Tiamat and Familicide [Archive] - Giant in the Playground Forums

kpenguin

2009-07-27, 05:52 PM

she's only the mother of CHROMATIC dragons. Bahamut is the father of the Metallic. or whatever the metallic dragon god is in this setting.

and no she wouldn't be targeted. it goes forward down the family line not backwards or it would have killed every chromatic dragon in existence. the only way for it to target Tiamat is for V to actually get straight up in Tiamat's face and hit her with it. and while it may not kill HER it will kill every chromatic dragon in existence.

What do you mean by "down the family" line? If it only targeted ABD's descendants, then no-one would be targeted since OotS already killed her only son.

David Argall

2009-07-27, 06:05 PM

and no she wouldn't be targeted. it goes forward down the family line not backwards or it would have killed every chromatic dragon in existence.
This is probably wrong. While the standards on the spell are distinctly vague, it is clearly not limited to descendants of Ma. 640 lists several classes of dead dragon.
In particular, note that nobody is going to be coming to revenge the dragon. Her parents and such are clearly prime candidates to do that. Her kids are by definition lesser threats. So a spell that merely disposed of the unimportant stuff is rather silly. Thus the spell knocked off any living ancestors of Ma as well as all of her kids.

But Tiamat, being a goddess, is pretty much not going to be bothered by any mortal magic.

EmperorSarda

2009-07-27, 06:15 PM

Familicide can probably only affect those on the same plane as the caster, so if other relatives were on other planes of existence, they wouldn't be affected.

The same goes for Tiamat. If she was related to Mother Dragon then she wasn't affected because she wasn't on Ootsworld, but on another plane of existence.

Demiurge

2009-07-27, 07:07 PM

FreakyCheeseMan

2009-07-27, 07:08 PM

Actually, Tiamat could explain something that was bugging me about the spell- it seemed to me that if it could branch out enough to kill 1/4 of the black dragons, it would just kill all of them.

But if we say that Tiamat is a common ancestor, and too powerful to be affected by the spell, then the Familicidal energy would rip it's way up the branching trees to her, but get stopped dead- wouldn't kill her, and wouldn't pass on to her family members, either, thus shielding the rest of the black dragon family tree.

derfenrirwolv

2009-07-27, 07:11 PM

Why tiamat might not be affected.

She's a god, immune to all mortal magic (even epic magic)

As a god, she's immune to death spells, energy draining, and probably whatever mechanism the spell used to kill people.

As a god, she's entitled to make call an automatic 20 on her saves.

The spell affects anything in 2 generations of the dragoness. If tiamat is her great grandmother, she's outside of the chain of death. (this does present a problem. Since creatures tend to marry outside of the family, there should be angry spouses lining up at the oracle )

The spell is only global, it doesn't count inter dimensional.

any and all of the above, including things we haven't thought of yet

holywhippet

2009-07-27, 08:06 PM

It's not that easy to permanently kill a God. Generally they need to run out of worshippers to die since they draw strength from them. Aoskar died because the mysteriously powerful Lady of Pain wiped him out.

In the Stick world, the god of the goblins used to be a mortal who died. It was the faith from his followers that allowed him to return as a God.

golentan

2009-07-27, 08:40 PM

The direct effect of Familicide (stated in the comic here (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0640.html)) was to kill off all direct blood relatives, and then to additionally kill any direct blood relative of THEM. Depending on what that means, it could potentially target tiamat, but as has been stated she would prolly have made her saving throw. Alternatively, it could just be targeting out to grandparents, siblings, and children. In which case something like what we observed would be reasonable, and tiamat would probably not be affected.

Ozymandias9

2009-07-27, 10:28 PM

Its worth noting that while she shares clear elements with the standard D&D deity, the rest of Tiamat's pantheon in OotS-land comes from the Mesopotamian pantheon that the D&D Tiamat was originally taken from. Its also worth noting that she was one of the creating gods, not an apotheosized mortal like the elven gods or the Dark One. In contrast, the Tiamat in 3rd and 3.5 D&D was an actual Dragon progenitor who gained Godhood (and notably lacked the outsider type).

TL:DR-- It would be unwise to assume that Tiamat in OotS is necessarily Tiamat from Deities and Demigods.

Raenir Salazar

2009-07-27, 10:29 PM

Gods are traditionally immune to arcane magic.

PId6

2009-07-27, 10:44 PM

But Tiamat, being a goddess, is pretty much not going to be bothered by any mortal magic.
An epic caster can certainly be a threat to deities, especially when most Deities and Demigods gods are woefully underoptimized. Even divine ranks aren't a guaranteed protection against arcane cheese, well, as long as they don't have that salient divine ability to instantly kill a mortal no save.

Liwen

2009-07-27, 10:46 PM

Gods are traditionally immune to arcane magic.

Lame. Are they immune to big metal shiny sticks too?

PId6

2009-07-27, 10:59 PM

Gods are traditionally immune to arcane magic.
Epic spells break all rules.

Kish

2009-07-27, 11:04 PM

Lame. Are they immune to big metal shiny sticks too?
Yes, (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0274.html) at least in OotS.

Liwen

2009-07-27, 11:13 PM

Oh right. Forgot about that part. it seems mortals a completely incapable of harming gods.

Next question, how do we expect the Snarl to be defeated then?

Herald Alberich

2009-07-27, 11:26 PM

I don't think anyone, in comic or out, considers that a realistic possibility. They want to stop Xykon from unsealing it from its Can (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/SealedEvilInACan) in the first place, and failing that, seal it back up before it can unmake too much of creation.

edit: Well, unless that hint in the aforementioned Scribble strip comes to pass, and a mortal attains a level equivalent to that of the gods.

pnewman

2009-07-27, 11:33 PM

Yes, (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0274.html) at least in OotS.

No, that's not what it says at all. It says that 'mortals like you or I' can't kill the gods. It does not say that 'mortals _unlike_ you or I can't kill the gods'. Epic level characters are unlike non-Epic level characters. Therefore the statement, if read literally, says nothing about whether or not epic level means can kill the gods.

Aldrakan

2009-07-27, 11:39 PM

Lame. Are they immune to big metal shiny sticks too?

Personally I object to the idea that mortals can gain enough power in the world that the gods created to challenge the gods, it seems a bit... quart into a pint pot, so I have no problem with the idea that the OotS gods are immune to anything a mortal can dish out.

Regarding the Snarl, I seriously doubt they're going to fight it unrestrained. Given that it can unmake an entire world in a matter of minutes, it would be a bit one-sided. Maybe hold it off long enough to reseal the gate.
For that matter given that now it's inside and part of their world if it were to get free it would probably destroy everything just by that.
It isn't a god itself and it was mentioned that mortals might be less susceptible to it than gods, so it could be technically vulnerable to their attacks even if they can't hope to defeat it.

GSFB

2009-07-27, 11:40 PM

My take is that it depends on the definition of "living." The spell, as described by V, targets LIVING relatives. It is a death effect. Tiamat, being a goddess, has transcended mortal life. Tiamat, as an immortal, is immune to most things that we mortals would consider death effects.

Also, an interpretation of the spell description could limit the effect to two generations back. It depends on how you interpret "bloodline." Your bloodline comes from your parents, whose blood you share. Going back to their parents, you get into other bloodlines. So the spell might kill your immediate family, including parents. It might then kill their parents. It gets fuzzy after that... the description says it kills "relatives." Does that include 7th cousins? If all chromatic dragons came from Tiamat, then all are related, so all would be dead. But we know the spell only killed a portion of the black dragons and no other colors. So relatives must mean something more like parents, siblings, progeny. So the relatives of the first wave would go back as far as grandparents.

Now, if the ABD was the granddaughter of Tiamat, then maybe the spell could potentially touch her five-headedness. But then, it would have hit more than just one quarter of the race.

Bottom line: too much is vague and uncertain... and I'm ok with that. Giant made a deliberate decision to say the splice is a unique homebrew and the epic spells have been left vague for a reason - putting too much thought into how it all works takes away from the wonder of the awesome power and trivializes the special deal the IFCC has produced. Not being vague about it all would invite too much potential criticism that the spells don't work or that the power level is too low or that Xykon could have done it, too, if he had set his power to it. That would be too distracting.

XAQ

2009-07-27, 11:55 PM

V didn't say it only progressed down the family line. If it killed every dragon that had any sort of claim to be related to the target dragon (as V said it did) then why didn't it kill all black dragons/draconians/dracotaurs? They should all share a mitochondrial Eve.

Heh. That assumes that dragons in this setting evolved from proto-dragons, and we know that the Stickverse was created by the Gods in the relatively recent past (geologically speaking). So, unless the Gods created only one male and one female to begin the species with, there would be no single MRCA (most recent common ancestor) for the Black Dragon species.

Liwen

2009-07-28, 12:05 AM

Personally I object to the idea that mortals can gain enough power in the world that the gods created to challenge the gods, it seems a bit... quart into a pint pot, so I have no problem with the idea that the OotS gods are immune to anything a mortal can dish out.

Well I object to the idea that an entity can be outright invincible to another entity. It just makes things really boring in a D&D setting. Knowing that whatever you do, you'll never even get the possibility of remotely having a shot at becoming powerful enough to overcome any foe or friend is just frustrating. To all programmers and game rulers who make some NPCs invulnerable, shame on you!

Aldrakan

2009-07-28, 01:25 AM

So your preferred character type is the http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/GodModeSue? Each to their own I guess.

I feel there are a lot of entities where it just doesn't make sense to be able to overcome them, and the creators of your world would qualify for that.

Ancalagon

2009-07-28, 03:48 AM

Would Tiamat be targeted by Familicide? She is the mother of all dragons, after all... although, she'd probably easily resist the spell, being a god.

In contrast to what many people seem to think: gods are not for xping.

kpenguin

2009-07-28, 03:48 AM

God are not for xp.

Tell that to my epic game.

Ancalagon

2009-07-28, 03:56 AM

Gods are not for xping. ;)

Epic or not... your are still crude, wobbly toys for gods. Level 20 or level 50? Still a weak mortal...

Random832

2009-07-28, 07:05 AM

Gods are not for xping. ;)

Epic or not... your are still crude, wobbly toys for gods. Level 20 or level 50? Still a weak mortal...

Most of the gods in Deities and Demigods are level 40-ish (though the divine abilities probably raise their CR somewhat). Certainly the possibility of a campaign that involves fighting and killing one is acknowledged in the book. IIRC, Specific XP awards are also discussed, independent of just working from the XP table generally.

Ancalagon

2009-07-28, 07:11 AM

May be... but I still consider "rules for gods" either as some sort of bad joke by the wizards or some scheme to make money by selling just another source-book. ;)

Johel

2009-07-28, 07:32 AM

May be... but I still consider "rules for gods" either as some sort of bad joke by the wizards or some scheme to make money by selling just another source-book. ;)

Also, for most settings, the übergod might disapprove.
Ao, for the Forgotten Realms, stated several times that balance was not to be disturbed. The gods tried to tip it a few times. They paid the price.

Mortals powerful enough to defy gods would probably get a job offer BEFORE they set to kill a god.

As for Familicide, there is surely a save (probably Fortitude, since it's a necromancy spell). The eldest dragons must have made the save. It blocked the spell's chain event.

vegetalss4

2009-07-28, 07:45 AM

May be... but I still consider "rules for gods" either as some sort of bad joke by the wizards or some scheme to make money by selling just another source-book. ;)

that is because you think of gods as in God, all-powerful and omniscient, if you approach them from a different viewpoint they aren't invincible. for example look at the Norse pantheon, they have in their own mythologies been challenged by mortals, dnd gods are closer to those, thus rules for them.

Zevox

2009-07-28, 07:54 AM

Mortals powerful enough to defy gods would probably get a job offer BEFORE they set to kill a god.
Tell that to Karsus.

Zevox

Ancalagon

2009-07-28, 09:00 AM

Also, for most settings, the übergod might disapprove.
Ao, for the Forgotten Realms, stated several times that balance was not to be disturbed. The gods tried to tip it a few times. They paid the price.

That's "super god" vs "normal gods". You need rules for that? Also, the rules we spoke about here were also "mortals" vs. "gods". I might agree some rules for "gods interacting with each other" might be useful (like... two or even five pages to get a rough idea who can do what and who is more powerful than who).

that is because you think of gods as in God, all-powerful and omniscient, if you approach them from a different viewpoint they aren't invincible. for example look at the Norse pantheon, they have in their own mythologies been challenged by mortals, dnd gods are closer to those, thus rules for them.

I always like it when people tell me how I think.
D&D gods surely are not all-powerful and omniscient. But I still say that mortals, no matter how powerful, cannot stand vs. gods, thus gods are no xp.
Note this does NOT mean powerful mortals could not stand vs. the Avatar of a god.

Also, D&D-gods are closer to norse gods, but they are not *that* close. D&D gods are full, powerful gods that are beyond anything what mortals do.
Even the novels of D&D cannot be taken as reference, as the confrontations of "some mortal" vs. gods is always a very special thing and the entire story is only about that.

I still find it fine if you play a long campaign where it's about the confrontation with some god, the campaign turns around that as the novels turn around someone who challenges the gods to become one himself or similar - but I really do not think you need RULES for something as that. A unique, special situation in a campaign that is about that situation does not need a rulebook.

And when gods are confronted on a regular basis (thus, you need rules to somehow treat it as something that is not a unique, special case) something is wrong as gods should not "just" be "mortals, just with much more power". I think that even when clerics can talk to gods, even when gods can get killed or new ones rise, they should be in a very, very basic way mysterious and non-mortal and... different. Rules take that away and reduce something in the world's background that should not be stats to mere stats.

PId6

2009-07-28, 09:28 AM

And when gods are confronted on a regular basis (thus, you need rules to somehow treat it as something that is not a unique, special case) something is wrong as gods should not "just" be "mortals, just with much more power". I think that even when clerics can talk to gods, even when gods can get killed or new ones rise, they should be in a very, very basic way mysterious and non-mortal and... different. Rules take that away and reduce something in the world's background that should not be stats to mere stats.
Gods already are different; the divine rank system gives them so many abilities that make them have total advantage over any but the most powerful mortals. And with so many examples of godslaying in fantasy and mythology, why shouldn't gods have stats? Why should they be so mysterious as to defy stats? They're not eldritch abominations.

In fact, that gods are killable and are not infallible is a core part of the default setting; the Athar (Planar Handbook), for example, believe that the so-called gods aren't really deities but are rather really powerful mortals, who are given to petty emotions and require sustenance in the form of prayers and belief. Having stats only reflect what's already been established, that the gods are powerful but can be challenged and are not infallible.

As long as gods can be challenged by mortals and there are enough people out there who would plausibly like to run such a campaign, then they should have stats. Arguing that having such rules takes away the "mystery" of gods is the same as arguing having rules on magic takes away the "mystery" of supernatural powers. If you want a campaign with mysterious and unbeatable gods or mysterious and unknowable magic, then nothing stops you from ignoring those rules and making them so. But if someone wants a rules system for gods or a clear system of magic, then it's a good thing they already exist.

Snake-Aes

2009-07-28, 09:34 AM

Pretty much. Thefact that they have stats don't mean they are weak by no meanings. In fact, based on how they get bonuses and abilities based on divine rank, your only hopes to beat a god are to either be a higher ranked god, or to be a veeeeery high level epic group. With the amount of theorycraft around, people seem to forgetwhat it means to go past level 20. A level 25~ character has enough power to destroy whole armies by himself, if not nations, or even the whole damned plane depending on how far you want to go with epic spells and rituals. And even those characters have little to no chance against a god.
Heck, a god's abortion is an epic monster.

Ormur

2009-07-28, 09:36 PM

The familicide spell kills all that shared the dragons bloodline and those that shared their bloodline. It seems like it would kill the Dragon mother's living ancestors or siblings (parents grandparents, etc) and then perhaps kill all their descendants, it might go one step further and kill all their living ancestors too if cousins and nephews are counted as sharing a direct bloodline. If we presume that not all the mother dragon's ancestors from the creation of dragonkind were still alive it would not be enough to kill all dragons. But since they breed slowly and are probably pretty inbred being so few, it could realistically kill a quarter of all living black dragons.

Optimystik

2009-07-29, 09:52 AM

Tiamat isn't a black dragon, so I doubt the spell would even target her, never mind being able to resist or otherwise ignore it.

GreatWyrmGold

2009-07-29, 10:32 AM

Tiamat isn't a black dragon, so I doubt the spell would even target her, never mind being able to resist or otherwise ignore it.

Actually, Mrs. T's 20% black dragon.

Optimystik

2009-07-29, 10:48 AM

Actually, Mrs. T's 20% black dragon.

No she's not, no more than Thor is part dwarf. Certainly she has no blood for Familicide to home in on.

Her avatar might, but she didn't have one active when the spell was fired as far as we know.

GreatWyrmGold

2009-07-29, 01:02 PM

I have a crazy theory:
As a god, Tiamat is IMMUNE to death-type spells!
I know, crazy, like saying that Xykon is immune to electricity because he's a lich!

Edit:

No she's not, no more than Thor is part dwarf. Certainly she has no blood for Familicide to home in on.

Her avatar might, but she didn't have one active when the spell was fired as far as we know.
Er, I meant that an amount equal to how much black dragon is in T,*and the rest as pointing out that Tiamat, unlike her mythical namesake, has 5 heads, 20% of which are black dragon heads.
*Twenty percent
Also, Thor doesn't even LOOK like a dwarf, nor is he the D&D version of the dwarven god (which probably means something).

Optimystik

2009-07-29, 01:10 PM

I have a crazy theory:
As a god, Tiamat is IMMUNE to death-type spells!
I know, crazy, like saying that Xykon is immune to electricity because he's a lich!

Epic spells are the exception that proves the rule. They were designed to take on larger-than-life opponents, like deities. Now we can argue that V's was not strong enough or that it couldn't target her as developed, but not that Tiamat is specifically immune to them.

Er, I meant that an amount equal to how much black dragon is in T,*and the rest as pointing out that Tiamat, unlike her mythical namesake, has 5 heads, 20% of which are black dragon heads.
*Twenty percent
Also, Thor doesn't even LOOK like a dwarf, nor is he the D&D version of the dwarven god (which probably means something).

I know what you meant, but a spell that affects black dragons isn't necessarily going to go after Tiamat just because one of her heads is black. We saw half-dragons being slain by Familicide, but no sorcerers of other races. A reasonable deduction is that the percentage of parentage goes no lower than 50.

EmperorSarda

2009-07-29, 02:22 PM

Or we can also argue that familicide only affects those of the plane on which it was cast. We saw the affects travel throughout all of OotsWorld, so even if Tiamat was somehow related to Mama Dragon, regardless of whether or not she could resist it, it wouldn't get to her anyway because she's on another plane of existence.

Optimystik

2009-07-29, 10:21 PM

veti

2009-07-29, 10:38 PM

It's a "campaign setting" question, not really rule-based at all.

Some campaign settings have gods who never actually appear or manifest in any form that could subject them to any kind of damage, while others have gods who pretty much stroll about the earth getting into bar-room brawls every week. Some campaign settings have mortals who know their place and never even discuss gods in terms of limitations and capabilities; others have mortals who regard "Deities & Demigods" as no more than an epic-level version of the "Monster Manual".

There is no right or wrong here, it's just however the DM wants to play it.

From a purely personal standpoint: I've had a lot of fun running a campaign in a monotheist setting, where the one god is completely inaccessible to any form of magic whatsoever; and I've had a lot of fun playing in a campaign where we rampaged through the outer planes as much as possible, culminating in our (very active) participation in Ragnarok. They both worked.

rewinn

2009-07-31, 10:47 PM

Heh. That assumes that dragons in this setting evolved from proto-dragons, and we know that the Stickverse was created by the Gods in the relatively recent past (geologically speaking). So, unless the Gods created only one male and one female to begin the species with, there would be no single MRCA (most recent common ancestor) for the Black Dragon species.

Yours is the simplest answer: that the Gods created a world that started with a full complement of black dragons, just as it did with respect to humans, elves and so forth. Thus the Familicide didn't reach all Black Dragons because most of them are not related by blood.

The other suggestions all limit the Epic Spell in ways not evidenced in the work as written and that, more importantly, ruin the purpose of the spell. If the spell is blocked by a saving throw, or is blocked from proceeding from a child to a grandparent because the child's parent is already dead, or is blocked because the parent is visiting another plane, that makes it all too easy for there to be survivors seeking revenge.

It's very likely that the Stickverse was created with a great many black dragons from the start, since we know
The Stickverse is only a little more than 1000 years old
Black dragons reproduce very slowly, in human terms (thus Stickverse is maybe 20 dragon generations old)
Black dragons have high mortality rates, as popular targets of adventurers (OOTS didn't seem especially surprised to encounter and kill one)
Yet, despite the above, black dragons are not rare. V's Familicide killed a great many dragons, but only 25% of them; therefore there must be more of them than would be likely were there but a single mated pair at the beginning of Stickverse.It's worth noting that over time, random pairings of BDs would gradually bring the current population to a state of having common ancestors, as the really old and unrelated ones die off and the sheer number of ancestors among the currently living BDs increase the likelihood of common ancestry. On the evidence, Stickverse hasn't reached that many dragon generations yet.

Also worth noting is that at least a few black dragons intermarry outside their species; the Ancient Black Dragon spoke approvingly of her son dating a Green Dragon, and the Familicide killed a couple of obvious hybrids. This would slow the development of single common ancestor.

For a more precise analysis, we need better census data, the lack of which is one of the limitations of a webcomic over a reality. It is to be hoped that at some point The Giant will disclose a helpful population study that will enable the resolution of these important issues, but it may be more efficient simply to consult the Oracle.

Thanatosia

2009-08-01, 12:06 AM

Bogardan_Mage

2009-08-01, 11:34 PM

World 1.0 had millions of souls roughly 27 minutes + a few rounds of combat after being 'newly minted' (http://www.giantitp.com/comics/oots0274.html)

I think the example of the first world strongly implies that world 2.0 was probably also created in a heavily populated initial state and that species do not have adam & eve type singular proto-ancestors.
That's 27 minutes after the Snarl revealed itself, not after the world was created. It is not implied that the Snarl revealed itself the second the world was finished. Indeed, it explicitly needed time to grow.

Herald Alberich

2009-08-01, 11:38 PM

That's 27 minutes after the Snarl revealed itself, not after the world was created. It is not implied that the Snarl revealed itself the second the world was finished. Indeed, it explicitly needed time to grow.

Indeed, but did it need the thousands or millions of years required for the Adam and Eve of each species to populate the world? We are talking about cosmic timescales here, so it's possible, but I dunno if the world would qualify as "newly minted" in that case.

factotum

2009-08-02, 01:23 AM

Indeed, but did it need the thousands or millions of years required for the Adam and Eve of each species to populate the world? We are talking about cosmic timescales here, so it's possible, but I dunno if the world would qualify as "newly minted" in that case.

There were clearly people--lots of people--running from the Snarl as it destroyed the world in the Scribble of Time. I doubt all those people were the first ones created by the gods.

GreatWyrmGold

2009-08-02, 06:47 AM

Epic spells are the exception that proves the rule. They were designed to take on larger-than-life opponents, like deities. Now we can argue that V's was not strong enough or that it couldn't target her as developed, but not that Tiamat is specifically immune to them.
If I recall correstly, A.) all epic spels involve saving throws, and B.) at some point, gods always roll natural 20's.
It's a safe guess that T's at that point.

I know what you meant, but a spell that affects black dragons isn't necessarily going to go after Tiamat just because one of her heads is black. We saw half-dragons being slain by Familicide, but no sorcerers of other races. A reasonable deduction is that the percentage of parentage goes no lower than 50.
An even more reasonable one is that it works as V said it would: "Anyone who could possibly make a claim to be part of your family is gone."
Which A.) makes me wonder why no centaurs/humanoids were killed, and B.) says that there's some reason that T wasn't affected (she's not the great-great-etc grandmother of all dragons, the spell only works on the same plane, SHE'S A DEITY FOR CRYING OUT LOUD!. etc)

Optimystik

2009-08-03, 09:46 AM

If I recall correstly, A.) all epic spels involve saving throws, and B.) at some point, gods always roll natural 20's.
It's a safe guess that T's at that point.

For some spells (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/epic/spells/vengefulGazeOfGod.htm), even making your save doesn't make much difference. Judging from the effectiveness of Familicide, it must be quite lethal even on a successful save.

An even more reasonable one is that it works as V said it would: "Anyone who could possibly make a claim to be part of your family is gone."
Which A.) makes me wonder why no centaurs/humanoids were killed, and B.) says that there's some reason that T wasn't affected (she's not the great-great-etc grandmother of all dragons, the spell only works on the same plane, SHE'S A DEITY FOR CRYING OUT LOUD!. etc)

A) If the spell truly targets based on bloodlines as V claims, then it won't hit the non-dragon parents (centaurs, humans etc.) because they don't have any of mama's blood, only the children do.
B) I already mentioned the planar targeting restriction as a possibility; I just said there could be others, such as Mama and Tiamat not sharing any blood.

Beren

2009-08-03, 11:08 AM

I don't know if it makes much difference with regard to Tiamat, but as far as how the spell works, it not only targeted relatives, but relatives' relatives as well. So, for example, if it were cast on me, it'd kill not only my siblings, but also their spouses (assuming they have children) because the children are related both to me and my brothers- and sisters-in-law.

Obviously, if you define "related" as any genetic relationship whatsoever, then *everyone* would die; actually, when you think about it, if you believe in evolution (and I do), then it might wipe out every living thing on the planet. In that case, the "relatives' relatives" clause is superfluous. So, I'm guessing this is NOT how it all works in OOTS. There either has to be a limit to the degree of separation (e.g., second cousins are close enough, seventh cousins aren't), or the world has to be young enough and had to have been prepopulated with enough distinct genetically-compatible-but-not-strictly-related dragons for "familicide" to not be indistinguishable from "genocide." But, in any case, I think it's the "relatives' relatives" part of the spell that makes the spell pretty scary. Its victims aren't necessarily all black dragons...

Faulty

2009-08-03, 11:12 AM

I don't think Tiamat actually laid the literal eggs of the first chromatic dragons, but sculpted them, so to speak. I thought that was the case with most/all racial progenator gods and goddesses.

GreatWyrmGold

2009-08-06, 05:04 PM

A) If the spell truly targets based on bloodlines as V claims, then it won't hit the non-dragon parents (centaurs, humans etc.) because they don't have any of mama's blood, only the children do.
No, they don't have to share Mama's blood; just (say) the blood of Mama's great-grandma's child's mother, or whatever. If the spell works as V claims, though, it probably should have wiped out almost all life on, er, Virga (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=6457009#post6457009) or whatever the planet is called. Hm, I guess Haerta didn't know what all the limits on the spell were...hm...I think there might be some dragons ready to attack V! WATCH OUT, V!!!
Oops, derail. Sorry.

B) I already mentioned the planar targeting restriction as a possibility; I just said there could be others, such as Mama and Tiamat not sharing any blood.
Then...why were we arguing?

I think I'll start a thread about the possibility revealed.

AlexanderRM

2009-08-06, 08:17 PM

Yeah, a larger issue with Familcide- if there was any restriction at all to it- only wiping out X degrees of separation, allowing a saving throw, or whatever- then it would only make the problem worse. You wouldn't have dragons seeking revenge for the specific dragon it was targeted at, but you'd have dozens (at least, probably far more) of dragons seeking revenge for various relatives wiped out by the spell.

So, I think the "relatively young world" thingy is probably the most likely answer, so only 1/4th of the black dragons on the planet were actually related to any of the other dragons affected by the spell at all.

Snails

2009-08-07, 03:43 PM

There is a difference between related in terms of how we think of genetics, and related in terms of personal family, for whom we might be motivated to plot revenge. Obviously all black dragons are related on the first level. On the second level, a second cousin whom I have never met and did not know even existed is not necessarily a relative.

In terms of the spell, the point is to annihilate all possible sources of revenge. In terms of my second cousin, if the intermediates have already passed away, there is no reason to think of such a person as a relative with respect to the purpose of the spell.