| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Bladewind |
Posted - 06 Feb 2013 : 11:46:44
Found this well written article for all Bane fanboys. Thought I'd share.
I too think achieving godhood and or slaying gods can make for fun stories, so including stats for gods in Faerun is preferred. DM's always have wriggle room to spare a gods life, but magic swords DO hurt them and can form a threat to their presence. |
| 24 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Bladewind |
Posted - 08 Feb 2013 : 00:58:07
I think fantasy needs a bit racial tension, so racial pantheons and their clergy are excellent elements to use in stories about cultural xenophobia. Games can be really intriguing by allowing racial tensions to build up before you decide the king declares war or make a cool historic adventure explaining the long lasting enemities.
Or perhaps you'd like to roleplay fledgling gods. As for their stats, usually its a simple exercise of muliplying every stat by 5 or more and godly feats can be performed. If the system is robust enough to enable combat against a god, why not use it? |
| Chosen of Asmodeus |
Posted - 07 Feb 2013 : 05:45:52
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
I skimmed over the article, and it seemed more tongue-in-cheek than anything else. I think people may be reading more into it than is really there.
Indeed, this was definitely a humor piece, which I'm fine with. It's important, I think, for D&D fans(or really, fans of anything) to take a step back every now and then and consider the silliness of it all.
That being said, I do agree with Mr. von Hindman's assessment of the "racist" (not necessarily the word I'd use) assignment of gods in previous editions, and do think that 4e core handled the gods best by making them cross cultural. |
| Chosen of Asmodeus |
Posted - 07 Feb 2013 : 05:45:19
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
I skimmed over the article, and it seemed more tongue-in-cheek than anything else. I think people may be reading more into it than is really there.
Indeed, this was definitely a humor piece, which I'm fine with. It's important, I think, for D&D fans(or really, fans of anything) to take a step back every now and then and consider the silliness of it all.
That being said, I do agree with Mr. von Hindman's assessment of the "racist" (not necessarily the word I'd use) assignment of gods in previous editions, and do think that 4e core handled the gods best by making them cross cultural. |
| Ayrik |
Posted - 07 Feb 2013 : 05:35:06
Thank you BRJ, I had never noticed those references before. Indeed, I'm now realizing I hadn't noticed a lot of interesting details from that manual. |
| Darkmeer |
Posted - 07 Feb 2013 : 04:50:09
quote:
Originally posted by Jeremy Grenemyer
Ha ha funny.
Dating Loviatar just sounds dangerous.
Not dangerous at all. You set up the rules, and, being lawful evil, she'll follow them to the letter 
Now, off to find the ointment from the last 75 lashes... I broke the rules   |
| Brian R. James |
Posted - 07 Feb 2013 : 04:35:06
quote:
Originally posted by Ayrik
But I just wanna know ... is there a (4E?) connection between Bane and bladelings?
Yes. It's from the Manual of the Planes, page 92.
"Chernoggar is also populated by a native race—the bladelings. Bane brought a race of martially inclined mortals to Chernoggar many centuries ago and sought to transform them into the perfect soldiers, but the bladelings proved more independent of will
than he had hoped. Although many of these fierce warriors still serve Bane today, others left Chernoggar long ago to seek a fate of their own devising."
and page 116:
"Long ago, Bane plucked a race of mortals from the world and used it to fashion a new race of soldiers. He bestowed the race with fighting skills and natural weaponry, yet he could not quash the independence that led some bladelings to rebel against him" |
| Ayrik |
Posted - 07 Feb 2013 : 04:12:46
But I just wanna know ... is there a (4E?) connection between Bane and bladelings? |
| Diffan |
Posted - 07 Feb 2013 : 04:08:21
quote:
Originally posted by sleyvas
I know its humor, but it scares me that this kind of writing is what they want to publish...... it screams, we couldn't give a damn
Well with the player-base being as fickle as they are, I really can't blame them. Everything they put out is highly criticized (more so than, IMO, any other company in RPGs) and it appears that fans really don't agree on anything. |
| sleyvas |
Posted - 07 Feb 2013 : 02:20:05
I know its humor, but it scares me that this kind of writing is what they want to publish...... it screams, we couldn't give a damn |
| Ayrik |
Posted - 07 Feb 2013 : 01:07:15
<ahem>quote:
[Bane] created his own race of people that were so kickass they had knives sticking out of their skin.
Is this just another of Jared's half-lame tongue-in-cheek attempts to be funny, or is it some reference to bladelings or something else cool? I ask because I've always had a bit of a soft spot for bladelings and Acheron and even Bane himself (mythological Bane and Ed-ological Bane, not the contrived "Bane is da man!" webvertising posture of this DDI/DDO article).
The article is well-researched, but I wouldn't call it well-written. Jared's done much better in the past. |
| Mirtek |
Posted - 06 Feb 2013 : 23:11:06
quote:
Originally posted by Lord Bane
I had to smirk at one point or the other but i do have to argue the point that the CORE Bane is the same as the Realms Bane. Besides that, only two words seem fitting to answer this article:
HAIL BANE!
IIRC the dragon article about Core Bane had a sidebar that specifically told that they are not the same deities |
| Kris the Grey |
Posted - 06 Feb 2013 : 20:21:51
I'm pretty sure it's just meant for yucks. I did enjoy it quite a bit (especially the dual blaster wielding cleric reference, I'd forgotten that module cover!).
All in all, my main (unsurprising) take away was the historical depth of those good 'ole Earth Realms crossover connections! I'd say they are pretty much screaming out for more action in the 'modern' Realms if you ask me...but that shouldn't come as much of a surprise to anyone. Lol. |
| xaeyruudh |
Posted - 06 Feb 2013 : 19:19:03
I was put off at first too, but then I saw the reference to Stupid Monsters and I said "ohhh it's that guy!" and it suddenly became a proper humor piece in my head. He's having fun at TSR/WotC's expense. Everything he brings in is for that purpose, and shouldn't be taken seriously beyond asking "seriously, guys... what were you thinking?" |
| Dalor Darden |
Posted - 06 Feb 2013 : 19:09:33
quote:
Originally posted by Diffan
quote:
Originally posted by The Masked Mage
For my two cents, this writer puts WAY too much stock in the nonsense of 4th ED. Want a good solution for that problem? Simple. Burn those books. Yes, I said burn those books in a location called Candlekeep. Their existence as books lessens all other books ever published. Burn them and do a little dance around the fire to whatever pantheon rocks your boat.
We probably could've done without this diatribe. Besides, I read the article and to me it's extreamly tongue and cheek. Sort of like the other one "complainino" about attempting to write a novel/story set in Waterdeep and having to delve into mountains of inforamtion, work, and content just so you don't mess up canon.
Personally speaking, I actually like Bane as a deity in areas where Humans are sort of "alone", facing a strong non-human opposition. For example, some smaller towns in the Moonsea region near Thar and the Ride where monstrous humanoids are plentiful and humans keep them at bay. Here the iron fist of law and order keep the people going and it's very much an "Us vs. Them" sort of thing (at least to me, it is).
I agree completely with you on this Diffan...I think Bane is so highly worshiped in the Moonsea area simply because the people there feel more secure knowing that a God (and by extension his clergy of course) are willing to do whatever it takes to keep them safe. Not every person in Zhentil Keep is evil, but Bane's church does well there simply because the church supports the most powerful individuals to rule...which to the people means they are going to have leaders who aren't simply born into a position of power...but someone capable of taking power and using it.
Also...the funny part of the article to me was when he blamed Ed Greenwood for Polytheism in D&D...guess he never read up much on Greyhawk! lol |
| MrHedgehog |
Posted - 06 Feb 2013 : 18:52:59
I like not having racial deities a lot. It makes much more sense to me. A+ Wotc.
Although it was tongue in cheek I didn't like the author mocking real religious figures people worshiped like Amerindian deities, Hindu deities, etc. I know the whole article was irreverent but come on. |
| Diffan |
Posted - 06 Feb 2013 : 17:23:10
quote:
Originally posted by The Masked Mage
For my two cents, this writer puts WAY too much stock in the nonsense of 4th ED. Want a good solution for that problem? Simple. Burn those books. Yes, I said burn those books in a location called Candlekeep. Their existence as books lessens all other books ever published. Burn them and do a little dance around the fire to whatever pantheon rocks your boat.
We probably could've done without this diatribe. Besides, I read the article and to me it's extreamly tongue and cheek. Sort of like the other one "complainino" about attempting to write a novel/story set in Waterdeep and having to delve into mountains of inforamtion, work, and content just so you don't mess up canon.
Personally speaking, I actually like Bane as a deity in areas where Humans are sort of "alone", facing a strong non-human opposition. For example, some smaller towns in the Moonsea region near Thar and the Ride where monstrous humanoids are plentiful and humans keep them at bay. Here the iron fist of law and order keep the people going and it's very much an "Us vs. Them" sort of thing (at least to me, it is). |
| Jeremy Grenemyer |
Posted - 06 Feb 2013 : 16:59:50
Ha ha funny.
Dating Loviatar just sounds dangerous. |
| The Sage |
Posted - 06 Feb 2013 : 16:03:25
Which is largely why I had a little snicker to myself when I read it on the way home from work.
I didn't think this was presented in too much seriousness. Bane just doesn't work that way.  |
| Brian R. James |
Posted - 06 Feb 2013 : 15:51:05
If it's not apparent, these articles written by Jared von Hindman are humor pieces, nothing more. The series is called "D&D Outsider" because it's written by a non-D&D person's point of view. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 06 Feb 2013 : 15:49:28
I skimmed over the article, and it seemed more tongue-in-cheek than anything else. I think people may be reading more into it than is really there. |
| Markustay |
Posted - 06 Feb 2013 : 14:15:30
Its the mustache.
All gods are bi, and the mustache just make him so darned cute.
EDIT:
Just got about halfway through the article... it was all I could stand. I guess when you bad-mouth past design and designers and call yourself "blessed" for having come into D&D in 4th edition they let you write articles for them.
And here I was actually considering finally subscribing... seems like nothing at all has changed. Thanks for posting that - it was a good wake-up call. |
| The Masked Mage |
Posted - 06 Feb 2013 : 13:32:29
Oh yeah, about Bane - WTF is with Xvim & Bane's 4th E Fzoul fetish? Anyone? In 2nd E he used Fzoul as a body because he could not trust him, then all of a sudden Fzoul is every god's best buddy. I don't get it. |
| Lord Bane |
Posted - 06 Feb 2013 : 13:13:45
I had to smirk at one point or the other but i do have to argue the point that the CORE Bane is the same as the Realms Bane. Besides that, only two words seem fitting to answer this article:
HAIL BANE!
|
| The Masked Mage |
Posted - 06 Feb 2013 : 13:04:09
For my two cents, this writer puts WAY too much stock in the nonsense of 4th ED. Want a good solution for that problem? Simple. Burn those books. Yes, I said burn those books in a location called Candlekeep. Their existence as books lessens all other books ever published. Burn them and do a little dance around the fire to whatever pantheon rocks your boat.
The article's writer has a very selective way of looking at older things, but to each his own.
Ok, now here's an answer to the killing gods idea. There is a point to be made in Forgotten Realms about killing gods - it's always been a theme. Excluding the recent drow series about killing off everyone else in your pantheon with a pair of loaded dice and a referee who does not care about rules (burn those too if you like), this is NOT an easy thing to do. In the time of troubles (when most of the recently dead gods were killed) every god was cast down from on high by Ao as punishment for their hubris. Even then, the gods were killed by gods.
Some of those made no sense either, by the way - Mystra forsaw her death, but proceeds to get her self killed anyways - that one has never made much sense, and I always wanted one of the authors to create another book where it ended up being part of old Mystra's plan, and I'm of the opinion that it is the old Mystra who is now back in Ed's novels, not the new Midnight Mystra. This would make the whole thing make a bit more sense.
Almost all of the books he referred to in his article make the point that a mortal cannot kill a god (or an immortal depending if you're back in D&D days). No, your sword +4 cannot kill a god. It CAN damage a god's avatar. PS kill an avatar and piss off a god forever, just saying. Other gods have the power to kill gods, your 1st level warrior does not. The stats all those sources provide is for the god's manifestation, not for the god. There are exceptions to be considered when it comes to demigods and quasi-deities, but that is due to their lack of sufficient power.
Now, there are a few exceptions to this rule, notably artifact level magical items that have the special purpose of affecting a god - either imprisoning them or cutting them off from their worshipers or actually killing them - though I think the only one that has the killing power comes form the aforementioned dice game novels, so we can pretend that's a bit of bunk.
Now, when it comes to BECOMING a god, anyone can do it - its just not an easy thing to do. The best rules for this, in my opinion, were from old D&D, where it was considered a basic goal of characters. In that system, divine ascension required a sponsor who shared your basic view of the cosmos. There are other methods - most notable in a FR based site like this is Karsus' Avatar Spell. He could have become a god, and did, just a dead god. In general I have no problem with divine ascension in a campaign, as long as the campaign is built for it - otherwise, it is a direct path to NPC god status. Congratulations, you're character is a god, take these dice and roll a new 1st level punk to play. |
|
|
