Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Erik Mona" data-source="post: 182657" data-attributes="member: 2174">John,I mentioned something about fallen angels, and you responded with mumbo-jumbo about the Great Wheel and how it fits into whether or not Asmodeus could be the single source of evil in the multiverse. Personally, I'm not actually interested in arguing the merits of Zoroastrian Dualism as it relates to D&D.I am, however, confident in saying that the fall of the angels is BY FAR the most interesting aspect of the Judeo-Christian creation myth in terms of what makes for cool D&Ding. It did, and continues to, boggle my mind that they didn't do anything interesting with the concept in Planescape (I believe the archon write-up in Planes of Law says that only a handful have fallen). I suspect it has to do with the arbitrary Jim Ward-inspired "clean up" of the nasty elements of D&D, a "movement" that's widely criticized on these boards and others.People in this thread seem to want _some_ trappings of Christian myth in their games, but not others. Demons and devils are fine, even embraced. Fallen celestials aren't. Weird.What makes this doubly weird to me, as the author of the fallen celestials material in Legions of Hell, is that that section of the book (at least conceptually) was almost universally praised in every review I've read of the book, with most people saying stuff like "finally, we get rules for fallen celestials."But in this thread, we've got a lot of people pointing to fallen angels as one of the "flaws" of Legions of Hell. I'm not saying that that opinion isn't valid (though I CERTAINLY disagree with it), but it is interesting to me because it's the first time I've seen this sentiment in any meaningful abundance.And, frankly, I still don't understand it. --Erik</blockquote>

Verification