Excerpts: Angels

[TerraDave]

Oh boy, yet another extraplaner threat...

Ok, but not great. And whatever happened to allies? Not all the time, but some times allies can be a good thing.

Also: I suspect that they changed angels from manifestations of a god's will to superpowered astral race, is so that people can summon them without getting into metaphysical arguments about what their deity wants, who's calling the shots, etc.

If each god makes angles...wouldn't they make them different? For this whole approach to work, each god has to have the same "angle of valor", this implies a common origin.

 

[AllisterH]

The whole angel thing is one of the few fluff changes that 4e made that I'm not really on board with. I understand why they did it. Even evil deities should have some kind of divine servant. But to me "Angels" should always be champions of good. I personally don't think heroic PCs should ever have to fear angel's appearing. I will probably house rule the name or something and keep the stats. I'll have to think about it.

I think this is an aspect of people used to having gods be "good". Take the word "radiant", "holy" and "divine". I betcha most people would assume that it refers to something that is pure and godly.

However, Bane is most assuredly a god so is his presence not divine? Is his aura not radiant? For example, "unholy" seems to give connations of "not of the divine" along with it being "evil" but even Grumush has to appear radiant to orcs, wolud he not?

 

[UngeheuerLich]

The whole angel thing is one of the few fluff changes that 4e made that I'm not really on board with. I understand why they did it. Even evil deities should have some kind of divine servant. But to me "Angels" should always be champions of good. I personally don't think heroic PCs should ever have to fear angel's appearing. I will probably house rule the name or something and keep the stats. I'll have to think about it.

An angel of vengeance send after you doesn´t sound that bad to me (in principle ar least... as a player I would hate it)

What i think is a good and bad info:

good: Legionaires could eb a template to make a minion of a creature...

bad: +13 Levels and doubbling the xp seems strange to me...

raising to the Level, where the Minion XP is the same as the base creature, but attack and defense are increased to make up for no HP seems more reasonable right now...

+13 Levels is odd...

 

[Lizard]

Oh boy, yet another extraplaner threat...

Ok, but not great. And whatever happened to allies? Not all the time, but some times allies can be a good thing.

Monsters is fer killin'.

 

[hong]

Monsters is fer killin'.

Well, yes.

 

[Cadfan]

I'm a big fan of angels as remorseless hunters of the condemned.

I really love what they've done with angels in terms of theming their special abilities, particularly the Cloak of Vengeance and Coldfire Pillar abilities. The vibe these give off in combination is that the angel is sort of... transcendent, perfect and untouchable, until you beat it enough that it loses its otherworldliness and it has to fight on your level.

I'll have fun describing the angel as losing its protections at the bloodied point. Maybe it will become slightly more corporeal, and suddenly realize that it, too, can bleed.

 

[EvolutionKB]

During the great war between the gods and the primordials, angels offered themselves as warriors to the gods that best encompassed their callings, and today they continue to act as mercenary forces for anyone willing to meet their price—be it wealth, or power, or a cause worthy of their attention.

People are worrying too much about the part of this statement that pertains to wealth. They seem to be missing the last part about "cause worthy of their attention." Since angels are individuals, each individual angel picks their own cause to fight for(this can lead to the typical, if stale, idea that angels fight for the side of good)

I like what they've done with angels, even the faceless art, makes them a little more mysterious and threatening looking in my opinion. They are now a suitable combat encounter with PCs instead of something interesting to have story wise and something for the Eberronian druids to wreak more havoc with.

I'd also like to point out they it says they worked initially only for the Gods, but they'll work for anybody. That is a strong idea that they can be summoned with rituals.

 

[Mustrum_Ridcully]

Oh boy, yet another extraplaner threat...

Ok, but not great. And whatever happened to allies? Not all the time, but some times allies can be a good thing.



If each god makes angles...wouldn't they make them different? For this whole approach to work, each god has to have the same "angle of valor", this implies a common origin.

They can still be your allies. Pelor won't send an Angel of Vengeance after you, but he might send you an Angel of Valor as support.

 

[Lord Mhoram]

I can live with a Summon Angel ritual, just as long as it doesn't involve these words:
"Hail, hail, fire and snow,
Call the angel, we will go,
Far away, far to see
Friendly angel, come to me"

Naw that is the Summon Insurance Salesman in a Bad Costume ritual.

 

[AlphaAnt]

The whole angel thing is one of the few fluff changes that 4e made that I'm not really on board with. I understand why they did it. Even evil deities should have some kind of divine servant. But to me "Angels" should always be champions of good. I personally don't think heroic PCs should ever have to fear angel's appearing. I will probably house rule the name or something and keep the stats. I'll have to think about it.

That about sums up my feelings on the subject. I'll probably call them Archons or something, instead of Angels. Angels, Devils and Demons were the three terms they stayed away from in AD&D (thus the terms Baatezu and Tanar'ri), so it seems like they've brought Angels back just because they could. However, Devils and Demons still represent largely the same things they did before, and their connotation is largely similar to what they are in mythology. Angels, however, deviate from what our mythology defines them as, and that's difficult for people to bend their head around, so I think a different term is in order. Other than that, I'm OK with the change.