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

[Kid Charlemagne]

Umm, that would be Brom...

"Brom's beard! This painting needs a little more burnt sienna!"

 

[Shroomy]

Overall, I like the change, but then again I was not really that devoted to the Great Wheel in the first place. For me, I think these new differences between demons and devils just follows one of 4e's overriding core design philosophies: function determines form and fluff.

 

[Wormwood]

/adds voice to the "This is freakin' awesome and *remarkably* similar to my homebrew campaign" chorus.

Honestly, I didn't think fluff would be as compelling a selling point for me as crunch.

Quel surprise!

 

[Lonely Tylenol]

I also find it interesting that Devils are evil-tainted Celestials, while Demons are evil-tainted Elementals. That makes for a rather profound difference, actually. I wonder where it will eventually lead . . . .

Expedition to the Temple of Elemental Evil?

 

[Intrope]

Man, I'm rocking with this! And I get to gloat, too: I just posted a day or so ago a post that we didn't know whether Succubi as Devils was good or bad because we didn't know the context. Now we do, and they slot in as Devils perfectly (as someone upstream put it, a Carnal Demon would not seduce anything).

BTW, why is everyone assuming a Devil=Law/Demon=Chaos model here? It's pretty clear that the various planes aren't alignment mapped--The Hells and The Abyss apparently aren't even in the same 'region' of the new Cosmology! I'm going to guess here that many Devils may well be lawful--but that they aren't inherently Lawful beings (Succubi may still be chaotics, for instance).

Also, just because a Demon is an annihalator, seeking destruction rather than dominion need not imply that they are dumb. Consider as Demonic: The Giger Alien. Various Lovecraftian Horrors. Lord Foul (The Covenant Chronicles). Thanos from Marvel[1] (when he was still a full-on villain). Hellmaster Phibrizzio from Slayers[2]. Parralax/Extant in DC (destroy the univers to remake it).

Devil seek to rule; Demons seek to destroy (often for reasons that are insane or ineffable to everyone else).

[1] His DC equivalent/source, Darkseid, is more nearly a Devil
[2] The other Monsters actually act more like Devils

 

[Lonely Tylenol]

True, however, when this new cosmology causes vast changes to existing mechanics, from the very nature of demons vs. devils, looks, powers, abilities, to the addition or removal of specific fiends (succubi, for example), it does influence anyone wishing to continue playing with older cosmologies. It may not be that bad, because anything can be fitted, re-written, re-imagined, etc, but it does add a lot of work for the DM, it is another big change for which existing campaigns will need serious adaptation.

I don't suppose it does create work for the DM. If you want to use the Great Wheel cosmology, all you have to do is say, "hey guys, we're using the Great Wheel cosmology." It's already been written, and everyone is familiar with it.

 

[Baby Samurai]

So, Glabrezu (Type III) a devil now?

 

[lukelightning]

I like this change, though in my own homebrew cosmology there is no difference between a demon and a devil, they are all "fiends" and originate in the same place...though I also do away with alignment other than a way to describe behavior.

But in core D&D, making demons array in "ravaging hordes" instead of "regimented troops" doesn't do enough to show their chaotic nature. Demons are supposed to be exemplars of chaos, it's built into their very being, yet 3.5 treats them as regular, organized, social creatures with a slightly sloppy attitude. And as others have pointed out, there are many demons that are described as what can only be described as Lawful.

If you are going to maintain a strong alignment system and a firm distinction between demons and devils, then this revision is the way to go.

And I always thought the good old "Type I, II, IV" demon system was far more suited for devils than for demons. It seems far more Lawful to have established types and ranks.

I think balors should "kill pit fiends and take their stuff" they are basically the same thing, and seem more demonic than diabolical. Mariliths? Obviously devils. Lots of demon lovers will not like this, but making them devils will give them the armies that they deserve as "master tacticians and generals." Succubus? That's iffy... as tempters they are devilish, but they don't seem to be out for some master plan, they are out to suck life and spread destruction in a very personal, one-on-one manner, so I'd leave them as demons.

Get rid of quasits, imps are the way to go for fiendish familiars. But perhaps they should be made neutral evil.... making them devils would mean that having one ties you into the devil schemes, but making them demons means you'd have an unwilling pet.

 

[FabioMilitoPagliara]

As a Mystara fan, I've got to say this sounds similar (at least in the small parts we are given here) to some of Mentzer's cosmology from the Gold Box Immortals set. Specifically, the "deific abodes" in an Astral Sea fits with Mentzer's Astral filled with myriad infinite Outer Planes.

Even the bit about the Abyss and demons could fit in with the Sphere of Entropy cosmology of the Gold Box.

Between this and the "Points of Light" notion (which strongly resembles the campaign worlds of the early D&D/AD&D modules), I'm wondering if we might see a resurgence of the Cook/Moldvay Known World in 4E.

tought the same (as an old Immortal Set fan!), and it also make me think (but less) to the old (1st ed) manual of the planes

good and good news for the devils and demons

I like it! also very simple to say that a particular prime material plane is nearere to particular "deific abodes" that compose the principal pantheons of that world

 

[Doug McCrae]

I'd have done it the other way round. Make them all a single type of entity called demons who come from Hell. As the article says, they were always very similar. I'd do away with the law/chaos bit, they're all just supernatural evil.

That said, the names and ideas presented are intriguing and evocative. I like the referencing of old D&Disms, such as Tharizdun's connection to elemental evil, combined with new ideas. A good lesson in how individual GMs can be similarly creative.