High CR enemies

[KillianHawkeye]

what's a time dragon? i don't remember those.

It's a dragon who is never late nor early. It arrives at precisely the time it intends to. Then it eats you.

[sleepyphoenixx]

Of course, as you say, there's no reason for the ability damage to have a duration either. So we're left with a spell that has a duration, while none of its mechanics require a duration, which is pretty stupid. Still, technically makes great wyrm time dragons immune, so good for them .

Lesser Shivering Touch at least has a passage that could reasonably be interpreted to only have the dex damage for the duration:

Your successful melee touch attack delivers a bitter chill to the target, causing it to shiver uncontrollably for the duration of the spell.
Shivering characters take 1d6 points of Dexterity damage.

Of course a imaginative rules lawyer could argue that they then take 1d6 points of dexterity damage for every round they're shivering.

Shivering Touch of course lacks even that much.

The other alternative i can see is that you can make Shivering Touch touch attacks for as long as the spell lasts, which is only slightly less ridiculous.

[Melcar]

It's a dragon who is never late nor early. It arrives at precisely the time it intends to. Then it eats you.

This really made me laugh!

Lesser Shivering Touch at least has a passage that could reasonably be interpreted to only have the dex damage for the duration:

Of course a imaginative rules lawyer could argue that they then take 1d6 points of dexterity damage for every round they're shivering.

Shivering Touch of course lacks even that much.

The other alternative i can see is that you can make Shivering Touch touch attacks for as long as the spell lasts, which is only slightly less ridiculous.

Right, the RAI was probably that its meant to only give the penalty for only a certain amount of time - and well, still does - but my interpretation, of the RAW, is that the standard rules for ability damage take over. That is so far how we've resolved it, and haven't had any problems with that... except the obvious that it is an exceedingly powerful spell!

[sleepyphoenixx]

Right, the RAI was probably that its meant to only give the penalty for only a certain amount of time - and well, still does - but my interpretation, of the RAW, is that the standard rules for ability damage take over. That is so far how we've resolved it, and haven't had any problems with that... except the obvious that it is an exceedingly powerful spell!

Yeah, but it's a really powerful spell even under the most restrictive reading. There is no option where no-save 3d6 dex damage isn't powerful.
It's just so badly written that it's really hard to tell how it's supposed to work.

[icefractal]

no they cant. they lack class features and metamagic feats. the only thing they can abuse is free wish but so can everyone else.

They can DCFS or use Psychic Reformation, so they have whatever feats they want to have at a given time.

Class features no (aside from Ice Assassin of someone who has one), but what features out there are really game-changing? There's a lot that are good, in the realm of "optimized but still basically playing the game normally", but once you get into TO territory it's all the raw power of spells. And if you're not in TO territory, the substantial benefits of being a god come into play.

Like, I'm not saying a game where you fight the gods and win is wrong, but "the gods are pushovers" includes an unstated and very important "if the PCs are played smart and the gods are played dumb".

Similar to "Here's my plan: Step one - find a higher level caster, who could easily pull off this trick themselves. Step two - pay them a few hundred gold to bootstrap me to nigh-infinite power. They will definitely do this for me rather than do it for themselves (or have already done it and be chilling on their private demiplane now), because spellcasting services are listed in the PHB." It's a fun trick for discussion purposes, but if a campaign actually worked like that it would feel pretty silly.

[newguydude1]

Class features no (aside from Ice Assassin of someone who has one), but what features out there are really game-changing? There's a lot that are good, in the realm of "optimized but still basically playing the game normally", but once you get into TO territory it's all the raw power of spells. And if you're not in TO territory, the substantial benefits of being a god come into play.

if we're talking free wishes to get infinite epic magic gears of at will all spells then both are equal.
if we remove the free wishes then its whoever can make the most ice assassins. ice assassin of god vs ice assassin of god.
if we remove ice assassin then its simply chain gate.
if we remove chain gate then it comes down to infinite craft contingent items
if we remove craft contingent items then finally it comes down to the better mailman overcoming the defenses of the opposition. and class features are the better mailman.

[icefractal]

if we remove craft contingent items then finally it comes down to the better mailman overcoming the defenses of the opposition. and class features are the better mailman.

So I'd agree we need to go at least that far before there's really a difference between people, but at that point I don't think being the better mailman necessarily matters, at least not "better" meaning more damage.

If you can do 10^27 damage and the deity in question can only do 300 ... that's effectively the same. You both kill the other in a single shot. At that point what matters (at a tactical level) is who can be stealthier / more perceptive, who can win initiative, and who runs out of (non-infinite) contingent defenses faster. And in all those categories, the deity is going to be on-par if not outright superior.

On a strategic level, you have one big advantage - deities tend to be more high-profile and have known places where they make appearances. On the other hand, the deity has a lot more followers and has SDAs like portfolio sense.

[Quertus]

So I'd agree we need to go at least that far before there's really a difference between people, but at that point I don't think being the better mailman necessarily matters, at least not "better" meaning more damage.

If you can do 10^27 damage and the deity in question can only do 300 ... that's effectively the same. You both kill the other in a single shot. At that point what matters (at a tactical level) is who can be stealthier / more perceptive, who can win initiative, and who runs out of (non-infinite) contingent defenses faster. And in all those categories, the deity is going to be on-par if not outright superior.

On a strategic level, you have one big advantage - deities tend to be more high-profile and have known places where they make appearances. On the other hand, the deity has a lot more followers and has SDAs like portfolio sense.

So, as statted, how much damage can the gods actually do? The big names are probably… Thor, Torn, Mystra, and Boccob?

Of course, those are probably all greater gods… if you're just trying to kill *a* god, what are the *weakest* deities? Anyone have any nominations?

What level are the PCs? I've certainly seen PCs who could survive 300 damage (even ignoring immunities).

The gods are a static target, at a static level of optimization. Eventually, the PCs will almost certainly exceed that target as they level, regardless of their level of optimization.

[icefractal]

The gods are a static target, at a static level of optimization. Eventually, the PCs will almost certainly exceed that target as they level, regardless of their level of optimization.

That's what I'm saying though - unless you're running an isekai-style game where the PCs are the only ones who can think outside the box, the gods shouldn't be static.

Or rather, they shouldn't be static with the stats given in D&DG. Those stats are appropriate in a world where the PCs look like Jozan / Tordek / Lidda / Mialee, optimization-wise. In a world where PCs live in a secure demiplane, walk around with dozens of buffs spells, and one-shot anything from the MM, the deities should be optimized as well. Again, unless the point is that everyone but the PCs is mentally stagnated.

But also, since even the least of the gods has the resources to rebuild themselves easily, they shouldn't be assumed completely static once play starts either.

[ExLibrisMortis]

That's what I'm saying though - unless you're running an isekai-style game where the PCs are the only ones who can think outside the box, the gods shouldn't be static.

Or rather, they shouldn't be static with the stats given in D&DG. Those stats are appropriate in a world where the PCs look like Jozan / Tordek / Lidda / Mialee, optimization-wise. In a world where PCs live in a secure demiplane, walk around with dozens of buffs spells, and one-shot anything from the MM, the deities should be optimized as well. Again, unless the point is that everyone but the PCs is mentally stagnated.

But also, since even the least of the gods has the resources to rebuild themselves easily, they shouldn't be assumed completely static once play starts either.

You can do a lot of world-building if you use optimization (including tier) and scaling build resources.

For example, consider a first-level soldier-type.

A human warrior is a weak soldier.
A human fighter is an average soldier.
A human crusader is a strong soldier.
A human crusader//incarnate is a very strong soldier.
A human crusader//cloistered cleric is stronger still.

And you can do the exact same thing with pit fiends and even deities. If you allow NPCs who accomplish PC-like acts to level up "sideways", you get a bit of social mobility as well (for those important zero-to-hero plots).

In a world like this, you rate people on build resources*optimization instead of CR. So you could have a captain of the guard who is a human fighter 2/battle dancer 1/marshal 2/crusader 1//bard 6, and they're considered equivalent to... dunno, a 12th-level aristocrat or something? Those characters consider themselves to be equals in-universe, share the same social circle, present similar challenges, and so on. I mean, it's probably even worse to balance than the CR system already is, but it's more interesting. You can take the imbalance in D&D (as expressed in the tier system, primarily) and the different methods of building characters (NPC, PC, gestalt PC), and use their differences to present a richer and more complex world.

Edit: Goes without saying, but to be explicit: In a world like this, I expect the big names to have optimization to match. But you can have a lot of fun with a Demon Prince who's got 50 HD and a terrible feat selection, doesn't understand this system, and keeps wondering why he's getting trounced by 20 HD opponents.

[Quertus]

That's what I'm saying though - unless you're running an isekai-style game where the PCs are the only ones who can think outside the box, the gods shouldn't be static.

Or rather, they shouldn't be static with the stats given in D&DG. Those stats are appropriate in a world where the PCs look like Jozan / Tordek / Lidda / Mialee, optimization-wise. In a world where PCs live in a secure demiplane, walk around with dozens of buffs spells, and one-shot anything from the MM, the deities should be optimized as well. Again, unless the point is that everyone but the PCs is mentally stagnated.

But also, since even the least of the gods has the resources to rebuild themselves easily, they shouldn't be assumed completely static once play starts either.

But you can have a lot of fun with a Demon Prince who's got 50 HD and a terrible feat selection, doesn't understand this system, and keeps wondering why he's getting trounced by 20 HD opponents.

I guess that there's two ways to look at this.

One, the gods are canonically dumb enough to have leveled up the way that they did, so they're clearly too dumb/ignorant/whatever to optimize. Surely I'm not alone in knowing players who simply *cannot* build characters at anywhere near "Playgrounder" level of competence (and that's definitely *me* in numerous systems (sometimes, even with help: "for the love of Gork, <Quertus>, take something with full auto" "but I don't *like* throwing away bullets like they were candy")) . Well, those are your gods. Deal with it.

Two, it's all an abstraction, classes and feats don't really exist in universe, the gods are what they are. Rebuild quests, like rerolls and Monty Python quotes, are 4th-wall breaking metagame constructs, and the gods simply don't have access to such (yet another reason why they fear the PCs).

Now, I'm all for intelligent villains - and allies - who can grow intelligently. But the gods are more like (and by "more like", I mean "usually are") the top dogs who got there through nepotism. They aren't the best because they had to work for it - they were handed their positions as their birthright.

So, no, I don't think it's good role-playing for deities statted out the horrifically suboptimal ways that they are in D&D to grow intelligently. It seems more in character to me to have a dieing god ask, baffled, "how did this happen?"

[sleepyphoenixx]

So, no, I don't think it's good role-playing for deities statted out the horrifically suboptimal ways that they are in D&D to grow intelligently. It seems more in character to me to have a dieing god ask, baffled, "how did this happen?"

That's certainly true for some gods. But not all of them.
Any god with a significantly superhuman intelligence should be able to at least keep up with the general optimization level of the setting.
At least for the feats that represent training instead of inborn gifts.

That goes double for gods of magic and battle who should be able to at least imitate the tactics of successful PC's of the relevant classes just by virtue of their portfolio senses, no matter their builds or intelligence.

[Quertus]

That's certainly true for some gods. But not all of them.
Any god with a significantly superhuman intelligence should be able to at least keep up with the general optimization level of the setting.
At least for the feats that represent training instead of inborn gifts.

1) that doesn't match my experiences with high intelligence players incapable of keeping up with optimization.

2) training? Gods? Lol no. Note the "untrained, unworthy nepotism" angle.

That goes double for gods of magic and battle who should be able to at least imitate the tactics of successful PC's of the relevant classes just by virtue of their portfolio senses, no matter their builds or intelligence.

"Yeah, he put the pointy end in the other guy, and he turned into a fine red mist, so I should be even *better* at that, being a god and all."

"And she cast a spell to one-shot that monster, but I prefer my fireball, as it hits *multiple* targets."

Plenty of GMs have failed to imitate the tactics of successful PCs - it's no different here. The gods will be as incompetent as they ever are, regardless of the competence of the PCs.

[Biggus]

The way I understand it, the spell deals ability damage, and we know how ability damage is healed, ergo the duration must refer to something else... because there is nothing in the spell that would indicate that the ability damage is not normal ability damage... and ability damage does not have a duration, but heals - iirc - 1/hour... so that’s is the duration of the effect. What ever the 1 round/ level is, must be the time in which the spell is active before the touch is delivered. So you cast the spell, and within 1/lvl you can touch a creature and give it ability damage... after the spell is delivered the rules for ability damage take over...

Right, the RAI was probably that its meant to only give the penalty for only a certain amount of time - and well, still does - but my interpretation, of the RAW, is that the standard rules for ability damage take over. That is so far how we've resolved it, and haven't had any problems with that... except the obvious that it is an exceedingly powerful spell!

The way I interpret it is "specific trumps general". Ability damage has a normal duration, but in this case it lasts 1 round per level, because that's what the spell says. There are plenty of examples of spells whose effects usually last for a certain amount of time but don't in their specific case. If the way you play it works for you, fair enough, but I don't think it's RAW or RAI.

[icefractal]

1) that doesn't match my experiences with high intelligence players incapable of keeping up with optimization.

...

Plenty of GMs have failed to imitate the tactics of successful PCs - it's no different here. The gods will be as incompetent as they ever are, regardless of the competence of the PCs.

That's not an argument for the gods being dumb though, it's an argument for the gods optimization levels to be based purely on the GM's skill, rather than the PCs. What if the GM is as good or better at optimizing than the PCs are?

To me, I feel like this is the other side of the "mechanical transparency" coin.
1) What the NPCs can do, the PCs should usually be able to do.
2) What the PCs can do, the NPCs should usually be able to do.

[Sam K]

"Yeah, he put the pointy end in the other guy, and he turned into a fine red mist, so I should be even *better* at that, being a god and all."

"And she cast a spell to one-shot that monster, but I prefer my fireball, as it hits *multiple* targets."

Plenty of GMs have failed to imitate the tactics of successful PCs - it's no different here. The gods will be as incompetent as they ever are, regardless of the competence of the PCs.

I'm now imagining the gods as mediocre middle managers sitting around in meetings all eternity:

Thor: "So clearly, as you can see these so called 'PCs' only have 80HD between themselves *hiccup* I'm 90HD so clearly we have nothing to worry about!"
Rat: "Exactly, now lets get back to worrying about the REAL problem: people who take levels of ninja and knight! Monkey sent out a REALLY urgent PM about that!"
Frey: "Hey, I only have 75 HD..."
Odin: "Work smarter, not harder!"
Loki: "Was that a Dilbert joke, or are you just senile?"
Odin: "Yes?"
Petitioner running the projector: "Listen, it's more complicated than that! I was a 5th leve wizard before dying, and I had a build all worked out where I'd ascend at 7th level, and even THAT was underpowered. Theoretically, at 20HD a single PC caster could..."
Thor: "Oh sure, in THEORY. But in THEORY wizard is the strongest base class. And in THEORY 5th ed is fun to play!"
Petitioner: "Just take a look at these numbers, it's a pretty simple build from Giant..."
Thor: "Again with the giants? How about I SMITE you as a giant? Cause I can totally do that! 90HD, baby! Who's your daddy?"
Odin: "Me?"
Loki: "I can't tell if you're pimpin' it or gimpin' it, dad."
Tyr: "Hey! Not cool!"
Loki: "I admit, that was an under-hand tactic."
Tyr: "Dude..."
Thor: "Anyway, if wizards are so powerful, how did you die? Huh? Huh?"
Petitioner: "Killed by a *mumble*...."
Thor: "Killed by a crit form a lvl 1 orc, that's right! You don't see anyone with 90HD doing that, do you?"
Petitioner: "No..."
Thor: "Exactly! Moving on: someone started praying to Zeus? Who's on call for answering prayers to has-beens?"
Petitioner: "It was just a random encounter, you know..."

[GrayDeath]

I am so stealing this once our "Evil Guys with Agency aiming for Godhood" Group gets to slaying a God or 2.

Muhahaha, I`ll even use the Gamers 1 End Scene. ^^

[ExLibrisMortis]

I guess that there's two ways to look at this.

Nononono. The idea is that you do both, in the same setting.

You have your top demon princes. Most of them are optimized according to their intelligence, and have around 40 HD with proper abilities (class or otherwise). But there's that one prince who just missed the boat and isn't that optimized at all (I mean, still moderately optimized, but let's say he didn't get the memo about Persistomancy). The only reason he's sticking about is that he's got 60 HD and a bazillion natural defences, so he's just a royal pain to kill, and the Abyss respects that (mostly by testing his defences, I imagine, but okay).

Now, this demon prince is totally aware that they've got a lot of HD (not in those terms, of course, but still aware). And the other demon princes never really bother to attack him, so he imagines he's pretty strong. But whenever he actually tries to throw down with Demogorgon or Orcus or Dagon or whoever, he always gets a trashing. And he just can't get it. Surely, with 20 extra HD (50% more!) he should be a dead certain winner? What's up with that? Something must be wrong in the world, it's so unfair! Cue much demonic outrage achieving exactly nothing.

Basically the idea is that you have a mix of optimization levels at a given power "rank", and an occasional outlier who is either a sucker (wizard 20 adventuring with fighter 20), a great hero to their class ("Look, it's the only person in the world who managed to overcome being a straight divine mind!"), or comic relief (i.e. this demon prince--who is also a sucker, but rule of threes and all that).

[Quertus]

That's not an argument for the gods being dumb though, it's an argument for the gods optimization levels to be based purely on the GM's skill, rather than the PCs. What if the GM is as good or better at optimizing than the PCs are?

To me, I feel like this is the other side of the "mechanical transparency" coin.
1) What the NPCs can do, the PCs should usually be able to do.
2) What the PCs can do, the NPCs should usually be able to do.

Well, no. That would be bad role-playing. The gods' stat blocks pretty well demonstrate what level of optimization the GM should roleplay them as capable of understanding.

The GM's own creations should be played at various levels of optimization, from "poor" to GM-level (or above, if they read online guides). But, outside of edge cases (like gaming with the ghost of Gygax), the gods aren't the GM's creation, and maxing out their optimization level to the GM's is as nonsensical as the PCs optimizing Jozan and company to theirs.

Even so, by level 1,000, I expect that the PCs will have exceeded the gods anyway, even at a different optimization level, so it's a moot point to my contention that the PCs will surpass the gods *eventually*.

----

In addition to being hilarious, these posts seem much better role-playing than Determinator "lol MAX OP":

Spoiler: spoiled for length

Show

I'm now imagining the gods as mediocre middle managers sitting around in meetings all eternity:

Thor: "So clearly, as you can see these so called 'PCs' only have 80HD between themselves *hiccup* I'm 90HD so clearly we have nothing to worry about!"
Rat: "Exactly, now lets get back to worrying about the REAL problem: people who take levels of ninja and knight! Monkey sent out a REALLY urgent PM about that!"
Frey: "Hey, I only have 75 HD..."
Odin: "Work smarter, not harder!"
Loki: "Was that a Dilbert joke, or are you just senile?"
Odin: "Yes?"
Petitioner running the projector: "Listen, it's more complicated than that! I was a 5th leve wizard before dying, and I had a build all worked out where I'd ascend at 7th level, and even THAT was underpowered. Theoretically, at 20HD a single PC caster could..."
Thor: "Oh sure, in THEORY. But in THEORY wizard is the strongest base class. And in THEORY 5th ed is fun to play!"
Petitioner: "Just take a look at these numbers, it's a pretty simple build from Giant..."
Thor: "Again with the giants? How about I SMITE you as a giant? Cause I can totally do that! 90HD, baby! Who's your daddy?"
Odin: "Me?"
Loki: "I can't tell if you're pimpin' it or gimpin' it, dad."
Tyr: "Hey! Not cool!"
Loki: "I admit, that was an under-hand tactic."
Tyr: "Dude..."
Thor: "Anyway, if wizards are so powerful, how did you die? Huh? Huh?"
Petitioner: "Killed by a *mumble*...."
Thor: "Killed by a crit form a lvl 1 orc, that's right! You don't see anyone with 90HD doing that, do you?"
Petitioner: "No..."
Thor: "Exactly! Moving on: someone started praying to Zeus? Who's on call for answering prayers to has-beens?"
Petitioner: "It was just a random encounter, you know..."

Nononono. The idea is that you do both, in the same setting.

You have your top demon princes. Most of them are optimized according to their intelligence, and have around 40 HD with proper abilities (class or otherwise). But there's that one prince who just missed the boat and isn't that optimized at all (I mean, still moderately optimized, but let's say he didn't get the memo about Persistomancy). The only reason he's sticking about is that he's got 60 HD and a bazillion natural defences, so he's just a royal pain to kill, and the Abyss respects that (mostly by testing his defences, I imagine, but okay).

Now, this demon prince is totally aware that they've got a lot of HD (not in those terms, of course, but still aware). And the other demon princes never really bother to attack him, so he imagines he's pretty strong. But whenever he actually tries to throw down with Demogorgon or Orcus or Dagon or whoever, he always gets a trashing. And he just can't get it. Surely, with 20 extra HD (50% more!) he should be a dead certain winner? What's up with that? Something must be wrong in the world, it's so unfair! Cue much demonic outrage achieving exactly nothing.

Basically the idea is that you have a mix of optimization levels at a given power "rank", and an occasional outlier who is either a sucker (wizard 20 adventuring with fighter 20), a great hero to their class ("Look, it's the only person in the world who managed to overcome being a straight divine mind!"), or comic relief (i.e. this demon prince--who is also a sucker, but rule of threes and all that).

I would love to have things like that in a game, but I'm not sure how they'd come up.

[sleepyphoenixx]

Well, no. That would be bad role-playing. The gods' stat blocks pretty well demonstrate what level of optimization the GM should roleplay them as capable of understanding.

The GM's own creations should be played at various levels of optimization, from "poor" to GM-level (or above, if they read online guides). But, outside of edge cases (like gaming with the ghost of Gygax), the gods aren't the GM's creation, and maxing out their optimization level to the GM's is as nonsensical as the PCs optimizing Jozan and company to theirs.

The only reason i'd even stat out a godly avatar would be if i expected it to get into a fight with the PC's.
If that happens i want it to be a challenge at least, and to any party with decent optimization the gods as statted are pushovers far before you reach their supposed CR.

So i'm going to optimize them to the level we're playing at, same as i do for most enemies.
Playing in a world of pushovers might be funny for an one-shot, but i don't think it'd be engaging long-term.

[icefractal]

Well, no. That would be bad role-playing. The gods' stat blocks pretty well demonstrate what level of optimization the GM should roleplay them as capable of understanding.

The GM's own creations should be played at various levels of optimization, from "poor" to GM-level (or above, if they read online guides). But, outside of edge cases (like gaming with the ghost of Gygax), the gods aren't the GM's creation, and maxing out their optimization level to the GM's is as nonsensical as the PCs optimizing Jozan and company to theirs.

So if I replace "Boccob" with my own homebrew god "Bokkob", who has a very similar personality/portfolio/etc, but makes better choices, that's all legit then?

More substantively, I would say that by playing PCs who don't mechanically resemble example ones at all, they are changing that. They're not optimizing "Jozan", but they are optimizing "the party", and that's the only context Jozan is important in. Is that wrong? Not at all. But neither is the GM doing the same thing.

Most substantively, it's an issue of consistency. Unless the premise is that the PCs are the first ones to reach high levels, or the only ones capable of creativity, then I have to imagine the world having existed before them. And "It would have been easy for any high-ish level caster to overthrow one or more gods, but somehow ... none of them ever did, not even the extremely ambitious ones who supposedly would do anything for power" isn't a consistent world. And neither is "So all these archmages who supposedly studied magic for centuries and understood it in great depth ... never noticed that you could summon powerful things with Gate? Or that Astral Projection is a game-changer?"

Unless, again, the PCs are explicitly special as part of the premise, capable of either power or invention that nobody else, not even supposed geniuses, can ever discover. Which is fine, but it's not like an inherent fixture of all campaigns.

[noob]

So if I replace "Boccob" with my own homebrew god "Bokkob", who has a very similar personality/portfolio/etc, but makes better choices, that's all legit then?

More substantively, I would say that by playing PCs who don't mechanically resemble example ones at all, they are changing that. They're not optimizing "Jozan", but they are optimizing "the party", and that's the only context Jozan is important in. Is that wrong? Not at all. But neither is the GM doing the same thing.

Most substantively, it's an issue of consistency. Unless the premise is that the PCs are the first ones to reach high levels, or the only ones capable of creativity, then I have to imagine the world having existed before them. And "It would have been easy for any high-ish level caster to overthrow one or more gods, but somehow ... none of them ever did, not even the extremely ambitious ones who supposedly would do anything for power" isn't a consistent world. And neither is "So all these archmages who supposedly studied magic for centuries and understood it in great depth ... never noticed that you could summon powerful things with Gate? Or that Astral Projection is a game-changer?"

Unless, again, the PCs are explicitly special as part of the premise, capable of either power or invention that nobody else, not even supposed geniuses, can ever discover. Which is fine, but it's not like an inherent fixture of all campaigns.

In some settings there is archmages that did overthrow some gods but the problem of why npcs do not innovate is that they can do everything they want with wish spam for greater effect and arbitrary plot rituals so they never wondered "I have the ability to summon super powerful creatures why do I never use it?" because they were too busy spamming wish to steal the power of the god of magic or doing a ritual to become the plane of negative energy or something silly like that.
Wish is 100 times more permissive when used by a npc.
So the actual premise is "the universe hates the pcs and grants the smallest amount of wishes possible so they search alternate solutions and also if the pcs tries to say "I read the book giving the tips for the plot ritual of acearak" the gm throws books at them"

Pcs are prevented from using the supreme plot multi tools that cause innovation stagnation in the npcs.

[Kayblis]

The way I run it, God statblocks are only accurate if you manage to have them fight outside their domain, without any deific abilities or minions, and to a level of 'fairness' that could only make sense if you have a way to cut its connection to their DM fiat powers. This usually means a variation of "completely ambushing a god while another, higher tier god supports you without restraint", at which point it's less you fighting a god and more you being a tool of another god for his own purposes.

Demon Lords and Princes are supposedly CR 25~30, but there are creatures far above that in most settings. Why aren't they all killed and eliminated from cosmology? Why don't they kill each other? Why is the Blood War eternal? In truth, it comes down to resources - Demogorgon might be CR 26, but he has dozens of classed Balors serving him, hundreds of greater Mariliths, millions of low-tier demons, hires tens of thousands of Yugoloths, has unique protections in his lair and unique tools to work with, all on top of being a CR26 encounter by himself. This is not a scry-n'-die enemy, this is an enemy that hires people to scry-n'-die others. Even if he himself doesn't have a personal ability to be immune to X, doesn't mean he's vulnerable to X at any given time, no matter what X is. This is not really "unfitting optimization" in my opinion, it's just how things are for the real movers and shakers of any given setting. Sure, give that overlord Toughness x5, let him have his unoptimized feat and class choices. He's not the top dog because of his build, he's the top dog despite his build.

If you run these kinds of creatures as a single monster encounter with only printed abilities and no support, I argue that you're not running a relevant enemy at all. It's not Demogorgon if he's alone in his room waiting flat-footed for his first round in initiative so he can swing his tentacle. It's not actual Orcus if he's sitting in an open field with no undead around, coming back home from buying groceries in the local mart. This is why people think "beating a demon lord is easy", because they think beating a demon lord is just fighting his statblock as if he's a lone orc in the woods.

[noob]

The way I run it, God statblocks are only accurate if you manage to have them fight outside their domain, without any deific abilities or minions, and to a level of 'fairness' that could only make sense if you have a way to cut its connection to their DM fiat powers. This usually means a variation of "completely ambushing a god while another, higher tier god supports you without restraint", at which point it's less you fighting a god and more you being a tool of another god for his own purposes.

Demon Lords and Princes are supposedly CR 25~30, but there are creatures far above that in most settings. Why aren't they all killed and eliminated from cosmology? Why don't they kill each other? Why is the Blood War eternal? In truth, it comes down to resources - Demogorgon might be CR 26, but he has dozens of classed Balors serving him, hundreds of greater Mariliths, millions of low-tier demons, hires tens of thousands of Yugoloths, has unique protections in his lair and unique tools to work with, all on top of being a CR26 encounter by himself. This is not a scry-n'-die enemy, this is an enemy that hires people to scry-n'-die others. Even if he himself doesn't have a personal ability to be immune to X, doesn't mean he's vulnerable to X at any given time, no matter what X is. This is not really "unfitting optimization" in my opinion, it's just how things are for the real movers and shakers of any given setting. Sure, give that overlord Toughness x5, let him have his unoptimized feat and class choices. He's not the top dog because of his build, he's the top dog despite his build.

If you run these kinds of creatures as a single monster encounter with only printed abilities and no support, I argue that you're not running a relevant enemy at all. It's not Demogorgon if he's alone in his room waiting flat-footed for his first round in initiative so he can swing his tentacle. It's not actual Orcus if he's sitting in an open field with no undead around, coming back home from buying groceries in the local mart. This is why people think "beating a demon lord is easy", because they think beating a demon lord is just fighting his statblock as if he's a lone orc in the woods.

With high enough optimisation it does not matters there is an infinity of balors and mariliths around the demon lord: you just kill them all in 0 rounds then kill the demon lord.

[NigelWalmsley]

If that happens i want it to be a challenge at least, and to any party with decent optimization the gods as statted are pushovers far before you reach their supposed CR.

Their builds are pushovers, but the special abilities they get for being gods are broken as hell.

Most substantively, it's an issue of consistency. Unless the premise is that the PCs are the first ones to reach high levels, or the only ones capable of creativity, then I have to imagine the world having existed before them. And "It would have been easy for any high-ish level caster to overthrow one or more gods, but somehow ... none of them ever did, not even the extremely ambitious ones who supposedly would do anything for power" isn't a consistent world. And neither is "So all these archmages who supposedly studied magic for centuries and understood it in great depth ... never noticed that you could summon powerful things with Gate? Or that Astral Projection is a game-changer?"

This is why the AD&D model where the gods are enemies you can just go out and stab to death is better than 3e. Originally, Lolth had 68 hit points and your party could just go out and stab her to death. The 3e decision to try to make the gods into invincible beings with arbitrary power makes the game worse in every conceivable way. Boccob can just be a regular high level Wizard with some extra divine abilities, and if you kill him you can become the God of Magic instead. And the history of the setting can include that happening, like AD&D-based settings (e.g. FR, Malazan) already do.

[Quertus]

The only reason i'd even stat out a godly avatar would be if i expected it to get into a fight with the PC's.
If that happens i want it to be a challenge at least, and to any party with decent optimization the gods as statted are pushovers far before you reach their supposed CR.

So i'm going to optimize them to the level we're playing at, same as i do for most enemies.
Playing in a world of pushovers might be funny for an one-shot, but i don't think it'd be engaging long-term.

Like, I'm not saying a game where you fight the gods and win is wrong, but "the gods are pushovers" includes an unstated and very important "if the PCs are played smart and the gods are played dumb".

Yes, the gods are (generally) pushovers if you don't restat them. You can cheat and restat them to railroad a particular level of challenge, but… well, better to have the PCs kill them at lower levels while they're still a challenge then, IMO, if "challenge" is what you're after. Lolth was first killed in a module by a, what, 12th level party?

So if I replace "Boccob" with my own homebrew god "Bokkob", who has a very similar personality/portfolio/etc, but makes better choices, that's all legit then?

Yes, that would be fine. You aren't badly role-playing the character, or cheating their stats (and history) at that point.

More substantively, I would say that by playing PCs who don't mechanically resemble example ones at all, they are changing that.

Nope. I am who I am, regardless of who you are.

They're not optimizing "Jozan", but they are optimizing "the party", and that's the only context Jozan is important in. Is that wrong? Not at all. But neither is the GM doing the same thing.

Of course the GM can provide challenges appropriate to the party (continent upon the… darn senility… "group agreement" thingy). But, if you're using the published deities, *and* you want them to be a challenge, consider having the party face them at the level where they're still a challenge.

Alternately, consider how to make the gods "a challenge" for my first-level god-slayer.

And I disagree: "Jozan" exists, regardless of the party. He'd be a poor fit at many tables - as would most any character.

Most substantively, it's an issue of consistency. Unless the premise is that the PCs are the first ones to reach high levels, or the only ones capable of creativity, then I have to imagine the world having existed before them. And "It would have been easy for any high-ish level caster to overthrow one or more gods, but somehow ... none of them ever did, not even the extremely ambitious ones who supposedly would do anything for power" isn't a consistent world. And neither is "So all these archmages who supposedly studied magic for centuries and understood it in great depth ... never noticed that you could summon powerful things with Gate? Or that Astral Projection is a game-changer?"

You probably have no idea just how many groups and individuals I've played with over the years in earlier editions who had absolutely no clue what abilities were good.

So, uh, yeah, unless your world has the internet (which is pretty unusual for a D&D world), it's actually horrible role-playing for you to play the average Wizards as if they actually comprehend even half the potential that their abilities give them.

Unless, again, the PCs are explicitly special as part of the premise, capable of either power or invention that nobody else, not even supposed geniuses, can ever discover. Which is fine, but it's not like an inherent fixture of all campaigns.

Play with noobs with no knowledge and no internet access, and get back with me about just how unrealistic this is, for many otherwise intelligent people to just not get it.

It's not Demogorgon if he's alone in his room waiting flat-footed for his first round in initiative so he can swing his tentacle. It's not actual Orcus if he's sitting in an open field with no undead around, coming back home from buying groceries in the local mart.

Strongly agree with this bit. Most beings of power are smart enough to realize that they are neither omnipotent nor invulnerable, and keep "loyal" minions around for protection (and grunt work, and company, and lots of other reasons). Acting otherwise is bad role-playing on the GM's part.

Disagree with most of the rest of your post, but this bit is spot on.

[AlanBruce]

I suppose it’s that time of the year again when players and their PCs want to kill gods.

Here’s the thing: regardless of the core books, splatbooks, obscure 3rd party material. The infamous builds and combos people adhere to with zealous abandon...

We are talking about gods here. Yes, even the fiendish lords and masters of the heavenly host. These beings are where they are for a reason. And yes, I am sure the following argument is quick to arise:

But Deities & Demigods say that...!

That little book, like every other printed, is a list of suggestions, not the absolute truth. You can still be a bonafide badass without having to slay these creatures because, in all honesty, you shouldn’t be able to. Beings of this nature are in a league all of their own. They have cemented their position for ages. Wouldn’t you think anyone else would’ve attempted your strategies prior? And yet they remain.

You can always foil these beings’ plans, certainly. Some of the best stories revolve around that without ending in mailman matches.

Keep the gods where they belong: in the inscrutable. Their presence oft heard, rarely ever felt.

[icefractal]

So, uh, yeah, unless your world has the internet (which is pretty unusual for a D&D world), it's actually horrible role-playing for you to play the average Wizards as if they actually comprehend even half the potential that their abilities give them.

Wait, what? I'm surprised because that's usually the argument given by anti-optimization GMs who claim that using your abilities effectively is bad roleplaying. To which the usual answer here (which I agree with) is "Not using your full abilities, when those abilities represent years of training and mean the difference between life and death, is more likely to be bad roleplaying."

So PCs can and should use their abilities to the fullest, but if NPCs (same class, same background, same mental stats) do that it's 'horrible' roleplaying? That's an interesting kind of logic.

Now if you're saying you'd rather be the one outsmarting NPCs and hitting above your weight class rather than vice-versa - sure, and in fact that's usually my preference too. And most of the time that's fine and doesn't cause any problem to verisimilitude. A Balor can be clowned on by some mid-level adventurers? Yep. Does that mean the Blood War gets ended early? No, because there are a lot of Balors and other demons. People who really utilize their abilities to the utmost are rare, and so a lot of opposition isn't going to be prepared for that.

Rare though, not unique. And in terms of "what threats does a deity have to deal with?", they're all going to be quite rare. So (again, if the campaign premise doesn't have the PCs as uniquely superior), a deity that's so easily defeated and is still around stretches plausibility. Dozens of deities that work like that breaks it into little pieces.

[NigelWalmsley]

Keep the gods where they belong: in the inscrutable. Their presence oft heard, rarely ever felt.

That's never been where the gods belonged. The idea that you could go out and kill the gods has always been a part of D&D. 3e pulled back on it, but that was a mistake. The stats from Deities and Demigods are problematic not because they give people the idea they can kill the gods, but because they push the prospect of doing so past the point where the game breaks down.

[AlanBruce]

This being merely an opinion at this point, previous editions then, did not have an interesting goal in mind when PCs are supposed to bring down pantheons or even a single deity. Some might even say it’s lazy writing.

Third edition did try to correct this via Aspects. But by then, the damage was done. The idea ingrained. The builds in full gear.

Regarding Deities & Demigods, I understand the need to sell books- I own one and the art holds very good for the most part. However, they should’ve stopped each entry with the basic info only, such as Domains granted and fluff.