DnD High Godly Regen

[Robo432343]

I was looking at the profiles for DnD on AFBW and came across this:
Gods cannot be slain by anything short of a god of greater power than their own, or a god wielding an artifact. Any god that suffers an attack that should destroy it simply disperses, then reassembles later. This would include regeneration from spells like Truenaming Magic, which can conceptually erase/rewrite a foe by the caster's will

 

[Robo432343]

Bump

 

[Mr. Bambu]

We have very few pieces of evidence about a deity being destroyed fundamentally (that is, including it's concept). For example, when Mystyl died, magic was destroyed, but she returned in the form of a different entity- Mystra.

There are very few instances where a god's concept probably ceases to be. Still, I'll ping @Qawsedf234 and @Tllmbrg to see if they have much to say on the matter.

 

[Tllmbrg]

I think this would be a case by case thing no?
I doubt all Gods can pull Mystra

 

[Mr. Bambu]

Even Mystra's wouldn't be High-Godly, it wasn't even the same entity that came back. If anything Mystra's event is evidence against High-Godly, although the argument exists that because she destroyed herself, perhaps it was bypassed. The other notable instance of Mystra's death did not destroy magic, it sent it haywire, meaning the concept of Mystra (that is, magic) still existed- it was just severely damaged.

Still, I'd want a specific feat, not arguing two unrelated statements. Nothing I can immediately think of qualifies.

 

[Qawsedf234]

Even Mystra's wouldn't be High-Godly, it wasn't even the same entity that came back. If anything Mystra's event is evidence against High-Godly, although the argument exists that because she destroyed herself, perhaps it was bypassed

The only instance i remember of a concept ceasing to exist is when Orcus destroyed the Gods of Secrets and thr concept of secrets stopped existing temporarily, but it still came back after a few seconds.

To me True Naming would only be evidence of High-Godly if you can show a god coming back from a True Name destruction attack. Plus there's a few examples of God's outright dying to non-deities or artifacts. Like with Pandorym or the Abyss just perma-killing some.

 

[Mr. Bambu]

Huh, site ate my reply.

Did said god return afterwards?

Also, as for Truenaming, I'm not sure even it would constitute High-Godly, since mostly it is just redefining a concept to enact changes on the thing that concept forms. I don't think there's anything for destroying a Truename.

 

[LephyrTheRevanchist]

Huh, site ate my reply.

Did said god return afterwards?

Also, as for Truenaming, I'm not sure even it would constitute High-Godly, since mostly it is just redefining a concept to enact changes on the thing that concept forms. I don't think there's anything for destroying a Truename.

Unname – Spell – D&D Tools

Complete list of all D&D spells, rulebooks, feats, classes and more!

dnd.arkalseif.info

 

[Mr. Bambu]

I'll be damned. It even lists out how one can be returned to life.

Yeah, great find, I'd be fine with High-Godly then.

 

[LephyrTheRevanchist]

I'll be damned. It even lists out how one can be returned to life.

Yeah, great find, I'd be fine with High-Godly then.

To the point that it even goes to mention the "fundamental laws of reality" just like our standards say it should. Pretty clear-cut ayy.

 

[Robo432343]

I'll be damned. It even lists out how one can be returned to life.

Yeah, great find, I'd be fine with High-Godly then.

ok this can be applied now

 

[Qawsedf234]

ok this can be applied now

No, since its just Bambu. Gods are entirely resistant to Mortal Magic meaning that a Truename would never work on them and when Orcus used something similar to a Trueword every God he encountered died. I don't think Deities have the evidence for High-Godly regen, just magic resistance.

 

[Mr. Bambu]

They are, but magic used by a higher or equal level of god would be applicable. And at that point, it's just resistance to the base ability anyways, my approval presumes entities that can affect the god are the ones actually using it, not just some guy.

 

[Qawsedf234]

They are, but magic used by a higher or equal level of god would be applicable. And at that point, it's just resistance to the base ability anyways, my approval presumes entities that can affect the god are the ones actually using it, not just some guy.

To me the descriptions are important since its "Gods can only die to Gods of equal or greater rank without artifacts". Meaning that a lesser god casting it would just be resisted and an equal God would be capable of killing them if it goes through.

 

[Mr. Bambu]

The fact that it affords a specific method of coming back (via spells) is, to me, strong enough evidence to suggest that their natural reformation processes would probably carry that out, too.

Not to mention that per lore we know there are beings outside of artifacts and deities that can affect deities with their powers, of course- although the options there are slim, they do exist as precedents to upset that statement.

 

[Qawsedf234]

The fact that it affords a specific method of coming back (via spells) is, to me, strong enough evidence to suggest that their natural reformation processes would probably carry that out, too.

I still disagree here. For it to be High Godly they must be destroyed by this spell and come back. Just negating the spell is a resistance feat, not a regeneration feat.

deities that can affect deities with their powers, of course- although the options there are slim, they do exist as precedents to upset that statement.

When Gods do die though its not something that's High Godly in scope imo

• Orcus' Last Word just perma-killed you
• The LoP perma-kills you with pain manipulation and sword
• Asmodeus killed a God by erasing its name from history after sealing it

Overall I just don't see High Godly being justified, its more along the lines of Information or conceptual resistance imo.

 

[Mr. Bambu]

The name bit for Asmodeus may just straight up relate to Truename stuff though (especially with how prevalent that is for fiends), and the requirement of sealing may then be taken as an extra step necessary.

Still, you're free to disagree if you like, you've more than earned the right to such a position.

 

[Robo432343]

bump

 

[Mr. Bambu]

At this point, you'd need other staff to vote one way or the other.

On the one hand, we have explicit evidence of magic being able to resurrect a target from conceptual erasure- a High-Godly feat that is not contested.

On the other, we have no direct statements of a deity actually coming back from it, as it is rare for deities do directly combat each other at all, much less for them to be destroyed.

The contention would be whether they can do this to themselves, or if we would consider their abilities to be "above" this sort of magic. I vote in favor of the idea that, yes, we can, whereas Qawsedf feels that the presence of similar abilities of deities that have not allowed for regeneration is evidence against applying this- a not-invalid position, I think.

@DarkDragonMedeus @Emirp sumitpo @Colonel_Krukov you get chosen from my magic hat to cover this. You may ignore it, but all that means is that you condemn some other poor bastard to be picked. I'd like a two vote advantage one way or the other to consider this concluded, preferably.

 

[Robo432343]

On the one hand, we have explicit evidence of magic being able to resurrect a target from conceptual erasure- a High-Godly feat that is not contested.

On the other, we have no direct statements of a deity actually coming back from it, as it is rare for deities do directly combat each other at all, much less for them to be destroyed.

The contention would be whether they can do this to themselves, or if we would consider their abilities to be "above" this sort of magic. I vote in favor of the idea that, yes, we can, whereas Qawsedf feels that the presence of similar abilities of deities that have not allowed for regeneration is evidence against applying this- a not-invalid position, I think.

if that's the case can't high godly regen be listed as a possibly rating?

 

[Mr. Bambu]

Shouldn't be, no. If the consensus is strong enough in one direction, just because something is in a literal sense technically possible, it doesn't mean we should assign a "possibly" rating: this is reserved for things that have a fairly high likelihood of being actually possible. In this case, the vote dictates that this would not be the case.

 

[Drite77]

Hey, ain't on the wiki anymore, but should that be considered given Deities have no Truenames?

I realize that statement is weird considering Kelemvor, Mystra, Cyric and the Red Knight (To name a few) were all mortals before ascending and probably had Truenames (Red Knight is confirmed to have one at the very least and the former 3 are all Greater Deities)

Not that knowledgeable on the whole cosmology thing but that is something I wondered while reading that

 

[Mr. Bambu]

Hey, ain't on the wiki anymore, but should that be considered given Deities have no Truenames?

I realize that statement is weird considering Kelemvor, Mystra, Cyric and the Red Knight (To name a few) were all mortals before ascending and probably had Truenames (Red Knight is confirmed to have one at the very least and the former 3 are all Greater Deities)

Not that knowledgeable on the whole cosmology thing but that is something I wondered while reading that

Some deities explicitly do, actually.

The statement about deities not having truenames come from a source that they have no known truenames. Specifically, it says "As far as anyone knows, powers do not have true names." I wouldn't take this as a concrete statement, especially when, as you've mentioned, a number of them likely do (and one of them is confirmed to).

 

[Drite77]

Some deities explicitly do, actually.

The statement about deities not having truenames come from a source that they have no known truenames. Specifically, it says "As far as anyone knows, powers do not have true names." I wouldn't take this as a concrete statement, especially when, as you've mentioned, a number of them likely do (and one of them is confirmed to).

That's Fair

 

[DarkDragonMedeus]

At least based on my understanding of "Conceptual Erasure", I personally don't see anything wrong with High-Godly regeneration. The "Disperses then resembles later" does alone sound like it would be a pretty good regeneration level. But that depends on if there are any feats where someone actually came back from the "Truename" stuff based on what I'm reading

 

[Robo432343]

bump

 

[Robo432343]

bump

 

[Mr. Bambu]

DDM seems to have gone with neutral, and the other two hate their fellow staff and wish for them to be cursed to this fate too. Such is life.

@LordGriffin1000 @Damage3245 @AbaddonTheDisappointment

 

[LephyrTheRevanchist]

DDM seems to have gone with neutral, and the other two hate their fellow staff and wish for them to be cursed to this fate too. Such is life.

same tbh

 

[LordGriffin1000]

Not sure why I was called for this...

Anyway, since they mention the Gods have the ability to disperse and reform later, from stuff that would kill them and truename stuff works on such a high level I'd say High-Godly works but from comments above, Gods seemed to have died and not come back before? So I'm not really sure how they'd all have it.

 

[DivineAura44]

Wouldn't this be best if it was moved to Content Revision?

 

[Mr. Bambu]

Not sure why I was called for this...

Anyway, since they mention the Gods have the ability to disperse and reform later, from stuff that would kill them and truename stuff works on such a high level I'd say High-Godly works but from comments above, Gods seemed to have died and not come back before? So I'm not really sure how they'd all have it.

Staff roulette brother, I chose randomly.

Gods work in a hierarchy, and deities of greater power can inherently negate the abilities of deities of lower powers. There are also specific things in-universe built to neg gods (Elder Evils, Orcus' Last Word isn't specifically about them but it does bypass their abilities, etc)

Wouldn't this be best if it was moved to Content Revision?

good call.

 

[LordGriffin1000]

Staff roulette brother, I chose randomly.

Alrighty then.

Gods work in a hierarchy, and deities of greater power can inherently negate the abilities of deities of lower powers. There are also specific things in-universe built to neg gods (Elder Evils, Orcus' Last Word isn't specifically about them but it does bypass their abilities, etc)

So are there any characters lesser than a god that theoretically can nuke them on a conceptual level (truename stuff) without negating their abilities, because we have the statement that they can come back from attacks that would kill them but are those lesser characters capable of using truename type hax?

 

[Mr. Bambu]

Yes- Lesser characters can use Truename abilities, and in fact the one linked above is just a very high level ability for normal players.

No- They would not be able to enact that on a deity.

 

[LordGriffin1000]

Yes- Lesser characters can use Truename abilities, and in fact the one linked above is just a very high level ability for normal players.

No- They would not be able to enact that on a deity.

Now I'm confused. So they can use it but can't use it on Gods, so how do we know Gods can reform from such levels of destruction if the lesser characters can't effect them but the stronger characters just negate it?.

 

[Mr. Bambu]

You might be getting caught up on the wrong details.

Unname is an ability of Truenamers to erase a creature's Truename from existence, with a specific magical means of being brought back (notably one weaker than the stuff that brings back divine entities). Their Truename is the fundamental framework for their existence- their concept, to put it as VSBW puts it. A normal Truenamer could not possibly use it on a deity simply because of scale. A weaker deity could not use this ability to destroy a stronger deity. This is not to say that there are not beings who can fight a deity on equal (for a given value of equal, at least) footing who could use this ability on them: primordials, demon lords, archdevils, etc etc.

You asked about beings lesser than a god- mortals, no. Godlikes, yes.

 

[LordGriffin1000]

You might be getting caught up on the wrong details.

Unname is an ability of Truenamers to erase a creature's Truename from existence, with a specific magical means of being brought back (notably one weaker than the stuff that brings back divine entities). Their Truename is the fundamental framework for their existence- their concept, to put it as VSBW puts it. A normal Truenamer could not possibly use it on a deity simply because of scale. A weaker deity could not use this ability to destroy a stronger deity. This is not to say that there are not beings who can fight a deity on equal (for a given value of equal, at least) footing who could use this ability on them: primordials, demon lords, archdevils, etc etc.

You asked about beings lesser than a god- mortals, no. Godlikes, yes.

I see. Well, if I understand what you're saying correctly then I guess High-Godly is okay.

 

[Qawsedf234]

Now I'm confused. So they can use it but can't use it on Gods, so how do we know Gods can reform from such levels of destruction if the lesser characters can't effect them but the stronger characters just negate it?.

Gods are explicitly immune to the powers of a mortal mage. So barring outliers no mortal mage's magic can ever effect a god. So if a Turename was used on them they'd just negate it.

Gods fighting Gods is already covered. A God of weaker rank cannot get through the resistance of a superior God in most cases, and Gods of equal/greater rank can already perma-kill another God because they can bypass their resistances.

Finally when a deity is killed its never in a High-Godly fashion and the closest usage to True naming in the Last Word just auto-kills every God it hits. Overall to get High-Godly you'd have to assume a scenario that has never canonically happened with beings that have never used the ability to get High-Godly. Which is why I don't think the rating is warranted.

 

[Mr. Bambu]

The Last Word is a lot more than simple Truenaming, though- using it as a form of contradiction doesn't really track. Otherwise, Qawsedf is correct, High-Godly only works if you run the stated rules to their logical conclusion, no explicit feat has occurred (barring some vague maybes and implications- the God of Humans being able to return if his name is remembered, an example mentioned earlier, may well be meant to relate to all of this).

 

[LordGriffin1000]

Gods are explicitly immune to the powers of a mortal mage. So barring outliers no mortal mage's magic can ever effect a god. So if a Turename was used on them they'd just negate it.

Gods fighting Gods is already covered. A God of weaker rank cannot get through the resistance of a superior God in most cases, and Gods of equal/greater rank can already perma-kill another God because they can bypass their resistances.

Finally when a deity is killed its never in a High-Godly fashion and the closest usage to True naming in the Last Word just auto-kills every God it hits. Overall to get High-Godly you'd have to assume a scenario that has never canonically happened with beings that have never used the ability to get High-Godly. Which is why I don't think the rating is warranted.

The Last Word is a lot more than simple Truenaming, though- using it as a form of contradiction doesn't really track. Otherwise, Qawsedf is correct, High-Godly only works if you run the stated rules to their logical conclusion, no explicit feat has occurred (barring some vague maybes and implications- the God of Humans being able to return if his name is remembered, an example mentioned earlier, may well be meant to relate to all of this).

This is a weird one for me then but given I'm more the type to have the visual proof, I'll agree with Qawsedf234 on the matter.