Changes to Devils and Demons

[Remathilis]

Color me Impressed...

I wonder what other demon/devils got remixed? Pit Fiend/Balor? Imp/Quasit?

I like the new flavor, but I am a bit saddened to see the classic era write-up go...

 

[Simia Saturnalia]

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.

Sign me up for some of this.

I certainly hope these suspicions hold water; with reduced mechanical effects for alignment I hold out hope that "angels" can represent a type of being rather than carrying the weight of alignment by implication.

Or supposing "good" and "evil" have a lot more to do with their relationship to the setting's gods than any specific behaviors...angels become "good" because they're keeping the world together in the face of devilish corruption and demonic horror, even if it means breaking a couple hundred people on the wheel in the process...alright, probably not, but I can dream.

 

[Minicol]

From Rich Baker's blog-



http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=906386

I don't think I like the sound of this. It's cutting a bit too close to real religions for me.

I don't like this change, not because it is a change of rules, but because it is a change in monsters. I HATE changes in monsters. I HATED the change for instance in the graoning spirits from 2.X to 3.X.

Why so ? Because if ultimately which rule set I use is not so important for me in the end, ADAPTING my HUGE libraries of adventures is WAY harder if not only the powers of the monster are different, but the actual monster coming after a name is not the same;

And if the background of the monster changes as well... well this is the worst case.

And quite frankly, contrary to some other 4.x changes that were discussed, I do not see any reasons why this one was necessary.

Anyways, I have probably a hundred or more 3.x books to read yet, and it would be a shame not to use all this stuff on my poor, poor, unsuspecting players, would it not ?

Mwahhaha !

So in any event, I will NOT convert at launch.

 

[an_idol_mind]

This strikes me as a change that would be better introduced in a new campaign setting rather than in the core books. It tosses out a lot of the very interesting demon and devil culture that has evolved in the game's loose continuity for 30 years. The change itself isn't a bad one, but it is one more thing that will alienate players of older editions.

 

[Wormwood]

I think that the new direction for the game is putting less emphasis on keeping "story" elements consistent with previous editions. Much like there is little emphasis on keeping mechanics elements from a previous edition just for the sake of them being "sacred cows".

If this is true then I'm more optimistic about 4e than ever.

Break the Great Wheel and 30 years of cosmological cruft and start anew.

 

[Minicol]

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

With due respect, for me it is absolutely the opposite.

one man's rules is another ... oh well, let's be frank I don't like any change

 

[Wormwood]

It's like asking for a resurgence of anti-D&D movement.

*Cha-Ching*

 

[Ry]

Sweet. I'm stoked for the new devils and demons. I just hope they put a little of that fluff in the SRD, otherwise I'll just have to make up my own anyway.

 

[olshanski]

I actually don't mind what they are doing with demons and devils.

I just hope they leave Baatezu and Tanar'ri alone!

 

[Nine Hands]

I like it.

At least now there is a story behind the stuff and its right in the MM not buried in loads of Planescape material.

And I am not knocking Planescape which I love dearly, but this origin at least sparked some cool ideas already and that means a good deal when it comes to D&D