Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Todesherr 09-07-07, 12:12 AM	Let's take a classic example: Garl Glittergold who seems to be LG (NG)...or Wee Jas LN (LE)... I have often wondered how such tendencies towards different alignment play out in the behaviour of deities. Does LG (NG) mean you follow the law most of the time and if it doesn't serve Good you break it without a second thought?! The same question can be raised about Borderline Outerplanes such as Arcadia, Bytopia, the Beastlands, Ysgard, Pandemonium, Carceri, Gehenna and Acheron... Often these planes seem more 'theme' oriented than alignment oriented such Arcadia with its harmony and Acheron with its regimentation. Contrast this with Celestia where it's all about LG and only LG or its Evil counterpart Baator where it's all about LE. Do you think it is more of a theme issue? And what about residence? Moradin is definitely LG but Clangeddin resides in Arcadia and whilst technically LG probably has some LN tendencies... What is your take?
Todesherr 09-07-07, 10:13 AM	Come on guys this is a bloody interesting thread....;)
Todesherr 09-07-07, 10:19 AM	Arghhhhhhhhhhhh...........so hard to get a discussion going............arghhhhhhhhhhhhh
Andyr 09-07-07, 11:00 AM	I assume that a LN(LE) deity would act LN, but if they were confronted with a situation they could solve in a LG or a LE matter they would be more likely to pick the latter (though that doesn't mean they'd never perform Good acts). Similarly, I'd assume they'd have more LE than LG priests (although again that doesn't mean no LG priests). EDIT: I'd also not complain about a lack of discussion when the topic is less than a day old...
Faraer 09-07-07, 11:34 AM	D&D alignment is a two-dimensional field divided into nine squares. LG(NG) means within the LG square but close to the border with NG -- or perhaps, if the god's alignment is a region rather than a point, overlapping with NG. Deities aren't people and don't have behaviour. Their stated alignment is a depiction of their metaphysical, not psychological, nature. For people, alignment doesn't dictate any single behaviour pattern (such as 'follow the law most of the time and if it doesn't serve Good you break it without a second thought') -- it's a simple abstraction of a much more complex field of possibilities. The classic example is that non-sapient animals, fairly selfish ordinary people, and philosophical druids are all Neutral. The grouping of Faerūnian gods into the Gygaxian Outer Planes even when their nature isn't defined by alignment (Tempus, for instance) never made much sense, no one pretended it did, and is the strongest argument for the 3E revision of the planar structure.
Todesherr 09-07-07, 12:21 PM	D&D alignment is a two-dimensional field divided into nine squares. LG(NG) means within the LG square but close to the border with NG -- or perhaps, if the god's alignment is a region rather than a point, overlapping with NG. Deities aren't people and don't have behaviour. Their stated alignment is a depiction of their metaphysical, not psychological, nature. For people, alignment doesn't dictate any single behaviour pattern (such as 'follow the law most of the time and if it doesn't serve Good you break it without a second thought') -- it's a simple abstraction of a much more complex field of possibilities. The classic example is that non-sapient animals, fairly selfish ordinary people, and philosophical druids are all Neutral. The grouping of Faerūnian gods into the Gygaxian Outer Planes even when their nature isn't defined by alignment (Tempus, for instance) never made much sense, no one pretended it did, and is the strongest argument for the 3E revision of the planar structure. I disagree; surely deities such as Torm and Tyr embody LG as much as they embody loyalty and justice respectively...
GothicDan 09-07-07, 02:59 PM	Not at all. They have no concept of "Lawful Good" in the D&D abstraction. Gygax's system of alignment was based very much on Moorcock's Elric Saga, in which the abstract forces of Chaos and Law were pitted against each other since time immemorial. While surely Ed drew bits and pieces from this series, in time, the Elric Saga doesn't seem to be a terribly large inspiration for the Realms, cosmologically or theologically - so the Realms' deities, as Faraer pointed out, would not necessarily fit the alignment stereotypes easily. Of course, as Planescape developed, the Great Wheel became a LOT more complex than just the basic 9 alignments: alignments became secondary to philosophy. I think this fit the Realm's deities much better.
godbeepit 09-07-07, 03:24 PM	Of course, as Planescape developed, the Great Wheel became a LOT more complex than just the basic 9 alignments: alignments became secondary to philosophy. I think this fit the Realm's deities much better. I'd have to second this, but not just for the Realms. Alignment is a very touchy subject simply because it is purposefully ambiguous. It is essentially a choice of interpretation not for each person but for each game. Someone can easily play one game in which all alignment is easily definable and you can point at something and say "That is evil." and later run a game in which the world is full of shades of gray and intent and means are hidden and nothing is obvious. But enough of this rant. I believe Dan means that alignment is used as a description instead of a definition. (Perhaps, I might be overstepping some boundaries) As such, I usually take Wee Jas as Lawful Neutral to mean that while she is normally evil she makes a concentrated effort to be even-handed or neutral.
Todesherr 09-08-07, 08:21 AM	As in a deity espousing a philosophy bound within his alignment or using it as a guide. Compare Hextor with Tempus, both war gods with very different takes on how it should get done...
GothicDan 09-08-07, 04:31 PM	Yes. But they don't base how it should be done on their alignments. Their alignments are based on how they think it should be done.
Todesherr 09-08-07, 07:08 PM	Yes. But they don't base how it should be done on their alignments. Their alignments are based on how they think it should be done. Are you essentially saying that alignment is worth diddly squat? I personally found it odd that the Torelian deities were removed from the outer planes. Or is it just the perception of where the gods live? the Oerth deities DO however still inhabit the outer planes; moreover whilst Hextor might me a war god primarily and LE secondarily, you have to admit that a guy like Asmodeus is all about LE, first and second...illud veritas est...
GothicDan 09-08-07, 07:41 PM	Alignment is based on a deity's perceived dogmas and the faiths he promotes. They are not based the other way around on his/her alignment.
Todesherr 09-08-07, 08:05 PM	Alignment is based on a deity's perceived dogmas and the faiths he promotes. They are not based the other way around on his/her alignment. What's up with the cosmology in FR? Do the gods have realms outside the outerplanes or not...?!
GothicDan 09-08-07, 08:08 PM	The current FR cosmology is presented in the FRCS and the PGtF. It's the Great Tree. The Great Wheel cosmology is connected to the Tree via the Plane of Shadow, and a few things are shared by both - like the city of Sigil exists in both cosmologies. Defeats the purpose of having a separate cosmology, if you ask me.
Xaean 09-08-07, 09:19 PM	I prefer the Great Tree for Faerun, because some deities would have no place in the Great Wheel and the Great Wheel was a bit too alignment focused when placing Faerunian deities their. That said, I like the Great Wheel too - it has it's place in the Greyhawk/standard setting and it is a good starting point for building new campaign worlds. For borderline alignments I think they are or were mostly used to show which part of an alignment axis is more important - if a god is LG (NG), it means that he is LG but the good component is more important than the lawful one. Or it is used show a slight preference for an alignment component that is not enough to actually be of that alignment such might be the case with characters or deities that are currently in the process of changing alignment. LN (LE) could mean that the deity will become evil within a view decades or centuries or that he or she always had evil tendencies.
GothicDan 09-08-07, 09:35 PM	I prefer the Great Tree for Faerun, because some deities would have no place in the Great Wheel and the Great Wheel was a bit too alignment focused when placing Faerunian deities their. That said, I like the Great Wheel too - it has it's place in the Greyhawk/standard setting and it is a good starting point for building new campaign worlds. Again, I guess that makes sense if you don't take into account the details PS added - like LG Paladin lords going against LG Paladin lords, and Lawful Guvners trying to find the order in the Chaotic Xaositects, and the NE Ghereleths fighting the NE Yugoloths, and the entire premise of the Deva Spark adventure, and so on...
SgtAnjay 09-09-07, 01:09 AM	All well and good, Planescape had very interesting stuff going on......and I agree, how a person does things determines their alignment, their alignment isn't some sort of magic curse that prevents things from acting a certain way. More than one being from commoner to deity has commited acts that have changed their alignment, further showing that its what one does that determines alignment, not the other way around. That said, should a setting as tied into the actions of its divinities as Forgotten Realms is be beholden to another campaign setting and its planar politics? Should my PCs have to be cosmically insignificant because the material plane they saved is considered a backwater and its most powerful deities tiny punks in another campaign setting? One thing that always irked me about Planescape was the constant downplay of the "lowly material planes", which amounted to pointing out how unimportant the other campaign settings were in the cosmic scheme of things. This especially applied, for whatever reason, to the Forgotten Realms, which was basically described as a young upstart backwater whose greatest native deities were naive little newcomers to anything which was really important. Now, maybe that was just my perception, but it was an opinion that was rectified in 3rd ed with the Great Tree, so who knows?
godbeepit 09-09-07, 01:26 AM	Again, alignment is a description not a definition. While each action and the actual alignment has effects and can even be stated as in-game knowledge (such as paladin's detect evil), there is nothing to say that a person can change alignments. They might not even consciously decide to.
GothicDan 09-09-07, 10:30 AM	Now, maybe that was just my perception, but it was an opinion that was rectified in 3rd ed with the Great Tree, so who knows? Not at all. They connected it to the rest of the multiverse, anyway. And FR was ALWAYS described as the least backwater of the Prime worlds, and it was said that some of its mages really knew what was what among the Planes. You seem to be thinking of Dragonlance. ;)
SgtAnjay 09-09-07, 12:16 PM	So Forgotten Realms was insulted the least, DL the most? Silly me....:rolleyes: And the different worlds may still be interconnected, but since each prime gets its own cosmology, rather than all being addendums to the Mighty Wheel (you know, that little blurb in the corner labeled "prime material" which encompasses the entirety of all the campaign settings except for Planescape), theres a much greater sense of importance to the primes. Not to mention having its own cosmology makes the divine power plays that have always been so ingrained into FR now something more than children running around in a great wide world much bigger than they could hope to be. I have to wonder if Ao was necessary if for no other reason than to explain why truly Important Deities (as defined by Planescape) hadn't kicked the FR upstarts to Baator and back and taken Faerun (and any other prime they pleased) for their own. You know, since they had real power (as defined by Planescape) in real planar politics (as defined by Planescape).
GothicDan 09-09-07, 12:23 PM	You do realize that your typical person in any prime world - 99.9999% of the population - would have no idea about ANY of this, right? It feels way too much like metagaming for my taste. It seems like it's largely the reason Eberron was made how it was - the adventurers are the sole important people, and all other aspects of the setting without the PCs should just be ignored. I just think it's showing the hubris inherent in the current gaming methodology to think that, to be special, you must be the center of the world/multiverse/what have you. And you seem to have a real misunderstanding of how Planescape worked. It was power of belief that really made things roll, and not necessarily sheer NUMBER of believers. You're simplifying things to the point of stupidity (note: not YOU being stupid, but you describing something complex and awesome as something stupid).
SgtAnjay 09-09-07, 01:44 PM	Of course most people in the worlds themselves have no idea about the cosmic scheme of things. But I'm a DM, not a comm1 on some turnip farm in Cormyr. And it irks me, as a DM, that this other setting is busy being bigger badder better because they're in on the dark and not silly little prime conies like my chosen campaign setting. There's an undercurrent of inherent superiority I didn't like in Planescape in relation to other settings, thats the long and the short of it. I'm not annoyed Forgotten Realms isn't the center of the multiverse, I'm annoyed that not only does Planescape does get to be the center of the multiverse, but they know they get to be the center of the multiverse. But 3rd edition rectified that, so perhaps I wasn't the only one feeling that way. And I'm not describing things "stupidly", I'm describing the thoughts and emotions that this complex construct called Planescape created in relation to the greater multiverse through my perceptions. This has nothing to do with Planescape on its own or its internal concepts. Basically, I dislike how Planescape interacted with the other campaign settings, not Planescape itself. If things from my point of view seem distasteful to you, then at least you understand why I feel negatively, even if you dont agree with my perceptions. Mission accomplished.
MarkHall 09-09-07, 03:24 PM	So, you were annoyed because Planescape thought it was better than you?
GothicDan 09-09-07, 09:55 PM	I hate it when inanimate things think they're better than me. ;)
godbeepit 09-09-07, 10:34 PM	So do I! It's so frustrating! And then when you argue with them they just give you the silent treatment! Arrrgh!:rant:
SgtAnjay 09-10-07, 01:31 AM	:rolleyes: Right, fine, sorry I brought up the possibility that Planescape shouldn't be the official greatest campaign setting in D&D with all others being mere footnotes that exist for those poor sods who couldn't get to the Great Wheel and have real adventures.
MarkHall 09-10-07, 04:28 AM	See, for me, Planescape was always the footnote. I couldn't concieve of starting a game there. If my group went out to the outer planes, I'd use Planescape to give it some color, but I kept the order of operations firm in my mind... the outer planes existed because of the Primes. Individual people from the primes weren't terribly important (unless they made themselves so), but the primes as a whole were. So the drama on the Planes was really about gaining the attention of the Primes, about gaining power and influence... because without them, they cease to exist.
GothicDan 09-10-07, 09:56 AM	Sgt, you really DID miss a lot of Planescape. The condescending feel you're talking about? Such statements were made largely from a Sigilian point of view. It was all about flavor, not fact. And as to the 'real adventure's part... That was around since before Planescape, when the Planes were nothing more than a dungeon for high level PCs who had surpassed the challenges on the Prime. It's a remnant of 1E more than anything else.
SgtAnjay 09-10-07, 02:59 PM	See, for me, Planescape was always the footnote. I couldn't concieve of starting a game there. If my group went out to the outer planes, I'd use Planescape to give it some color, but I kept the order of operations firm in my mind... the outer planes existed because of the Primes. Individual people from the primes weren't terribly important (unless they made themselves so), but the primes as a whole were. So the drama on the Planes was really about gaining the attention of the Primes, about gaining power and influence... because without them, they cease to exist.You could run a campaign that way, but the fact is that in Planescape there were plenty of mortals inhabiting the planes, so believers would be in ready supply even if a a prime or two (or, in other words, a couple of the other entire campaign settings) were completely destroyed. Not to mention that infinite primes but only One Cosmology (i.e., the Great Wheel) makes the primes a dime a dozen while its the planes that are truly unique and important. Sgt, you really DID miss a lot of Planescape. The condescending feel you're talking about? Such statements were made largely from a Sigilian point of view. It was all about flavor, not fact.Oh, there was plenty of flavor touting how superior the Planescape environs and its inhabitants were. But as I stated above, the fact that the infinite prime planes (usually designated in planar diagrams by a little bubble somewhere about the imposing figure of the Great Wheel) were each multitude while the Wheel and its planes unique in all of existence puts the cosmology in a position of superiority, in fact as well as flavor. However, 3rd ed rectified this, and you'll have to excuse me if I dont think this is a coincidence.
GothicDan 09-10-07, 03:56 PM	Oh, there was plenty of flavor touting how superior the Planescape environs and its inhabitants were. But as I stated above, the fact that the infinite prime planes (usually designated in planar diagrams by a little bubble somewhere about the imposing figure of the Great Wheel) were each multitude while the Wheel and its planes unique in all of existence puts the cosmology in a position of superiority, in fact as well as flavor. Demiplanes could evolve into full planes, giving time - the Demiplane of Shadow was thought by some to be on that path. And there's evidence that at one point the Inner Planes were arranged completely differently. And the Great Wheel WASN'T an actual physical construct. The Outer Planes had no actual physical structure. The Great Wheel was the philosophical structure created largely by SIGILIAN natives - why do you think they show Sigil and the Spire at the center? Not because it actually IS, but because THEY think it is. I've honestly never heard of anyone reading PS so wrong. Look at my name - GothicDan. It claims I'm Gothic. Currently I'm wearing bright orange sunglasses, a neon green polo, and jean shorts. Is that very Gothic? No, but my apparent statement sure says I am. Planescape was rife with irony, a lot of it you seemed not to have picked up on - or at least chosen specifically to ignore. However, 3rd ed rectified this, and you'll have to excuse me if I dont think this is a coincidence. I don't see the connection.
SgtAnjay 09-10-07, 07:13 PM	Hmmm. Perhaps I made it too much about Planescape the setting, because Planescape was specifically set in the cosmology. Really and truly, its how beholden the campaign settings were to the cosmology, not neccesarily the roleplaying setting of Planescape that I dislike. The planes of the Wheel were unique. The prime material planes were many, and any given prime disposable. So a prime material got destroyed; sucks to have been a prime there. But any given major event on a plane of the Great Wheel could reverberate across infinity. And if, say, Mechanus got trashed and reshaped? A Mechanus-Shaking-Event would require detailing across all primes, i.e. every single campaign setting. Moreover, once a major player on the planes is described, be they paragon, manifestation, or deity, you get the disparities in power bringing up questions. The uber-powerful deities worshipped on thousands of worlds could easily make quick work of any upstarts on their home plane. So for example, the cosmic shenanigans (whatever you might think of their quality) involving Cyric, despite how they shook up the Realms, could have been cut short by a planar power deciding Cyric annoyed him, walking across Limbo, and smiting him in a second without a second thought. The Planes could trump the any given prime. The primes, basically, really were just a little bubble attached to the planes of real importance. The flavor of Planescape, where they were all convinced about how much more important they were, was justified because it was fact as well as flavor. 3rd edition changed this. Because the various primes have their own cosmologies, any given prime is no longer insignificant in a cosmic sense. If a prime is destroyed, it matters to more than just that prime. A deity feared for his might and power on Faerun no longer exists solely because a deity with some real power in the planes decided not to kill him out of hand. I like it better that way. That is, of course, my point of view, my preference. I've stated that several times. It is no more, or less, right or wrong than any other personal preference. Certainly I understand that others like the old way better. But I dont find it coincidental nor unfair that now its possible to run a game where your very reality doesnt have to be insignificant.
GothicDan 09-10-07, 07:39 PM	To me, it's no different than if they blew up Waterdeep. Waterdeep, whether you were in Silverymoon or Bezantaur, would still be blown up. You may not like it, either way - Mechanus or Waterdeep blowing up - but ultimately, it's the exact same problem that 3E has had with RSE's. Only in 2E, Planescape, they kept Cosmology-Shaking-Events down to a minimum.
MarkHall 09-10-07, 11:57 PM	I've honestly never heard of anyone reading PS so wrong. Look at my name - GothicDan. It claims I'm Gothic. Currently I'm wearing bright orange sunglasses, a neon green polo, and jean shorts. Is that very Gothic? No, but my apparent statement sure says I am. Dear gods, and I claim to not care about clothing.