• NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.

Aasimar are now . . . Devas.

More pointless flavor changes, and since it's from an FR source, yet another retcon for the Realms. *sigh*

The "point," of course, was to replace one idea with a better idea. Whether it worked or not remains to be seen, since we're probably only talking about a few lines in a book none of us have read yet.

I'm not sure that the old-model aasimar really fit in the new cosmology, since angels have been so dramatically reimagined. But establishing that they reincarnate . . . that's interesting, isn't it? Is there any other race in 4th Edition that routinely reincarnates? This gives devas a perhaps unique niche that aasimar just didn't have.
 

log in or register to remove this ad


Do I have to have an opinion on this? I'm leaning towards "OK, sure."

I mean, if I had to pick a side, I guess I'm good with it. Aasimar always was a pretty ridiculous name.

-O
 

More pointless flavor changes, and since it's from an FR source, yet another retcon for the Realms. *sigh*

It seems as if you're trying best to fulfill your user title. ;) I wonder a little why you still bother reading WotC articles? Do you hope for a surprise? Do you like your worries/predictions come true?

Probably better not to think too much about it... Everybody does his own thing...
 

Or, it's just another name for aasimar and always has been. Kinda like even some in LotR called hobbits "halflings".

Or, it's just what they call them now, since aasimar was, apparently, a Mulhorand/Unther name, and deva has risen to take it's place as the common name, since Mulhorand and Unther bit the big one.
 

It seems as if you're trying best to fulfill your user title. ;) I wonder a little why you still bother reading WotC articles? Do you hope for a surprise? Do you like your worries/predictions come true?

Probably better not to think too much about it... Everybody does his own thing...

Never underestimate the overpowering human desire to complain about something on the internet. ;p

I think I like Deva better than Aasimar, myself. I enjoy the word, and old Devas didn't really get much mileage in non Planescape settings. At least, from the campaigns I've encountered over the years.
 

Aasimar was a neat name, if a little goofy.

Deva... I don't know if I like it, but it's workable. Certainly a lot better than some of the other names WotC has thrown around as of late.

Though thinking about it, aasimar just sounds like it was made to look and sound "exotic" simply for the sake of being such; deva sounds like a much more reasonable word for celestial folk, something that "normal people" would use.

Still not sure if I like it, but it sounds a bit more reasonable.
 

Aasimar was a neat name, if a little goofy.

Deva... I don't know if I like it, but it's workable. Certainly a lot better than some of the other names WotC has thrown around as of late.

Though thinking about it, aasimar just sounds like it was made to look and sound "exotic" simply for the sake of being such; deva sounds like a much more reasonable word for celestial folk, something that "normal people" would use.

Still not sure if I like it, but it sounds a bit more reasonable.

To me, "aasimar" carries a lot of Planescape connotations. It's very much a Planescape sort of name. Since I never liked Planescape, I'm not sorry to see it go. "Deva" has more of an old-school, First Edition, before-2E-messed-everything-up-by-pandering-to-the-D&D-is-Satanism-crowd feel.
 


I'm indifferent. Both names are problematic ... I can just see someone asking to play a Diva, which I know is the wrong way to say it, but it amuses me.
 

Into the Woods

Remove ads

Top