| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| silverwolfer |
Posted - 16 Jul 2013 : 21:11:46
Just want some feedback, what was the point , we have gods, we have worshipers, what was the point of adding another tier to the level of power of having Lord Ao, and then to compound it, by the ending of the time of troubles showing Ao reporting to an even more powerful thing. |
| 30 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| ksu_bond |
Posted - 26 Jul 2013 : 00:11:18
Ao and the other over-deities, isn't a bad concept and depending on the sort of campaign one was choosing to run I'm sure could have been a useful one (ie. PC's seeking divinity).
Ao became a problem only after he was overused as an element to advance the plot and ultimately made him more relatable, rather than simply an enigmatic boogieman to the gods.
I actually have an NPC who is a "cleric of Ao", a former LN noble scion who was in Waterdeep during the ToT and forever dedicated his life to the Cult of Ao ... obviously Ao doesn't provide him with spells, but another deity has and over time the NPC has become LE. |
| Ayrik |
Posted - 25 Jul 2013 : 23:49:41
I don't recall Ao being fleshed out, really. Ao was included in 3E-era material only for purposes of consistency, I think, and when mentioned at all it was in only the most cursory and vague manner. Ao was then opportunistically used as a convenient foundation for 4E Realms mythology ... which seemed poorly conceived and more poorly received (especially by me!) ... but it could be argued that FR4E is hardly even the same setting, redefining this single character/entity hardly made much difference in light of the other collateral damage suffered through this edition transition.
In short, I try to remember that Ao in 2E was just an omnipotent-yet-not-quite-omniscient story device, while Ao in 4E was a character in (to me) an entirely different setting only based on the Realms. |
| Therise |
Posted - 24 Jul 2013 : 18:52:59
quote:
Originally posted by Ayrik
There is always a bigger fish. Ao's first appearance in the Avatar trilogy concluded with him reporting the status of the Realms to his master.
Old D&D Immortals material was largely based on the bigger-fish mentality: every time you exceeded the "maximum" possible level you ended up being the most recent entrant in an entirely larger world.
I don't mind the "bigger fish" concept, really. At the time, though, it mucked with the established origin story and wasn't well-executed in the novels.
And as disliked as AO was at the time, I'm somewhat surprised that they chose to flesh it out even further and make it central to the Sundering. Rather disappointing IMO.
|
| Ayrik |
Posted - 24 Jul 2013 : 02:55:59
There is always a bigger fish. Ao's first appearance in the Avatar trilogy concluded with him reporting the status of the Realms to his master.
Old D&D Immortals material was largely based on the bigger-fish mentality: every time you exceeded the "maximum" possible level you ended up being the most recent entrant in an entirely larger world. |
| Therise |
Posted - 23 Jul 2013 : 18:00:14
quote:
Originally posted by Arcanus
If it brings back the realms i love then i dont really care how they do it.
I'm not sure that's really possible at this point. "Bringing back" to me indicates some kind of a re-set, such that you go back to a point where certain changes, and quite a lot of history, didn't happen - along with invalidating a lot of reveals about the "way things work" in the Realms (or at least making them questionable or "unreliable narration").
Granted, what I'd like most is exactly that kind of re-set. Not so much to get rid of various historical events but more to get rid of meta-concepts that define the "way things work" and are explained. But I just don't see it happening.
To be more specific, even if we did turn back the clock to some specific year in 1E or 2E, it still wouldn't necessarily get rid of several things I really dislike immensely:
- Gods as narrow-minded "living concepts" rather than fully anthropomorphic deities in the vein of Norse gods or Greek gods.
- Local, unique gods are really just Flavored Avatars of some primal, living concept. In reality, there's only one pantheon, and all deities of magic across the globe really are just splinters of Mystra.
- The entire re-frame of the original origin story, with the clunky overlay of AO, the "necessity" of a twinned planet called Abeir, and the "don't like a region, just swap it out or eradicate it with Spellplague Plotdevice magic" and another Mystra death.
Those three things alone have radically and permanently altered the way I look at and interpret the published Realms in a heavy-handed and top-down manner. By cementing them in place with the events of 4E and enhancing the AO story further in 5E with another massive RSE / Sundering, there's just no going back IMO. It's really no longer possible to tell players, "well, it's all just unreliable narrator stuff" or "that's merely one way that this one particular sage pictures reality".
The only real way to "go back" at this point would be to stop publishing the current Realms and totally replace it with a re-framed alternate world set in 1E. For example, a fully Re-Booted 1E Realms -or- alternate-divergent Realms that is entirely based on a Ed's "home Realms" without all the added material (i.e. no ToT, no 4E changes, no time jump, etc...). But I don't see that happening unless the 5E Sundering Realms fails to sell.
|
| Arcanus |
Posted - 23 Jul 2013 : 15:23:02
If it brings back the realms i love then i dont really care how they do it. |
| sleyvas |
Posted - 23 Jul 2013 : 14:25:53
Time changes all things. Whenever the ToT happened, I was pretty upset that Bane was gone, but over time and after seeing Xvim in action, I got over it. I was also upset to see Myrkul gone, but Velsharoon took over that "role" for me and was better at it (though I like the idea of Myrkul in the crown). Ironically, at the time (and we're talking what half my life ago?) I wasn't as upset to see Leira gone, but as I've grown older and I see the value in a good trickster deity, I really would like to see her come back in some hidden plot. |
| CorellonsDevout |
Posted - 23 Jul 2013 : 03:24:15
I can think of one thing that a lot of people want and have spoken about at length, but WotC (or whoever is in charge), has deigned not to listen. This is not the thread for it, though.
I don't mind the idea of Ao, but Therise makes some interesting points, ones I hadn't considered. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 22 Jul 2013 : 23:11:37
quote:
Originally posted by silverwolfer
That is a interesting point, very few folks tend to like something when it first comes out, but it seems views on TOT have soften and folks are even brave enough now to admit they may have enjoyed it.
I've been saying I didn't have an issue with it since I've been discussing the Realms online. I've said it here multiple times, and I'm sure I said it on the WotC forums, before they banned me. That was like 2003 or so. |
| Irennan |
Posted - 22 Jul 2013 : 22:23:41
Idk, that's the reason why many people tend to be vocal about both what they like and don't. I guess it depends on the individual, but I wouldn't say that shyness is the most common feeling in this regard. |
| silverwolfer |
Posted - 22 Jul 2013 : 21:40:20
Popular opinion can be a very powerful thing. |
| Irennan |
Posted - 22 Jul 2013 : 19:50:26
Not sure about what you mean with that, but I don't think that people are scared to say whether they like something or not, or that bravery is needed to express the enjoyment of something  |
| silverwolfer |
Posted - 22 Jul 2013 : 19:11:34
That is a interesting point, very few folks tend to like something when it first comes out, but it seems views on TOT have soften and folks are even brave enough now to admit they may have enjoyed it. |
| Therise |
Posted - 22 Jul 2013 : 16:49:48
I think Ao was introduced because a few authors at the time wanted to add some deities that would be highly active and generate world-spanning conflict. Up to that point, many deities were relatively balanced out (and quite excellent for small local stories), which didn't play well with their desire to shake things up for 2nd edition. Or at least, they thought so. Shar was balanced by Selune, Mystra was relatively neutral, the three (Bane, Bhaal and Cyric) were somewhat balanced by the trio of Helm, Torm, and Tyr.
For real, blood-curdling evil, you'd pull out one of the demon lords or one of the devil lords. But this isn't what the author team wanted, because it seemed too "spread out" for epic, grand stories. And someone had the "bright idea" of casting the gods down and raising a few mortals up.
The general idea was interesting, but the execution failed big time IMO. Personally, I think Cyric was one of the worse additions to the Realms and I completely rejected using him in my home campaign. I also didn't do the whole Time of Troubles thing because it just played out badly in the books.
So, why AO? Well, an overgod could cast everyone down and (eventually) raise everyone back when necessary, even raising mortals into new godly positions. Shar and Selune, in my mind, were instantly reframed and demoted, the entire origin story turned to mush in order to serve the ToT plot. IMO the story itself was bad because very little about it was natural and organic. Did Cyric gather worshipers and generate a massive following in order to deserve his ascension? Nope, he fumbled around, was used by others, and was accidentally in the right place with overpowered tools put into his hands. Midnight was even worse, her story haphazardly created to replace a goddess who suddenly lost every point of IQ and confronted Helm at full power. Terrible.
The ToT also re-framed the gods as these narrow-visioned, mentally deficient entities that somehow could only see reality from the perspective of their own portfolios. But why? It was mind-boggling how stupid they'd become. Or rather, it might be more accurate to say that they'd entirely lost their anthropomorphic perspectives and reasoning abilities, and replaced them with severe autism. It was just terrible writing, and a terrible change of course for the Realms. Instead of limiting the gods with their former humanity (their hopes, desires, etc), the gods were re-written as "living concepts" with very limited awareness of other points of view. And truthfully, I think that's why their avatars were written as being so bone stupid, able to think only in black and white. Only those who were recently ascended (Cyric, Midnight, and eventually Kelemvor) managed to retain moderately interesting characteristics, but those were handled badly as well. Major deities acting like high schoolers?
I think it's truly unfortunate that they're enhancing and further developing AO and all those really awful plot-threads of the Time of Troubles for 5E. Very few people liked AO at the time, very few liked the extremely ham-handed top-down changes to the pantheon and the setting. At least in 2nd edition you could completely ignore Midnight, Cyric and the ToT and keep playing as if none of that happened. But with 4E firmly cemented in, and 5E fleshing out these concepts that were terrible to begin with, the Realms will be well and truly changed from what it once was.
|
| Irennan |
Posted - 20 Jul 2013 : 17:46:22
Ah, I see. Well, just change ''WotC'' to whatever company owns D&D and it won't really alter the fact that Ao is there as a mere deus ex machina. |
| TheHermit |
Posted - 20 Jul 2013 : 17:28:08
quote:
Originally posted by Irennan
Forgive my ignorance, but I don't get what you're trying to say. The only D&D related fact I managed to find about Lake Geneva is that Gygax and Weis were born there...
As was TSR Inc., where it remained until it was sold to Wizards in '97.
I'm saying while it's possible to mumblegrumble about many sins and slights against the Realms and lay them at WotC/Hasbro's feet, the majority of Ao and his godbothering business goes back to the gang at the original clubhouse in Lake Geneva, not the new digs in Seattle. |
| Irennan |
Posted - 20 Jul 2013 : 16:35:48
Forgive my ignorance, but I don't get what you're trying to say. The only D&D related fact I managed to find about Lake Geneva is that Gygax and Weis were born there... |
| TheHermit |
Posted - 20 Jul 2013 : 16:31:25
quote:
Originally posted by Irennan
quote:
Originally posted by Dennis
When left to their own (sick) devices, gods tend to act like unruly children. They need a “father” to spank their sorry asses once in a while, hence Ao.
Or WotC could just stop portraying beings who should far smarter than any mortal like that, instead of using this quite ridiculous (IMO) approach of the ''dad'' who thinks that allowing catastrophic events to happen in order to teach the ''children'' a lesson is a clever idea.
WotC could, I guess, but it's probably worth remembering that most of Ao's appearances came straight out of Lake Geneva, if I recall correctly. |
| Irennan |
Posted - 20 Jul 2013 : 10:58:49
quote:
Originally posted by Icelander
quote:
Originally posted by Irennan
Or WotC could just stop portraying beings who should far smarter than any mortal like that, instead of using this quite ridiculous (IMO) approach of the ''dad'' who thinks that allowing catastrophic events to happen in order to teach the ''children'' a lesson is a clever idea.
It's not like fictional characters have their own will which can't be shaped as their authors see fit...
To be fair, everything in Realms canon indicates that upon assumning a divine portfolio, people/beings also have their consciousness narrow down that of this portfolio, to function at a level that in a human would be called autistic. Gods are not fully-functional people, otherwise there would be far fewer of them, with much more cooperation between those left and the whole world pretty much a paradise (according to the most numerous faction).
Gods are not people. They work differently. And they can't see other gods' point of view. This is why we still have the Realms, instead of the paradise imagined by the strongest God.
That wouldn't make much sense IMO. It would imply that deities can only do and think about stuff related with their portfolios, which clearly is not true. Also, anyone with a brain could outsmart a being whose consciousness is limited to the size of a peanut (like restricted to tyranny, darkness, the Sun and so on).
True, gods are not people, they're supposed to be smarter than mortals and to be able to foresee and understand the consequence of their actions. People can, deities can too.
Also, why would the situation develop as you say? Last time I checked, it didn't happen for people, neither in the FR nor in RW. There would be factions and alliances, but that's pretty much what you have now...
@silverwolfer
quote:
Yep to what the dwarf said.
Gods become the embodiment of what they represent and little else more besides the desire of MORE MORE MORE!!!!
Deities are embodied ideas, however they do develop personalities on their own (as we have seen in the FR) and their choices aren't limited to MORE MORE MORE. Many gods act like that, but some act for different purposes (heck, some even act for mortals). Their personalities and choices in this regard are obviously influenced by their porftolios, but they are not balls of energy who only crave for more of it.
The problem is again in the portrayal of the gods. Why can't they be reasonable and must instead go around with the divine equivalent of a ''me smash!'' attitude in order to obtain their goal? This is a pretty stupid and ''unrealistic'' (i.e. none -but the heroes of the day- does anything about it and everyone just sits and watches) idea of deity.
quote:
Ao rules on three levels, above petty mortal things of good and evil.
1. Make sure the rules are enfored in how power works and how it is gained.
1B. The reason being for this rule results in sub section A: Ao wants his crystal to stay active, not turn utterly destroyed through outragous rule beaking.
1C. Chaos does not flow against these rules, but is one of the fundamental pillars of his sphere.
2. The thing above Ao, could saftely assume put Ao in charge of this sphere. So it is his job to make sure it stays such.
2b. Everything dieing is not against the rules, ripping the entire time-space cycle to destroy everything is.
3. So ultimatly it comes down to this
Lord Ao is not the balance of law and order and good and chaos. He is the balance of reality itself and the rules that govern it, that being said that chaos is a cycle that does progress, not the utter oblivion of everything * ala shar* He does not decide who wins, he just makes sure everyone can still play chess.
1: The rules about how power works can be tied to reality, much like the rules of magic (and this totally makes sense, as this power is magic), or the laws of Physics. They would be the pillars of reality and everything would happen accordingly to them. No need for Ao here.
2: Meh, it's obvious that Ao wants to do his job, this doesn't imply that he is needed. About the ''everyone cna die, but world has to stay thingy'', Ao would be kinda pointless in this regard. The ball of rock and the cycle of time* will stay no matter what happens. The overgod allowing countless deaths and destruction to happen so that the gods could learn their lesson (because ''balance'') makes him/her/it look like a complete idiot, TBH.
3: Reality exists, has its onw rules, works accordingly to them. There is no need for anything to ''balance it''. Would you say that RW needs something to balance the laws of Physics? The ''structure'' (i.e. the mechanisms and rules) of reality will stay no matter what, everyone will be able to ''play chess'', Ao or not.
Also, I didn't mean chaos as in destruction, but as in a scarce rigidity of the ''structure'' of reality, vs order which implies a rigid one (basically both of them are degrees of the ''rigidity'' of the laws that rule reality. And here there's nothing to balance, as the actual structure is what it is, and falls somewhere between the two extremes).
*Someone could travel in time and alter events within the boundaries set by Mystra or even --lets say-- outside of them. However the ''structure of time'' (w/e it is) you talk about will be kept, as it is what rules time traveling and cannot be altered through it.
|
| silverwolfer |
Posted - 20 Jul 2013 : 07:04:54
Yep to what the dwarf said.
Gods become the embodiment of what they represent and little else more besides the desire of MORE MORE MORE!!!!
Ao rules on three levels, above petty mortal things of good and evil.
1. Make sure the rules are enfored in how power works and how it is gained.
1B. The reason being for this rule results in sub section A: Ao wants his crystal to stay active, not turn utterly destroyed through outragous rule beaking.
1C. Chaos does not flow against these rules, but is one of the fundamental pillars of his sphere.
2. The thing above Ao, could saftely assume put Ao in charge of this sphere. So it is his job to make sure it stays such.
2b. Everything dieing is not against the rules, ripping the entire time-space cycle to destroy everything is.
3. So ultimatly it comes down to this
Lord Ao is not the balance of law and order and good and chaos. He is the balance of reality itself and the rules that govern it, that being said that chaos is a cycle that does progress, not the utter oblivion of everything * ala shar* He does not decide who wins, he just makes sure everyone can still play chess. |
| Icelander |
Posted - 20 Jul 2013 : 05:49:01
quote:
Originally posted by Irennan
Or WotC could just stop portraying beings who should far smarter than any mortal like that, instead of using this quite ridiculous (IMO) approach of the ''dad'' who thinks that allowing catastrophic events to happen in order to teach the ''children'' a lesson is a clever idea.
It's not like fictional characters have their own will which can't be shaped as their authors see fit...
To be fair, everything in Realms canon indicates that upon assumning a divine portfolio, people/beings also have their consciousness narrow down that of this portfolio, to function at a level that in a human would be called autistic. Gods are not fully-functional people, otherwise there would be far fewer of them, with much more cooperation between those left and the whole world pretty much a paradise (according to the most numerous faction).
Gods are not people. They work differently. And they can't see other gods' point of view. This is why we still have the Realms, instead of the paradise imagined by the strongest God. |
| CorellonsDevout |
Posted - 20 Jul 2013 : 04:28:34
I don't mind having Ao as a "god of gods", but I hope WotC uses his actions in 5e tastefully. |
| Irennan |
Posted - 18 Jul 2013 : 16:01:02
quote:
Originally posted by Dennis
Did I sound like I was defending the Power-That-Be’s decision to introduce Ao? I was only stating what appears to be reason for such introduction.
If I’d be given a free hand on things, I’d have all the gods and overgods obliterated. No exception. Yes, that’s how I love them.
Oh, I misunderstood you then. My apologies.
If it was up to me, the gods wouldn't be removed (except Ao), as I think that having mortal ideas concretized in entities which can then even manage to develop their own personality is a cool thing. However I'd completely erase the act of worshipping, relationship with deities would look like working together towards a common goal, without having one side bow to the other. |
| Dennis |
Posted - 18 Jul 2013 : 15:55:31
Did I sound like I was defending the Power-That-Be’s decision to introduce Ao? I was only stating what appears to be reason for such introduction.
If I’d be given a free hand on things, I’d have all the gods and overgods obliterated. No exception. Yes, that’s how I love them. |
| Irennan |
Posted - 18 Jul 2013 : 15:41:44
quote:
Originally posted by Dennis
Balance is the sole purpose of Ao’s existence. So long as it’s not compromised, he can spank or obliterate any childish gods as he sees fit.
Justifying most of the past RSEs by saying that the ''keeper'' of Toril allowed it to be swept by a continuous stream of destructive events just to teach the gods (who should be able to easily understand or forsee the consequence of their actions) to not meddle is quite contradictory and cheesy.
What I mean is that any clever creature should be able to manage itself without the need of some uber being who can fix everything with a snap of its fingers.
I don't like this idea that Toril would rot if not for the wisdom/might/knowledge/whatever of Ao, it implies that its inhabitants (both mortal and not) are incapable of making choices leading to good and improving results and that they need something bigger to do it for them.
Furthermore, what is this ''balance'' Ao supposedly is in charge of?
Balance between good and evil? It'd be inappropriate, since these concepts aren't absolutes and actually describe the consequences of some kinds of behaviour: any action could fit in both categories depending on the beholder. Someone who has to ''balance'' it can't be neutral, because distinguishing ''good'' actions from ''evil'' ones requires expressing an opinion, which ultimately implies* siding with one of the groups of persons/deities/creatures involved in said action. The ''balance'' of this kind of matter is better left in the hands of mortal and deities.
What else could be ''balanced''? Caos vs order? I don't see anything to balance about it. Toril has a structure and its ''laws of Physics/Magic/whatever'' which regulate how stuff happens on it, there's no chaos and order to equilibrate in that. Law vs Freedom in societies? Mortals/deities should deal with it, no need for some superior being.
I can't think of anything else atm. At the end of the day, I think that Ao is not needed at all and that his presence is just a reset tool, like Arcanus pointed out before me in this thread.
*EDIT: Just to not be misunderstood, I'll give an example. Lets say someone steals money in order to buy some food. This action can be easily judged in terms of the law w/o taking any side, but if the judge -after having considered the motivation of the thief- said that the action was something evil, (s)he would be giving a personal comment, effectively siding with the person who got robbed. An emotionless, impartial, even somewhat alien being like Ao cound't be able to express himself on the balance between two non-absolute concepts like ''good'' and ''evil''.
|
| Dennis |
Posted - 18 Jul 2013 : 15:22:01
quote:
Originally posted by silverwolfer
quote:
Originally posted by Mirtek
quote:
Originally posted by The ArcanamachI only mentioned this process because in one of the novels Cyric has so much power that Ao is somehow 'diminished' and Mystra realizes that Ao's power isn't absolute. It's a scene in which Cyric is seen as insane and he sort of flexes his divine muscles (so to speak) in an effort to get Ao to see something (I forget what Cyric's actual point was in that scene though).
Ao took the greater powers, except for Cyric, somewhere they couldn't normally go on their own to have a talk with them without Cyric.
Cyric was unhappy to be left out and surprise his fellow greater powers by just going there through his own power and to show his displeasure at being left out he dimed the stars Ao used as background illumination for a split second (which suprised even Ao IIRC) before Ao overwrote Cyric's adjustment to them.
refrence please, I don't remember that in the trial books
The following is lifted from pages 38–39 of Crucible: The Trial of Cyric the Mad by Troy Denning (emphasis mine).
quote:
“Yes, Midnight,” sneered the One’s voice. “I am beyond you now. I am beyond you all—you who dare think yourselves great enough to destroy me—or to ‘save’ me.”
Mystra shot a glance toward Tempus and saw the Battle Lord’s shoulders sink. Whatever Cyric was doing, it had surprised the Foehammer as much as it had her. She looked next to Oghma. The Wise God’s face paled, and his jaw hung slack.
Mystra looked away. To catch Oghma in such a state of bewilderment was akin to spying Sune in an instant of ugliness. Without realizing she had reached for it, the Goddess of Magic found herself grasping Kelemvor’s hand.
“Lord Ao?” Mystra asked. “Did you summon Cyric?”
“Summon me?” scoffed Cyric. “Fellows do not summon fellows!”
Fellows? boomed Ao. Fellows! You dare compare yourself to me?
“With whom else?” demanded Cyric. “I have raised myself as far above them as you were once above me!”
The stars dimmed, as though a cloud of mist had filled the infinite void.
Mystra slipped her hand from Kelemvor’s grasp, and at last she began to feel the proper fear of the One and All. If Cyric could dim Ao’s sparkling light, what could he not do?
The mist cleared, and the stars began to shine as brightly as before. I see.
It was then that Mystra understood even Lord Ao had his limits. Until that moment, Ao had not known how dangerous Cyric could be—and neither had she. Tempus was right; there was nothing to do except destroy Cyric—before he destroyed them.
And that is why they wish to kill you, Cyric? Because you are more powerful than they?
Mystra dared to interrupt. “Yes, Lord Ao.”
She felt Kelemvor grab her arm and squeeze, urging her to be careful. Mystra would not remain silent. She had to makeLord Ao see that they could handle the situation for themselves, or he might replace Cyric with someone more capable—or worse still, simply cure the One’s madness.
“We must kill Cyric,” Mystra said. “We must destroy him, for he has made himself better than us!”
A sphere of wavering light appeared before Mystra’s eyes, and in it she fancied she could see Cyric’s gaunt face.
“You see how they envy me?” asked the sphere. “Is it any wonder I refuse to grace them with my presence?”
No wonder at all, replied Ao. You have made yourself so much more powerful than they.
|
| Dennis |
Posted - 18 Jul 2013 : 14:53:19
quote:
Originally posted by Irennan
quote:
Originally posted by Dennis
When left to their own (sick) devices, gods tend to act like unruly children. They need a “father” to spank their sorry asses once in a while, hence Ao.
Or WotC could just stop portraying beings who should far smarter than any mortal like that, instead of using this quite ridiculous (IMO) approach of the ''dad'' who thinks that allowing catastrophic events to happen in order to teach the ''children'' a lesson is a clever idea.
It's not like fictional characters have their own will which can't be shaped as their authors see fit...
Balance is the sole purpose of Ao’s existence. So long as it’s not compromised, he can spank or obliterate any childish gods as he sees fit. |
| Irennan |
Posted - 18 Jul 2013 : 14:45:51
quote:
Originally posted by Dennis
When left to their own (sick) devices, gods tend to act like unruly children. They need a “father” to spank their sorry asses once in a while, hence Ao.
Or WotC could just stop portraying beings who should far smarter than any mortal like that, instead of using this quite ridiculous (IMO) approach of the ''dad'' who thinks that allowing catastrophic events to happen in order to teach the ''children'' a lesson is a clever idea.
It's not like fictional characters have their own will which can't be shaped as their authors see fit... |
| Dennis |
Posted - 18 Jul 2013 : 13:52:30
When left to their own (sick) devices, gods tend to act like unruly children. They need a “father” to spank their sorry asses once in a while, hence Ao. |
| Arcanus |
Posted - 18 Jul 2013 : 12:18:53
He is the ultimate reset button, as will be demonstrated in the sundering. Its an easy tool for wizards to use to backtrack when they realise that they have made an almighty cock up. |
|
|
