D&D 4E 4E Devils vs. Demons article

[Drkfathr1]

I've moved away from the Great Wheel cosmology myself, so some of these changes don't bother me, and it sounds as though any "big" changes can be easily incorporated into my home setting. But if not, I can always ignore them, and keep my cosmology the way it is now. Not a big deal.

As for the difference between Demons and Devils, I like! This is something I've been doing on my own anyways, and really, isn't a huge change.

I think some of the Design articles we're seeing are only giving us brief glimpses that lead to unintended generalizations. So I wouldn't worry too much about Demons "being dumb" yet, or "Elemental Planes are killed".

 

[Knight Otu]

If Demons are like that I will be happy. But I am worried that they will be not like that. But all I can do for now is to hope for the best and wait for the MM.

Well, it's how I'm reading the article, at least, but since we're taking different things away from it, we do have to wait and hope to see who is right. I think it's clear that most people, me included, would not be happy if we got the dumb brutes you are afraid we'll get.

 

[Lonely Tylenol]

Seems like a change to Tharizdun

Tharizdun's worship in WG4 seemed like a sham to hide his true nature. Elemental Evil was a put-on religion used as a cloak.

Now it has a basis in the "reality" of the planes.

Where's the pseudo-religious cult?

While I understand what you're implying, I don't really get it from the preview. It looks like Tharizdun is still Tharizdun, bad guy supreme. He just happened to create the abyss one day when no one was looking. I'd be surprised if he was really associated with the abyss in any way (except perhaps being imprisoned there), or with elemental evil. It's just an example of how nasty he is, that he corrupted something to the point that it now produces an infinite number of monsters that want to destroy everything in existence. It fits with his character, I think.

 

[Kobold Avenger]

I'm against the changes as it basically makes demons stupid. Chaotic Evil is not Chaotic Stupid.

 

[JamesM]

While I understand what you're implying, I don't really get it from the preview. It looks like Tharizdun is still Tharizdun, bad guy supreme.

But why even use Tharizdun at all? It's not like he's exactly a household name, even among D&D players of long standing, let alone those of more recent vintage. He's a very specifically Greyhawk deity.

Truthfully, it's this kind of sloppiness that makes me fear 4E. If Greyhawk, even the watered-down bastardized version we got in 3E, is no longer the default setting, then why nick its deities and use them in odd ways? I honestly don't see what is gained by using the name Tharizdun except perhaps to tick off those of us who prefer the original version. Bad enough Complete Champion totally borked his lore, but now this? Count me out.

 

[Lord Zack]

It seems to me that the only change they've made is to make Demons and Devils more 1 dimensional. So only devils can come up with complex plots and demons are what? Mindless mobs waiting in the dungeon to be killed for exp? And Devils don't get they're hands dirty once in a while? They were this way before, but they also had room to be used in other roles too. Chaotic does not necessarily mean destructive brute. In 3e and earlier demons could spread chaos in more subtle ways, doesn't mean they're lawful. Likewise a Devil doesn't always try to
corrupt his enemies. Sometimes he spreads dominion by brute force. Doesn't mean he's chaotic.

 

[Stormtalon]

I'm against the changes as it basically makes demons stupid. Chaotic Evil is not Chaotic Stupid.

I'm not seeing that, honestly. It just means that whatever plans a demon makes, whatever convoluted, twisted ideas they might come up with, they're all geared towards a singular focus -- that being destruction simply for the sake of destruction.

It doesn't mean that they can't be clever, crafty and roundabout, especially in regards to the more powerful demons and even moreso the demon princes. It just means they're not interested in power for the sake of power. Think of The Joker in Tim Burton's "Batman." Definitely Chaotic Evil. Definitely after destruction and death for the sake of destruction and death. However he was also definitely intelligent, canny and capable of long-term plans -- just ones that most people would find the reasoning behind to be totally incomprehensible.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

But why even use Tharizdun at all? It's not like he's exactly a household name, even among D&D players of long standing, let alone those of more recent vintage. He's a very specifically Greyhawk deity.

Truthfully, it's this kind of sloppiness that makes me fear 4E. If Greyhawk, even the watered-down bastardized version we got in 3E, is no longer the default setting, then why nick its deities and use them in odd ways? I honestly don't see what is gained by using the name Tharizdun except perhaps to tick off those of us who prefer the original version. Bad enough Complete Champion totally borked his lore, but now this? Count me out.

It's the Ultimate Marvelization of the D&D metasetting. The Ultimate universe pissed off some Marvel fans, but it also succeeded in bringing in a whole lot of new readers and bringing back lots of lapsed ones. It's impossible to know yet whether Ultimate D&D will do the same, but it's clearly a similar impulse with the designers.

 

[JamesM]

It's the Ultimate Marvelization of the D&D metasetting. The Ultimate universe pissed off some Marvel fans, but it also succeeded in bringing in a whole lot of new readers and bringing back lots of lapsed ones. It's impossible to know yet whether Ultimate D&D will do the same, but it's clearly a similar impulse with the designers.

I think you're probably right. It's for this reason that I'm inclined to see 4E as really Dungeons & Dragons 2.0, a reboot and re-imagining of the game that draws on what has gone before but also makes quite a number of changes. In a very real sense, it won't be the same game as before, even if it's heavily inspired by what went before.

 

[Shroomy]

BTW, here are some comments from the article's author Chris Sims, taken from the WoTC Boards:

In this short article, I couldn't do much more than make generalities.

Demons are anything but cut-and-dry killers, but they come off that way overall. Of course, as 4e develops, all the fiends will get more treatment.