Pathfinder 1E Are demons and devils too similar?

[VelvetViolet]

This article (http://www.wizards.com/DnD/Article.aspx?x=dnd/drdd/20070924) is old news, but I think it raises an interesting point. Demons and devils have more similarities than they do differences. Then you have "daemons," which is a funny misspelling of "demon." What's next? Daevils, daimons, daimones, deamons, deemons, deevels, deevils, deveels? (All these funny words are actually used in literature and poetry dating back up to two hundred years.)

Could demons and devils in Pathfinder benefit from more differentiation, a la 4th edition?

 

[Crothian]

They may look similar mechanically, but books like Books of the Damned can really help it so the creatures have very different motives and the way they behave.

I have no idea what 4e did to make them different

 

[Morrus]

It's not so much "are they too similar?" as "do we really need to divide them into two groups?" Demons, devils, daemon, all those other words you used... they're all the same thing really.

I prefer the idea of getting rid if the big categories, and just making each demondevildaemonthing unique.

 

[Ruzak]

I like having two or three fundamentally different groups, and I like that the differences are small and subtle. It somehow adds a level of mystery. We mortals can't tell the difference, but there is a whole lot more going on.

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

They may look similar mechanically, but books like Books of the Damned can really help it so the creatures have very different motives and the way they behave.

I have no idea what 4e did to make them different

Demons have Variable Resistance, and are elemental. Devils are immortals. (In effect, devils seem more like fallen angels.) But the things that tie demons or devils together aren't large, and there's little advise on diverging their behavior.

In 3e, the biggest differences between demons and devils seemed to be what cut through their DR and regeneration.

 

[Olfan]

As a Planescape freak, I only see huge differences between the baatezu and the tanar'ri. To call them the same nullifies the Blood War and a bunch of other awesome stories. Demons and devils are different. Daemons to me fill a role that demons should. If I were to remove any group, I'd remove them.

 

[DaveMage]

I like them how they are in 1E/2E/3E/Pathfinder cuz that's what I've grown up on.

 

[SkidAce]

My devils were once angels that have become tainted by fighting the demons. Tainted by the very thing that tainted whatever the demons were before they were demons...who's next? Humanity?

Scholars once suggested that a third race of demon tainted creatures existed, that had once been humans, but the scholars were all assassinated by a band of mercenary demons with an oddly spelled name.

 

[Stormonu]

D&D has spent a vast amount on verbiage to differentiate the two, but most other games haven't bothered to make a distinction. Overall, I wouldn't mind if they were all squished into one creature type, as overall I don't use them much in games.

 

[Mishihari Lord]

Yes, I think they're too similar. I'd like a distinction to really set them apart. The one I favor is that demons are mindless destructive beasts alone, but get enough of them together and they form a kind of groupmind. The devils on the other hand are individually intelligent, often very intelligent.