D&D 5E Asmodeus in 5E Faerun

Parmandur · Jun 12, 2015

Technically, as I understand it, the Forgotten Realms are on lease to TDT/WOTC; there are, stupendously improbable, conditions that would return ot to Greenwood, and he retains certain rights, such as fiat "what I say goes, without review by Wizards" though he had no control over WOTC products. It is a peculiar set-up.

Irennan · Jun 12, 2015

Alzrius said:
Can you expound on this? What is this "contract" you speak of, and how exactly does it give Ed the ability to declare what is and isn't "canon" short of WotC's say-so?

It's part of the original agreement between Ed and TSR that what he writes or says about the Realms is canon unless contradicted by official published material. This agreement passed on to WotC. IIRC, it has been stated even in public, at some GenCon panels, and in discussions over the Candlekeep forums, where Ed speaks through a poster named The Hooded One.

Irennan · Jun 12, 2015

Mephista said:
There's absolutely no proof one way or another if Asmodeus is going to stay a god, or not. In 4e, he was considered one, but even then, he was never part of the human standard pantheon.

I'm personally leaning towards yes, still a god, but vastly reduced in importance. They're likely going to be doing the same thing with Asmodeus they did with the succubus. Are they devils or demons? Answer - make it so that its both. Why? 1) We've seen hints about ashmedai cultists in FR. 2) 5e prides itself on "the everyman edition." They're going to keep enough to play any edition, and keeping Asmodeus as a god allows people that like him to continue using him, but doesn't hurt anyone that doesn't want to use him. 3) Asmodeus has had the option of being treated as a god in any number of source materials.

http://dnd.wizards.com/articles/features/excerpt-bone-devil in that excerpt from the MM it is said that Asmodeus has the power of a lesser god (wich is a huge jump from greater, since he's going to lose Azuth, probably in the next Erin Evans' novels, which is how he attained godhood in first place), but it doesn't say that he is one . At this point the difference becomes subtle or depends on the perspective, since what makes a god such? Archdevils can be worshipped like gods, but they don't have portfolios, spheres of influence and so on and cannot grant divine spells. But really, from a narrative PoV the difference is almost non existent, since both kind of creatures are godlike beings.

Mirtek · Jun 12, 2015

If you want to know Asmodeus' status in 5e, look no further than the MM, it spoils his final status in the entry to the listings of the devils.

If you want to know how this came to be, that will be answered in the next (maybe next couple of) book by Erin M. Evans.

Irennan · Jun 12, 2015

Parmandur said:
Technically, as I understand it, the Forgotten Realms are on lease to TDT/WOTC; there are, stupendously improbable, conditions that would return ot to Greenwood, and he retains certain rights, such as fiat "what I say goes, without review by Wizards" though he had no control over WOTC products. It is a peculiar set-up.

To my understanding, he still can't say major things that WotC haven't agreed on. If you ask him for the details about how waterdhavian nobles party, then yes, but he won't say that -for example- a deity is back if WotC doesn't want said deity to be back. Erin Evans hinted in her ''questions for'' thread over Candlekeep that the RPG department has a quite strict control over how the Realms look like.

In the case of the reply that I linked, Ed tried to get WotC's answer about how Tiamat all of sudden was trapped in Baator, when it wasn't the case in the Realms. Since WotC didn't have an answer, he gave his own (which is therefore ''official'', unless WotC comes in and says no).

TarionzCousin · Jun 12, 2015

Asmodeus is very, very sneaky.

He insidiously founded a boardgame company in France to secretly infiltrate society to further his agenda.

Alzrius · Jun 12, 2015

Irennan said:
It's part of the original agreement between Ed and TSR that what he writes or says about the Realms is canon unless contradicted by official published material. This agreement passed on to WotC. IIRC, it has been stated even in public, at some GenCon panels, and in discussions over the Candlekeep forums, where Ed speaks through a poster named The Hooded One.

No offense, but this...really sounds like one of those industry rumors that takes on a life of its own. Is there a link to someplace where Ed himself (or a TSR/WotC employee) talks about this in more detail?

EDIT: What I'm trying to say is that, while it's entirely believable that Ed Greenwood has some sort of business agreement with TSR/WotC regarding the Realms - it is his creation after all - a particular clause of "what he says is 'canon' unless the company says otherwise" just strikes me as very odd. Most business contracts are concerned with, well, business. Having a section of it call out something like "setting canonity," which is a concern only to the fans, seems odd to say the least.

Irennan · Jun 12, 2015

Alzrius said:
No offense, but this...really sounds like one of those industry rumors that takes on a life of its own. Is there a link to someplace where Ed himself (or a TSR/WotC employee) talks about this in more detail?

EDIT: What I'm trying to say is that, while it's entirely believable that Ed Greenwood has some sort of business agreement with TSR/WotC regarding the Realms - it is his creation after all - a particular clause of "what he says is 'canon' unless the company says otherwise" just strikes me as very odd. Most business contracts are concerned with, well, business. Having a section of it call out something like "setting canonity," which is a concern only to the fans, seems odd to say the least.

Setting canonicity is not of concern only to the fans, it is of concern to the publishers as well because it establishes a continuity, which is rather important to a setting like the Forgotten Realms (or any setting with a storyline, really). If anything, setting canonicity is of more concern to the copyrights holders than it is to players/DMs, as individual games can easily diverge from ''canon'' --and should, if it leads to a more enjoyable experience for the people involved--.

Anyway, I tried to search over the Candlekeep forums, and here you go:

http://forum.candlekeep.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=17833&whichpage=1#422069

Remember that ''The Hooded One'' often speaks for Ed Greenwood himself over Candlekeep (and no, she is not an impostor, she is just a dear friend of the creator of the Realms, and has been delivering his answers to people who have questions for him for like ten years now).

Alzrius · Jun 12, 2015

Irennan said:
Setting canonicity is not of concern only to the fans, it is of concern to the publishers as well because it establishes a continuity, which is rather important to a setting like the Forgotten Realms (or any setting with a storyline, really). If anything, setting canonicity is of more concern to the copyrights holders than it is to players/DMs, as individual games can easily diverge from ''canon'' --and should, if it leads to a more enjoyable experience for the people involved--.

Except that in this case, that's a moot point anyway. If they own the intellectual property rights, or have them during a period where they're licensed, then there is no need to carve out an "he decides canon, except for us" clause, since that would be completely redundant. That is to say, since the publishers are already the ones who ultimately decide what's canon and what isn't, the distinction as to Ed's status is meaningless.

Anyway, I tried to search over the Candlekeep forums, and here you go:

http://forum.candlekeep.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=17833&whichpage=1#422069

Remember that ''The Hooded One'' often speaks for Ed Greenwood himself over Candlekeep (and no, she is not an impostor, she is just a dear friend of the creator of the Realms, and has been delivering his answers to people who have questions for him for like ten years now).

Thanks for the link. That said, I still find this to have a few too many degrees of separation to be what I'd call reliable. We have a third-party speaking for another party in generalities with regards to an unverifiable contract clause. That's a pretty big grain of salt.

To be clear, I'm not calling The Hooded One (or you, for that matter) in any way dishonest; I just think that there's a lot of room for something to be misinterpreted when it's going through this many sources, like in a game of telephone. If THO is misremembering a point that Ed only mentioned offhandedly about a contract that he hasn't looked at in years, then it's easy for minor points to be taken as something that they're really not.

Or, to put it another way, "Ed's friend said so" doesn't rise to the level of being a valid citation.

Irennan · Jun 12, 2015

@Alzrius Well, Ed trusts her to speak on his behalf, and she has done that for more than 10 years now (she has basically become his voice), this is quite enough for me (and for many others, including the admins of the FR wiki, since they accept Ed's answers as valid references for info contained in articles). Also, from this link : http://forum.candlekeep.com/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=1854&&whichpage=1#30938 it emerges that THO owns a copy of said contract (sure, she could be lying and making everything up, but I mean, what would be the point of that?).

Besides, this matter is non neglectable, and the info about Ed's word being canon has been told multiple times and on multiple occasions (as I said, even at a GenCon panel). If it weren't the case, surely Ed or anyone else would have clarified. Especially since he and THO contact each other quite often (she is one of his players in his original world campaign, IIRC).

Except that in this case, that's a moot point anyway. If they own the intellectual property rights, or have them during a period where they're licensed, then there is no need to carve out an "he decides canon, except for us" clause, since that would be completely redundant. That is to say, since the publishers are already the ones who ultimately decide what's canon and what isn't, the distinction as to Ed's status is meaningless.

Perhaps this is something that Ed required as part of the contract... Also, it is not as meaningless as you make it to be. I have made an example in another post. There are matters (basically the major stuff) where Ed will say only what WotC has agreed on (for example, if a deity is back or not), but this is a way for details on other matters, which DMs/players could be interested in, but that aren't and (by their nature) wouldn't easily be published in books (for example, the details on how a religious ritual is performed, sayings, typical food, attitudes in certain religious communities or towns/regions towards certain matters or other stuff like that), to have an ''official'' source. Or in this current state of the Realms, with WotC basically refusing to give a broad update of the setting, Ed's word essentially is the only official source that we have (when he doesn't run into NDAs).