D&D 4E 4e Prediction - Devils and Yuggoloths get axed

Why should WoC axe Devils and Yugoloths?
That would mean Less possible Monsters - and that would mean less Monster Books.
Nope, never cut the Tree you sit on.

Asmodeus wil be a God whereas Orcus is going to be a Monster.

Grrr, Orcus is not a Monster but a Demon Prince. He will be in the Monster Manual, true, but he is still a Demon Prince.
I hope.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

KnightErrantJR said:
Finally, Asmodeus already had a "heads up" on being a god with some of the back story that was introduced back in 2nd edition. I think this is more of a revelation or confirmation of an "open secret" in D&D, not to mention it likely gives them a good iconic LE god to use in the Player's Handbook.

Actually, you should reread some parts of the 1st edition DMG and 1st edition Deities and demigods .... There were already a few interesting lines on the subject.
 

Mouseferatu said:
But then, I've never been an enormous fan of the Blood War. (Or, for that matter, with Planescape's treatment of fiends in general. I love the Planescape setting overall, but not that aspect of it.)

Same here, the blood war always seemed to me to be a lame attempt to avoid fleshing out the forces of the upper planes and balancing them with those of the lower planes.
 

Blair Goatsblood said:
Although I imagine that they'll be rebranded as "Demons." Reasoning:

I would be astonished if this were the case.

- WOTC seems to have a program to rebuild their monsters 4e with a ruthless attitude regarding sacred cows.

Being ruthless doesn't mean slaughtering for the sake of slaughtering, or at least it shouldn't. Where something works, it should surely be retained?

And the concept of two irredeemably Evil races engaged in an interminable war over the philosophical difference between Law and Chaos? That's great stuff.

- Easier play. It's going to be easier for "joe/jane average" to play and enjoy D&D if they don't have to learn about the 3+ different kinds of "evil outsiders". Everyone knows what a demon is, but it gets confusing when there's Aggathoggs and G'hularis, etc, et al.

There's no need for the players to ever learn that stuff. And for the DM, all that's really needed is that they're different types of monsters. Of course, there's more there, but it's hardly necessary.
 

Keldryn said:
"Yugoloth" is still a terrible name. I hated it when they introduced it in the "Outer Planes" Monstrous Compendium appendix, and I still hate it. Wish they'd just ditched the "Baatezu" and "Tanar'ri" crap when they went back to calling them Devils and Demons in 3rd Edition. The sound like names out of Star Trek or something.

Totally, and I like it when the Balor was just the name of one Type VI demon.
 

I can imagine we won't see yugoloths in the 4e Monster Manual, but only because of a limited page count. The issues mentioned here are just no reason for me why devils and yugoloths should be banished from 4e or merged with the daemons.

The blood war is just too good and interesting to not have it.
 

mhacdebhandia said:
I see no reason to start calling all the different types of fiends "demons" when there's a perfectly good word for them - "fiends".

My opinion exactly.

BTW, when did 'Blood War' appear as a concept? Was it during 2e times? I wasn't playing D&D in those days, so probably missed it (but from what I gather about it I didn't like the concept and have never used it - I've always had a situation much more similar to that which Mouseferatu describes)
 

mhacdebhandia said:
I see no reason to start calling all the different types of fiends "demons" when there's a perfectly good word for them - "fiends".

I don't believe, at this stage, that Wizards of the Coast will make serious changes to the canon cosmology.

I don't think they will either. Those extra names offer extra monsters to cram into extra monster manuals of dubious usefulness.
 



Remove ads

Top