Changes to Devils and Demons

[pawsplay]

I don't see the need for this: sucubbus methods and allegiances are very different from those of the erinyes.

I suppose the reasoning is that they only need one kind of hawt chixx0rs with bat wings. I consider that pretty weak reasoning. I mean, you can never have too much of that....

But seriously, in my campaign, I was using erinyes in their avenger role as servants of Hekate.

 

[pawsplay]

To clarify, I would almost be surprised if there were no fundamentalist group that latched onto the whole, " We killed God " aspect of the devils background. Yes, similar things happened in other religions, but there aren't exactly a lot of devout followers of the Olympians running around. It's like asking for a resurgence of anti-D&D movement.

No publicity is bad publicity.

 

[occam]

The twisted little origin for gelugons might be a really nifty idea, but we'll see how the fluff handles this. I can be won over on this one. 'loth origin gelugons, bound by contract and chaffing against it. This could really be developed into some cool stuff. EDIT: 10 minutes later, I'm digging this one.

Me, too (provisionally, until we see the full extent of the changes).

Merging succubi and erinyes is a mistake. A really bad mistake. I can't immediately see how to reconcile this with the material already out there, and even produced in the past year. Hmm. Jacobs did some really awesome material with Malcanthet and her rivals, and this change really makes moving them forward into 4th difficult, unless we want to have succubi/erinyes populating both Baator and the Abyss, having split in an ancient ideological schism (or the CE ones having been perverted by X Abyssal lord, obyrith, etc). The in-game rationalization here needs to be amazing or else this change may really, really present difficulties.

Ditto. Changes in fluff are easy enough to ignore, but crunchy overhauls are irritating.

 

[GSHamster]

Wait, if devils are angels who betrayed their god, does it mean that in 4e all gods (including evil ones) use angels as their servants?

I think it's implied that it was a good god. Put me in the camp of liking the change.

As for the succubus/erinyes thing, I'm not sure I really see "avenging" as a devilish trait. Conforming to the traditional sins (Lust, in this case) seems like a more solid plan for the new devils.

 

[Reaper Steve]

Wait, if devils are angels who betrayed their god, does it mean that in 4e all gods (including evil ones) use angels as their servants?

I would like it if the deault setting had just that. Astral and/or etheral planes, elemental planes, and then just 'heavens' and 'hells'...without the Great Wheel. Save that for Planescape, but for the new vanilla D&D, all I need is angels and demons/devils.

 

[Shemeska]

Speaking of which, are we even going to have a Far Realm in 4e?

With Cordell on the writing team, I think it's a safe assumption that the Far Realm will eventually appear in some form or another.

 

[Aexalon]

On the temptresses: as much as I like the name Erinyes (greek origin, the Furies), the niche of the seductress fiend mythologically belongs to the Succubi (jewish origin, via Lilith) lock, stock and barrel.

Edit: GSHamster beat me to it.

As for the succubus/erinyes thing, I'm not sure I really see "avenging" as a devilish trait. Conforming to the traditional sins (Lust, in this case) seems like a more solid plan for the new devils.

 

[Szatany]

I think it's implied that it was a good god. Put me in the camp of liking the change.

I don't think it matters. If the only way to become a devil is to betray your god (as I understood from the article), then devils don't serve any gods. Demons might, but I have a feeling that they are independant force on their own.

Another possibility is that each god's entry states what type of outsiders he commands. There are demons, slaadi, formians, yugoloths, angels, archons, and so on.

 

[Shade]

Merging succubi and erinyes is a mistake. A really bad mistake. I can't immediately see how to reconcile this with the material already out there, and even produced in the past year. Hmm. Jacobs did some really awesome material with Malcanthet and her rivals, and this change really makes moving them forward into 4th difficult, unless we want to have succubi/erinyes populating both Baator and the Abyss, having split in an ancient ideological schism (or the CE ones having been perverted by X Abyssal lord, obyrith, etc). The in-game rationalization here needs to be amazing or else this change may really, really present difficulties.

Ugh. This is the first thing I've seen than makes we want to steer far, far away from 4e.

 

[pawsplay]

I don't think it matters. If the only way to become a devil is to betray your god (as I understood from the article), then devils don't serve any gods. Demons might, but I have a feeling that they are independant force on their own.

Another possibility is that each god's entry states what type of outsiders he commands. There are demons, slaadi, formians, yugoloths, angels, archons, and so on.

Does Asmodeus still rule the devils, then? Hm...