Changes to Devils and Demons

[Lonely Tylenol]

I streamline it down to two: orcs and ogres. It works great. You should try it some time.

I actually use all kobolds and goblins. OTOH, my goblins have a hive intelligence and are artificers; something like a cross between an evil tinker gnome and a warhammer ork.

 

[Scholar & Brutalman]

One bit I particularly liked:

The Hells are the devils' prison, and it is difficult for them to get out without mortal aid.

Now they have a reason to want to be summoned, and a reason to tell said summoners that they're willing to serve him, you just have to sign here first, don't worry about the little details, I'll fill them in later...


And for my opinion on Erinyes, I'll repost something I wrote over at rpgnet:

Oh, and my opinion on the Erinyes for whoever wants it: they should be the LN replacements for the Inevitables, who suck.

The Erinyes should of course serve Nemesis, who I think should be the LN goddess for the implied setting - she's real world, she fits the alignment and she has the most metal name ever!.

 

[pemerton]

I streamline it down to two: orcs and ogres. It works great. You should try it some time.

Agreed. Although I also use Gnolls and Lizardfolk as more fringe/wilderness humanoids, wherease Orcs and Ogres are the humanoids who interact in an interesting fashion with other civilisations (as is shown by the existence of Half-Orcs and Half-Ogres).

 

[AFGNCAAP]

I think the change is an interesting one, and I personally prefer it compared to the 2nd ed. reimaging.

However, I usually lumped all of the demons, devils, daemons/`loths, demodands, hordelings, and even slaads into one big "fiend" category, with the `loths at the top of the chain, manipulating all of the other fiends into doing their bidding.

One idea I was intending to use, and it's an idea I think could have worked for 4e, was to have Devils be an advanced sort of demon (akin to hobgoblins and bugbears being more potent versions of goblins). Even have "devil" be a title of potent demons.

However, the new devil/demon split works well. I could care less about the rebranding of the succubus--just as long as they look the same & some hot gamer girls feel compelled to cosplay them at conventions...

... I mean, what?

 

[JoeGKushner]

I mentioned it on another board, but I wonder if we'll see any other merging based on simliarities.

orc, ogrillion, ogre, hill giant, troll, kobold, goblin, hobgoblin, bugbear, etc....

 

[Malhost Zormaeril]

...She did what she felt was for the greater good. She was probably an otherwise law-abiding citizen. Is she now chaotic because she broke a serious law in her homeland? It's legal in other places! But whether she is lawful or chaotic I bet through all of it she is a Good person , although some might argue the that what she did was Evil. (...) But what is lawful and what is not depend on what the local laws are.

I don't know; I will reserve my opinion on the girl, but what I really think is, you're missing the point. It doesn't take the disrespect of one law (or one specific law) to turn you from Lawful to Chaotic. What matters is, do you believe you're better off with or without laws? Or better, Is it better to have organisation or to let things happen at their own pace? If you're Lawful, you'll naturally want to follow laws, or set them up. You'll try to cooperate with others to achieve your goals (be they fair or foul) and try to set up an environment where everyone can know what is expected of them.

On the other hand, if you're Chaotic, you have little use for strictures; everyone has tugged along at their own pace, and somehow, they've found an equilibrium. You thrive off that equilibrium, pursuing your own goals (be they fair or foul) without much heed as to what others expect of you.

So it was the same with Devils and Demons: Devils/Baatezu feel the need to work within a defined structure, and subvert it to their own baleful needs. Thus, they are deceivers and slanderers, but they try to work from within mortal society. Demons/Tanar'ri have little need for this -- they are rapers and destroyers, and will bring to ruin all that is good and fair by fire and steel, if need be; in fact, they much prefer that method!

Of course, even if alignment is de-emphasized, the ghosts of those ancestral roles still remain. Because, in the end, they're still very interesting archetypes for villains the heroes can be set against.

 

[Merlion]

I don't know; I will reserve my opinion on the girl, but what I really think is, you're missing the point. It doesn't take the disrespect of one law (or one specific law) to turn you from Lawful to Chaotic. What matters is, do you believe you're better off with or without laws? Or better, Is it better to have organisation or to let things happen at their own pace? If you're Lawful, you'll naturally want to follow laws, or set them up. You'll try to cooperate with others to achieve your goals (be they fair or foul) and try to set up an environment where everyone can know what is expected of them.

On the other hand, if you're Chaotic, you have little use for strictures; everyone has tugged along at their own pace, and somehow, they've found an equilibrium. You thrive off that equilibrium, pursuing your own goals (be they fair or foul) without much heed as to what others expect of you.
.

But see, most people dont really give a flip about either of those things. Most people want to be safe, and they want to be able to persue the things that make them happy. They generally only care about laws, or the lack thereof, insofar as they help or hinder those goals.

Most people who believe in and/or make laws do so for one of two reasons: to further the greater good, at least as they see it, or conversely to further whatever their own goals may be, regardless of their effects on others. Which is to say, to do Good, or Evil (or bad or wrong at least).

Likewise, most people who are totally against having laws and rules etc feel that way either because they feel it is the better/more beneficial way for people to be, or because they themselves want to be able to do whatever they want without fear of consquences. Again, basically it stems from Good and Evil, Right and Wrong, or at least peoples views of them. Generally, if people think about "Law" and 'Chaos" at all, its as means to an end, not as ends in themselves.


The closest that people usually come to being "Lawful" or "Chaotic" is one or both of two ways. One is politics...either actually being in politics, or even just a persons political views. The other is personality traits...obessive/compulsives, or just highly neat and orderly people could be said to have "lawful" personalites I suppose. But do any of those things really justify having spells to specifically affect people with that trait? Why not have "Smite People Who's Favorite Colour is Yellow?"

 

[Merlion]

For what its worth, "Law" and "Chaos" are more accurately termed "Order" and "Chaos." And the way they are presented is as more of a cosmic thing than as a political thought process in D&D.

Law and/or Order represents the idea that you see the world as a place that was planned and structured, and that structure should occur and be reinforced, and the overall the universe is better with a grand plan and structure.

Chaos is the not following a specific plan, and trusting that either the universe will work itself out without having a plan, or that the universe is destined to fall apart anyway, and since entropy is inevitable, there is no point in fretting over it.

This may be how its presented in settings like Planescape, but in core D&D "Law" and "Chaos" basically represent poltical leanings and/or personality traits that have for some reason been made part of the "alignment" system.

 

[Tewligan]

Well, they did just invalidate two of their best books, the Fiendish Codices. As someone who enjoys the history of D&D itself, this just strikes me as odd. Looks like poor Malcanthet and Castle Maure are going to have their stories rocked.

This thread nearly makes me cry in frustration. No, they did not invalidate those books, no more than Eberron invalidates the default settings. If you like those books, and they work for your campaign, keep using them. There is no reason you can't keep using the fluff put forth in those books. None.

 

[avin]

No offense, but I disagree. Good and Evil are the same as Chaos and Order or Black and White or Autumn and Spring. You fail to convince me, sorry.