, Toril, and Krynn. The Faerunian and Krynnish deities were mentioned in FCI, not FCII. WoTC did this to have the freedom to work with each setting seperately so that if an FR author kills off Orcus, then it won't effect core. It's not as if WotC doesn't have the power to say "you can't kill Orcus" if that came up. This is a "problem" people keep mentioning, but it's really only a bogeyman, a mirage. It's not something that would ever actually cause anyone difficulties. They've resurrected Orcus before, after all. There are many difficulties with multiple cosmologies, however, that are very real. The editors of Dungeon were complaining (bitterly) about the problems they were having making a reasonable conversion for their Savage Tide adventure path for the Eberron setting, since so much of it takes place in the Abyss - a plane that doesn't exist in Eberron's cosmology. Someone trying to play adventures like Lord of the Iron Fortress or Expedition to the Demonweb Pits in a setting without Acheron or the Abyss would have great difficulties converting things, making those adventures much less playable for many people. And, honestly, the the newer cosmologies are all inferior to the Great Wheel in terms of depth, scope, flexibility and the amount of existing resources detailing them. The Great Wheel has been part of D&D for 30 years - it is D&D - and it's proven itself. Contrast that with the FR and Eberron cosmologies, which are little more than names with lists of outsiders linked to them - outsiders that must now be reinterpreted, since they were created with the Great Wheel in mind. The choice between the Great Wheel and the newer cosmologies is essentially a choice between gold and cardboard. The Great Wheel is rich and interesting, and it enriches all that it touches. The newer cosmologies are flat and bland, and they detract from the settings they're associated with. Many WotC designers feel the same way, which is why you continue to see references to planes like Gehenna, the Outlands, and Limbo in 3rd edition Forgotten Realms game supplements and novels. You'll notice the absence of FR deities such as Mystra, Cyric, Torm and Bane in any core material. Actually, I've noticed their presence. See Fiendish Codex I, page 156. I don't understand how you can cavalierly dismiss the fact the GH is the assumed core world. There are three Greyhawks, really. There's the more detailed version described in the Living Greyhawk Gazetteer (a 3e product) and elaborated still more in the Living Greyhawk Journals and various issues of Dragon and Dungeon Magazine, with most of the old canon still in play. Then there's the RPGA's Living Greyhawk campaign, which uses the above canon and adds a lot of material created by regional Triads. Being officially sanctioned and fully 3.5 compliant, it's certainly a form of Greyhawk that exists beyond whatever nouns are used in the core books. Then there's the simpler one, sometimes nicknamed "corehawk," which uses as its base the Dungeons and Dragons Gazetteer, an abridged version of the Living Greyhawk Gazetteer that was published specifically to be a simpler resource for core developers (according to D&D manager Ryan Dancey at the time). You can, if you like, add to this whatever specifically Greyhawk things have been introduced in the various core supplements. These core supplements don't really reference the D&D Gazetteer, though, and since 3.5 they no longer necessarily assume Oerth as the base setting. For example, the background of the city of Kaddistrei in Cityscape doesn't really fit into any of these three versions of Greyhawk. I've also seen quotes from designers who've stated point blank that Greyhawk isn't really the "core world" anymore - the designer used as an example the Eberron monsters (changelings, warforged, shifters, etc.) that appeared in the MMIII; these aren't, according to him, now Greyhawk monsters just because they've appeared in a core book - it's just evidence of D&D's current worldlessness. There's a thread about this in the Greyhawk forum of these boards - I can find it if you're interested. WoTC isn't willing to retcon them out of existance Therefore, they still exist. It is no longer valid for the totality of D&D settings It's valid until explicitly contradicted. Eberron has its own take on gods and fiends, and since it was never part of Planescape I wouldn't cite Planescape materials for that campaign. But the Forgotten Realms still has ties to the Great Wheel, ties which still explicitly exist in 3e.
Mirtek 08-12-07, 07:06 PM	I don't even recall any Planescape canon that went this far. Planescape kept both the gods and the archfiends as beings beyond stats altogether but never elevated Asmodeus to the ranks a Guide to Hell did. PS did stat the archfiends that were non-divine (like Graz'zt) while the archfiends that were divine were beyond stats. How a non-divine Graz'zt with gamestats could contest with beings like Demogorgong and Orcus (who both were lesser deities and beyond stats) was a contradiction that was never solved. It IS seperate. It is a metasetting that attempts to combine all settings in a kind of D&D star trek. I liked Planescape when I ran it, its cool as it is but is is only a setting. There are things in PS that are still included because some of it still works for canon, but much will never be included because WoTC really wants to keep the settings seperate. They give lip service to certain PS concepts and that is all. Certain aspects of PS are fundamental to vanilla D&D canon but have NO say over setting specific details of the planes, the gods, etc. It WAS one of the same until 3.x came around and seperated it. Events from PS had impact on all the prime worlds. One of the latest big events that happened in PS only but also affected all settings was the fiends losing their power to teleport. The whole event happened only in PS supplements yet the last FR adventurer featuring fiends that was published after these PS supplements said "Because of certain events from the PS setting all fiends in this module lack their standard teleportation powers".
Witch 08-12-07, 07:12 PM	So, based upon the stuff shown in FC2, Set retains elements of his Egyptian styling yes? So why is a deity of Chaos, Disorder and hostility L/E Could you tell me whenever he has been a deity of chaos and disorder? As he was the god of the desert, Set was associated with sandstorms, and desert caravans. Due to the extreme hostility of the desert environment, Set was viewed as immensely powerful, and was regarded consequently as the chief god. One of the more common epithets was that he was great of strength, and in one of the Pyramid Texts it states that the king's strength is that of Set. As chief god, he was patron of Lower Egypt, where he was worshiped, most notably at Ombos. The alternate form of his name, spelled Setesh (stš), and later Sutekh (swtḫ), designates this supremacy, the extra sh and kh signifying majesty. As the Ogdoad system became more assimilated with the Ennead one, as a result of creeping increase of the identification of Atum as Ra, itself a result of the joining of Upper and Lower Egypt, Set's position in this became considered. With Horus as Ra's heir on Earth, Set, previously the chief god, for Lower Egypt, required an appropriate role as well, and so was identified as Ra's main hero, who fought Apep each night, during Ra's journey (as sun god) across the underworld. Set only became known as evil because he was linked to the foreign oppression of the Hyksos.
Shemeska the Marauder 08-12-07, 11:23 PM	The core must assume the official stance of WoTC in regards to the fact that cosmologies are officially distinct and no longer all on one prime material plane in a bunch of crystal spheres. Only core earth dieties and core Greyhawk deities are ever mentioned. You'll notice the absence of FR deities such as Mystra, Cyric, Torm and Bane in any core material. This is because core is for core. Beshaba of the Faerunian pantheon is included in the Abyss in FC:I, along with other members of that pantheon and Hiddukel of the Krynnish pantheon. And beyond FC:I, as of 3.5 there's a cleric of Lathander among the persons of influence and importance in the Outlands gatetown of Ecstasy. Planescape materials are given lip service because it is no longer a supported metasetting for the D&D universe It's the assumed default cosmology, and the extent to which you then reference all of its previous depth and the other setting that co-existed as part of it, has varied depending on which author is doing the writing. The authors of the 3e Manual of the Planes faced massive creative restrictions which have since vanished (thus they had to tiptoe around the references to Loki, members of the Olypian pantheon, etc). The authors of FC:I went down pretty much the same path that I would have taken, while the authors of FC:II went almost as far, and in my own smaller contribution to planar lore, I've used PS material as a major resource and incorporated (or reconciled) it with 3.x material as needed.
vlndlcat0r 08-12-07, 11:32 PM	"Power" can be a very relative term that is not easily sated by referencing things like stats. For example, if we were to ask the deity that heard Orcus use the Final Word about his thoughts on the matter, he'd have a hard time answering. And I'm sure he had some pretty good stats compared to Orcus too. As was sad before, the stats given for the archfiends are for their aspects, and on top of that both of the Fiendish Codex books give progressions so you can make the archfiends as powerful as your campaign might need. The storyline is the core of a game, and stats should be merely a reflection of that. I do not think that the game designers have kept that in mind with some of their updates concerning beings of this power level. In the end, the story speaks for itself. The gods tread lightly in the lower planes. They have been killed and expelled when angering the fiends, and no amount of stat referencing will change that.
ChaosVirus 08-13-07, 07:21 AM	Could you tell me whenever he has been a deity of chaos and disorder? Set only became known as evil because he was linked to the foreign oppression of the Hyksos. Okay I cant find any sources on the chaos thing, which I am guessing I might have picked up from modern retellings of the myth (Apep was definatley chaos though wasnt she?) and I have heard he was not evil originally to. I am guessing the myth when he killed orsiris was after this change in alignment? Hmm was he interpretted as evil, in the myth when he *did somthing of a sexual nature* on horus's hands. If I remember correctly Horus's mother cut his hands off when she discovered what was on them =P (though I dont think Horus consented to sets pervy act anyway). Actually a bit unreleated, but which myth is correct, the one which portrays set as the father of anubis. Or the one in which set is infertile, and orsiris is the father when he mistakes Nephthys for his wife?
Witch 08-13-07, 07:30 AM	I'm not an expert on Egyptian mythology, but I'd not make rash judgement on myths being correct or incorrect. Myths evolve according to the political situations of their time. Particularly in the fairly liberal theological interpretations of Egypt, where even Aton was subsumed into the standard mythology again after Achnaton's monotheistic goals. And yes, Apep was more Chaos oriented.
Count Arioch the 28th 08-13-07, 09:49 AM	Who's more powerful, gods or planar entities? Whoever the DM says is more powerful.
TheHarrow 08-13-07, 10:41 AM	Could you tell me whenever he (Set) has been a deity of chaos and disorder? Set only became known as evil because he was linked to the foreign oppression of the Hyksos. Always. Are you a Khabit? Is this nWoD? No! Set is the God of Darkness and Evil. Arguments with the rightful planar land lord have caused him to uproot from Hell and claim his own Layer in the 'byss. (IMC and maybe yours as well. opinions?) He is a god of storms, hunting, and night after all. Deities and Demigods Set is Set how he was worshipped on earth, in a DnD context. LE Set is an ANACHRONISM fit only for the back of the 3e Ravenlft GM screen. Set is CE now, and Apep is his prison *****. Mythology as seen through the 3.5e prism. That said, i love Set. He is my favorite fantasy god because he so firmly represents the dark fantasy anti-hero to me. His alignment might as well be irrelevant because IMC he's a lovecraftian elder god (Seriously, wtf is a typhon beast and why does he have it for a head? Madness checks all around).
Witch 08-13-07, 11:49 AM	I want references to your claim that the Egyptian Set was worshiped as a chaotic god on earth. For the record - in a D&D context, reference to Serpent Kingdoms (among others) for the fact that Set is LE, not CE. (And Serpent Kingdoms is more recent than D&Dg.)
vegetalss4 08-13-07, 05:03 PM	hello i find this thread very interesting. now i am going to tell how it is in my world, i dont want to argue it, it MY world after all. gods are the most powerfull of the three, the only reason why they dont kill the demon lords/arch devils are the evil gods (and maybe the pact primeval depending on what that is, if anything) then the arch devils (theres nine of them and infinitive of the demon lord and the still wages war with tham and getting a draw) than the demon lords.
pbs 08-13-07, 05:46 PM	I have to admit that it does not look as if my original stance is supported by "lore" i still think a god should be more powerful but the others are most likely at that level of power as well.:gel:
Kain Darkwind 08-13-07, 09:22 PM	The same book depicts yugoloths as coming from larvae, tanar'ri being specifically harmed by lightning, etc. so I'm not going to put much weight in terms of planar lore there, because it didn't follow the body of planar lore in many cases. The Simbul is the new Waldorf. :rolleyes: Did he? Or do people labor under the delusion that those events actually happened? We shall see, I say with a glimmer in my fiendish little eyes. Though those novels were non-canon. Gygax's novels are irrelevant to the planes unless you're in Gygax's homebrew home. His vision of the planes and their dynamics and politics has incredibly little in common with the planes as they are now. Don't get me wrong; I largely agree with you and rip's stance on the matter. Power is dictated by 'turf'. On the other hand, when people are confused or have the idea that gods > archfiends, it is easy to see where it comes from. You have your justification for the events I've described, Rip has his, and I have mine. But not everyone is going to bother, they are going to see gods as the superiors.
AlanBruce 08-13-07, 10:55 PM	I do enjoy this topic alot because there is really no definitive answer. WOTC has left this wide open to individual interpretation... and that is perhaps the most clever move they could've pulled. We must come to understand that, ever since we were all infants, we were taught that God (or in some instances, Gods) were the all knowing, all powerful beings in creation. Later on, when most of us here in the boards at least began reading the old myths (be they greek, norse, african, or whatever), we saw great stories were the Gods were portrayed as the ultimate DMs of old: all powerful and omnipotent. When we discovered D&D and found Gods were part of the belief system, we were happy: all those stories from our fantasy ridden youth could now be incorporated into our own stories through role playing. To serve and fight for Odin, Zeus, Mystra, or Pelor made us happy and, in a way, comfortable. Then along come the enigmatic Planar Lords. Who are they? They aren't gods per se, but... they are as powerful as one... or even more so?! Impossible... right? This is D&D, people. And one thing this game has taught us all very well: There is ALWAYS a bigger fish out there...
AlanBruce 08-13-07, 10:55 PM	I do enjoy this topic alot because there is really no definitive answer. WOTC has left this wide open to individual interpretation... and that is perhaps the most clever move they could've pulled. We must come to understand that, ever since we were all infants, we were taught that God (or in some instances, Gods) were the all knowing, all powerful beings in creation. Later on, when most of us here in the boards at least began reading the old myths (be they greek, norse, african, or whatever), we saw great stories were the Gods were portrayed as the ultimate DMs of old: all powerful and omnipotent. When we discovered D&D and found Gods were part of the belief system, we were happy: all those stories from our fantasy ridden youth could now be incorporated into our own stories through role playing. To serve and fight for Odin, Zeus, Mystra, or Pelor made us happy and, in a way, comfortable. Then along come the enigmatic Planar Lords. Who are they? They aren't gods per se, but... they are as powerful as one... or even more so?! Impossible... right? This is D&D, people. And one thing this game has taught us all very well: There is ALWAYS a bigger fish out there...
TheHarrow 08-14-07, 01:46 AM	I want references to your claim that the Egyptian Set was worshiped as a chaotic god on earth. For the record - in a D&D context, reference to Serpent Kingdoms (among others) for the fact that Set is LE, not CE. (And Serpent Kingdoms is more recent than D&Dg.) You just answered yourself, dear Witch. You know very well what source the chaotic nature of Set's alignment comes from. He dwells within the 12 Hours of the NIght. And besides, Serpent Kindoms, though more current then D&Dg, is the reason we have pun pun. Besides again, can you show me your reference to where the Egyptian Set was ever worshiped by reptillian humanoids on earth? I doubt you can. Theres no right or wrong answer here, it's a matter of opinion and taste. I like my Set CE, you seem to prefer LE (But tell me why he's apparently losing ground to Levistus; i think i missed something there). Also, MOP makes no reference to Set when describing Stygia, though it does mention Sekolah (Riiiiicola!).
Blackened_Blade 08-14-07, 03:27 AM	so which is true? (it make the gods sound like imagery friends.) never mind i don't care, It it irrelevant to the debate, the origin of the gods devils and demons, or there age. Quite the contrary, it is absolutely important. For example, you said in earlier post that demons originate from their environment. This is true. Chaos is described as being constant, a sort of wellspring that existed before the gods. That explains why there are an infinite number of demons, all spawning on an infinite number of planes that are infinitely large. As for the whole discussion about worshipers creating and powering their gods, that depends on cosmology. If we look at the Forgotten Realms, for example, most gods exist and are powered by their worshipers. The only exception to this is the Ao, Selune, Shar, and Tempus, who was born from the war between Shar and Selune. Demons in this setting are, therefore more powerful because of survivability. An cliché interplanar invasion that attacks the gods’ power source will destroy the gods. Demons, on the other hand, cannot be destroyed because they spawn continuously in an environment that has existed before the gods. Sorry if someone else covered this.
Shemeska the Marauder 08-14-07, 06:35 AM	Also, MOP makes no reference to Set when describing Stygia, though it does mention Sekolah (Riiiiicola!). When the 3e Manual of the Planes was written, they were under some rather stiff creative restrictions that prevented overt mention of gods beyond the Greyhawk/Core pantheon. You'll still see Hades of the Olympian pantheon, but it dances around the issue, and Loki and his divine domain are described in Pandemonium, but they don't call him Loki, etc. Those restrictions are no longer in place, which is why the authors of FC:II were able to include Set's domain in Stygia, as well as other references to gods of the Egyptian and Olympian pantheons. FC:I did the same, and included gods from those pantheons, along with the Vedic, Chinese, Faerunian, and Krynnish pantheons.
Sundragon 08-14-07, 10:04 AM	After participating in this discussion I can easily see that there are valid arguments from both sides. There is evidence that the gods are more powerful, there is evidence that the Archfiends transcend "godhood" via their trans-cosmological nature. Ultimately it boils down to the setting you are running. If one is running a PS game with PS assumptions, I would think that maybe a fellow like Asmodeus is more powerful than many of the gods by nature that there is only one of him and many of them holding power only on certain worlds whereas he is on many of them. However, if the DM is running a setting like FR with the NEW COSMOLOGY and using only FR fluff to decide the way things are, then Asmodeus and the others are nothing but powerful sub-divine extra-planer entities who may threaten the gods through some evil plot to slay their worshippers, but outside of that would be obliterated in a toe-toe fight. If one is using Eberron the Archfiends are Rakshasa Rajas and hold no power equaivalent to the deities who are unknowable by mortals. If one is using Core/Greyhawk then the power of these beings is relative to the myths you are using to define them. If it is a Guide to Hell type myth you like you are going to have a far, far more powerful Asmodeus. If you go with the pact primeval myth then you have gods who are more powerful. And forget 3rd party settings like Krynn, Dark Sun, Midnight, Arcanis, Iron Kingdoms, Avadhnu, etc. Each of these have their own way of dealing with the issue, if the archfiends exist in these cosmologies at all. No one is officially and definitively right save as DMs of their own settings with the right of Kings....errr...DMs that allow them to decide the way things are for the setting they run. :) Starlion
Steely_Dan 08-14-07, 11:10 AM	Of course I haven't used any novel references in anything I've said. But you are using certain 2nd edition authors' takes on it, and material that was edited out of FC: II. Which is cool – I do the same thing.
Shemeska the Marauder 08-14-07, 03:27 PM	But you are using certain 2nd edition authors' takes on it, and material that was edited out of FC: II. I could back up my opinion on the topic with stuff I've written, but that's probably really gauche. http://arcanofox.foxpaws.net/shemmywink.gif
Ornum 08-14-07, 03:46 PM	I could back up my opinion on the topic with stuff I've written, but that's probably really gauche. http://arcanofox.foxpaws.net/shemmywink.gif Even though I'm in agreement with your opinions on the subject and ALL D&D games I run (whether FR, Planescape, Greyhawk, or my own creation) share the same ideas as far as the Archfiends/Gods angle is concerned, I have to point this out. While some people might reference a Dragon article to back themselves up, it would hardly be fair for you to do so.
Chanmanm8 08-14-07, 11:04 PM	Um...well...since so many people here seem to have extensive knowledge of older material...I was wondering if someone could clear something up for me (since I can't get a hold of the supplement). In the 2e Epic Vecna Adventures that went through three settings (these campaigns include "Vecna Lives", and most famously "Die Vecna Die"; they went through Ravenloft, GreyHawk, and Planescape I think...?), we saw a mortal turned god accomplish a number of things thought impossible to accomplish. Anywho, one of the last biggest things Vecna accomplished was getting into Sigil and almost overthrowing the Lady of Pain. What I am confused about is how this happened. One source vaguely mentioned he found some "way" to bypass the Lady, while another source commented that "the lady, for reasons of her own, allowed him into the city". So what actually allowed him to? I can't seem to find the campaign book at any of the hobby shops nearby. -Chanman
Shemeska the Marauder 08-15-07, 03:34 AM	What I am confused about is how this happened. Then you're in the same boat as everyone else. ;) Some might answer "bad design" as the reason it happened, since the module tosses out a bunch of notions that were frankly, antithetical to the setting, and have been roundly ignored since that point. I'm more inclined to say the events happened, but not for the same reasons as the module claims. My take is that the Lady allowed Vecna in, and ultimately hurled him out for reasons too obscure to fathom (we already know that she isn't bound by linear time and presumable views the multiverse on a rather massive scale, so we might simply lack the same scope to understand why she acted as she did). The module itself claimed that Vecna was in league with an entity known as The Serpent (which was, before that module, just Vecna's insanity and not an actual being), which was on the same power level and potentially shared origin as The Lady, but it never explained the reasoning behind any of that. Later material has either backed up the "Vecna was insane" angle, or had The Serpent be simply a personification of magic or epic level magic (which still however fails to give any rationalization of why such a thing would be helping Vecna break into Sigil).
WorldsLargestDungionFan 08-15-07, 09:03 AM	If the gods did indeed want to go agest the Arch Devils, Gods win If the Gods did indeed want to go agest the Abyssal Lords, Gods Win The problem is this, Gods I beleve want to teach eveyone and have as many people be Redeemed, Not only that but I Beleve the current people on the planet must relise that they can solve some of there own problems, and some prays dont need to be answerd, (Ever Seen Bruce allmighty? Kinda like that) And the Evil people in the world need to relise there doing stuff thats dumb in the long run, To long of a story to explain why, plus that will lean even more clouser to going into religius beleves of people, So Gods, Are trying to "ReDeem" Evil or at least some of the evil people, So I dont beleve Gods will just charge in there and Kick ass, Though besides the whole peace talk, Gods Kick there ass, they lose, Gods Win, No if and or buts about it, You allready lost, you cant say anything agest it becouse you dont excist to say it!
WorldsLargestDungionFan 08-15-07, 09:29 AM	Um...well...since so many people here seem to have extensive knowledge of older material...I was wondering if someone could clear something up for me (since I can't get a hold of the supplement). In the 2e Epic Vecna Adventures that went through three settings (these campaigns include "Vecna Lives", and most famously "Die Vecna Die"; they went through Ravenloft, GreyHawk, and Planescape I think...?), we saw a mortal turned god accomplish a number of things thought impossible to accomplish. Anywho, one of the last biggest things Vecna accomplished was getting into Sigil and almost overthrowing the Lady of Pain. What I am confused about is how this happened. One source vaguely mentioned he found some "way" to bypass the Lady, while another source commented that "the lady, for reasons of her own, allowed him into the city". So what actually allowed him to? I can't seem to find the campaign book at any of the hobby shops nearby. -Chanman There are many theroys, But hears mine Vecna is the lord of Secrets, Vecna went into the place becouse he learned some "Secrets" About the plane, Ok so he allmost won, but lost, Well Just imagin the Secrets Vecna learned!, If they play Vecna like he should be played, Then Lady of pain is going to lose next time around, inless alot of other gods come running in to save the day or something, Vecna is the only realy truely powerful evil god, at least in my mind, He is the lord of Secrets, He knows the Secrets, Hell in my games Vecna Leans the secret to come up with the true name of the lady of pain and use it agest her wish, Bam, Vecna wins at least in my games, that and alot of the players I talk to all kinda agree to that, not Exactly like that, but they all agree in some way or another Vecna is going to win next time around at the very least, INLESS something weird happins like other gods come to help her out or something
Chanmanm8 08-15-07, 11:23 AM	Well another problem you run into is current flavor being based on the current stat setup (where gods are more powerful). The end of that six part Dark Elf series comes to mind, where a lesser (intermediate?) god pimp smacks around a supposed yugoloth archfiend, volunteering to kill the General of Gehenna. Elminster in Hell features the Simbul tearing through several outcast archdevils, who were 'on par with Dispater or Mammon, so long as the confrontation was one on one, without armies and political influence'. It then stands to reason, that the Simbul could tear through Dispater or Mammon if they didn't have their armies and faced her in person. I loved that book. The Simbul was insane...she didn't even stop to take a break! She took on so many, including Nergal (another famous demonic name I seen mentioned in various stories, tv shows, and books before). And of course, a mortal paladin king chased Orcus across the planes. Who was this paladin? And was this before or after Orcus' resurrection? So....flavor wise, the planar powers get punked on a regular basis. It's like people who can't believe Hal Jordan clocked Batman in the jaw because "no one hits the Batman". Batman doesn't do anything BUT get clobbered. When was this? My knowledge of comics is very small (my favorite is the Phoenix Force stuff). Was this when Hal Jordan was possessed by Parallax? Or maybe when he had the power of The Spectre?
Kain Darkwind 08-15-07, 12:27 PM	Who was this paladin? And was this before or after Orcus' resurrection? After, I believe. But I don't know when the Bloodstone module took place. The paladin was King Gareth of Vaasa. When was this? My knowledge of comics is very small (my favorite is the Phoenix Force stuff). Was this when Hal Jordan was possessed by Parallax? Or maybe when he had the power of The Spectre? Green Lantern: Rebirth, the last issue. Hal had broken free of both Spectre and Parallax at this point. http://photos10.flickr.com/14279520_7ec28267f4_m.jpg
Mortavier Shadewalk 08-15-07, 12:48 PM	If the gods did indeed want to go agest the Arch Devils, Gods win If the Gods did indeed want to go agest the Abyssal Lords, Gods Win The problem is this, Gods I beleve want to teach eveyone and have as many people be Redeemed, Not only that but I Beleve the current people on the planet must relise that they can solve some of there own problems, and some prays dont need to be answerd, (Ever Seen Bruce allmighty? Kinda like that) And the Evil people in the world need to relise there doing stuff thats dumb in the long run, To long of a story to explain why, plus that will lean even more clouser to going into religius beleves of people, So Gods, Are trying to "ReDeem" Evil or at least some of the evil people, So I dont beleve Gods will just charge in there and Kick ass, Though besides the whole peace talk, Gods Kick there ass, they lose, Gods Win, No if and or buts about it, You allready lost, you cant say anything agest it becouse you dont excist to say it! The problem is you're using the idea of good=right evil=wrong that is most commonly used in real life. In the D&D Great Wheel, it isn't evil and good, it's Evil and Good, if there is one, there is the other. The universe has to have both. So just because the gods want to "redeem" them, it in no means lends anything to their abilty to defeat them. And I'm pretty sure that the evil gods don't care jack squat about redeeming anyone. Being evil isn't dumb in the long run either. Look at these lords of the abyss and hell. Asmodeus, Orcus and Demogorgon have existed since before the mortal coil even came into existance, and yet, these oh-so-all powerful gods of good have never dethroned them. Orcus was taken out for a time, but he came back, with even more power then he had before. If the gods are good, then they should have destroyed them or redeemed them. Seeing as how they're still there, then it seems to me there are two options- 1. The gods of good are not really good. They've allowed a torturous evil force that they could have eliminated to continue to devastate the mortal coil for eons. 2. They aren't capable of ousting the lords of the lower planes. I tend to assume the best of the gods of good, so I'll go with 2 unless someone can conclusively proove that the gods are more powerful, using flavor, not the awful stats we've seen cranked out lately. The very fact that the evil gods have domains in the lower planes, as opposed to controlling the entire thing shows that the fiends at least have home field advantage.
TheHarrow 08-15-07, 01:03 PM	Green Lantern: Rebirth, the last issue. Hal had broken free of both Spectre and Parallax at this point. http://photos10.flickr.com/14279520_7ec28267f4_m.jpg Guy Gardner avenged! Now i want to suck up to dicefreaks :cool: . Those DC comic superheroe builds? Yeah, they rock. Sinestro is my totem. /Hopeless fanboy. //"You stand in my way, Zamoran. Love will conquer all" // Pinkish power ring FTW
Bob the Efreet 08-15-07, 03:13 PM	After, I believe. But I don't know when the Bloodstone module took place. The paladin was King Gareth of Vaasa. I'm not exactly sure, but I think Throne of Bloodstone is the module in which Orcus is officially killed, and he remains dead until Dead Gods.
Ornum 08-15-07, 07:10 PM	Then you're in the same boat as everyone else. ;) Some might answer "bad design" as the reason it happened, since the module tosses out a bunch of notions that were frankly, antithetical to the setting, and have been roundly ignored since that point. I'm more inclined to say the events happened, but not for the same reasons as the module claims. My take is that the Lady allowed Vecna in, and ultimately hurled him out for reasons too obscure to fathom (we already know that she isn't bound by linear time and presumable views the multiverse on a rather massive scale, so we might simply lack the same scope to understand why she acted as she did). The module itself claimed that Vecna was in league with an entity known as The Serpent (which was, before that module, just Vecna's insanity and not an actual being), which was on the same power level and potentially shared origin as The Lady, but it never explained the reasoning behind any of that. Later material has either backed up the "Vecna was insane" angle, or had The Serpent be simply a personification of magic or epic level magic (which still however fails to give any rationalization of why such a thing would be helping Vecna break into Sigil). Probably not the best thread to bring this up, but since someone else did, I'll ask anyway. How can one assume the events described in Die Vecna Die are still considered to have happened? Wasn't the supposed event that triggered Vecna's ascension the drain of Iuz's power and his subsequent death? Since Iuz is obviously still around, can't one assume that the whole thing never took place? The only possible explanation I can think of is that since Iuz's portfolio is deception, he somehow managed to trick Vecna into thinking he was successful.
Chanmanm8 08-15-07, 08:35 PM	Probably not the best thread to bring this up, but since someone else did, I'll ask anyway. How can one assume the events described in Die Vecna Die are still considered to have happened? Wasn't the supposed event that triggered Vecna's ascension the drain of Iuz's power and his subsequent death? Since Iuz is obviously still around, can't one assume that the whole thing never took place? The only possible explanation I can think of is that since Iuz's portfolio is deception, he somehow managed to trick Vecna into thinking he was successful. I just got the book finally, but even before I got it, I knew that Iuz didn't die. After Vecna was rejected from Sigil at the end of that adventure, Iuz broke free out of Vecna. I'll quote the text for you: FROM DIE VECNA DIE Module The heroes Prevail If the heroes bring Vecna's avatar to 0 hit points or less, he is ejected from Sigil. The ejection evokes a mighty pyrotechnics display, turns day into night then back again, and destroys Vecna's single foothold in the City of Doors by sucking his avatar down a whirlpoollike conduit. Vecna will never regain his foothold in Sigil. As noted earlier, with Vecna's removal from Sigil, most of his works begin to fade away, due to the Lady of Pain's power over her own realm. What of luz? luz is a demigod. His near-godly power, shackled to the Eye of Vecna and a mistakenly chanted ritual in the Language Primeval, served as the catalyst for Vecna's ascension to a Greater Power. Still, can a demigod be so easily extinguished? If under the thumb of a Greater Power, then yes; however, luz's absorption by Vecna is a special case and has special repercussions. luz was absorbed totally and completely into Vecna; he was not extinguished, nor was his mentality eradicated. Through all of Book Three, luz's spirit lives on, a personality fragment abiding in the mind of Vecna. In this fashion, luz clings to existence, unable to effect any change in the mind of the god who holds him captive. Yet luz remains, and he seeks any opportunity to free his mind and a portion of Vecna's power. That opportunity comes with Vecna's ejection from Sigil! As a bodiless Power, stunned and unfeeling, Vecna falls to Oerth, the plane of his birth. Before the Whispered One can draw new raiment about him and manifest even a single avatar, luz makes his move. Drawing on the force of will that only a demigod can realize, luz burst his bonds, escaping Vecna. An exploding solar flare to Vecna's star, luz flees with his mentality and a portion of Vecna's power. In time, luz materializes, a demigod once more, but with a renewed and burning hate for Vecna. On the other hand, Vecna does little. His crushing defeat is a blow to his godly ego. It is almost as if the remnants of his mortal body, his relics, conspired to defeat him. In a temper, Vecna plucks his recovered Eye from his essence and sends back out into the world, free to instigate evil. Though mentally wounded, it is only a matter of time before Vecna recovers his equilibrium and attends to the threads of other plots left untended. He's free of the prison plane that held him, and despite the liberation of luz, still a god. Triumphant heroes have accomplished a mighty feat. Award each contributing player 100,000 XP.
Ornum 08-15-07, 10:26 PM	Ah, I see. I never read that far. I got as far as "Vecna gets into Sigil" and then stopped. That would explain things.
illathid 08-16-07, 02:39 AM	If one is using Eberron the Archfiends are Rakshasa Rajas and hold no power equaivalent to the deities who are unknowable by mortals. Actually, if you use this definition in Eberron, then the archfiends would be more powerful than the gods. This is because the common assumption is that existence is greater/more powerful than non-existence. It is a fact that the Rajahs exist as sentient entities, while the gods could possible not exist, and even if they do are are only active as a source for clerical magic. Sul Khatesh, the Rajah of Secrets, is one of the most powerful beings stated out in the world of Eberron. This Overlord from the age of demons has plans to set the Church of the Silver Flame against the dragons of Argonnessen, so that (s)he may escape her prison and once again walk the surface. It is whispered that she is the force that drove Mordain the Fleshweaver mad. She is both sentient and can exert (a limited) control over the world. The same can not be said about any of the gods, whether they are the Gods of the Host, the Silver Flame, or any other divine being. The only control they can be said to exert in the world is through their clerics, whose powers can be replicated even by those who are avowed atheists. And of the sentient beings that are worshiped (primarily the Lord of Blades and Vol, to an extent) none are more powerful than the Rajahs themselves. For example, compare the Lord of Blades to any of the aspects presented in FC:II and see who would win in a fight. ;) However, as Keith Baker has said, I disagree with the assertion that the Rajah Overlords are merely the archfiends in Eberron. They are much too tied to the great wheel to fit into Eberron's cosmology.
ripvanwormer 08-16-07, 02:43 AM	I'm not exactly sure, but I think Throne of Bloodstone is the module in which Orcus is officially killed, and he remains dead until Dead Gods. Throne of Bloodstone is about destroying Orcus' wand, not about killing him. It's set up so that the PCs kill Tiamat, but not Orcus. He died offscreen, at the hands of Kiaransalee, and no adventure had anything to do with that. What's more, it happened centuries ago (Dead Gods also claims that Throne of Bloodstone happened centuries ago, though, which isn't the case in FR).
Frostflame29 08-16-07, 02:28 PM	Throne of Bloodstone takes place 1359 Dale reckoning, It is 1374 I Think Dale Reckoning right now.
danzig138 08-16-07, 04:16 PM	People who're judging by mechanics are dealing with a problem: flavor is generally written decently. The mechanics of the archfiends as 20HD creatures were written incompetently or not with that intention. You should never base a judgement in something that relies this much on flavor solely on badly designed mechanics. Wow, way to straighten the situation out. Or not. Sorry, but not liking the mechanics doesn't end the discussion. Just cause you don't think they represent the power correctly doesn't mean they don't for other people. I firmly believe the OP knew when he posted that this would be one of those long, drawn-out stupid threads. There will be no agreement. Some people are biased one way, some the other way - and every one of you knows who you are. And since right here, you've completely dismissed the only actual concrete way to determine who could win in a fight (the mechanics), there's no point. Personally, in the games I run (the only ones where the question has any merit for me), it depends. For the most part, if you take the toughest gods agaisnt the toughest of the infernals, the gods will win. Some of the gods might not fare as well against the baddest of the bad, but the only infernal who can compete on completly even footing with the biggest of the deities is Samael. Now this is a straight up fight on neutral territory. Move either battle to specific turf, and someone will have the home field advantage - mainly a plethora of soldiers and minions to get in the way of the opponent. Now a question: I keep seeing people talk about the gods getting their power from their worshippers. Now I admit that there are a lot of sourcebooks I haven't read (or haven't read in a long time at least), but I remember that being a Forgotten Realms convention. I can't provide a cite, but I sure do seem to recall that the gods of Greyhawk were indepedent from their worshippers in terms of their power, as were the Dragonlance deities.
Witch 08-16-07, 04:21 PM	Wow, way to straighten the situation out. Or not. Sorry, but not liking the mechanics doesn't end the discussion. Just cause you don't think they represent the power correctly doesn't mean they don't for other people. When CR 21 beasts are said to scare the gods away, the stats are effectively wrong and cannot be used. I firmly believe the OP knew when he posted that this would be one of those long, drawn-out stupid threads. There will be no agreement. Some people are biased one way, some the other way - and every one of you knows who you are. And since right here, you've completely dismissed the only actual concrete way to determine who could win in a fight (the mechanics), there's no point. Flavor can be used in these discussions to far greater effect than mechanics.
Taeldrin Laesrash 08-16-07, 06:28 PM	Now a question: I keep seeing people talk about the gods getting their power from their worshippers. Now I admit that there are a lot of sourcebooks I haven't read (or haven't read in a long time at least), but I remember that being a Forgotten Realms convention. I can't provide a cite, but I sure do seem to recall that the gods of Greyhawk were indepedent from their worshippers in terms of their power, as were the Dragonlance deities. Both Planescape and FR have referenced gods dying from a lack of worship. I don't know if any others settings work that way. Since Planescape, though, was considered something of a meta-setting, what applies to those gods could conceivably apply to all the gods.
Sundragon 08-16-07, 08:06 PM	However, as Keith Baker has said, I disagree with the assertion that the Rajah Overlords are merely the archfiends in Eberron. They are much too tied to the great wheel to fit into Eberron's cosmology. Actually the archfiends are too tied to christian/religious mythology to be of any use to the Gret Wheel. Well Tiamat is too tied to being the Queen of Chaos in Babylonian Mythology to be the 5 headed dragonqueen of the Great Wheel cosmology. Do these sound ridiculous? Well they should. They sound just about as ridiculous as the above quote because you are judging something different from a thing with the assumptions of that thing. Eberron is a discreet cosmology that officially has nothing at all to do with the Great Wheel or any of its assumptions in regards to the planes, the Archfiends, Gods, etc. Officially, the abyss and the hells do NOT exist for Eberron, they weren't removed, they aren't unknown, they aren't hidden, the do not exist in the same way that methane breathing dragons don't fly the skies of Neptune in our universe. Officially, what the PS setting assumes for the planes is irrelevant to... Eberron FR Dawnforge Midnight Iron Kingdoms ...or any D&D game setting with its own cosmology. People can pretend that officially there is some impact of PS on the cosmologies of other settings the same way that they can pretend Spelljammer fans can even though neither phlogistan and crystal spheres thankfully no longer exist officially in the D&D mythology. Sundragon
Sundragon 08-16-07, 08:14 PM	Both Planescape and FR have referenced gods dying from a lack of worship. I don't know if any others settings work that way. Since Planescape, though, was considered something of a meta-setting, what applies to those gods could conceivably apply to all the gods. PS is a defunct metasetting in regards to WoTCs official stance and has no arbitration as to whether or not gods die from worship. The conceit of gods dying from lack of worship started in FR with Ao's decree that the gods are now bound to the worship of mortals. This was before PS was published and brfore 2e was even published. Greyhawk's gods do not die from lack of worship. Krynn's gods do not die from lack of worship. FR's gods do die from lack of worship. If a DMing is using the PS metasetting as a D&D star trek universe where everything is interconnected then ALL gods die from lack of worship. It all depends on what assumptions you are working with. Starlion
Bob the Efreet 08-17-07, 03:56 AM	Throne of Bloodstone is about destroying Orcus' wand, not about killing him. It's set up so that the PCs kill Tiamat, but not Orcus. He died offscreen, at the hands of Kiaransalee, and no adventure had anything to do with that. What's more, it happened centuries ago (Dead Gods also claims that Throne of Bloodstone happened centuries ago, though, which isn't the case in FR). Ah, right. Had I bothered thinking about anything I know of Orcus, I would have realised that.
illathid 08-17-07, 03:28 PM	Actually the archfiends are too tied to christian/religious mythology to be of any use to the Gret Wheel. Well Tiamat is too tied to being the Queen of Chaos in Babylonian Mythology to be the 5 headed dragonqueen of the Great Wheel cosmology. Do these sound ridiculous? Well they should. They sound just about as ridiculous as the above quote because you are judging something different from a thing with the assumptions of that thing. Eberron is a discreet cosmology that officially has nothing at all to do with the Great Wheel or any of its assumptions in regards to the planes, the Archfiends, Gods, etc. Officially, the abyss and the hells do NOT exist for Eberron, they weren't removed, they aren't unknown, they aren't hidden, the do not exist in the same way that methane breathing dragons don't fly the skies of Neptune in our universe. Officially, what the PS setting assumes for the planes is irrelevant to... Eberron FR Dawnforge Midnight Iron Kingdoms ...or any D&D game setting with its own cosmology. People can pretend that officially there is some impact of PS on the cosmologies of other settings the same way that they can pretend Spelljammer fans can even though neither phlogistan and crystal spheres thankfully no longer exist officially in the D&D mythology. Sundragon Thanks for disregarding the point of my post. :rolleyes: Anyways to clarify, you seeming to be contesting my claim that Planescape and Eberron should be separate. All I was saying in that quote is that one should not equate the Rajahs with the archfiends as it will have a negative effect on the game. The Archfiends as presented in D&D for much of it's existence has their goals and personality defined by their relationship to the great wheel. That is why it would be a bad idea to say "Demogorgon is one of the Rajah Overlords... so is Asmodeus." One could maybe place the archfiends in Shavarath with some tweeking, but having them as Rajahs would require a complete overhaul of their fluff. However, that would be a waste as the 3E stats for the Archfiends are quite weak to be Rajahs. The rajahs have at least 40 class levels AND 20 Outsider hit dice, which is a tad stronger than most archfiend stats as they stand. Just placing Archfiends willy-nilly into Eberron is not smart. I'm still trying to understand why you seem to be suggesting this.
Raymond_Luxury_Yacht 08-17-07, 04:06 PM	PS is a defunct metasetting in regards to WoTCs official stance and has no arbitration as to whether or not gods die from worship. The conceit of gods dying from lack of worship started in FR with Ao's decree that the gods are now bound to the worship of mortals. This was before PS was published and brfore 2e was even published. Considering how many gods in FR explicitly died or were severely weakened from lack of worship long before Ao's decree, it's safe to say that Ao's decree was nothing but a statement about what was already going on. Also, I could have sworn that the Time of Troubles took place during 2e.
pbs 08-19-07, 08:34 PM	(not a bump) thx to all who participated this thread is dead.
Starmage21 08-19-07, 10:37 PM	Considering how many gods in FR explicitly died or were severely weakened from lack of worship long before Ao's decree, it's safe to say that Ao's decree was nothing but a statement about what was already going on. Also, I could have sworn that the Time of Troubles took place during 2e. It did, and the dieties were about 1/2 and 1/2 before the time of troubles. After Ao's decree, I think they went to being fully reliant on worshippers for their power/existance/influence. Alot of gods lost ranks when that happened.
ripvanwormer 08-20-07, 02:16 AM	Spelljammer fans can even though neither phlogistan and crystal spheres thankfully no longer exist officially in the D&D mythology. Of course they do, unless they've been specifically removed. The nature of outer space hasn't been dealt with at all in 3e, so 2e's standards must still apply. Greyhawk's gods do not die from lack of worship. If Fiendish Codex II applies to Greyhawk's gods, then those gods are born from mortal worship. See the description of God Street: "Whenever a certain critical mass of lawful evil devotional energy attaches itself to one of these entities, a new deity is created. If the object of worship is a previously living creature, its soul is retrieved from its prison or devil form and infused into a new divine body. If it is a fictional being, it simply coalesces into ineffable life. Either way, the new deity appears on God Street..."
Sundragon 08-20-07, 01:30 PM	Of course they do, unless they've been specifically removed. The nature of outer space hasn't been dealt with at all in 3e, so 2e's standards must still apply. They are removed by implication of all the cosmologies being separate now. If FR, DL, Eberron, Greyhawk are in discreet multiverses, then there are no crystal spheres because they assmume one large prime material plane containing all seperate settings. The nature of outer space has been dealt with. If Fiendish Codex II applies to Greyhawk's gods, then those gods are born from mortal worship. See the description of God Street: "Whenever a certain critical mass of lawful evil devotional energy attaches itself to one of these entities, a new deity is created. If the object of worship is a previously living creature, its soul is retrieved from its prison or devil form and infused into a new divine body. If it is a fictional being, it simply coalesces into ineffable life. Either way, the new deity appears on God Street..." Well its hard to make any sense of this with the barrage of subtle internal consistancies between books by different authors. The Deities and Demigods book doesn't mention any of this Gods being created by worshippers stuff. This is just a new bit of writing by an author that creates more assumptions and like many of such things there are inconsistancies because each writer wants it to be the way they want regardless of previous material to the contrary. Sundragon
Mirtek 08-20-07, 01:33 PM	They are removed by implication of all the cosmologies being separate now. If FR, DL, Eberron, Greyhawk are in discreet multiverses, then there are no crystal spheres because they assmume one large prime material plane containing all seperate settings. While Krynn and Abeir-Toril are no longer on the same prime with Oerth, the core prime material plane is still considered to house several solar systems. So the nature of outer space can still be the same as in 2e, no implication of changes (beside having two planets less)
Sundragon 08-20-07, 02:09 PM	While Krynn and Abeir-Toril are no longer on the same prime with Oerth, the core prime material plane is still considered to house several solar systems. So the nature of outer space can still be the same as in 2e, no implication of changes (beside having two planets less) Not quite correct. Housing several solar systems is not the same thing as seperate crystal spheres. Solars systems as within a given universe ie. they would exist within a given crystal sphere. All of the universe we can see (all 20 billion light years worth) would be all within one crystal sphere because they can 1.) be seen from earth and 2.) are not separated by some metaphysical boundary such as either crystal spheres or phlogistan. Crystal spheres are according to SJ cosmology effectively mini finite universes, each one housed by a gigantic sphere of crystal and sperated by a magical flammable liquidlike/atmospherelike substance. Earth, Greyhawk, Krynn, Mystara, etc. all exist within these spheres. They are not merely seperate solar systems within the same universe. Sundragon
ripvanwormer 08-20-07, 02:11 PM	They are removed by implication of all the cosmologies being separate now. If FR, DL, Eberron, Greyhawk are in discreet multiverses, then there are no crystal spheres because they assmume one large prime material plane containing all seperate settings. Mirtek's put it as well as I could. The idea that Krynn is in a separate cosmology from Toril has nothing to do with whether or not the worlds are surrounded by crystal spheres and, beyond that, other spheres floating in the Phlogiston. Because that part hasn't been retconned, we're forced to assume they still are. Each Material Plane is a universe made up of many crystal spheres. The Spelljammer setting does not necessarily assume there is only a single Prime Material Plane. It didn't retcon the idea of alternate material planes, so by the same reasoning as above, they still existed in Spelljammer - there were alternate versions of Oerth, Toril, Krynn, and Refuge in parallel planes, versions with higher or lower magic, or where history had taken a different path, or versions where physics works in a different way. All of these possibilities were explored in the 1e Manual of the Planes. All of these alternate planes were accessible from the Astral. Housing several solar systems is not the same thing as seperate crystal spheres. Solars systems as within a given universe ie. they would exist within a given crystal sphere. All of the universe we can see (all 20 billion light years worth) would be all within one crystal sphere because they can 1.) be seen from earth and 2.) are not separated by some metaphysical boundary such as either crystal spheres or phlogistan. Mirtek is correct. You are completely, dramatically, and astoundingly wrong. Crystal spheres always include no more than one solar system in the Spelljammer setting. They are not separate universes. The other stars visible from a world are miniature balls of fire, usually embedded in the substance of the sphere (or other things, like portals in the crystal sphere, or torches held by titanic sculptures of dead gods). If Earth existed in the Spelljammer setting, the universe we could see beyond our own solar system would be a mirage, scattered flecks of light painted across the surface of the sky. They would not be separate solar systems. They would be no more than twice the distance of Pluto away. Well its hard to make any sense of this with the barrage of subtle internal consistancies between books by different authors. Oh, there's no doubt about that. You could decide that the most recently published source is always the "right" one, but I don't think that's very useful or intelligent. I prefer to go by whatever ideas I like better.
Sundragon 08-20-07, 04:06 PM	Mirtek's put it as well as I could. The idea that Krynn is in a separate cosmology from Toril has nothing to do with whether or not the worlds are surrounded by crystal spheres and, beyond that, other spheres floating in the Phlogiston. Because that part hasn't been retconned, we're forced to assume they still are. Each Material Plane is a universe made up of many crystal spheres. If each is a different COSMOLOGY then they are each in their own Prime Material plane. The SP assumption requires that they are in the same prime material plane bobbing aroung in phlogistan like rubber ducks in a bathtub. Spelljammer ships are not planejammers, they travel within the prime material plane through either space or phlogistan but in either case they do not leave the prime material. The Spelljammer setting does not necessarily assume there is only a single Prime Material Plane. It didn't retcon the idea of alternate material planes, so by the same reasoning as above, they still existed in Spelljammer - there were alternate versions of Oerth, Toril, Krynn, and Refuge in parallel planes, versions with higher or lower magic, or where history had taken a different path, or versions where physics works in a different way. All of these possibilities were explored in the 1e Manual of the Planes. All of these alternate planes were accessible from the Astral. No, not true. The spelljammer universe was like planescape without being planar. Unlike PS however which required and assumed alternate prime material planes and the worlds therein, the SJ setting required that FR, Krynn, Greyhawk, Mystara, Birthright, Athas, etc. were part of one vast Prime Material plane reachable without interplanar travel via the medium of phlogistan. There is no interplanar travel assumed to be necessary in SJ as no SJ ships were capable of traveling to alternate primes. Mirtek is correct. You are completely, dramatically, and astoundingly wrong. Crystal spheres always include no more than one solar system in the Spelljammer setting. They are not separate universes. The other stars visible from a world are miniature balls of fire, usually embedded in the substance of the sphere (or other things, like portals in the crystal sphere, or torches held by titanic sculptures of dead gods). If Earth existed in the Spelljammer setting, the universe we could see beyond our own solar system would be a mirage, scattered flecks of light painted across the surface of the sky. They would not be separate solar systems. They would be no more than twice the distance of Pluto away. I never saw any SJ rule that mandated one solar system per crystal sphere. Why would this be the case at all? Because you haven't seen the published settings with more than one solar system in a sphere? That means nothing. There were no rules on this. A mirage, oh please that is a handwave if there ever was one. There were also no definitive rules as to what stars were or were not in SJ. However, these questions, and other ridiculousness, were the very reason I gave up on the SJ setting, there is the fantastic and there is nonsensical. A universe where no one can see a star that was actually a star beyond their own sun is idiocy IMO. My players would have strung me up by my own pitard for ever suggesting such a thing. There is a limit to suspension of disbelief. I prefer to go by whatever ideas I like better. I do to, alot of my arguments are about the game in general, not whether or not I need validation from WoTC. Sundragon
ripvanwormer 08-20-07, 05:17 PM	If each is a different COSMOLOGY then they are each in their own Prime Material plane. The SP assumption requires that they are in the same prime material plane bobbing aroung in phlogistan like rubber ducks in a bathtub. Spelljammer ships are not planejammers, they travel within the prime material plane through either space or phlogistan but in either case they do not leave the prime material. That's right. That doesn't mean that each Material Plane doesn't have its own crystal spheres, which is the heart of your non sequitur. I'll try to explain it better. Imagine an infinite universe, connected to the Great Wheel. Within it, there are many crystal spheres, including Krynnspace, Greyspace, and Realmspace. That's the Spelljammer universe. Now imagine another infinite universe, also with many crystal spheres. This one's connected to the Great Tree cosmology. This is also a Spelljammer universe, but not the same one. It also has a Krynnspace, a Greyspace, and a Realmspace, but these aren't the same worlds as those in the parallel universe. They're parallel worlds. Now continue on: an infinite series of cosmologies, an infinite series of Material Planes, and an infinite number of crystal spheres in each one. No, not true. What Mirtek and I are talking about is a *fundamental* part of the Spelljammer setting. I'll go grab the Spelljammer boxed set later on (which I've read, cover to cover, in the last few months) and quote it at you. I can't believe you're arguing about this. Each sphere, in Spelljammer, contained a single system. The stars seen in the night sky were far smaller celestial bodies, and they didn't represent other star systems. That's the way things were. And are. Here, the Concordance of Arcane Space, page 9: "The size of a crystal sphere is determined by the size of the planetary system [that is, solar system, except they're not all heliocentric] inside. Usually a sphere has a radius at least twice as big as the orbital radius of the outermost celestial body in the system." "Those fantasy systems with stars in the night sky often have these stars mounted along the inside of the crystal sphere. The nature of stars varies from sphere to sphere, however. Within some spheres the stars are small portholes looking out on the phlogiston, in some they are painted lights along the interior, in some they are great cities inhabited by alien creatures, and in others they are great bowls of fire held aloft by huge statues of forgotten gods." Whether you personally like Spelljammer is beside the point, but that's how the D&D cosmos was defined and, in lieu of anything contradictory, that's still how it's defined. It doesn't make any difference whether there's one Material Plane or many - the planes that Toril, Krynn, and Oerth are on are all structured that way because of legacy material that tied them firmly to the Spelljammer setting, material that hasn't been retconned.
Daydreamer 08-21-07, 06:40 AM	based on the official states that exist, the gods by far.