D&D 4E Angels in 4e: a possible future problem

[LoneWolf23]

Angels in fourth Edition are no longer paragons of Good, but are emotionless servants of the gods, both good and evil. That's all well and good, but it opens up a potential issue.. All those folks who proclaim high and loud that D&D is "Demonic" will be able to point at Angel monsters and say "See! They promote the idea of slaying Angels! With Demonic characters, no less!"

...I'm not saying I don't like the idea. I love the notion of Angels as emotionless servants of the gods. But it does leave the game more open to crticism from the religious loonies.

 

[Khuxan]

From what I've heard of the 80s (I wasn't even alive then), the controversy and fuss actually drove up the sales of D&D, getting it free publicity and making it seem like rebellion against the establishment. Maybe this will do the same.

Given I haven't heard complaints about WoW allowing you to play an undead warlock, and EQ a dark elf shadowknight, it seems 'dark' fantasy has become accepted.

 

[Masquerade]

Given I haven't heard complaints about WoW allowing you to play an undead warlock, and EQ a dark elf shadowknight, it seems 'dark' fantasy has become accepted.

I know a college student who hides the fact that he plays WoW from his religious parents. There are still Jack Chicks out there.

I also like the new direction of angels. I wouldn't mind seeing the term "angel" applied to a wider variety of creatures than it has in the past. (Have there ever been thrones or similarly odd angels in D&D?)

 

[Mallus]

To paraphrase a certain someone, so what? The religious loonies will we always have with us.

 

[The Little Raven]

But it does leave the game more open to crticism from the religious loonies.

Nothing prevents stupid people from making stupid claims, so we shouldn't try to limit our behavior or our content because of that.

 

[Scholar & Brutalman]

But it does leave the game more open to crticism from the religious loonies.

But they'll criticize D&D no matter what WotC does - their minds are made up. And I don't think there's any benefit in pandering to people who want you destroyed.

 

[JohnRTroy]

I just think it's stupid. Angels are typically good, Fallen Angels are Demons or Devils. When you use the word "demon" or "devil" you have an expectation, so too with "angel"

They should have just kept the name Deva, Planetar, and Solar--they fit the Astral Mentality (as they come from Theosophy) and then you could expect them to be different alignments.

 

[Tiberius]

And I don't think there's any benefit in pandering to people who want you destroyed.

They tried it in 2e. I still shake my fist in revulsion at the terms "Baatezu" and "Tanar'ri".

 

[Relique du Madde]

I serious doubt Religious wackos will use the new edition of DnD as a scapegoat for anything considering that there are better scapegoats in todays media such as ultra violent video games , the internet, tv, movies, drugs, and music.

 

[Haffrung Helleyes]

I like it

I think it's a great change. I don't like the idea of a class of creatures that are innately, supernaturally good, independent of any diety.

Ken