D&D General The Role and Purpose of Evil Gods

[Zubatcarteira]

From what I can tell in the 5e DMG, Asmodeus is listed as the God of Tiranny, while Bane is the God of War and Conquest.

 

[Voadam]

From what I can tell in the 5e DMG, Asmodeus is listed as the God of Tiranny, while Bane is the God of War and Conquest.

That is the entry for the Dawn War pantheon which is different from the Forgotten Realms cosmology and the FR versions of the two gods.

In the 5e PH for the Forgotten Realms pantheon on page 294 Bane is listed as the God of Tyranny. Asmodeus is listed as an FR god in the 5e Sword Coast Adventurer's Guide with worship of him having gained steam after the Spellplague and he being known to give worshippers what they want and to hide their sins from other gods. It also mentions how he consumed the divine spark of Azuth in the Spellplague to achieve godhood (despite Azuth still being listed as an FR god with his own entry). SCAG page 21 lists Asmodeus as the god of indulgence and Bane as the god of Tyranny.

If you look at the 5e DMG page 64 where the Nine Hells are being discussed Asmodeus is referred to throughout only as the Archduke of Nessus. It is designed so he can be either a god and archdevil as DMG page 11 says he is in the Dawn War pantheon cosmology, or he can be a non-deity archdevil in other cosmologies.

 

[Faolyn]

Gotcha on the warlock thing. I didn't pick that up from what you said. Gods are capable of having warlocks as well, so while they don't imbue clerics with power like a warlock, someone who wasn't a faith based follower could bargain with the god or a highly placed underling and make a pact with the god.

But can (do?) gods make warlocks? Even celestial-pact warlocks have angels as patrons, not gods. I mean, they probably could make warlocks because they're gods, but they have no actual need to.

Mortals that ascend to godhood are usually demigods.

Unless it's the Realms and the mortals are Cyric, Kelemvor, or Midnight...

Only lesser gods and higher have been able to create avatars in prior editions. Demigods and lower(and archdevils and demon lords were lower) could not manifest an avatar. The DMG on page 11 only mentions avatars being made by lesser and greater gods, but doesn't specifically exclude demigods.

I'd say that if archfiends can't create avatars then neither can demigods. I'd also say that, like archfiends, demigods only die if killed on their home plane. Otherwise, they're just banished.

 

[Maxperson]

But can (do?) gods make warlocks? Even celestial-pact warlocks have angels as patrons, not gods. I mean, they probably could make warlocks because they're gods, but they have no actual need to.

I'm sure there are reasons for some to make them. It can be useful to have a warlock agent to do things that might be bad for a cleric. Internal god rules on who can do what and where and things like that. Or heck, even getting around an area where divine magic doesn't work.

Ares: "Thor! Your cleric burned down my temple in Istanbul! That's a clear violation of the Segovia accords. You owe me big time. Pay up!"

Thor: "But that was in retaliation for you burning down my temple in Miami!:

Ares: "Ahh, but he was a warlock. We don't have any rules against warlocks burning down temples. Muahahahaha!"

Unless it's the Realms and the mortals are Cyric, Kelemvor, or Midnight...

That's why I said "usually"

The Realms has a number of ascended mortal demigods as well.

I'd say that if archfiends can't create avatars then neither can demigods. I'd also say that, like archfiends, demigods only die if killed on their home plane. Otherwise, they're just banished.

Demigods couldn't in 1e-3e(Can't remember if they existed in 1e). And I think that's correct for demigods that die.

 

[Rabulias]

Just to note that in AD&D 1st edition, some unique extraplanar beings were promoted to lesser gods.

NOTE: The following beings from the MONSTER MANUAL and FIEND FOLIO should be treated as lesser gods, though they very rarely have human worshipers:

MONSTER MANUAL
Demon:
Demogorgon
Juiblex
Orcus
Yeenoghu

Devil:
Asmodeus
Baalzebul
Dispater
Geryon

Dragon:
Bahamut
Tiamat

FIEND FOLIO
Demon:
Lolth
Elemental Princes of Evil

Slaad:
Ssendam
Ygorl

 

[Helldritch]

1) This isn't accurate, as per the earlier parts of this post.

This isn't accurate either. In AD&D, as soon as the concept of a "god" came to matter (ie in DDG), the archdevils and demon princes were declared to be gods.

2) There are no canonical anti-paladins in 1st ed AD&D (unless you count Death Knights, whom the Fiend Folio (p 23) conjectures are created by Demogorgon), and I don't know of them in 2nd ed AD&D either. 4e D&D has a discussion of paladins of evil gods in its DMG (p 163).

1) This is accurate with D&DG page 9.
1&2nd level spells are acquired through faith and knowledge
3rd through 5th are given through the Deities' agents including demi-deities
A demi-deity can not grant spell above 5th level.
6th & 7th spell levels are given directly by the deity itself. And only Greater gods can grant 7th level spells...

As for devils and demons being gods.
None of these had access to divine powers as per D&DG.
None had multiple classes levels.
None could use multiple abilities (some of them functionning continuously).

The deification of Demon Lords and of Asmodeus occured around the advent of 2nd editions. Yes there were clerics with higher than 2nd level spells such as Banak in H1, but these were the exceptions not the norm. This is also something that has always bugged me to no end. But editions change a lot of thing in their itterations and this is both good and bad. Sometimes, a change is for the better (good lord thaco is done for for good) but others not so much (this trend trying to remove alignment... ).

2) Right you are. The closest thing (out of Dragon Magazine) that could be considered anti-paladin was the Death Knight. Which in my mind perfectly fills the role. Dead, and working for evil with a twisted honnor system...

 

[Chaosmancer]

But anyway. I think it's been said elsewhere ITT that in earlier editions at least, gods count grant higher-level spells than demon lords and other such demi-powers. While that's no longer the case, it's definitely possible that gods have powers that demon lords don't have. I have no idea if this is supported anywhere, but I'd say that a full-fledged god should have semi-omniscience. Like, if there's a consecrated temple to the god in the area, then the god can, if it chooses, see anything it wants to in that area. And "area" could be continent, world, or even entire solar system (using the Spelljammer notion that gods could only give spells to clerics if they were worshiped in that particular sphere). But an arch-fiend can maybe only see things through the eyes of its worshipers or the "eyes" of any idols, magic mirrors, or whatever that are consecrated to it.

The thorny part of this discussion is that there have been at least three distinct “eras” where certain things were true. Yes, in the earliest days when these beings were first created, the clerics of Demon Lords and Archdevils were limited in their ability to cast higher level spells. But, at least by 3.5 according to the Fiendish Codex’s I quoted, that was no longer the case. They were explicitly allowed high level spell access. Now, in 5e, there is some confusion on the issue. Because a cleric of Asmodeus or Orcus wouldn’t be limited in spells, but it maybe argued that they are drawing power from a philosophy, not the being itself,

It is supported that “gods” in 3.5 had limited omniscience. They could see anything within X miles of their temples or worshippers. The exact value ranged depending on the power of the god in question. I don’t remember the exact details, or if this applied to Demon Lords as well.

Well, two and a half worlds, that is, because Bane is a god on Exandria and he was/is a god in Ravenloft (eventually changing his name to The Lawgiver when Ravenloft was put out was S&S). Of course, that could be just the Dark Powers messing around and Bane may never have gotten any benefits from his worshipers there.

So in this way, Bane may only have two and a half worlds officially under his belt, but he can see anything on those worlds. Bane would have nearly complete awareness of at least all of Faerun, if not the entirety of Toril or Realmspace. Whereas Asmodeus has a presence on countless worlds but is only aware of what happens in tiny slivers of them.

One reason I haven’t been discussing Exandria too much is because I’m uncertain if they actually have Demon Lords. I know that Asmodeus is a god there, and I know Orcus existed in the campaign, but I don’t know if Orcus was also a god or how he was considered in relation.

I guess the question is far trickier than we imagined though. Because in every single world where Bane exists for certain (skipping Ravenloft because as you said, uncertain) Asmodeus is ALSO a god. And I don’t think his personal power has ever shifted. Which brings us to a conundrum.

Asmodeus is a god in at least two settings, same as Bane. And yet, the forces of the Demons and Demon Lords are a legitimate threat to his power, as considered by the Blood War. So, if Orcus or Demogorgon are roughly his equals in power, and Asmodeus is a god at least twice… it makes saying that the gods are obviously more powerful than Archdevils and Demon Lords a bit hard to justify. Additionally, even if we take out the Blood War, we have the issues of Levistus, Beezelbub and other Archdevils who threaten to take over from Asmodeus. Yes, we say that they are clearly not a match for him, but that isn’t because of his overwhelming power, but instead because they can’t outsmart him.

So, how do we justify “the gods are more powerful” in this dynamic? That’s my question.

Whether or not you want to use my idea, there's still pride. Would a god, especially one with Bane's portfolio, be willing to admit that Asmodeus is tougher than he is? If Bane strikes at Asmodeus on one world and wins, then As can pull resources from countless other worlds (which could possibly include most or all tieflings). If he loses, then he'd have to admit that some upstart little archdevil is stronger than him. (Plus, you know that As has tons of contingencies in play for just such a threat.)

Going against Asmodeus would also turn other Archdevils and Demon Lords against him, and possibly other gods as well. Bane could probably easily kill As, but can he kill all the other archfiends that will unite against him?

If Asmodeus is a fellow god, then how can Bane easily kill him? We have yet to see a world where they are not both considered gods, according to previous discussions. And how is Asmodeus retaining control and influence in countless realms if he is weaker than a god who can’t even conquer a continent?

And on the notion of Pride, what about Asmodeus’ pride? He is the unquestioned ruler of the Nine Hells, why would he allow some god who can barely reach past his homeworld to challenge him?

The power dynamics here are bizarre, but I think that is only because we keep insisting that

1. Gods must be more powerful
2. Archdevils and Demon Lords act in the multiverse, while gods are limited to their worlds.

 

[Chaosmancer]

One of the lore bits of Asmodeus on Toril is that he was the warden of hell but was actively temping mortals to commit sin in order for them to be sent to Baator for soul harvest.

Which doesn’t explain why in other places he is the representative of Tyranny.

The real explanation, as mentioned earlier, is the inconsistent writing. But I think if we were to work in the meta-textual level to fix the inconsistent writing, Asmodeus is far more fitting as the Lord of Tyranny, than of Indulgence. Yes, he tempts people, but Tyranny is tempting, when portrayed intelligently.

I also find the idea of “sin” in the DnD worlds bizarre. Sin is, definitionally, “an immoral act considered to be a transgression against divine law”. So, you can only sin if you break the laws of the gods… so murder isn’t a sin, because we have a god of murder. Neither is torture, because we have a god of torture. Greed? Waukeen is the goddess of Wealth, she isn’t all in on greed but it is a very fine line. Pride? Sune is the goddess of Beauty, and practically oozes pride from every pore.

I don’t think you could find a classical sin that doesn’t have a God supporting it at least in part, so the concept of Sin doesn’t fit into the paradigm of DnD.

 

[Chaosmancer]

My question is actually about gamer culture, mostly DnD games but I can think of at least one other where DFC (For an acronym I'm gonna go with DFC over GOO) are a thing. Not just a thing, but the thing. The big bad of all the big bads.

Why the hell are DFC necessary? What do they do that's different to a demon prince?

Hmmm. Now I say it like that I realise I'm echoing the OP.

But I really am thinking about gamer culture rather than any in-game reasons. Why do so many gamers (and I guess game designers) feel the need for DFC at all? Why do we need another layer of "supreme evil?" How many superlatives is enough? Is this in some way an expression of nerdy one upmanship? "You think your supreme evil thing is evil? Wait til you see how supremely evil my supreme evil is!" Cos this is what it feels like.

Ah, I agree. I think it comes from a few places.

1. We want GOOs because of body horror and corruption themes that they do better than Demons. Demons are about evil and destruction, GOO’s are about corruption of the body and mind.
2. New Horizons. People have beat Orcus. People have beat Asmodeus. The closest Mythos beings get to being “defeated” is being driven off or sealed. No one actually kills them, because they were written and introduced as something you cannot fight. Meanwhile, the express purpose of fiends is to fight them.

But, I agree. You could easily shift demons a little bit and make them take over that role with ease.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Just to get this straight, are you and @Chaosmancer simply arguing over Realms canon here?

I ask because if this is the case, those of us who don't use FR for our setting can safely skip these posts and not miss anything.

I was thinking it was more using an illustrative example instead of general statements, but it seems to have devolved more and more into Realms specific lore. To the point that it turns out we weren’t even discussing the subject I thought we were.