# Richard Baker on Orcus and Deity Slaying



## Ultimatecalibur (Mar 27, 2008)

This was originally posted by Richard Baker in the  The one and only "Ask the Realms authors/designers thread" 3 on Wednesday.

Maaaybe. We haven't statted up a deity for fightin' just yet. The toughest thing currently in the game is Orcus, who's around level 33 -- so he's a tough fight for level 30 characters. Of course, Orcus is about the toughest demon, and there are other demon princes who sit in the high 20's.

We've kicked around the idea that a greater god like Moradin could handle Orcus, but couldn't handle Orcus and Demogorgon together. Hence, the greater gods are cautious about picking fights with demons, because you never know if Demogorgon and Grazzt are hiding just around the corner, waiting to jump out and ambush you. That would suggest that Moradin (or any greater god, really) is maybe something like level 37 or 38. He's going to be out of the reach of even 30th-level PCs. That's why I said that taking on a god might involve a whole chain of epic quests to line things up just right--to find the weapon, the place, and the time where you catch a Bane or Shar at their weakest.

So, to sum up: Any high-epic party will likely do in an archdevil, exarch, or demon prince somewhere in their last four or five levels of adventuring, possibly even two or three if the DM sets up the adventures that way. But taking out a greater power is probably something you only do once, and even then, you only do it if the DM decides to make it the theme of the last big adventure your characters have as mortal heroes. It's hardly working your way through Deities & Demigods in alphabetical order.

Interesting explanation about epic opponents isn't it?


----------



## Fallen Seraph (Mar 27, 2008)

Got to say I like it.

It means we can take on the gods, just not directly. Which I always liked, I have always liked the idea of mortals tricking a god into a situation where they have the upper-hand and demanding something from the god, or simply killing the god.

So thumbs up for me  

I wonder though, if any of these 37-level gods will be stated out? Perhaps in a pantheon book?


----------



## Lurks-no-More (Mar 27, 2008)

Sounds like a good idea to me, as well.

Not sure about whether the gods should be statted out... if they're supposed to be "optional end-bosses", WotC is probably going to focus more on the archdevils, demon princes and exarchs in game-mechanical terms.


----------



## Fallen Seraph (Mar 27, 2008)

*Nods* Personally doesn't matter to me too, if my players take down gods it will be in RP-terms not mechanics.

 But, some groups given they have gained these "god-killing weapons" and various strategies, they will want to actually fight the god, so will need stats then.


----------



## Mouseferatu (Mar 27, 2008)

> Of course, Orcus is about the toughest demon, and there are other demon princes who sit in the high 20's.




Bah! Everyone knows that Demogorgon's tougher than that goat-faced upstart


----------



## malcolm_n (Mar 27, 2008)

> Bah! Everyone knows that Demogorgon's tougher than that goat-faced upstart




If more arms = tougher, maybe 

As to gods, if they flesh them out, per se, they'll probably stat them as 30 solos and tell you to quest to get them that easy to kill.


----------



## AZRogue (Mar 27, 2008)

Orcus level 33? Cool, that sounds about right. If the power ratio remains fairly constant, that would be like a DnDXP party going up against that black dragon. Very, very difficult but possible. Or somewhere in that ballpark.

A diety? I would like them to be given stats at some point, I imagine, like in a supplement. I think they should go ahead and do what was mentioned here and keep them level 38 or so. That would put them beyond the normal party and would require some special circumstances for a PC party to take them on.

BUT it would also give me, as a DM, the ability to have, say, Moradin, Orcus, Demogorgon, and a host of devils and angles all in one place having it out and the PCs caught up in the middle, tipping the scales one way or the other. Level 38 is well outside the range of a normal party but stats at that level would give me the tools to plop them down in an epic adventure somewhere and turn it into something memorable. 

As a matter of fact, the most memorable adventure ever for my group was a 1E adventure with a Cloud Dragon and a lot of Gates and rolls on the random tables. We had so many Gods, Devils, Demons, Solars, and what have you in that fight that the combat itself took five sessions. We still talk about that one. If I could approach that again, that would be awesome.


----------



## Plane Sailing (Mar 27, 2008)

Nice 1e feel to that.


----------



## dm4hire (Mar 27, 2008)

Wow, if the toughest dwarf god is only 38, I'd hate to run into the Lady of Pain.    

Anyone who can keep gods in check has got to be at the top of the food chain.  I'd say she'd be at least lvl 40 if not 45 then, maybe even 50!!     I remember when they first introduced her they said they'd never stat her out as they wanted her to give that awe of absolute power, so powerful no one could fathom how powerful she is.


----------



## AZRogue (Mar 27, 2008)

I always thought the Lady of Pain was all powerful ... but only in Sigil. I thought she was just the baddest of the bad, there, but of unknown power elsewhere.


----------



## Fallen Seraph (Mar 27, 2008)

Oh Lady of Pain one of the most kick-ass characters ever in D&D. I am looking forward to seeing how they fit her and Sigil into 4e.

I suspect/hope they keep her in-particular un-stated for just the reasons you said above.

Yeah part of her power comes from simply refusing to allow gods within Sigil. I think the second most powerful person/thing in Sigil is the one wizard or necromancer (forgot his name) with all the skulls and true-names (forgot his name funny enough).


----------



## dm4hire (Mar 27, 2008)

She was all powerful, but to maintain the peace in Sigil she couldn't be worshiped or it would break the truce that allowed for all alignments to mingle there in peace.  Anyone caught trying to worship her was either killed or banished into the maze.  It was noted that she did fight a god or two in the initial fight for Sigil, but they never really got into it.  Helped keep the mystery going.

She'd have Orcus toeing the line, going "Yes ma'am."


----------



## Fallen Seraph (Mar 27, 2008)

dm4hire said:
			
		

> She'd have Orcus toeing the line, going "Yes ma'am."




Hehe, just got a mental image of her hovering through the streets of Sigil, and having Orcus walk behind her, with head down, sniffling like a little kid.


----------



## skullking (Mar 27, 2008)

Fallen Seraph said:
			
		

> Hehe, just got a mental image of her hovering through the streets of Sigil, and having Orcus walk behind her, with head down, sniffling like a little kid.




Until he butts her in the ass!


----------



## AZRogue (Mar 27, 2008)

That's strange. I must have really misread something when I first got the original boxed set, then (which I no longer have, more's the pity). I remember basing an entire campaign around the Lady of Pain sending agents out across the planes because she was, effectively, powerless, helpless, and a big target if she left Sigil itself. So she worked through proxies. 

This was a while back, and my only Planescape campaign, though, so I'm sure it's just my memory.


----------



## dm4hire (Mar 27, 2008)

Yeah she basically walked in and smacked everyone around and said this is how it was going to be.  I think the biggest reason she couldn't leave Sigil was she'd made so many enemies by doing that, that if she left they would all attack her.  So as long as no one worshiped her under the agreement no god could come into Sigil keeping her safe, but at the same time trapping her within the city.  She is the ultimate being of neutrality with a really really, I mean really big ruler she can smack you with.


----------



## Roman (Mar 27, 2008)

Mouseferatu said:
			
		

> Bah! Everyone knows that Demogorgon's tougher than that goat-faced upstart




Agreed! Demogorgon could/should have Orcus for breakfast!


----------



## AZRogue (Mar 27, 2008)

dm4hire said:
			
		

> Yeah she basically walked in and smacked everyone around and said this is how it was going to be.  I think the biggest reason she couldn't leave Sigil was she'd made so many enemies by doing that, that if she left they would all attack her.  So as long as no one worshiped her under the agreement no god could come into Sigil keeping her safe, but at the same time trapping her within the city.  She is the ultimate being of neutrality with a really really, I mean really big ruler she can smack you with.




I think I must have misunderstood the reasoning behind her being trapped in Sigil, then, as that makes sense. I remember her use of proxies and that was the defining factor of the campaign; that and the Doors, of which the PCs came across a listing of several on their home plane though they didn't at first realize their significance. Either way, it was a very long, and very fun campaign that was a blast to run. We went with a FR campaign after that one to get back to some basics and that's when 3E came out and so never got the chance to revisit, really. If a 4E Planescape book came out, I would use it in a second.

And now back to your regularly scheduled, on topic, thread.


----------



## dm4hire (Mar 27, 2008)

I agree with Planescape, it was my all time favorite.  December is the Manual of the Planes and I'm hoping it is covered.  Sigil would fit in nicely with the Points of Light theme and to be honest marketing wise it is about time for Planescape to come back.  Most settings outside of Greyhawk, Forgotten Realms, and Dragonlance only go for about two years or so.  Plus Planescape would fit nicely for epic and beyond to which the Lady of Pain would be a great way to keep the party in control, especially if they leave her statless.

I can see the party now when receiving their orders from one of the proxies.  "The Lady wants us to kick who out of Sigil?  Um, won't that make him mad at us?"

"That's your problem, not hers.  Unless..... you want it to be her problem?"

"Right, well let's get to it then."


----------



## Fallen Seraph (Mar 27, 2008)

Well apparently in the DMG there is going to be atleast a paragraph talking about Sigil. So hopefully they will expand upon it.


----------



## nick012000 (Mar 27, 2008)

Uhh... the Lady of Pain never acted through proxies, unless you count those rare occasions when she turned up with a dabus beside her doing her talking to be "acting through proxies". Hell, she hardly ever acted, period; the entire point of her was the mystery. Well, that, and that she was a living plot hammer to smash anything that got too out of whack and threatened Sigil.

She certainly never gave any PCs any jobs. If your PCs are running errands for the Lady of Pain, your DM is doing Planescape wrong.


----------



## Quartz (Mar 27, 2008)

I'm guessing that something like the Epic Level Handbook will come along in a year or so.


----------



## Skyduke (Mar 27, 2008)

Sounds good to me. Although to be honest, even the Pit Fiend, with its level 26 elite build, didn't seem THAT powerful to me. I hope the level 33 and up provide suitable challenges for PCs that think they can kill gods.


----------



## Doug McCrae (Mar 27, 2008)

I like the god killing, it's very D&D.

Anything with stats can be killed and in D&D everything has stats. The Lady of Pain is a 2e aberration. I say bring her in line with the rest of the game's history and smash her stupid pointy face in.


----------



## Nightchilde-2 (Mar 27, 2008)

I like this.  I hope they do stat out the gods, but keep them mostly out-of-reach of the PCs. 

I like having god-stats.  I dislike having the PCs waltz in and whack them.

I'm so glad gnomes are out, maybe this time we won't get such a a..ahrm.."fabulous"...picture of Garl Glittergold in this edition's Deities & Demigods...


----------



## Plane Sailing (Mar 27, 2008)

nick012000 said:
			
		

> She certainly never gave any PCs any jobs. If your PCs are running errands for the Lady of Pain, your DM is doing Planescape wrong.




No. Just No.

Who are you to say that a DM is "doing Planescape wrong"? It is a campaign setting that any DM can take and run with however they like. There is no "wrong" about it. There are no "Planescape Police".

If someone wanted to treat the lady of pain as if she was the wizard of Oz (i.e. a big fake) for their own campaign then -that is how it is- in that campaign. That is "right" for their campaign.

Please don't pronounce judgements on other peoples campaigns.

Thanks


----------



## (Psi)SeveredHead (Mar 27, 2008)

MAny demon lords are in their high twenties? Isn't the pit fiend level 26?


----------



## robertliguori (Mar 27, 2008)

Doug McCrae said:
			
		

> I like the god killing, it's very D&D.
> 
> Anything with stats can be killed and in D&D everything has stats. The Lady of Pain is a 2e aberration. I say bring her in line with the rest of the game's history and smash her stupid pointy face in.




I'm reasonably sure that if she's in, she'll be statted up similar to how Atropus was, as an aspect of Sigil, with a refractory regeneration period of no action.  So, totally demolish her, and another comes along instantly while Sigil still stands.  That's how I'd do it.


----------



## Khuxan (Mar 27, 2008)

(Psi)SeveredHead said:
			
		

> MAny demon lords are in their high twenties? Isn't the pit fiend level 26?




It's an Elite 26. I assume the demon lords will be solos. I think over twice as powerful as a pit fiend is sufficiently powerful.


----------



## DonAdam (Mar 27, 2008)

I want to know at what level I can start granting the townsfolk spells for worshiping me.


----------



## Elsenrail (Mar 27, 2008)

So that means a lesser god would have the power of Orcus/Demogorgon. It sounds very nice. A great challenge for a player. (and fighting a greater power only in certain circumstances).


----------



## Upper_Krust (Mar 27, 2008)

Hey all! 

Very interesting.

Assuming Orcus is a solo monster, then Level 33 would be roughly equal to a Level 42 Standard monster (in terms of EXP). While Moradin, at 37th, would be akin to 46th level.

Interesting that he suggests a dynamic of Demogorgon + Orcus to deal with Moradin (a 4 level difference assuming all three are solo encounters). That presents each 'step-up' (Lesser Deity to Greater Deity in this case) as a jump of power akin to an Elite monster vs. a Standard monster. I was sort of thinking it would be more like Solo Monster vs. Standard Monster.

...oh and my money's on Demogorgon against Orcus.


----------



## Li Shenron (Mar 27, 2008)

Ultimatecalibur said:
			
		

> This was originally posted by Richard Baker in the  The one and only "Ask the Realms authors/designers thread" 3 on Wednesday.
> 
> Maaaybe. We haven't statted up a deity for fightin' just yet. The toughest thing currently in the game is Orcus, who's around level 33 -- so he's a tough fight for level 30 characters. Of course, Orcus is about the toughest demon, and there are other demon princes who sit in the high 20's.
> 
> ...




That seems a very reasonable approach to me. The gamers will certainly screw it up.


----------



## Saishu_Heiki (Mar 27, 2008)

Li Shenron said:
			
		

> That seems a very reasonable approach to me. The gamers will certainly screw it up.



Games work perfectly until people get involved 

Hmm.... that applies to my network as well. There is never a failure until a user gets involved. If I eliminate the users, then I eliminate the point of failure. Brilliant!


----------



## dm4hire (Mar 27, 2008)

nick012000 said:
			
		

> Uhh... the Lady of Pain never acted through proxies, unless you count those rare occasions when she turned up with a dabus beside her doing her talking to be "acting through proxies".




Thanks, I couldn't remember the race's name, and since I was up at 4am due to my cold I am surprised I remembered anything.  The Dabus where just as mysterious and where a great way to tick your players off with their pictograph dialog by having them interpret what they were saying when they first met them.  After that I usually just said what they had to say.

I love that they are at least keeping the concept of killing a god as a possibility, making it into a quest makes it even more interesting.  A quest like that would be very epic in performing as well as telling, along the lines of the Odyssey, having to search for various things or complete given tasks before being able to fight the god in question.  The place could be some battlefield where the god once stood, summoned after the hero finds a horn blown in that battle to challenge him, and then the hero has to fight with a sword forged by the titans.  Anything else would be extra garnish to make it more interesting.  Very epic indeed.


----------



## hexgrid (Mar 27, 2008)

Quartz said:
			
		

> I'm guessing that something like the Epic Level Handbook will come along in a year or so.




I hope not. Or at least, I hope the point of it isn't to add non-ending level advancement like the 3e version did. Doing this really screws with the meta-setting if you've already established the most powerful beings in the multiverse as being in the 30's, level wise.


----------



## EATherrian (Mar 27, 2008)

I like the idea of fighting Gods, but I'll still stick to the copout that these are just their avatars.  To truly destroy a God would never involve direct combat for me, it would be a wild ride of a campaign though I bet.

Oh, and everyone knows that Dagon is the real power of the demons.


----------



## happyelf (Mar 27, 2008)

dm4hire said:
			
		

> Wow, if the toughest dwarf god is only 38, I'd hate to run into the Lady of Pain.
> 
> Anyone who can keep gods in check has got to be at the top of the food chain.  I'd say she'd be at least lvl 40 if not 45 then, maybe even 50!!     I remember when they first introduced her they said they'd never stat her out as they wanted her to give that awe of absolute power, so powerful no one could fathom how powerful she is.



I would assume she falls under the 'right place at the right time' clause they mentioned. Any god stupid enough to step into sigil is in trouble, but I doubt she could exert much power elsewhere.


----------



## Dausuul (Mar 27, 2008)

What I wonder is how they plan to handle the problem I always had with gods.  It's essentially the same problem one has running a campaign in the Forgotten Realms--namely, if the PCs are on a quest to stop Evil from overrunning the world (or significant portion thereof), how come all these super-powerful good-aligned NPCs don't come and fix the problem, instead of relying on a mismatched handful of adventurers to get the job done?

A common solution to this problem is one of those nonintervention deals where the gods have an agreement not to interfere in the mortal world lest it start an apocalyptic war... but those always make the gods feel a little wussy to me, and if the stakes get high enough it stops being credible (that is, if the lords of the Abyss are about to crack the world like an egg, direct divine intervention would seem to be justified regardless of the risks).

Maybe the gods are physically unable to manifest directly in the material plane?  Then if you want to kill one, you have to go to the Astral Sea and find his/her divine dominion.


----------



## franzel (Mar 27, 2008)

hexgrid said:
			
		

> I hope not. Or at least, I hope the point of it isn't to add non-ending level advancement like the 3e version did. Doing this really screws with the meta-setting if you've already established the most powerful beings in the multiverse as being in the 30's, level wise.




And not doing it screws with campaigns where you already have 30th level+ characters.

I have been saying to my gaming group for a while that 4e has a very 2e feel about it so far, including a hard cap at 30th level.  We got around that in '97 by introducing "salient" powers (based conceptually off the spelljammer archlich) that you could advance by spending earned experience points once you stopped leveling.  Looks like we'll have to go back to that idea just to squeeze our ~50th level party back into a 30th level box.


----------



## I'm A Banana (Mar 27, 2008)

Yep! This is a good direction, and god-killin' is lots of fun, so I'm very content with this. Definately a better solution than 3e's "Uh....no CR, but here's some stats!" approach.


----------



## Steely Dan (Mar 27, 2008)

dm4hire said:
			
		

> She was all powerful, but to maintain the peace in Sigil she couldn't be worshiped or it would break the truce that allowed for all alignments to mingle there in peace.




The Kriegstanz, right?


----------



## dm4hire (Mar 27, 2008)

I don't remember off hand the agreement, but that's the gist of it.  My books are buried away if I still have them.  There use to be a pretty good Planescape fan site, but not sure if it is still active.  It was sorta like the site for FR that led to "Grand History of the Realms" only Planescape.


----------



## I'm A Banana (Mar 27, 2008)

Planewalker.com still is active and going.

But, really, the Lady of Pain is and IMO should always be Big Mystery territory. If one DM wants to define her/it, cool, but there shouldn't be an official explanation. Just a description of what she actually does and her effects on Sigil. 

But that's all tangental to the discussion about PC's killin' gods.


----------



## WyzardWhately (Mar 27, 2008)

Well, remember, 4E scales differently.  That is, each individual level increase is less of a big deal than it was in 3.x.  So, getting together like 10 30th level adventurers to take down something that should normally outclass a party is probably a much more reasonable option, if you really have to go out there and take down Moradin himself.


----------



## ruleslawyer (Mar 27, 2008)

Steely Dan said:
			
		

> The Kriegstanz, right?



No; that's the faction war.

As to the Lady: The entire point of the PS materials is that all that people really know about her is that a) you don't worship her, or you'll come to a bad end; and b) she's effectively omnipotent within Sigil. Everything else is a mystery.

Doug: I tend to agree with you, but I will say that mysterious plot devices are fun, and that it's not so much that there should be some sort of _prohibition_ on entities having stats (as there was in 2e), but that such a thing is a nice option for DMs. For instance, IMC it is unlikely (or, shall we say, impossible) that PCs will ever directly interact with gods. Demons, angels, strange otherwordly beings? Sure. But one of the major divine objects of worship? No. Gods IMC are plot devices; they may or may not have physical manifestations or avatars, they may act to empower places or people, they may send people on strange paths of destiny, but they're not necessarily tangible characters. Nothing wrong with Rich's approach, but I don't think it has to be the only one.


----------



## lukelightning (Mar 27, 2008)

Fallen Seraph said:
			
		

> Oh Lady of Pain one of the most kick-ass characters ever in D&D.




Meh. She always struck me as rather hackneyed, like a clumsily implemented personification of DM-fiat plus deus-ex-machina.

Edit: I don't know much about her from the source materials, rather mostly from people's comments on the boards, which is probably tainting my impression, a la "she's so kewl she can kill gods and cut people's souls apart with her hair and when my PCs think they've defeated the BBEG she's gonna stop them with her L33t powerz to maintain balance!"


----------



## MichaelK (Mar 27, 2008)

Plane Sailing said:
			
		

> If someone wanted to treat the lady of pain as if she was the wizard of Oz (i.e. a big fake) for their own campaign then -that is how it is- in that campaign. That is "right" for their campaign.




That is the coolest idea I've ever heard for a planescape game.


----------



## Daniel D. Fox (Mar 27, 2008)

Feh, I still cannot for the life of me get behind "killing gods" in D&D.


----------



## Daniel D. Fox (Mar 27, 2008)

MichaelK said:
			
		

> That is the coolest idea I've ever heard for a planescape game.




This one.


----------



## frankthedm (Mar 27, 2008)

lukelightning said:
			
		

> Meh. She always struck me as rather hackneyed, like a clumsily implemented personification of DM-fiat plus deus-ex-machina.



Yeah, she was an in-joke about the TSR boss.


----------



## AZRogue (Mar 27, 2008)

Moniker said:
			
		

> Feh, I still cannot for the life of me get behind "killing gods" in D&D.




I'm sure other people ran their games differently, but the concept, for my group, began with 1E. Remember the 02% chance to have your Patron God show up to help you (or punish you, depending) if you called out for help? I've seen that roll succeed five times, though we used to do it for everything. It was just a natural progression. And that was before I was the DM of the group so the encounter would start going bad, we'd call out for aid, and get the roll, the patron diety would show up, and the DM would trump it by having the bad guy open a Gate and having an evil God show up in return. And so it went.

Of course, those were the days when we'd have our characters gamble and if they lost and couldn't pay we'd stick a Ring of Regeneration on them, hack them to pieces, and carry them in a sack until they could come up with the cash somehow.

So, killing Gods, or at least having it be POSSIBLE, is very old school to me.


----------



## dm4hire (Mar 27, 2008)

I'd model it after Tinman if I did it as that miniseries was a pretty good twist of the story.

I never saw the Lady of Pain as hackneyed, the principle idea what the everyone should be too busy to be concerned with her or concerned with fighting her.  She's more the genie in the bottle you don't want to let out.

A lot of thought has to go into it as well; ready to face the consequences of their actions both good and bad.  I had a group of players who magic jarred Asmodeus one time and thought they were the bomb; ready to rule Hell until I pointed out that they had just disrupted the balance of power and they were fools to think any Devil was going to let them, let alone escape Hell alive with it.  When they exclaimed they would just break him free if they got attacked I asked what they thought he'd do then.  Worried they suggested turning the bottle over to a good god and I pointed out that they probably wouldn't be too keen on that either.  They suddenly realized the extent of their brash bright idea and planeshifted away before anyone caught them.  The bottle turned up in a neutral temple where it vanished shortly after reaching the alter.  They were tough but they lacked the requirement to maintain control over what they thought they were going to do, if not for the jar they would have lost the fight as it was.


----------



## ruleslawyer (Mar 27, 2008)

lukelightning said:
			
		

> Meh. She always struck me as rather hackneyed, like a clumsily implemented personification of DM-fiat plus deus-ex-machina.



Funny. I always thought of her as the Elizabeth I to Sigil's 16th-century London. (Moreover, I've never thought she was either "hackneyed" or "clumsily implemented." How many other Gloriana figures are there in FRPGs? How many other deities who kill you for daring to worship them? How many other figures who directly exploit D&D's gate and demiplane mechanics like that?)


----------



## kennew142 (Mar 27, 2008)

I don't like the idea of PCs killing gods either. It doesn't fit my campaign style. I don't even like the gods to intervene indirectly IMC. Heck, my upcoming 4e campaign doesn't even have gods, just very powerful celestials and infernals. Even they don't know the true font of the divine power source.

Other folks like it, however, so I'm glad the rules support it.


----------



## lukelightning (Mar 27, 2008)

ruleslawyer said:
			
		

> How many other Gloriana figures are there in FRPGs? How many other deities who kill you for daring to worship them? How many other figures who directly exploit D&D's gate and demiplane mechanics like that?)




There are lots of super glory goddess/figures types in D&D and fantasy literature.  The Forgotten Realms are full of them.

How many other deities who kill you for daring to worship them? All of them...eventually.   

How many other figures who directly exploit D&D's gate and demiplane mechanics like that?
The "omnipotent in my own realm" trope is hardly novel. Heck, it's kind of an assumption of _all_ deities to explain why they don't come to "Earth" (or whatever land) and stop the bad guys themselves. They are powerful in their own realms but not outside.


----------



## Keenath (Mar 27, 2008)

DonAdam said:
			
		

> I want to know at what level I can start granting the townsfolk spells for worshiping me.



Well, I dunno about THAT, but I think you get to be a demigod if you complete the Apotheosis epic destiny.


----------



## ruleslawyer (Mar 27, 2008)

lukelightning said:
			
		

> There are lots of super glory goddess/figures types in D&D and fantasy literature.  The Forgotten Realms are full of them.



This right here explains why I don't think you're getting the point. "super glory goddess" has nothing to do with Gloriana. Likewise to my point about planar mechanics; I'm not talking about "home field advantage," but rather about the idea of gate and demiplane mastery, which is briefly explored in Moorcock but not really anywhere else.


----------



## lukelightning (Mar 27, 2008)

I have no problem with PCs killing gods.  Of course, in the games I run there are no real gods, only "gods";  you know, those powerful pushy beings who think they are all that, but really they are just puffed-up demons/devils/angels/whatevers.  They don't really grant spells, they just know some secrets of tapping into some divine power sources which they then pass on to a select few of their worshippers.


----------



## Fifth Element (Mar 27, 2008)

nick012000 said:
			
		

> She certainly never gave any PCs any jobs. If your PCs are running errands for the Lady of Pain, your DM is doing Planescape wrong.



How can anyone ever do any campaign wrong as long as they enjoy it? There's no one right way to do anything in D&D. Is it fun? If yes, you're doing it right.


----------



## Elsenrail (Mar 27, 2008)

I only hope they get rid of the overgods (because its confusing*). Greater powers are enough. There are some imprisoned primordials as well.

*I don't like the idea that there is a Big Brother whose job is to maintain neutrality and stability of the cosmos. The universe is all about possibilities for the PCs. If they want to shake its foundations, so be it. It's a game.

It seems the whole concept of deities is similar to Greek ones. They are strong, but they can be outfoxed and beaten. Hercules was a demigod, but he couldn't take an army single-handily.


----------



## Doug McCrae (Mar 27, 2008)

In my opinion these are the good ways to handle the gods:

1. Distant and unknowable. May not exist at all. Cannot be killed.
2. Walk around on Earth, get in the PCs' faces and are generally annoying. Can be killed.


And this is the bad, wrong way:

1. Walk around on Earth, get in the PCs' faces and are generally annoying. Cannot be killed.


----------



## ruleslawyer (Mar 27, 2008)

Are you citing badwrongfun, Doug? 

Seriously, I agree with you 100%. Making the gods unwieldy 60th-level monstrosities like 3e did was IMO the worst approach. I actually didn't mind the 2e approach so much, with its separation of gods into plot devices (who couldn't visit the Material Plane) and fightable monsters (avatars), but I found the 3e approach nigh-useless.


----------



## WyzardWhately (Mar 27, 2008)

I like the idea that there are numerous different kinds of greater powers, and any or all of them can be served by supernaturally imbued mortals (clerics, essentially.)  This ranges from the great big Demon-crocodile god that a high-end Heroic party could potentially slay, to regional god-kings that are mid-to-high Paragon solos by themselves, to extra-planar beings like the aforementioned jumped-up angels and demons, to things above that, the planar divinities that have portfolio-style power over aspects of the Prime, to those inscrutable powers from the Far Realms...etc.

If any of these things are eternal, they are so only in a sort of cyclical sense, and how inscrutable they are depends a lot on where you are in relation to them.  So, the Great Old One equivalents are as incomprehensible to the Level 15 Pharaoh-esque God-King as the Pharaoh's intricate byzantine plots are to the illiterate but HUNGRY crocodile-god.

I, too, want to know how many people the PCs need to have worshipping them before they can grant spells to their clerics.  This is relevant to my interests, you see.


----------



## WyzardWhately (Mar 27, 2008)

Doug McCrae said:
			
		

> In my opinion these are the good ways to handle the gods:
> 
> 1. Distant and unknowable. May not exist at all. Cannot be killed.
> 2. Walk around on Earth, get in the PCs' faces and are generally annoying. Can be killed.
> ...




I think we're more or less on the same page.  My preference is to definitely have option 2, and maybe option 1 as well, in the same world.


----------



## Shemeska (Mar 27, 2008)

Not my cup of tea (statted gods and archfiends), but I can respect the 1e nostalgia of having PCs fighting them directly (and to be fair, I once let a PC suckerpunch the Oinoloth).

However, that said, giving the reason that greater gods don't just go kill Orcus as being that Grazzt or Demogorgon might be lurking around like a tagteam of The Million Dollar Man and Ultimate Warrior to help out Orcus's Andre the Giant?







I'm joking. Mostly. Kinda. The reasoning just doesn't work for me.


----------



## med stud (Mar 27, 2008)

After reading the novels by Steven Erikson (great reads btw), I'm all sold on this idea! In his books the goods are very powerful, but still slayable. There are also beings on the world that are more powerful than the gods.

After reading those novels I got my head full of campaign ideas for a 4e game. God slaying is one of them


----------



## Goobermunch (Mar 27, 2008)

Mouseferatu said:
			
		

> Bah! Everyone knows that Demogorgon's tougher than that goat-faced upstart




At least until Orcus gets his hands on the GSL.    

--G


----------



## Chocobo (Mar 27, 2008)

hexgrid said:
			
		

> I hope not. Or at least, I hope the point of it isn't to add non-ending level advancement like the 3e version did. Doing this really screws with the meta-setting if you've already established the most powerful beings in the multiverse as being in the 30's, level wise.




I wouldn't say it is out of the question for the eventual Deities and Demigods book to include rules for playing in the Immortal tier (31-40).  BECM_*I*_ did it after all, and the quoted article did say "last big adventure your characters have _as mortal heroes_".


----------



## Elsenrail (Mar 27, 2008)

You can become immortal before reaching 30th level. Lichedom, becoming a shade, perhaps as a monk, vampire.


----------



## WyzardWhately (Mar 27, 2008)

Chocobo said:
			
		

> I wouldn't say it is out of the question for the eventual Deities and Demigods book to include rules for playing in the Immortal tier (31-40).  BECM_*I*_ did it after all, and the quoted article did say "last big adventure your characters have _as mortal heroes_".




I'd probably buy that.  I've felt a certain incompleteness in those editions of the game that didn't include rules for apotheosis.


----------



## DM_Blake (Mar 27, 2008)

I haven't seen it mentioned in this thread yet, so here's my plug for The Primal Order.

Find it, buy it, swear by it.

The short version:
This book takes a look at gods and offers rules for them that can be applied to any RPG. Basically, the same power that wizards use to cast a fireball, or mentalists use to read minds, or druids use to wildshape, etc., is all just a shadow of Primal magic. To use Primal magic, you need to be a Primal entity. How you become a Primal entity can vary, but typically for a guy to start out mortal (a PC of any usual D&D variety) then become Primal, he needs to receive a Primal infusion from some other Primal entity. This weakens the giver but strengthens the receiver - most Primal entities don't do this lightly.

Once you have Primal energy, you can tap into the raw power of the universe. You don't need spells, you don't need rituals. Your power is yours to bid as you see fit. You get some replenishable reserves (for simplicity, the reserve replenishes daily) and you get some base energy that doesn't replenish - ever. You can spend both kinds of energy, but spending your base becomes a slow road to suicide.

Primal energy is far more powerful than other kinds of energy. The simplest Primal Bolt would blast straight through a Prismatic Wall as if it wasn't even there, and the simplist Primal Shield would stop a Maximized Enlarged Meteor Swarm.

With Primal energy you can build things, destroy things, answer prayers of your faithful, etc. But since your reserves are limited, you need to spend your energy wisely. The most efficient use of Primal is to trickle it into other, simpler activities, such as using a normal human to lift a giant boulder and infusing his muscles with just enough Primal to get the job done - this uses less Primal energy than doing some sort of Primal Telekinesis to lift the same boulder.

You increase your Base and Daily Primal by gaining followers, building temples and shrines, gaining domains (e.g. being the God of Fire), gaining planes (e.g. being the god who rules the Plane of Fire) and you can take Primal from other entities by force, sucking the divine life out of them.

This book gives a very interesting set of rules to explain how to become Primal, how to use Primal energy, and how to exist and grow as a Primal entity.

It's a very fun read, and very easy to incorporate into just about any RPG. I have used it 3 times in 3 long epic campaigns in which players eventually gained some Primal energy, then had to figure out what to do with it, and had to face Primal entities that far transcend the stuff you find in any Monster Manual.

Great fun for all.


----------



## EATherrian (Mar 28, 2008)

Shemeska said:
			
		

> Not my cup of tea (statted gods and archfiends), but I can respect the 1e nostalgia of having PCs fighting them directly (and to be fair, I once let a PC suckerpunch the Oinoloth).
> 
> However, that said, giving the reason that greater gods don't just go kill Orcus as being that Grazzt or Demogorgon might be lurking around like a tagteam of The Million Dollar Man and Ultimate Warrior to help out Orcus's Andre the Giant?
> 
> ...




ASTROSLAM MMMMCMXXVIII - This year the Dead Dudes Orcus and Hades take on Team Lightning Zeus and Thor in an Admantite Cage Match hovering above the plane of Coordinate Opposition!  The guest referee Asmodeus assures us that everything will be on the up and up and there is most certainly no horde of devils waiting to destroy the winners.   Scouts honor.  See it on Astravision for only 10 Astral Diamonds!


----------



## ruleslawyer (Mar 28, 2008)

Shemeska said:
			
		

> Not my cup of tea (statted gods and archfiends), but I can respect the 1e nostalgia of having PCs fighting them directly (and to be fair, I once let a PC suckerpunch the Oinoloth).
> 
> However, that said, giving the reason that greater gods don't just go kill Orcus as being that Grazzt or Demogorgon might be lurking around like a tagteam of The Million Dollar Man and Ultimate Warrior to help out Orcus's Andre the Giant?
> 
> I'm joking. Mostly. Kinda. The reasoning just doesn't work for me.



I'm thinking it's just probably Rich's off-the-cuff phraseology. What he's saying, in essence, is that the archfiends may be less powerful than the gods, but not so much less powerful that the gods can simply run roughshod over them for fear of either a) provoking an alliance between archfiends, which no single god would be able to defeat (archfiend x2 > deity); or b) provoking the intervention of a hostile deity, which again no single god would be able to defeat (archfiend + deity > deity). This is a sharp change from 3e (or at least BoVD/HotA) in which an officially-statted archfiend would be a mere speedbump for a true deity.


----------



## nick012000 (Mar 28, 2008)

DM_Blake said:
			
		

> I haven't seen it mentioned in this thread yet, so here's my plug for The Primal Order.
> 
> *snip way too long ad*




Words cannot express my undying hatred for you. Crappy third party supplements are annoying. I don't know whether your third party supplement is crappy, but odds are it is. Save for the occasional supplement released by WotC's ex-employees, almost all the stuff on the market is.

Now, I came into this thread looking for discussion about 4e, and found your spam for your crappy products. This is very annoying to me. It's little better than the viagra spam you get in your email. If anything, you've ensured I'll never buy your products.


----------



## Dausuul (Mar 28, 2008)

nick012000 said:
			
		

> Words cannot express my undying hatred for you. Crappy third party supplements are annoying. I don't know whether your third party supplement is crappy, but odds are it is. Save for the occasional supplement released by WotC's ex-employees, almost all the stuff on the market is.
> 
> Now, I came into this thread looking for discussion about 4e, and found your spam for your crappy products. This is very annoying to me. It's little better than the viagra spam you get in your email. If anything, you've ensured I'll never buy your products.




You'll never buy the products of the company that published The Primal Order?

Heh.  Guess you'll never buy 4E then... it was published by Wizards of the Coast, way back in the day.


----------



## WyzardWhately (Mar 28, 2008)

nick012000 said:
			
		

> Words cannot express my undying hatred for you. Crappy third party supplements are annoying. I don't know whether your third party supplement is crappy, but odds are it is. Save for the occasional supplement released by WotC's ex-employees, almost all the stuff on the market is.
> 
> Now, I came into this thread looking for discussion about 4e, and found your spam for your crappy products. This is very annoying to me. It's little better than the viagra spam you get in your email. If anything, you've ensured I'll never buy your products.




Pathetic.


----------



## nick012000 (Mar 28, 2008)

Dausuul said:
			
		

> You'll never buy the products of the company that published The Primal Order?
> 
> Heh.  Guess you'll never buy 4E then... it was published by Wizards of the Coast, way back in the day.




What was it, a 2e product? I don't remember any WotC products by that name. Not for 3e, anyway.


----------



## WyzardWhately (Mar 28, 2008)

nick012000 said:
			
		

> What was it, a 2e product? I don't remember any WotC products by that name. Not for 3e, anyway.




It's exactly what he said it is.  A product containing rules for deities, generically usable with most any RPG.  I believe it was released before WotC bought out TSR, so it doesn't have any specific connection with D&D rules (although I would be unsurprised to find out that that was what most people used it for.)


----------



## Desdichado (Mar 28, 2008)

nick012000 said:
			
		

> What was it, a 2e product? I don't remember any WotC products by that name. Not for 3e, anyway.



That does it.  I am MOVING Wizards' bookmark!


----------



## Wormwood (Mar 28, 2008)

Hobo said:
			
		

> That does it.  I am MOVING Wizards' bookmark!



NOOOOO! Please don't do anything so drastic!

Seriously. We can talk about this.


----------



## nerfherder (Mar 28, 2008)

nick012000 said:
			
		

> Words cannot express my undying hatred for you. Crappy third party supplements are annoying. I don't know whether your third party supplement is crappy, but odds are it is. Save for the occasional supplement released by WotC's ex-employees, almost all the stuff on the market is.



I'm confused - are you saying The Primal Order is good, because it was written by a WotC ex-employee (well, technically Peter Adkinson is the ex-owner, I guess)?


----------



## Imperialus (Mar 28, 2008)

nick012000 said:
			
		

> Words cannot express my undying hatred for you. Crappy third party supplements are annoying. I don't know whether your third party supplement is crappy, but odds are it is. Save for the occasional supplement released by WotC's ex-employees, almost all the stuff on the market is.
> 
> Now, I came into this thread looking for discussion about 4e, and found your spam for your crappy products. This is very annoying to me. It's little better than the viagra spam you get in your email. If anything, you've ensured I'll never buy your products.




Yeah!  Peter Adkison is such a hack!  And who are those WoTC folks that published it?  Stupid 3rd party publishers!


----------



## Klaus (Mar 28, 2008)

Hobo said:
			
		

> That does it.  I am MOVING Wizards' bookmark!



 The children! Why won't anyone think of the CHILDREN?!?


... wait, let's make this on-topic...


The demigods! Why won't anyone think of the DEMIGODS?!?


----------



## cignus_pfaccari (Mar 28, 2008)

nerfherder said:
			
		

> I'm confused - are you saying The Primal Order is good, because it was written by a WotC ex-employee (well, technically Peter Adkinson is the ex-owner, I guess)?




I think he's confused and thought it was a crappy third-party 3e supplement.

Brad


----------



## AZRogue (Mar 28, 2008)

cignus_pfaccari said:
			
		

> I think he's confused and thought it was a crappy third-party 3e supplement.
> 
> Brad




Yeah, it happens. I'd never heard of it either.


----------



## DM_Blake (Mar 28, 2008)

nick012000 said:
			
		

> Words cannot express my undying hatred for you. Crappy third party supplements are annoying. I don't know whether your third party supplement is crappy, but odds are it is. Save for the occasional supplement released by WotC's ex-employees, almost all the stuff on the market is.
> 
> Now, I came into this thread looking for discussion about 4e, and found your spam for your crappy products. This is very annoying to me. It's little better than the viagra spam you get in your email. If anything, you've ensured I'll never buy your products.




LOL, I won't point out the irony of this post, since others already have.

I will say I'm not a publisher, and never have been a publisher. I won't sell anyone my copy of TPO since I love it too much to part with it.

This wasn't an ad to buy a product I have any stake in - it was a user endorsement of a product that has brought great fun to my games by enlightening the difference between deities and mortals, separating them in a substantial and playable way, and given outlines for including them as entities in any game system without debasing them to common stat blocks of ordinary skill and mortal abilities.

So, I'm not selling anything here.

I just wanted that to be clear.


----------



## Psion (Mar 28, 2008)




----------



## WyzardWhately (Mar 28, 2008)

cignus_pfaccari said:
			
		

> I think he's confused and thought it was a crappy third-party 3e supplement.
> 
> Brad




Which doesn't justify Nick's going off on the guy who posted about it.


----------



## Morrus (Mar 28, 2008)

nick012000 said:
			
		

> Words cannot express my undying hatred for you. Crappy third party supplements are annoying. I don't know whether your third party supplement is crappy, but odds are it is. Save for the occasional supplement released by WotC's ex-employees, almost all the stuff on the market is.
> 
> Now, I came into this thread looking for discussion about 4e, and found your spam for your crappy products. This is very annoying to me. It's little better than the viagra spam you get in your email. If anything, you've ensured I'll never buy your products.




OK, so you're asked to leave one thread for declaring it "stupid" and in another you express your undying hatred for another poster?

Raher than simply ask you to leave this thread and babysit you for the next few days, I'm going to ask you to leave the boards for a week to cool off.  In the meantime, you are welcome to review the rules here at EN World.

Any questions, please email me.  The ban will expire in 7 days.


----------



## Imperialus (Mar 28, 2008)

AZRogue said:
			
		

> Yeah, it happens. I'd never heard of it either.




He's not getting called out because he hadn't heard of it.  He's getting called out for making a raft of assumptions about another poster then expressing his "undying hatred" towards DM Blake who was trying to suggest a book that he has found useful in his game.


----------



## Rel (Mar 28, 2008)

nick012000 said:
			
		

> Words cannot express my undying hatred for you. Crappy third party supplements are annoying. I don't know whether your third party supplement is crappy, but odds are it is. Save for the occasional supplement released by WotC's ex-employees, almost all the stuff on the market is.
> 
> Now, I came into this thread looking for discussion about 4e, and found your spam for your crappy products. This is very annoying to me. It's little better than the viagra spam you get in your email. If anything, you've ensured I'll never buy your products.




Dude, maybe you're just having a bad week or something, but every post of yours that I've seen today has been dripping with bile.  Take a deep breath.  Go out for walk.  Whatever you need to do.  But just knock it off.


----------



## WyzardWhately (Mar 28, 2008)

Rel said:
			
		

> Dude, maybe you're just having a bad week or something, but every post of yours that I've seen today has been dripping with bile.  Take a deep breath.  Go out for walk.  Whatever you need to do.  But just knock it off.




He's gotten kicked off the boards at RPG.net a lot, too.  This isn't an atypical event.


----------



## Rel (Mar 28, 2008)

WyzardWhately said:
			
		

> He's gotten kicked off the boards at RPG.net a lot, too.  This isn't an atypical event.




I think we've all learned a valuable lesson here today.  That lesson is that Morrus is a no-good thunder-stealer.


----------



## Lizard (Mar 28, 2008)

nick012000 said:
			
		

> Words cannot express my undying hatred for you. Crappy third party supplements are annoying. I don't know whether your third party supplement is crappy, but odds are it is. Save for the occasional supplement released by WotC's ex-employees, almost all the stuff on the market is.
> 
> Now, I came into this thread looking for discussion about 4e, and found your spam for your crappy products. This is very annoying to me. It's little better than the viagra spam you get in your email. If anything, you've ensured I'll never buy your products.




Yeah, the way he shills an almost TWENTY YEAR OLD supplement is just sooooo spammy.

(It's also a totally kick-ass supplement. Worst thing about M:TG? It meant the rest of the series would never happen...)


----------



## Lizard (Mar 28, 2008)

nick012000 said:
			
		

> I don't remember any WotC products by that name.




I think I am drowning in irony...

Don't they teach kids HISTORY in schools anymore?


----------



## Rel (Mar 28, 2008)

Lizard said:
			
		

> I think I am drowning in irony...
> 
> Don't they teach kids HISTORY in schools anymore?




Lizard, he's banned for a week.  No need to beat this horse any further.


----------



## Lizard (Mar 28, 2008)

Rel said:
			
		

> Lizard, he's banned for a week.  No need to beat this horse any further.




Sorry, was reading through in order...


----------



## FabioMilitoPagliara (Mar 28, 2008)

DM_Blake said:
			
		

> I haven't seen it mentioned in this thread yet, so here's my plug for The Primal Order.




my primal basketweaving is unsurpassed

next primal power I take must be something on primal forum posting 

very nice book for the time.... it's about what almost 20 years ago? it was before magic! when wizards was a very small game company


----------



## lukelightning (Mar 28, 2008)

One reason I like to allow killing gods is that I want to allow the heroes to really have a victory. If Orcus is the supreme enemy of the campaign that the PCs are fighting against, when the time comes I'd like to let them really defeat him. Not just send him to jail for a time. Not just mess up his plans, but really end him Once. And. For. All. Preferably avoiding the cliches of "his body is destroyed but his spirit is....somewhere, biding its time.


----------



## Orcus (Mar 28, 2008)

Goobermunch said:
			
		

> At least until Orcus gets his hands on the GSL.
> 
> --G




Word!

Clark Peterson, President of Necromancer Games, proud maker of "crappy third party products". Cause if that guy hates them, I want to be hated.


----------



## frankthedm (Mar 28, 2008)

Wish I had heard about The Primal Order years ago. i was hoping the 4e ruleset would have encompassed more of it.

http://www.sjgames.com/pyramid/sample.html?id=330

http://www.rpg.net/news+reviews/reviews/rev_2459.html


----------



## see (Mar 28, 2008)

FabioMilitoPagliara said:
			
		

> very nice book for the time.... it's about what almost 20 years ago?



"© 1992 by Wizards of the Coast, Inc."  So sixteen years.

And, well, who can resist a book with notes on how to use it with AD&D, RIFTS, GURPS, and Synnibarr?


----------



## Psion (Mar 29, 2008)

Rel said:
			
		

> Lizard, he's banned for a week.  No need to beat this horse any further.




Aw, c'mon!


----------



## AZRogue (Mar 29, 2008)

Imperialus said:
			
		

> He's not getting called out because he hadn't heard of it.  He's getting called out for making a raft of assumptions about another poster then expressing his "undying hatred" towards DM Blake who was trying to suggest a book that he has found useful in his game.




No, I understand, and certainly wasn't trying to leap to any defense. I was just saying that I see how he thought it was an unknown 3rd party product. Obviously how he reacted to that assumption is what led to his ban, not the assumption itself. It's all good.


----------



## Doug McCrae (Mar 29, 2008)

WyzardWhately said:
			
		

> He's gotten kicked off the boards at RPG.net a lot, too.



That doesn't mean anything, I'm perma-banned there. Those drugged up communists have no taste.


----------



## Zil (Mar 29, 2008)

WyzardWhately said:
			
		

> Well, remember, 4E scales differently.  That is, each individual level increase is less of a big deal than it was in 3.x.  So, getting together like 10 30th level adventurers to take down something that should normally outclass a party is probably a much more reasonable option, if you really have to go out there and take down Moradin himself.




This all sounds so World of Warcraft.  And so not the D&D I've been playing and enjoying for the past 28+ years.  To each their own, I guess, but talk of god killing being enshrined in the rules is what first tipped me off that 4E was probably not for me.  Sure, minor demon lords, maybe even weak avatars, weakened fallen gods or other quasi divine things, perhaps.  But killing a greater god?  Sheesh.  That's just way too munchkin for my liking.


----------



## Fallen Seraph (Mar 29, 2008)

Well you figure that when your talking on these demons and gods (after going through a long plotline to even have a chance of beating them) your going to be level 30. Which is essentially level 40 or more in 3.5.


----------



## DandD (Mar 29, 2008)

Zil said:
			
		

> This all sounds so World of Warcraft.  And so not the D&D I've been playing and enjoying for the past 28+ years.  To each their own, I guess, but talk of god killing being enshrined in the rules is what first tipped me off that 4E was probably not for me.  Sure, minor demon lords, maybe even weak avatars, weakened fallen gods or other quasi divine things, perhaps.  But killing a greater god?  Sheesh.  That's just way too munchkin for my liking.



 I guess that you are aware of the existence of those deity-books with their stats that TSR and Wizards of the Coast produced, aren't you? 

Killing gods in whatever form has always been possible in D&D in all editions. Complaining about D&D 4.0 making it possible to kill gods is baseless, as you could do that in all prior editions too, and only the preferences of the Game Master and/or the Players involved decided if they really wanted to use those rule supplementals. 

"Munchkining" to the point of killing gods is quite normal in D&D. That's what epic levels are here for, and all that D&D 4.0 does is making epic now a core rule, instead of supplemental. 

And it still falls to the gaming group itself if they really want to kill a god/arch-demon/duke of hell/my little pony in their game.


----------



## dm4hire (Mar 29, 2008)

You know the sad thing is that Primal Order was another of the long list of products I owned at one time and decided I needed money more than it.  

It really is a good book and had a lot of great ideas in it.  I noticed Amazon lists two copies available.  I wonder if there was more earlier.  

Munchkin 4e!!!!  Travel to exotic planes, meet interesting deities, then kill them!!


----------



## GeorgeFields (Mar 29, 2008)

It looks like I'm in the minority here.

PCs killing gods isn't something I ever care to see in a campaign. Having gods killed by other gods / greater beings is open game. I plan to use _Requiem for a God_ and have my PCs witness the death of one of their gods in my next campaign.

Demon princes and arch-devils are another story, though. I consider them just a step below deity status, but I prefer to have them beefed up a bit more than RAW have them.

As far as the top Demon? hmmmm, sorry, Clark, I'm going with Demogorgon over Orcus; nothing personal.


----------



## DandD (Mar 29, 2008)

Oh, it's not that I personally like seeing stats for gods at all, or that I even like the idea of being able to kill gods to begin with. 
If anything at all, D&D 4.0 should be critisized that they're still allowing gods to be killed, the same way as they still make Raise Dead and other non-transforming-you-into-an-undead-type ressurection effects possible, like in all prior editions. Those are sacred cows that still haven't been slaughtered. Perhaps in D&D 5.0, we'll see the changes needed.


----------



## Desdichado (Mar 29, 2008)

Doug McCrae said:
			
		

> That doesn't mean anything, I'm perma-banned there.



That doesn't mean something?


----------



## Mouseferatu (Mar 29, 2008)

Zil said:
			
		

> This all sounds so World of Warcraft.  And so not the D&D I've been playing and enjoying for the past 28+ years.  To each their own, I guess, but talk of god killing being enshrined in the rules is what first tipped me off that 4E was probably not for me.




As others have said, every edition of the game so far has given gods stats and made it possible to kill them. Heck, some of the gods statted up in the 1E _Deities and Demigods_ were downright _easy_ to kill.


----------



## Mirtek (Mar 29, 2008)

*ups. Please delete*


----------



## Mirtek (Mar 29, 2008)

DandD said:
			
		

> Killing gods in whatever form has always been possible in D&D in all editions. Complaining about D&D 4.0 making it possible to kill gods is baseless, as you could do that in all prior editions too, and only the preferences of the Game Master and/or the Players involved decided if they really wanted to use those rule supplementals.



Well, except for 2e and it's

_"Another interesting aspect of the gods is that they cannot be killed by anything save another god of greater stature, or by a god of any stature using an artifact. This means that no mortal may ever kill any god. He might be capable of inflicting enough damage to drive off or dissipate a god, especially if he is wielding an artifact, but the god will always recover from its damage. [...] The reader will note that there are no statistics for the powers and abilities of true gods listed anywhere in this book. This is because the power of the gods is such that it is impossible to quantify it. Statistics quite simply become meaningless when dealing with the gods."_ -> Legends&Lore/Faiths&Avatars


----------



## Upper_Krust (Mar 29, 2008)

Howdy Mirtek! 



			
				Mirtek said:
			
		

> Well, except for 2e and it's




...mistakes.



> "Another *interesting * aspect of the gods is that they cannot be killed by anything save another god of greater stature,




...and this was interesting why exactly?



> or by a god of any stature using an artifact.




...apparently gods have been known to carry these.

So unless a god is an idiot and doesn't want to defend itself against more powerful deities its going to carry an artifact, negating rule #1 (can only be killed by a god of greater stature).



> This means that no mortal may ever kill any god.




...so for those seeking to use 2E D&D to run high-level fantasy in the vein of Moorcock, Howard, Lieber, Gygax or even classical mythology. Tough.



> He might be capable of inflicting enough damage to drive off or dissipate a god, especially if he is wielding an artifact, but the god will always recover from its damage. [...]




...so a mortal with an artifact can fight, wound, injure, defeat, drive off, dissipate or otherwise banish an immortal but we don't have rules for any of this in the book.



> The reader will note that there are no statistics for the powers and abilities of true gods listed anywhere in this book.




...but we'll shoe in a bunch of bland "Avatars" and defeating one is supposedly meaningful, except that the god can just send another one (or ten), or just pull a deus ex machina and kill you itself for the affront of attacking its Avatar.



> This is because the power of the gods is such that it is impossible to quantify it.




...so how can you tell Greater Deities are more powerful than Lesser Deities then?



> Statistics quite simply become meaningless when dealing with the gods." -> Legends&Lore/Faiths&Avatars




...when we confuse pantheistic and polytheistic gods with monotheistic GOD to appease a moral majority that cares not a whit for roleplaying games.


----------



## Klaus (Mar 29, 2008)

Mouseferatu said:
			
		

> As others have said, every edition of the game so far has given gods stats and made it possible to kill them. Heck, some of the gods statted up in the 1E _Deities and Demigods_ were downright _easy_ to kill.



 Yeah!

Hell, some of them were even in the Monster Manual/Fiend Folio (Orcus, Asmodeus, Lolth... with her whopping 66 hit points!).


----------



## zoroaster100 (Mar 29, 2008)

I'd rather have killable gods as optional in a supplement (which I won't buy).   But it doesn't bother me too much that 4E have some supplemental rules for it, as most previous editions have.  Certainly in my campaign I wouldn't want to have that part of the reasonable realm of possibility.


----------



## dm4hire (Mar 29, 2008)

Klaus said:
			
		

> Lolth... with her whopping 66 hit points!).




I remember those days, and now she's all grown up and become a full fledge greater god.  Brings a tear to the eye.  Been a long time coming too; she's a fine example of climbing the ladder to success.  Granted each rung was a dagger in someone's back she stepped on, but she did it all on her own.


----------



## Jack99 (Mar 29, 2008)

Zil said:
			
		

> This all sounds so World of Warcraft.  And so not the D&D I've been playing and enjoying for the past 28+ years.  To each their own, I guess, but talk of god killing being enshrined in the rules is what first tipped me off that 4E was probably not for me.  Sure, minor demon lords, maybe even weak avatars, weakened fallen gods or other quasi divine things, perhaps.  But killing a greater god?  Sheesh.  That's just way too munchkin for my liking.




I just want to point out that if you kill every single monster in WoW, you only kill one god (in AQ40, can't recall it's name, it has been a long time). So the ability to challenge the gods (and kill them) has very little to do with WoW. If you do want 4e to sound like a MMORG ripoff, you should have compared it to EQ, where you get to kill at least 30+ (could be much more, I don't really know anymore) various gods across the different expansions.

Not that you will be correct, as others have pointed out, the ability to kill gods was in the older editions, which all pre-dates the various MMORGs.


----------



## Hussar (Mar 29, 2008)

Zil said:
			
		

> This all sounds so World of Warcraft.  And so not the D&D I've been playing and enjoying for the past 28+ years.  To each their own, I guess, but talk of god killing being enshrined in the rules is what first tipped me off that 4E was probably not for me.  Sure, minor demon lords, maybe even weak avatars, weakened fallen gods or other quasi divine things, perhaps.  But killing a greater god?  Sheesh.  That's just way too munchkin for my liking.




You can kill gods in WOW?  I gotta start playing that game.  

In any case, I'll third the notion that apotheosis should be an epic level quest.  That would be groovy.


----------



## GeorgeFields (Mar 29, 2008)

dm4hire said:
			
		

> I remember those days, and now she's all grown up and become a full fledge greater god.  Brings a tear to the eye.  Been a long time coming too; she's a fine example of climbing the ladder to success.  Granted each rung was a dagger in someone's back she stepped on, but she did it all on her own.




Yep, our little spider demon is all grown up. :sniff sniff:



			
				Jack99 said:
			
		

> If you do want 4e to sound like a MMORG ripoff, you should have compared it to EQ, where you get to kill at least 30+ (could be much more, I don't really know anymore) various gods across the different expansions.




From what I've read and heard, one doesn't need this article to do that; but that's just my opinion.


----------



## WyzardWhately (Mar 29, 2008)

Forget Lolth.  Her ass should still be just a really major arch-demon that can grant spells, or at MOST some kind of least goddess.  Now, my man Asmodeus I'm proud of.


----------



## Dausuul (Mar 29, 2008)

DandD said:
			
		

> Oh, it's not that I personally like seeing stats for gods at all, or that I even like the idea of being able to kill gods to begin with.
> If anything at all, D&D 4.0 should be critisized that they're still allowing gods to be killed, the same way as they still make Raise Dead and other non-transforming-you-into-an-undead-type ressurection effects possible, like in all prior editions. Those are sacred cows that still haven't been slaughtered. Perhaps in D&D 5.0, we'll see the changes needed.




*shrug* This is one of those things where the designers have to ask:

#1: How many people want killable gods versus how many people want unkillable gods?
#2: Which house-rule is harder to implement: Killable gods in a system where they are unkillable by default, or unkillable gods in a system where they are killable by default?

I don't know for certain what the answer to #1 is, but anecdotal evidence based on this thread suggests that the majority want killable (if extremely hard to kill) gods.

The answer to #2 is that it's far easier to implement a house-rule changing killable gods to unkillable gods than to go the other way.  If gods are killable by default, all you have to do is say, "Gods are unkillable.  Deal widdit."  If gods are unkillable by default, then you have to figure out what stats they ought to have, what the impact of a god's death would be, et cetera.

So, I rather suspect gods will remain killable in future editions.


----------



## Desdichado (Mar 29, 2008)

WyzardWhately said:
			
		

> Forget Lolth.  Her ass should still be just a really major arch-demon that can grant spells, or at MOST some kind of least goddess.  Now, my man Asmodeus I'm proud of.



Bah.  There shouldn't be any functional difference between what you describe and the gods anyway.

Fan of CR 30+ Archdevils and Demon Lords Spikey


----------



## dm4hire (Mar 29, 2008)

When it comes to killing gods I have often looked at it as you are killing a figurehead of a profile and thereby assume their place or take their position if you are mortal or steal their position if you are another deity.


----------



## WyzardWhately (Mar 29, 2008)

Hobo said:
			
		

> Bah.  There shouldn't be any functional difference between what you describe and the gods anyway.
> 
> Fan of CR 30+ Archdevils and Demon Lords Spikey




You know, I'm pretty down with that, too.  In my old campaign, the only difference between the gods and the top-tier demons/devils was which side they were on.  And that being caught worshipping the demons/devils anywhere civilized would get you killed.


----------



## UngeheuerLich (Mar 30, 2008)

Gods in FR where always killable...

But: in 3.x we had stats for gods which were pretty useless. Gods are so much more powerfull than any mortal, that those stats were just a waste of space.


----------



## Mirtek (Mar 30, 2008)

UngeheuerLich said:
			
		

> Gods in FR where always killable...



FR deities were killable, but only if the killing blow came from annother deity or the aid of annother deity. Not even during the times of troubles did a deity die by the pure hand of a mortal without divine aid. In 3e the F&P web enhancement re-introduced the immortality vs. mortals rule.

In the FR we have:

Borem -> not really slain but more knocked out and even this with secret aid of Jergal
Mystryl -> chose suicid to end Karsus's spell prematurely. Could have waited until the normal end and have been none the worse for wear
Moander -> slain with the help of Tymora
Myrkul -> slain at a point when Midnight was already filled with the energies of Mystra
Bhaal -> slain with Mask
Selvetarm -> most likely slain by either Elistrae or Lolth at the sava table
Kiaranshalee -> most likely slain by Lolth at the sava table


----------



## UndeadScottsman (Mar 30, 2008)

Jack99 said:
			
		

> I just want to point out that if you kill every single monster in WoW, you only kill one god (in AQ40, can't recall it's name, it has been a long time). So the ability to challenge the gods (and kill them) has very little to do with WoW. If you do want 4e to sound like a MMORG ripoff, you should have compared it to EQ, where you get to kill at least 30+ (could be much more, I don't really know anymore) various gods across the different expansions.
> 
> Not that you will be correct, as others have pointed out, the ability to kill gods was in the older editions, which all pre-dates the various MMORGs.




Two gods..  Though the first (Hakkar the Soulflayer In Zul'gurrub) is probably an extremely lesser god, and the second, C'thun, is one of the "Old Gods" who were defeated by the Titans.  C'thun is actually still pretty badly weakened from his fight with the Titans, explaining why the players are able to slay him.


----------



## Jack99 (Mar 30, 2008)

UndeadScottsman said:
			
		

> Two gods..  Though the first (Hakkar the Soulflayer In Zul'gurrub) is probably an extremely lesser god, and the second, C'thun, is one of the "Old Gods" who were defeated by the Titans.  C'thun is actually still pretty badly weakened from his fight with the Titans, explaining why the players are able to slay him.




Ah yeah, C'thun, that was the one I was thinking off. It's been a while. As to Hakkar, I must admit I had forgotten about him, but isn't he merely the son of an Old God? I must confess my WoW-lore isn't super-strong, in WoW, it was always more about ze loot for me 

Cheers


----------



## Carnivorous_Bean (Mar 30, 2008)

Definitely a campaign setting thing. I'd never allow a character to kill a god .... after all, Hercules was essentially a demigod in the stories, but would he have been able to take on Zeus with any chance of winning? I seriously doubt it.


----------



## Zil (Mar 30, 2008)

DandD said:
			
		

> I guess that you are aware of the existence of those deity-books with their stats that TSR and Wizards of the Coast produced, aren't you?
> 
> Killing gods in whatever form has always been possible in D&D in all editions. Complaining about D&D 4.0 making it possible to kill gods is baseless, as you could do that in all prior editions too, and only the preferences of the Game Master and/or the Players involved decided if they really wanted to use those rule supplementals.
> 
> ...




Yes, what you say is indeed true.  Back in 1E there were stats for various gods (400 HP seemed to be the max hit points for any god for example), but it was never codified in the main rule books or discussed amongst the game designers in such an open way that they were designing the game with an eye to allow and encourage god killing.  That is what is different now.  The new game seems to be geared towards moving up to a much higher power level for the players with the opponents at these epic levels being various demonlords and godlings.


----------



## Klaus (Mar 30, 2008)

Carnivorous_Bean said:
			
		

> Definitely a campaign setting thing. I'd never allow a character to kill a god .... after all, Hercules was essentially a demigod in the stories, but would he have been able to take on Zeus with any chance of winning? I seriously doubt it.



 While he was alive (he only ascended to full godhood after death), he took on Gigantes (which were godlike in their own right).


----------



## Zil (Mar 30, 2008)

Jack99 said:
			
		

> I just want to point out that if you kill every single monster in WoW, you only kill one god (in AQ40, can't recall it's name, it has been a long time). So the ability to challenge the gods (and kill them) has very little to do with WoW. If you do want 4e to sound like a MMORG ripoff, you should have compared it to EQ, where you get to kill at least 30+ (could be much more, I don't really know anymore) various gods across the different expansions.
> 
> Not that you will be correct, as others have pointed out, the ability to kill gods was in the older editions, which all pre-dates the various MMORGs.




The WOW comparison comparison  was more the concept of gathering together a huge gaming party of epic to take down the big uber-boss / quasi divine thing.   Okay, I admit that comparison is a bit tenuous - I originally misread something and thought the party size of epic heroes was 30 rather than 10 members.  

Still, I do stand by the fact that none of the previous versions of the rules really encouraged players to kill gods in such a core way as Rich Baker seems to be suggesting now.  Sure, there have been stats in 1E and 3E via each version's Deities & Demigods, but neither of these books were ever really presented primarily as monster manuals for player opponents.  Some munchkin 1E groups certainly would have used them that way, but the D&D core game designers never promoted their use in that way.  

That is what is different now.


----------



## orangefruitbat (Mar 30, 2008)

Of course you could kill them - why else would you bother with stats?

Then again, if you were hardcore 1E, you would just kill Thor with a Push spell.



			
				Zil said:
			
		

> Yes, what you say is indeed true.  Back in 1E there were stats for various gods (400 HP seemed to be the max hit points for any god for example), but it was never codified in the main rule books or discussed amongst the game designers in such an open way that they were designing the game with an eye to allow and encourage god killing.  That is what is different now.  The new game seems to be geared towards moving up to a much higher power level for the players with the opponents at these epic levels being various demonlords and godlings.


----------



## Jack99 (Mar 30, 2008)

Zil said:
			
		

> The WOW comparison comparison  was more the concept of gathering together a huge gaming party of epic to take down the big uber-boss / quasi divine thing.   Okay, I admit that comparison is a bit tenuous - I originally misread something and thought the party size of epic heroes was 30 rather than 10 members.
> 
> Still, I do stand by the fact that none of the previous versions of the rules really encouraged players to kill gods in such a core way as Rich Baker seems to be suggesting now.  Sure, there have been stats in 1E and 3E via each version's Deities & Demigods, but neither of these books were ever really presented primarily as monster manuals for player opponents.  Some munchkin 1E groups certainly would have used them that way, but the D&D core game designers never promoted their use in that way.
> 
> That is what is different now.




Fair enough, however, you should bear in mind that this is one designer's word about this aspect of the game, and we have no real way of knowing if this is a way of playing that they all advocate. 

Cheers


----------



## AZRogue (Mar 30, 2008)

I suggest that those who don't want to kill Gods not plan any adventures where their players can kill Gods. I think that this may save the world as we know it ... if we're all careful.

But as for me, those buggers are taking a dirt nap while sipping their morning coffee and looking over their "prayer reports".


----------



## med stud (Mar 30, 2008)

Zil said:
			
		

> Yes, what you say is indeed true.  Back in 1E there were stats for various gods (400 HP seemed to be the max hit points for any god for example), but it was never codified in the main rule books or discussed amongst the game designers in such an open way that they were designing the game with an eye to allow and encourage god killing.  That is what is different now.  The new game seems to be geared towards moving up to a much higher power level for the players with the opponents at these epic levels being various demonlords and godlings.



He said that if the DM wants to have a god as the final enemy of a campaign, ending at level 30, he can do so by giving the PCs some kind of edge. In a straight up fight, I read his statement as if a party of level 30 PCs can't kill a god.

I can't see how that makes the game geared to have god killing- campaigns. I read his descriptions of Orcus the same; a top level enemy, a campaign ender, but not the monster of room #2 in a level 28 dungeon.


----------



## dm4hire (Mar 30, 2008)

med stud said:
			
		

> I read his descriptions of Orcus the same; a top level enemy, a campaign ender, but not the monster of room #2 in a level 28 dungeon.




Ah!! Come on, why can't Orcus hang out in the coat room?

Orcus:  Welcome to Chateux de'Dungeon.  May I take your coats please?

Ranger:  Why thank you, mighty nice place you have here.  You don't mind if we ransack the place do you?

Orcus:  No, no, go right ahead.  The first mob is waiting for you just inside to the right.

Rogue:  Here you go, now where's the nearest gold pile?  Oh, shiny wand.

Paladin: (To cleric) Something about this coat checker I just don't like.

Cleric:  Well they gave this dungeon five stars in Explorer Monthly.  Sure it isn't that pit fiend you killed yesterday coming back on you?

Orcus:  Here's your tickets, you can claim everything on the way out if you live, I mean when you return.


----------



## Iron Sky (Mar 30, 2008)

I'm curious about anyone's current/past Epic-level 3/3.5 games.  When characters get up to levels 25-30+, what do they usually do?  I've only skimmed the Epic level handbook since I find regular old high-level 3.x annoying enough that Epic is a total turn off, so what do they fight?  The Tarasque's big brothers?  I would think eventually WotC would run out of non-godlings for them to kill and put some of them in there.  

I'd think at some point with the amount of power Epic level characters in 3.x have, they be bound to terminally piss off some god or another and be so powerful that the god has to "do it himself" - thus necessitating the DMs have/create god stats unless they want to end the players by DM fiat:

DM: "A god shows up, throws a globe of pure energy at you, and you die."
Player: "What?  Which god?"
DM: "You can't tell 'cause you're dead."
Player: "Was that a ranged attack or something?"
DM: "Sure, I'll roll it... ok, that's a 2 so he hits touch AC one thousand." 
Player: "Do I get a save?" 
DM: "Sure, roll it." 
Player: "Which one?"
DM: "Reflex I guess."
Player: "Sweet, I have +40 in Reflex...  natural twenty!" 
DM: "You die."


----------



## The Little Raven (Mar 31, 2008)

Lizard said:
			
		

> (It's also a totally kick-ass supplement. Worst thing about M:TG? It meant the rest of the series would never happen...)




I thought it was the Palladium lawsuit and WotC's inability to really make any substantial profit off the RPGs at that time that led to TPO's demise. Almost every historical account I've read of the time suggests that trying to get into RPGs was killing WotC and M:TG actually saved it from going under.


----------



## Gort (Mar 31, 2008)

Iron Sky said:
			
		

> DM: "A god shows up, throws a globe of pure energy at you, and you die."
> Player: "What?  Which god?"
> DM: "You can't tell 'cause you're dead."
> Player: "Was that a ranged attack or something?"
> ...




Ranged touch attack AND a save? This god has some rubbish spells!


----------



## hong (Mar 31, 2008)

Zil said:
			
		

> Still, I do stand by the fact that none of the previous versions of the rules really encouraged players to kill gods in such a core way as Rich Baker seems to be suggesting now.




What a very strange interpretation you have.


----------



## robertliguori (Mar 31, 2008)

Hmm.  My personal preference is for any entity that earns the monkier God to be both unable to be affected by and unable to directly influence the world at large.  There can be a gods of whatever you want there to be gods for, and they can have actual personality, desire, motivation, and action, but they should not be physical entities.  Make 'em setting mechanics.  Say, the god of war offers a boon to characters with a BAB above 6 when they perform a certain ritual on the eve of battle, but he can't actually show up and smite people with his sword, nor be smote in turn.

Now, you can include actual foci for worship, belief, and religion, that can range from nonmagical idols to Solar Exalted, but if stabbing is a way that this entity can interact with the world, I'd prefer not to call it a god.


----------



## Imban (Mar 31, 2008)

Mirtek said:
			
		

> FR deities were killable, but only if the killing blow came from annother deity or the aid of annother deity. Not even during the times of troubles did a deity die by the pure hand of a mortal without divine aid. In 3e the F&P web enhancement re-introduced the immortality vs. mortals rule.
> 
> In the FR we have:
> 
> ...




In the (terrible) Time of Troubles modules, you bumped off Bane (and, uh, Torm technically) yourself using an artifact. Theoretically Torm was helping you fight Bane, but only in an abstract "the gods are fighting outside our city!" way before you fried both of them with an artifact. That's the last battle of Tantras.

Meanwhile, in Waterdeep, you can theoretically bump off Bhaal yourself if you really work to derail the plot. The book certainly attempts to railroad you away from doing it, but leaves the possibility there.

Myrkul, as you stated, gets fried by Midnight using Super God NPC Powers regardless of anything the players try to do.


----------



## Lizard (Mar 31, 2008)

Mourn said:
			
		

> I thought it was the Palladium lawsuit and WotC's inability to really make any substantial profit off the RPGs at that time that led to TPO's demise. Almost every historical account I've read of the time suggests that trying to get into RPGs was killing WotC and M:TG actually saved it from going under.




My memory is that the Palladium lawsuit was settled and the books were re-issued with minor changes. I have not head WOTC was doing worse than any other small press company of the time, but given the chance to make millions with M:TG or thousands with TPO, well, they made the only sane choice. No MTG, they probably would have published a few more books and gently faded off like most small gaming companies do, possibly still being run from Peter Adkison's basement like R. Talsorian. Of course, it's also possible that without WOTC, D&D would have died in the late 1990s, and the bulk of the hobby with it.


----------



## AZRogue (Mar 31, 2008)

If people don't want to kill Gods then I think that's perfectly fine. However, as the "big bang" at the end of an Epic adventure, I would like the option available. It's much easier for the game to include some stats to typical extreme beings for those who want the option than to not do so and leave us to figure it out for ourselves.

It's easier to not use available material than to leave DMs to make it up. And there's a long history, as far as I'm concerned, of having Gods be killable. 2E changed that, to a large degree, and the system was worse for it, IMO. People who started playing around that time would naturally be against it as it's unfamiliar, but it's definitely an option that should be available for those interested in adding some real "Epic" to their epic campaigns.


----------



## VannATLC (Mar 31, 2008)

robertliguori said:
			
		

> Hmm.  My personal preference is for any entity that earns the monkier God to be both unable to be affected by and unable to directly influence the world at large.  There can be a gods of whatever you want there to be gods for, and they can have actual personality, desire, motivation, and action, but they should not be physical entities.  Make 'em setting mechanics.  Say, the god of war offers a boon to characters with a BAB above 6 when they perform a certain ritual on the eve of battle, but he can't actually show up and smite people with his sword, nor be smote in turn.
> 
> Now, you can include actual foci for worship, belief, and religion, that can range from nonmagical idols to Solar Exalted, but if stabbing is a way that this entity can interact with the world, I'd prefer not to call it a god.




Well, I can understand why you think that way, and, ultimately, all of the classical polythiest religions had something that approached 'creator' over 'God'.

The Gods of DND are God's in the original sense of the word, not the monothiestastic christian version, that translates God to 'creator'.


----------



## DM_Blake (Mar 31, 2008)

GeoFFields said:
			
		

> It looks like I'm in the minority here.
> 
> PCs killing gods isn't something I ever care to see in a campaign. Having gods killed by other gods / greater beings is open game. I plan to use _Requiem for a God_ and have my PCs witness the death of one of their gods in my next campaign.
> 
> ...




Ahh, but you can do both.

I've never had a party of mortal PCs take down any god. Not even a petty godling or abyssal princeling. 

But I have run campaigns where powerful PCs ascend beyond being mortals. Become god(like) in their own right. Contend with demigods, princelings, and other petty divinities to find their own place in the pantheon pecking order, and eventually even rise through that comological muck to take a seat at the big table - by knocking off the guy who was already sitting there.

I once had a group of ascended PCs decide to start their own pantheon. They picked spheres, like War, Magic, Justice, etc., but they just couldn't win many followers. Eventually they figured out that every pantheon needs strife, and theirs was totally lacking in evil entities. So they got some NPC divine hirelings, if you will, ascended them to a truly godlike status, and hung spheres like Death, Destruction, Evil, etc., on them. Then declared war on them. And eventually the followers started flocking in...

Puts a campaign into a whole new realm when you take it places like that.

That was over 15 years ago, and I still have players reminiscing about how angry it made them (in-character anger) when their newly ascended adversaries ran around destroying their hard-won temples and followers to undermine the PC's divine source of power.


----------



## WyzardWhately (Mar 31, 2008)

DM_Blake said:
			
		

> Ahh, but you can do both.
> 
> I've never had a party of mortal PCs take down any god. Not even a petty godling or abyssal princeling.
> 
> ...




I would kill to have players that proactive.


----------

