Deity Stats...? (3.X)

[BrokenChord]

I'm reading through everywhere in Deities and Demigods (3.0 version) where it would seem to be put in, but I can't find anywhere that it says how Deities got such high ability scores. Like, I can't find anything saying they get their Divine Rank added to their stats, or that they gain bonuses at an especially fast rate, or anything. I mean, I know that with most of them as creatures with 20 Outsider HD and 40 class levels, they would have 10 extra ability points (possibly 15 depending on rules readings), but that doesn't explain how they get things like 30ish in every stat before items or buffs.

Can somebody explain this to me? Are they maybe just implied to have started with almost 30 in every ability score? If that's not the case, what is it? Or if that IS the case, what would be a good baseline to use for scores were I to try to make my own Deity?

(Note, I'm not asking for help beating them. There are plenty of tricks that I could probably figure out on my own for beating Deities, if I were trying to beat one in a high-op game. I'm trying to build a few for a pantheon, though, and I'm just wondering how to figure out their Ability Scores.

[Vedhin]

I'm pretty sure it's DM fiat. The writer's just didn't explain that they thought "they're gods, lets give them giant boosts for no reason".

And reading this post over, it might come across offensive. If so, I apologize.

[hamishspence]

Dragon 300 explains this one- in Wizards Workshop, which would later become Sage Advice:


All the deities in Deities and Demigods have a standard array of ability scores (similar to the standard array for NPCs in the Dungeon Master's Guide). The standard array is 35, 28, 25, 24, 24, 24.

To this standard divine array, the Deities and Demigods designers added +1 for every 4 class levels a deity had and +1 for every point of divine rank. Certain deities also received racial adjustments. For example, Corellon Larethian received elf racial adjustments.

All the deities in this book have ability scores generated this way, even those who are (or are reputed to be) ascended mortals. If you include divine ascension in your game and you want to use the standard divine array, you can require these scores before ascension (Epic Level Handbook offers some ideas and information on how characters can acquire these high scores), or you can just give the characters these scores as a benefit of ascension.

Of course, there's no reason for you to give your deities any ability scores other than the ones you think they should have.

[SiuiS]

There is actually consistent math behind it. Look up "divine array" on google; I don't recall if it's an actual array or if it's a bunch of tiered bonuses, but someone went through and pared down the deities and they have consistent stats. Something like +20/+16/+14/+14/+10/+10 or thereabouts?

Keep in mind I am heading to bed now, much later than I should have, and the exact numbers aren't right.

E: thanks, Hamish! Man, I was shooting low, there XD

[Talya]

I'm trying to build a few for a pantheon, though, and I'm just wondering how to figure out their Ability Scores.

Divine fiat?

The Gods don't follow the same rules mortals do. They can have whatever godly ability scores the writer chooses to give them. They do not roll or follow a point buy. They're gods.

[BrokenChord]

Wow, that's a great find, hamish! I'll probably use that, though it doesn't actually seem consistent with some of the gods' (such as Pan's) stats.

[skyth]

I thought it was the racial stats for Titans (Which the dieties are all based on).

[hamishspence]

True. I also remember reading somewhere that in the case of the Olympians, the Titan stat block was a starting point from which they were built up.

EDIT: Ninjaed.

[BrokenChord]

Ah. That makes this whole thing a lot more sensible. I really wish they had just included that in the books instead of being dodgy about it, but thank you all for helping me find this information!

[Yawgmoth]

Divine fiat?

The Gods don't follow the same rules mortals do. They can have whatever godly ability scores the writer chooses to give them. They do not roll or follow a point buy. They're gods.This. Although to be honest, I wouldn't even bother with ability scores or feats or skill points or in fact any stats outside of portfolio/domains and maybe salient divine abilities, because there's just no reason for it. Unless you're playing a high epic game where they might actually get in a fight, there's no reason to put numbers to them.

[Vedhin]

This. Although to be honest, I wouldn't even bother with ability scores or feats or skill points or in fact any stats outside of portfolio/domains and maybe salient divine abilities, because there's just no reason for it. Unless you're playing a high epic game where they might actually get in a fight, there's no reason to put numbers to them.

It just invites the Lord British problem. If it has stats, someone will find a way to kill it.

[Elderand]

It just invites the Lord British problem. If it has stats, someone will find a way to kill it.

I don't see how that's a problem.

[Vedhin]

I don't see how that's a problem.

It's a problem for the DM. It's also a problem for the plot.

[DeathGodKyo]

I don't see how it's a problem that it's possible to kill something if the requirements to kill said thing are "optimizing to the level of trivializing every encounter ever". If the DM wants to run a game with those players, it works out fine.

[Elderand]

It's a problem for the DM. It's also a problem for the plot.

It really isn't, it's just a new plot waiting to happen.

[Jormengand]

It's a problem for the DM. It's also a problem for the plot.

They could have done something similar to Achaekek instead - he has stats, but you can't actually kill him because he has an ability which stops you killing him. Make that ability (Ex), make it apply to deities and demigods as well as mortals, and laugh.

[eggynack]

I don't see how that's a problem.
Some people like their deities untouchable and unassailable. They are immortal, and exist on a whole other plane from us mortal folk. Even really tough mortal folk. For them, being able to punch out a deity is problematic. Then there's other people who like their deities incredibly powerful, but still vulnerable to a good stabbing. For them, it's not a problem. I figure that people can switch between categories, depending on the game and the setting.

[Vedhin]

They could have done something similar to Achaekek instead - he has stats, but you can't actually kill him because he has an ability which stops you killing him. Make that ability (Ex), make it apply to deities and demigods as well as mortals, and laugh.

See Lord British. He was invincible, in some way or another. The players managed to kill him throughout many games.

I think Knowledge Affiliation will let you get past that (Ex) ability.


Some people like their deities untouchable and unassailable. They are immortal, and exist on a whole other plane from us mortal folk. Even really tough mortal folk. For them, being able to punch out a deity is problematic. Then there's other people who like their deities incredibly powerful, but still vulnerable to a good stabbing. For them, it's not a problem. I figure that people can switch between categories, depending on the game and the setting.

Me, I just think that if you give something stats, even ridiculouc ones, you should be prepared to have it die. Too many inexperienced DMs think that if they give something crazy stats, it will be unkillable.
As long as you are comfortable with your Critter of Great Power being killable, give it stats.

[eggynack]

Me, I just think that if you give something stats, even ridiculouc ones, you should be prepared to have it die. Too many inexperienced DMs think that if they give something crazy stats, it will be unkillable.
As long as you are comfortable with your Critter of Great Power being killable, give it stats.
Oh, I definitely agree. I mean, maybe you can toss on some well defined abilities, like ultra-lightning, but if a creature has defenses that aren't "No," you've gotta expect those defenses to be breached.

[Elderand]

See Lord British. He was invincible, in some way or another. The players managed to kill him throughout many games.

I think Knowledge Affiliation will let you get past that (Ex) ability.



Me, I just think that if you give something stats, even ridiculouc ones, you should be prepared to have it die. Too many inexperienced DMs think that if they give something crazy stats, it will be unkillable.
As long as you are comfortable with your Critter of Great Power being killable, give it stats.

I actually prefer having everything killable one way or another. If your ultimate being is impossible to kill it remove agency from the players.

[Jormengand]

See Lord British. He was invincible, in some way or another. The players managed to kill him throughout many games.

I think Knowledge Affiliation will let you get past that (Ex) ability.

Really? How about an ability which gets rid of your knowledge affiliation? How about a line saying that he can never lose his regeneration? If you can get through all of that, then you can probably kill the LoP by this point anyway.


I actually prefer having everything killable one way or another. If your ultimate being is impossible to kill it remove agency from the players.

It's still possible to knock Achaekek unconscious, though, and so you can fight him, defeat him, and get XP for defeating his encounter.

[Elderand]

It's still possible to knock Achaekek unconscious, though, and so you can fight him, defeat him, and get XP for defeating his encounter.

I suppose kill is the wrong word, neutralize is better. There should be only one thing in the game that is completely unstoppable and can wipe a party at whim and that should be the DM.

[Vedhin]

Really? How about an ability which gets rid of your knowledge affiliation? How about a line saying that he can never lose his regeneration? If you can get through all of that, then you can probably kill the LoP by this point anyway.

I don't pretend to have enough OP-fu to get through that. I'd make an Ice Assassin and have it duel the invincible critter to the death just for lulz though.

And the Lady of Pain proves my point. She has no stats, so that the DM can use her as a plot device without the players killing her somehow.

[Jormengand]

I suppose kill is the wrong word, neutralize is better. There should be only one thing in the game that is completely unstoppable and can wipe a party at whim and that should be the DM.

But that's my point - the difference between Achaekek MK II and The Lady of Pain is that Achekek MK II has to try to wipe the floor with you, and you can fight back. You can't kill him, but you can still "Win" the combat.

[Elderand]

But that's my point - the difference between Achaekek MK II and The Lady of Pain is that Achekek MK II has to try to wipe the floor with you, and you can fight back. You can't kill him, but you can still "Win" the combat.

Which is fine, the challenge lies with finding a way to dispose of the guy whitout being able to kill it.

Lady of pain though ? Kill the entire setting for me. There is no point to doing anything in sigil. Ultimatly you are never anything more than the lady lapdog, whether you know and admit it or not because the minute you do something she doesn't agree with you lose.

[Jormengand]

Which is fine, the challenge lies with finding a way to dispose of the guy whitout being able to kill it.

Lady of pain though ? Kill the entire setting for me. There is no point to doing anything in sigil. Ultimatly you are never anything more than the lady lapdog, whether you know and admit it or not because the minute you do something she doesn't agree with you lose.

This is my point. I'm saying that deities should be like AMKII and not like the LoP.

[Elderand]

This is my point. I'm saying that deities should be like AMKII and not like the LoP.

so we are basicly arguing about how much we agree with each other ? :P

Altough I'd say I'm fine with deities being killable even. I'd prefer if it took some convoluted method to do it but I'm fine with gods being offed.

[Chronos]

Keep in mind that, in classical literature, it was possible for mortals to challenge the gods. The odds were hugely against them, but it was possible. One of the heroes of the Iliad (admittedly, bolstered by Athena, but we can model that in the game as him being a cleric or paladin of her) managed to drive Ares into a retreat, and Fingolfin was able to permanently maim Melkor in the Silmarillion before getting killed. In that context, having very high (but still finite) stats seems perfectly reasonable.

[Talya]

so we are basicly arguing about how much we agree with each other ? :P

Altough I'd say I'm fine with deities being killable even. I'd prefer if it took some convoluted method to do it but I'm fine with gods being offed.

I kinda like Faerun's approach.

Yes, a god can be killed. But death doesn't mean a whole lot to a God. A dead god is still more alive and powerful than any mortal could ever dream of. And they can always come back.

[Urist]

Which is fine, the challenge lies with finding a way to dispose of the guy whitout being able to kill it.

Lady of pain though ? Kill the entire setting for me. There is no point to doing anything in sigil. Ultimatly you are never anything more than the lady lapdog, whether you know and admit it or not because the minute you do something she doesn't agree with you lose.

The thing with the Lady, though, is that you can do just about whatever you want, as long as you don't worship her or destroy Sigil. I'm okay with her being invincible, because she ultimately doesn't interfere with players OR NPC's very often at all.

[AlltheBooks]

Everyone as their own approach to deities. For my group the statted beings are the most powerful aspect of the deity available(altered of course). There are a few of them as well as a multitude of lesser ones in a broad range of power.

Nearly taking one out would result in a consolidation and the deity would come off autopilot and start really paying attention. If you were messing around within the influence of their portfolio it could go poorly for you.

As far as the Lady goes. No. Just No.

[Talya]

As far as the Lady goes. No. Just No.

Exactly. The Lady is not a deity. And none of us are worshipping her.

Really. We're not! So don't pay any attention to any of us here.

[BWR]

This is my point. I'm saying that deities should be like AMKII and not like the LoP.

And I'm saying that they shouldn't.
At least not necessarily. For some settings, mortals challenging and even winning against gods is fine but this doesn't mean all settings should have killable gods. Planescape was like this. None of the gods were stat'ed, because of "Stat it and they will kill it". You might mess with their plans and if you were really awesome you might defeat an avatar but there was no way a mortal had any chance against a god in full manifestation. Fighting gods was not about dice rolls and the right epic spells to mess with them or Pun-Puning your way to power, fighting a god was a matter of philosophy, armies, personal combat against key minions, insane long-term planning, deals with their enemies/rivals, politics and reducing their power base, or just plain story fiat (probably all of the above and more). A story, not base mechanics.
The Lady's purpose is flavor and the ultimate untouchable. Unless the PCs insist on being stupid and pushing limits they should have no interaction with her and everything should be fine.


I actually prefer having everything killable one way or another. If your ultimate being is impossible to kill it remove agency from the players.
I honestly don't understand this concept. Simply do not understand it. Why must everything be killable? Or even fightable? How does having some things be off limits remove player agency? Must players have absolute freedom in their ability to destroy absolutely everything in order to ensure agency? PCs must be at least theoretically capable of destroying the entire uni/multiverse to make sure they don't feel powerless?

[137beth]

Keep in mind that, in classical literature, it was possible for mortals to challenge the gods. The odds were hugely against them, but it was possible. One of the heroes of the Iliad (admittedly, bolstered by Athena, but we can model that in the game as him being a cleric or paladin of her) managed to drive Ares into a retreat, and Fingolfin was able to permanently maim Melkor in the Silmarillion before getting killed. In that context, having very high (but still finite) stats seems perfectly reasonable.

And of course in Norse literature they could actually be killed:smallbiggrin:

[skyth]

Keep in mind that, in classical literature, it was possible for mortals to challenge the gods. The odds were hugely against them, but it was possible. One of the heroes of the Iliad (admittedly, bolstered by Athena, but we can model that in the game as him being a cleric or paladin of her) managed to drive Ares into a retreat, and Fingolfin was able to permanently maim Melkor in the Silmarillion before getting killed. In that context, having very high (but still finite) stats seems perfectly reasonable.

On a side note, Melkor wasn't a god. There is only one diety in Middle Earth. Melkor was one of his servants.

[Angelalex242]

Well, Deity Stats are there for those times you want to run a JRPG plot.

In Lunar 1, Althena qualifies for deities and demigods...and by extension, so must Ghaleon once he absorbs enough of her power.

In Lunar 2, for example, you're supposed to punch out Zophar. I'd stat Zophar up with the Deities and Demigods rules. Lucia, one of your party members, ALSO follows deities and demigods rules.

In Final Fantasy 6, Kefka ascends to god of magic. I'd stat that clown up (as a final boss only...) with the deities and demigods and rules. (and he'd absolutely have divine prankster as a PrC...)

Sin (Final Fantasy X) also qualifies for the deities and demigods rules.

Fal'Cie (Final Fantasy XIII) also qualifies.

Short version:It's perfectly okay to make the final boss of your game an evil god.

[Talya]

On a side note, Melkor wasn't a god. There is only one diety in Middle Earth. Melkor was one of his servants.

While as a technicality, this is correct, in practice, this isn't really true.

Iluvitar is not known by the people of Middle Earth. His creations, the Valar, serve as the de facto deities of the setting, worshipped by the people in it. The Maiar act as angelic beings.

If you want a D&D analog, compare Ao with the under-gods, and then celestial beings and devils and such.

[Clistenes]

I think that an Epic character with 60 character levels and access to any magical item, Wish spells, Grafts, Template-granting rituals and all that cheese could easily reach those stats.

Deities are assumed to either have been the most powerful among the most powerful mortals before gaining their divinity, so they had insane epic stats, or they were born deities, and have insanely high abilities because their "race" just is that way (same way titans and dragons just have higher stats than humans)

[Story]

It really isn't, it's just a new plot waiting to happen.

In fact, in the campaign I'm currently playing in, the ultimate goal is to kill a god.


They could have done something similar to Achaekek instead - he has stats, but you can't actually kill him because he has an ability which stops you killing him. Make that ability (Ex), make it apply to deities and demigods as well as mortals, and laugh.

And watch as the players get that ability for themselves somehow.

[Angelalex242]

I believe the answer for that is 'the gm rolls the dice behind his screen, declares he rolled a 1, and the foolish PC explodes for his idiocy.' ;)

[Story]

I believe the answer for that is 'the gm rolls the dice behind his screen, declares he rolled a 1, and the foolish PC explodes for his idiocy.' ;)

Luckily I was using Diamond Mind.

[Scumbaggery]

On a somewhat related note, some might also have items that justify their stats.

Example: Thor's belt doubles the strength score of the wearer

[Jormengand]

And watch as the players get that ability for themselves somehow.

If they can do that, they can also acquire the LoP's no-save-just-die ability. No-one's managed it yet, to my knowledge.

[Vedhin]

If they can do that, they can also acquire the LoP's no-save-just-die ability. No-one's managed it yet, to my knowledge.

Proabably because it's not statted out anywhere.

[Brookshw]

Depending on the campaign I'm not seeing the problem here. I've had players as gods, I've killed gods for plot pieces, I've had players kill gods. Go ahead and let them in high level epic planar campaigns, maybe avoid it in others.

But never The Lady.

[BrokenChord]

This is not high epic planar, but I'm also intending for the gods I make to be fightable and even able to be killed... Err, I hope they're able to be killed, anyway. The group will be low-op pre-epic, so... Meh :smallsigh: Not really my concern at this point. I need to be able to successfully put a fully statted god on a piece of paper before I worry about being able to balance it.

[afroakuma]

Lady of pain though ? Kill the entire setting for me.

I never understand this attitude. She's nothing more than a setpiece, but because she's humanoid somehow it offends people more than "rocks fall, everyone dies." The setting instructs DMs to deploy her very sparingly and to almost never have her involved in anything the PCs do, unless they're deliberately out to poke her in the eye.


There is no point to doing anything in sigil.

And there's the second issue; Sigil isn't the whole of Planescape, not even remotely. Much of the time it's just a convenient traffic hub to get you from where you are to where you want to be. The Lady of Pain doesn't involve herself in business outside of Sigil. The rest of the setting - and it is vast and wonderful - doesn't involve her.


Ultimatly you are never anything more than the lady lapdog, whether you know and admit it or not because the minute you do something she doesn't agree with you lose.

Except that most adventures don't involve the Lady at all; at best they start in Sigil or pass through on their way to something else. The Lady doesn't control everybody; her role as a setpiece boils down to "don't worship her, don't attack her, don't burn down the city" and pretty much anything else you can get up to is gravy. Demons and devils walk the streets with impunity; her agreement is not relevant to the goings-on of the setting.

Really, I think you're dismissing Planescape for an ill-advised reason.

[Elderand]

I'm not dismissing planescape, just sigil.

Wheter you like it or not everysingle thing you do must at best not displease the lady. And yes it's more offending than rock fall for a simple reason. Rock fall happen when you annoy your DM. The lady happen when you annoy a character, in setting, with it's own set of rules (limited as they may be) and if you break them, wheter you pissed the dm or not you are still dead.

It's one thing to piss off the dm and have him give up on the campaign (rock fall) and quite another to have a ultimate npc trounce you whitout any chance of escape for purely IC reasons.

Worse, not only can you do nothing to the lady, you can't even learn anything about her. It's not a plot hook, it's not a puzzle to solve, it's just a list of do not do this no matter what no reason ever given or die (or get mazed, which is more or less the same thing).

You piss off any other npc, you always get some sort of chance, you might need to be high level or really smart about it but you can prevail or escape. The lady ? Nope. Just nope.

[Khatoblepas]

I'm not dismissing planescape, just sigil.

Wheter you like it or not everysingle thing you do must at best not displease the lady. And yes it's more offending than rock fall for a simple reason. Rock fall happen when you annoy your DM. The lady happen when you annoy a character, in setting, with it's own set of rules (limited as they may be) and if you break them, wheter you pissed the dm or not you are still dead.

It's one thing to piss off the dm and have him give up on the campaign (rock fall) and quite another to have a ultimate npc trounce you whitout any chance of escape for purely IC reasons.

Worse, not only can you do nothing to the lady, you can't even learn anything about her. It's not a plot hook, it's not a puzzle to solve, it's just a list of do not do this no matter what no reason ever given or die (or get mazed, which is more or less the same thing).

You piss off any other npc, you always get some sort of chance, you might need to be high level or really smart about it but you can prevail or escape. The lady ? Nope. Just nope.

Come on, there are three things that piss off the Lady of Pain:

1) Trying to destroy Sigil, her or her servants who are trying to keep the city in good nick.

2) Worshipping the Lady of Pain.

3) Being a God within the walls of Sigil.

She exists only to maintain balance within Sigil. If the players piss her off, she has a difficult maze that is difficult, but not impossible, to escape.

But if they're pissing her off, they're doing something stupid that would upset the balance of the city.

Anything else, from murdering random people to stealing pretty much every gold coin in Sigil, does not anger the Lady of Pain.

There are only three things that do anger her, and you really do have no reason to do any of them.

[Elderand]

Come on, there are three things that piss off the Lady of Pain:

1) Trying to destroy Sigil, her or her servants who are trying to keep the city in good nick.

2) Worshipping the Lady of Pain.

3) Being a God within the walls of Sigil.

She exists only to maintain balance within Sigil. If the players piss her off, she has a difficult maze that is difficult, but not impossible, to escape.

But if they're pissing her off, they're doing something stupid that would upset the balance of the city.

Anything else, from murdering random people to stealing pretty much every gold coin in Sigil, does not anger the Lady of Pain.

There are only three things that do anger her, and you really do have no reason to do any of them.

Look you're not going to convince me and I'm not trying to convince anyone. I'm just giving my opinion.

If I wanted to have an ultimate being I cannot interact with in any way shape or form whitout dooming my character I'd play call of cthulhu.

[Scumbaggery]

If I wanted to have an ultimate being I cannot interact with in any way shape or form whitout dooming my character I'd play call of cthulhu.

I think you need to meet Old Man Henderson (http://1d4chan.org/wiki/Old_Man_Henderson).

[afroakuma]

Wheter you like it or not everysingle thing you do must at best not displease the lady.

She's not there to arbitrate your actions. Reducing it to this level is oversimplistic.


And yes it's more offending than rock fall for a simple reason. Rock fall happen when you annoy your DM. The lady happen when you annoy a character, in setting, with it's own set of rules (limited as they may be) and if you break them, wheter you pissed the dm or not you are still dead.

Except that that's not at all true; the Lady only happens if you piss off the DM, because if the DM doesn't want her to show up, she doesn't show up. If the DM intends to use her as the flavor describes, then pissing off the Lady = pissing off the DM, because if he wanted to do anything other than maze you or kill you, what you've done is not on his list of things he wanted to have done. If the DM doesn't, then it doesn't matter. She's offstage eternally except at a DM's discretion. Just like rocks.


It's one thing to piss off the dm and have him give up on the campaign (rock fall) and quite another to have a ultimate npc trounce you whitout any chance of escape for purely IC reasons.

If you're not being offered a chance of escape, that's the DM. The Lady serves the game, not the other way around.


Worse, not only can you do nothing to the lady, you can't even learn anything about her. It's not a plot hook, it's not a puzzle to solve

And why not? The absence of canonical answers isn't a prohibition on their existence, it's an opportunity for creativity. The nature of the Lady is open-ended so that it can serve the campaign, rather than ask the campaign to incorporate it. It's no different from the Dark Powers of Ravenloft, or the many mysteries of Eberron. I disagree completely, it's definitely a valid plot hook.


You piss off any other npc, you always get some sort of chance, you might need to be high level or really smart about it but you can prevail or escape. The lady ? Nope. Just nope.

That assumes that every other NPC is statted or otherwise delimited. Plenty of DMs wouldn't agree. How many adventure hooks lack a strict mechanical basis in published material? How many require new material to exist? How many lack any strict mechanical basis whatsoever? Looking through back issues of Dungeon from the 3.X era, it's a recurring theme that the plot is not obligated to the mechanics and not every NPC is limited in what they are capable of doing by some crunch delineation that allows you to fight back.

Anyway, I doubt you're interested in debate, but there it is. I think I'm done here.

[NichG]

Does the existence of the sun in real life deny my agency as a person? There is nothing I can possibly do in my lifetime to kill or neutralize the sun, and that includes things that might involve unifying all of humanity towards that goal. There are also absolute realities involving it that I must respect - if I stare at the sun without eye protection I will damage my vision, if I stand outside on a sunny day for long enough without sunscreen I will get a sunburn, etc.

But at the same time, the fact that there is no way I could personally make my life goal 'kill the sun' and succeed doesn't actually prevent me from accomplishing any number of other things and making any number of other choices.

[Elderand]

We are at a point were we'll just start arguing in circle. I have my opinion, you have yours (and unlike rule discussion this is nothing more than a matter of opinion and taste).

Some like to have everything neutralizable, others don't. Leave it at that.

[Deophaun]

Isn't it implied that the Lady is only omnipotent within the confines of Sigil? That being the case, it's possible to kill her, even if it's unbelievably unlikely.

[herrhauptmann]

It just invites the Lord British problem. If it has stats, someone will find a way to kill it.

I love you for this reference.
Which shard were you on?

[Chronos]

Eh, in the NES version of Quest of the Avatar, the Skull of Mondain would kill British just like anyone else.

[Vedhin]

Does the existence of the sun in real life deny my agency as a person? There is nothing I can possibly do in my lifetime to kill or neutralize the sun, and that includes things that might involve unifying all of humanity towards that goal. There are also absolute realities involving it that I must respect - if I stare at the sun without eye protection I will damage my vision, if I stand outside on a sunny day for long enough without sunscreen I will get a sunburn, etc.

But at the same time, the fact that there is no way I could personally make my life goal 'kill the sun' and succeed doesn't actually prevent me from accomplishing any number of other things and making any number of other choices.

Actually, with current technology it is technically possible to destroy the sun. Not feasible, but possible.


I love you for this reference.
Which shard were you on?

It's been so long, I can't remember.

[NichG]

Actually, with current technology it is technically possible to destroy the sun. Not feasible, but possible.


I would love to hear this explanation. Lets be generous and say my lifespan is 100 years from now and that I immediately become Lord Regent of Earth with all of its resources at my command.

Given all of that, how can I extinguish the sun by the end of my lifespan with current technology?

[ShurikVch]

They could have done something similar to Achaekek instead - he has stats, but you can't actually kill him because he has an ability which stops you killing him. Make that ability (Ex), make it apply to deities and demigods as well as mortals, and laugh.
Achaekek is not immune to negative levels.
Bunch of Shadow Dragons can kill him in no time.

[Jormengand]

Achaekek is not immune to negative levels.
Bunch of Shadow Dragons can kill him in no time.

Negative levels are an effect which would kill it instantly, so it takes its full hit point total +46 nonlethal damage.

In any case, AMKII is immune to everything that kills him, because the point of AMKII is to be immune to everything that kills him. I didn't say that Achaekek couldn't be killed, because he can, I said you could do something similar to Achaekek, where he actually can't be killed.

[ShurikVch]

Negative levels are an effect which would kill it instantly, so it takes its full hit point total +46 nonlethal damage.
You know what also will kill him instantly?
Stealing and destroying his immortal soul.
Do you seriously say Achaekek will just stand up and walk away after this?! :smallfurious:
Negative level is not a damage, it's a status effect. Regeneration cannot restore it.


In any case, AMKII is immune to everything that kills him, because the point of AMKII is to be immune to everything that kills him. I didn't say that Achaekek couldn't be killed, because he can, I said you could do something similar to Achaekek, where he actually can't be killed.
Sorry, English is not my language. What you are just trying to say in this quote?

[Ravens_cry]

If I'd use the stats at all, those are merely the avatars of the god, rather than the gods themselves. To destroy a god, you'd have to destroy their concept, their domains. And how do you destroy the very idea of life and death, water and fire, good and evil?
This being said, I personally like gods who are very awesome* and majestic. The kind of being that where even the 'good' ones would probably burn your mind to a cinder if you tried to perceive their whole reality. A god whose servants would be things like wheels within wheels and creatures with six wings ,three heads, and far too many eyes.
Still, you like your gods to be very killable 'jerks with superpowers', than that's one way to go too, in which case the stats are more than appropriate.
*in the sense of awe inspiring.

[Jormengand]

You know what also will kill him instantly?
Stealing and destroying his immortal soul.
Do you seriously say Achaekek will just stand up and walk away after this?! :smallfurious:
Negative level is not a damage, it's a status effect. Regeneration cannot restore it.


Sorry, English is not my language. What you are just trying to say in this quote?

Negative levels are indeed not damage. However, any effect (including negative levels) which would normally kill it:


the effect instead deals nonlethal damage equal to the Mantis God’s full normal hit point total +46 (normally 851 points of damage).


The point isn't that Achaekek can't be killed, it's that you can do something similar which really does make a creature who can't be killed, but can be fought.

[HolyCouncilMagi]

If I'd use the stats at all, those are merely the avatars of the god, rather than the gods themselves. To destroy a god, you'd have to destroy their concept, their domains. And how do you destroy the very idea of life and death, water and fire, good and evil?
This being said, I personally like gods who are very awesome* and majestic. The kind of being that where even the 'good' ones would probably burn your mind to a cinder if you tried to perceive their whole reality. A god whose servants would be things like wheels within wheels and creatures with six wings ,three heads, and far too many eyes.
Still, you like your gods to be very killable 'jerks with superpowers', than that's one way to go too, in which case the stats are more than appropriate.
*in the sense of awe inspiring.

To be fair, the things that would melt the minds of level 1 commoners (the perspective most real people come from) are vastly different from the things that melt the minds of level 20 characters. And the 'jerks with superpowers' perspective was only really intended to come into play for characters with levels upwards of 60, at which point even the game designers probably know there are mechanical methods for getting Divine Ranks.

Granted, ignoring Deities and Demigods (the book) entirely is a perfectly valid option, and indeed even the book itself points out that it's ok to have statless gods or to change the gods' stats so they aren't suddenly trivialized by level 100 characters or something.

[Jormengand]

...characters with levels upwards of 60...level 100 characters or something.

If you're level 60, you should be fighting an entire pantheon of gods as one of your equal-CR encounters. If you're level 100... yeah, you should be able to take on all the gods ever. In every setting. In one encounter. Why you are playing such a high-level game, I'm not sure.

[Zanos]

If I'd use the stats at all, those are merely the avatars of the god, rather than the gods themselves. To destroy a god, you'd have to destroy their concept, their domains. And how do you destroy the very idea of life and death, water and fire, good and evil?
This being said, I personally like gods who are very awesome* and majestic. The kind of being that where even the 'good' ones would probably burn your mind to a cinder if you tried to perceive their whole reality. A god whose servants would be things like wheels within wheels and creatures with six wings ,three heads, and far too many eyes.
Still, you like your gods to be very killable 'jerks with superpowers', than that's one way to go too, in which case the stats are more than appropriate.
*in the sense of awe inspiring.
In D&D at least, slaying a god does not destroy those eternal concepts. The deities just wear them, they are not the eternal avatars of justice, death, or love. They champion those concepts, but they are not the concept itself. Another deity will rise to take on those mantles should they be slain.

[eggynack]

In D&D at least, slaying a god does not destroy those eternal concepts. The deities just wear them, they are not the eternal avatars of justice, death, or love. They champion those concepts, but they are not the concept itself. Another deity will rise to take on those mantles should they be slain.
That does seem reasonable. However, I generally like the whole Gaiman/Pratchett thing where forgetting about a God effectively represents the death of that God, and belief and remembrance fuels their power. It's not their eternal concepts that must be destroyed, but their followers.

[HolyCouncilMagi]

If you're level 60, you should be fighting an entire pantheon of gods as one of your equal-CR encounters. If you're level 100... yeah, you should be able to take on all the gods ever. In every setting. In one encounter. Why you are playing such a high-level game, I'm not sure.

No, see, I agree with you entirely. I'm going based off what the books say; the designers' intentions were for them to be encounters of that high a level. However, with even the slightest bit of logical optimization, as anybody who has ever read a thread in this forum would make use of, the gods become trivialities by that level.

[Ravens_cry]

To be fair, the things that would melt the minds of level 1 commoners (the perspective most real people come from) are vastly different from the things that melt the minds of level 20 characters. And the 'jerks with superpowers' perspective was only really intended to come into play for characters with levels upwards of 60, at which point even the game designers probably know there are mechanical methods for getting Divine Ranks.
And if that's how one wants to play it, fine. One advantage though I think to having more aloof gods is that you can realistically have intra-factional wars and conflicts, without wondering why the god doesn't wander over to the chief temple and tell the high priests, "Wait a minute, that isn't what I meant. It says 'cockroach' not 'witch'! Stop being such knucklheads, ya dweebs!" before departing in a huff.


Granted, ignoring Deities and Demigods (the book) entirely is a perfectly valid option, and indeed even the book itself points out that it's ok to have statless gods or to change the gods' stats so they aren't suddenly trivialized by level 100 characters or something.
No doubt.

[Elderand]

No, see, I agree with you entirely. I'm going based off what the books say; the designers' intentions were for them to be encounters of that high a level. However, with even the slightest bit of logical optimization, as anybody who has ever read a thread in this forum would make use of, the gods become trivialities by that level.

That's a problem with the gods writeup, not with the idea of gods being fightable.

[Jormengand]

No, see, I agree with you entirely. I'm going based off what the books say; the designers' intentions were for them to be encounters of that high a level. However, with even the slightest bit of logical optimization, as anybody who has ever read a thread in this forum would make use of, the gods become trivialities by that level.

Well, no. The entire Egyptian Pantheon is actually about CR 55-60 - it's hard to work out exactly because they're all different levels. Each god should "only" be about CR 40-50, depending on which god they are. Conveniently, Pathfinder gives us the CR 39 Lucifer as its highest-level encounter, and non-divine 3.5 encounters go up to a similar level. That means that you should be able to have meaningful encounters at any level up to about 50, before you have to start fighting multiple gods for this to make sense.

The fact that it is possible to kill most gods at about level 20 with TO builds is not really the point.

[Elderand]

And if that's how one wants to play it, fine. One advantage though I think to having more aloof gods is that you can realistically have intra-factional wars and conflicts, without wondering why the god doesn't wander over to the chief temple and tell the high priests, "Wait a minute, that isn't what I meant. It says 'cockroach' not 'witch'! Stop being such knucklheads, ya dweebs!" before departing in a huff.

That has less to do with gods being fightable and more to do with scope of things. It's entirely possible to have fightable gods and still have them aloof. They may not care too much what happens on a single world because they control entire planes of existence.

If you think about it, 20th level character do not worry about the same things as 1st level character do. And at 20th level optimised you can replicate a lot of what gods do. To me it then follows that the difference between a god and a mortal is one of scope and power level more than a fundamental difference in nature that make them impossible to ever touch.

When it comes down to it there are two views of the gods. We either see them as most of humanity saw the gods for much of history. Human+. Or you see them in a more modern view of ultimate beings that are completely different from us and utterly untouchable.

[Captnq]

Actually, It all makes sense.

There was a supplement for D&D called the Immortals set and while the rules for it was... meh. I found the cosmology of the whole thing to be rather spot on. The whole 1-3 dimensions, then the 4th dimension is magic, 5th dimension is where gods get their power.

So I stole it whole cloth and adapted it to the cosmology of D&D 3.5.

You need a top town approach. If you don't understand the underpinnings of your cosmology, questions like, "Diety Stats?" will vex you. How do I handle a given situation?

There was a suggestion before, I'll sum it up:
Just make a power called Invulnerable (ex): Cannot be killed. There!

Well, now you are reducing the game to the school yard:

"I shot you!"
"No you didn't! I got Magic Armor!"
"Cowboys don't have magic armor!"
"Well I got magic armor and ray guns! Pew! Pew! Pew!"

A DM has one job, and one job only:

Maintain the illusion of the world the players are experiencing.

The moment the DM gives up and just throws his hands in the air and says, "I don't know HOW he's invulnerable, he just IS." Is the moment the illusion is shattered. It's like when the PCs wander off the edge of the map and the players know the DM just railroaded them back into the area where he has encounters.

It's like being on a holodeck and bumping into the wall.

So if you are going to include Gods, you need to know how they work. If they cannot be killed, you need to know how and why. Here. Let me blow your mind.

Plane of concordant opposition.


In addition to this, magic itself was gradually neutralized as you approached the center of the plane (which appeared as a huge mountain, tree, fountain, tornado, tower, column, etc.). At about a thousand miles (1,600 km) out, high-level spells ceased to function. Every hundred miles (160 km) or so, lower level spells would begin to fail, until finally at two hundred miles (320 km) from the center even first-level spells would not function. This applied to divine magic and the powers of the gods as well. Therefore, this ring around the center of the plane became a meeting place, bazaar, and common ground used by every intelligent species of the Outer Planes including greater deities of differing alignments. Moving in closer to the center, at about one hundred miles (160 km), all chemical reactions ceased to function and even the gods could not get any closer to the center of the plane.



It's got a weird thing in the middle. One of the players came up with a really GOOD way to figure out what that thing in the middle was. Now, as a DM you have a few choices:

1. You have no idea. They fail. Get over it.
2. You make something up and hope it doesn't come back to bite you in the ass.
3. You figure out what the hell it is and you figure out how it pertains to the rest of the universe and you let the players find out.

So, with my cosmology, what is it?

Take a sphere. The surface is 2-dimensional. Put an ant on it. How would an ant walk off that sphere? It could not. You would have to connect to the sphere somehow. Maybe pull a long strand of the sphere up and away, connect it to something else. Now make that a 5-dimensional sphere and pull the strand into the 6th dimension...

In my cosmology, the thing in the center of the plane of concordant opposition isn't the center of the multiverse. It's the edge of the multiverse. It's the border. It's the way out. That's why nothing can live or survive when it tries to exit. The closer you get to the "thing" the further from normal 5-D space you get. 5 dimensional things simply cannot survive in 6-D space. 100 miles out, you have moved far enough into 6-D space that you won't die. You will cease.

That's something else that dropped out of my cosmology. Death is one thing. To Cease, that is another thing entirely.

But it's all top down. It's all quite obvious when you work out the over arcing reasons and then everything else just falls into place. Now, I'd give you more to work with, but I can't. I run a campaign and I'm only going to share what the players have already figured out.

My point is, as a DM, don't just "give up" and say, "They're gods. You can't win." because at some point someone else was a mortal, they became a god, and they won. That means the players can win too. They might FAIL, but they can TRY. If you say, "You can't even try." Then what you are really saying is this:

"I have not finished this part of the map. I don't want to figure out this part of the map. I'm not going to let you play off the map."

And that's FINE. But you need to state that up front. You need to be clear BEFORE The campaign starts. There are several edges to the playing area. If you reach them, you will be out of bounds. I don't run for players out of bounds. here are your boundries:

1) If you become gods, you become NPCs.
2) If you try to fight a god alone, you lose.
3) I don't like multi-plane campaigns, you are stuck on one plane. Deal with it.
4) Don't expect to get over 20th level.
5) I work out one main encounter and two back up encounters an evening. If you ignore all three, it's gonna be a boring night.
6) I really hate these rule books...

See? Easy. If you TELL people where the walls are, your players won't go running into them. If you don't tell them there are walls, your players WILL go running around, arms flailing, trying to bump into them.

Figure out your Cosmology. Figure out your own walls. Everything else will answer itself, or you'll find a new wall for yourself. Just make sure to let your players know about that wall sooner, rather then later.


And since it's come up:

I play that there are Domains and Portfolios.

Domains are those things clerics get. Portfolios are just generalize concepts. Gods have perks over those things. Domains are a rather new thing.

Originally there were "titans" who were on the power level of Gods, but each titan was his/her/its portfolio. I am the titan of Air. I am the titan of Hate. I am the Titan of Blah. Titans don't need worshipers, they tap power directly from the portfolio itself. The problem is, you ARE the portfolio.

Gods figured out how to mix and match. How to give them up and switch them around. How to share. Now, there was a god side to this, how to keep the portfolio? You needed something to keep it on you. Some sort of "glue" as it were.

Worshipers.

The Goddess of Love could fight and kill the Titan of War and take his Portfolio, then become the Goddess of Love and War. But the Worshipers were what provided the "glue" to make it stick. Titans never needed the glue. I am The Titan of war. As long as war exists, I exist. Well, right up until the goddess of love ripped out my spirutal essance and devowered me for power.

See, in my cosmology, the Great Titan/God war wasn't about The Children overthrowing the Tyrantical Parents. It was about evolution. The Gods simply figured out a more effective way to handle Portfolios. Then they, with the help of worshipers, invented things called "Domains".

Gods could mix and match. In theory, A bunch of gods could give all their domains and portfolios to One God. Sort of like Voltron, they could unite. Titans ARE their portfolios. No trading. No uniting. (I have all sorts of rules on how God combat works, what porfolios and domains do, how you use them defensively and offensively. how much "energy" you have and how you can draw upon sources of energy. It's all highly symbolic.)

Of course once all the titans were killed/imprisoned the Gods took to squabbling with one another, but hey, that's something else entirely.

But WHY did it take place? Was it just random chance or part of some larger plot? Ooo... Wouldn't YOU like to know?

[Ravens_cry]

I am quite a proponent for having everyone follow the same rules, but gods?
I guess I like them to be more Other.
Look at the laws of physics. Even, no, especially, if you are a highly trained physicist, you know that the more you know, the more you know you don't know.
PCs don't need to know everything.
Still, do not say "I don't know.", because the DM is not an 'I' in the game.
Instead, say, "You don't know." I love to come up with explanations and deep world building that goes over all the fun little details, but quite often when you try to hash all this stuff out, it gets like Midi-chlorians. What I mean is, it answers a question no one was asking while creating all sorts of new ones. Trying to answer all those questions is a path of infinite recursion. It's like trying to explain fully magic.
Sometimes the best answer is "you don't know," just like someone in almost any time wouldn't know why one can dive into water but not into stone.
The PC might have a theory. Heck, there will probably be some, likely conflicting, theories discussed by in-universe scholars and sages.
But the truth? No one knows.
You don't have to do it this way. Gods could be like the Immortals from Basic D&D or even merely be high level people without literally divine abilities at all.

[Deophaun]

In any case, AMKII is immune to everything that kills him...
But if he's immune to it, it can't kill him.
So he's not immune to it.
So it kills him.
So he's immune to it.
So it can't kill him.
So he's not immune to it...

::Head explodes::

[HolyCouncilMagi]

But if he's immune to it, it can't kill him.
So he's not immune to it.
So it kills him.
So he's immune to it.
So it can't kill him.
So he's not immune to it...

::Head explodes::

I know I say this to people far too often, but you are a monster of the worst sort for that.

[Vedhin]

I would love to hear this explanation. Lets be generous and say my lifespan is 100 years from now and that I immediately become Lord Regent of Earth with all of its resources at my command.

Given all of that, how can I extinguish the sun by the end of my lifespan with current technology?

The explanation for that is many pages long, and filled with incomprehensible jargon.


There was a suggestion before, I'll sum it up:
Just make a power called Invulnerable (ex): Cannot be killed. There!


Knowledge Affiliation! It's like an offensive Iron Heart Surge.

[Jormengand]

But if he's immune to it, it can't kill him.
So he's not immune to it.

Very nice non sequitur here. Care to explain how something not killing you constitutes you not being immune to it?

[Just to Browse]

Very nice non sequitur here. Care to explain how something not killing you constitutes you not being immune to it?

Well done, sir.

For those of you confused, Jorm's point is that the condition [not able to kill AMKII] does not cause [AMKII is not immune]. This is a conditional statement, and the paradox only occurs if the statement is biconditional. It would be two premises:

1. Capable of Killing AMKII == A
2. AMKII is Immune == B
3. A ↔ B
4. B → ~A

The truth table for a conditional statement is:
{table]A|→|B
T|T|T
T|F|F
F|T|T
F|T|F[/table]

And you can see, the statement still evaluates to true if AMKII is immune to something that doesn't kill.

For a biconditional, however:
{table]A|↔|B
T|T|T
T|F|F
F|F|T
F|T|F[/table]

Here, if AMKII is immune to something that kills, then the statement cannot be true, so this causes the paradox as listed above.

[Jormengand]

Well done, sir.

For those of you confused, Jorm's point is that the condition [not able to kill AMKII] does not cause [AMKII is not immune]. This is a conditional statement, and the paradox only occurs if the statement is biconditional. It would be two premises:

1. Capable of Killing AMKII == A
2. AMKII is Immune == B
3. A ↔ B
4. B → ~A

The truth table for a conditional statement is:
{table]A|→|B
T|T|T
T|F|F
F|T|T
F|T|F[/table]

And you can see, the statement still evaluates to true if AMKII is immune to something that doesn't kill.

For a biconditional, however:
{table]A|↔|B
T|T|T
T|F|F
F|F|T
F|T|F[/table]

Here, if AMKII is immune to something that kills, then the statement cannot be true, so this causes the paradox as listed above.

You know, I don't think that most people in the thread will have an understanding of this sort of thing. I do (just) but I think you left everyone more confused than I did.

[Deophaun]

Very nice non sequitur here. Care to explain how something not killing you constitutes you not being immune to it?
I'll just point you here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humor).

[Jormengand]

I'll just point you here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Humor).

But humour implies that it's funny, and makes sense... :smallconfused:

[Deophaun]

But humour implies that it's funny, and makes sense... :smallconfused:
At least one other person was amused by it. As for making sense: logical fallacies are the basis of much comedic material, from Jack Benny to Monty Python to Jon Stewart. I doubt any of those careers would have existed if their routines had to be logically sound.

[Just to Browse]

You know, I don't think that most people in the thread will have an understanding of this sort of thing. I do (just) but I think you left everyone more confused than I did.

Perhaps I was a bit too excited.

[Vedhin]

Perhaps I was a bit too excited.

I got it! And my message needs 10 characters!

[NichG]

The explanation for that is many pages long, and filled with incomprehensible jargon.


That's not really an answer. I can't think of any way with modern technology or anything that is currently believed to be theoretically possible to even get close to something like this. Even dumping supposed particle-accelerator-micro-black-holes into the sun, which don't really eat fast enough to prevent themselves from evaporating anyhow (and would be difficult to generate in that environment anyhow), would take far more than 100 years to have a noticeable effect on the sun.

If you want to argue that this is something we can do, you have to back it up.

[Chronos]

Besides which, there's no such thing as "incomprehensible jargon". The purpose of jargon is to make things more comprehensible, not less. It won't be comprehensible to everyone, of course, but it will be comprehensible to at least some folks. If it doesn't meet that criterion, then it's babble, not jargon.

[Ravens_cry]

Besides which, there's no such thing as "incomprehensible jargon". The purpose of jargon is to make things more comprehensible, not less. It won't be comprehensible to everyone, of course, but it will be comprehensible to at least some folks. If it doesn't meet that criterion, then it's babble, not jargon.
Jargon is meant to expedite understanding within a group. If I said to a 3.X D&D player "Since my Bee Ay Bee was nine, I picked up Improved krit so my great falchion had fifteen to twenty crit range for two dee twelve times two on a crit," that's quite incomprehensible to someone without the extra knowledge. I can take this even further by saying I got the great falchion from "It's Hot Outside," in which case only a subgroup of 3.X D&D players will understand.
That's what is meant by "incomprehensible jargon." Not that no one can understand it, but that those outside the group can not even hope to piece it together.