Changes to Devils and Demons

[Shade]

Okay, but note this - the new stuff is, as you've said, geared to folk who don't have the background to pull that off. Meaning that they're likely not familiar with the Planescape/Great Wheel mythos and don't care about it. So it's only a real blow to them if the mythos is demonstrably, factually, better than the new, easy-to-pick-up-devils-as-fallen-angels fluff. And it's obviously not, given the number of folk in this thread alone who like it.

I was actually referring to simplifying the "crunch" bits, not the flavor background.

I see many cries for simplification from long-time gamers on the boards, but I'd wager most of them wouldn't like the long-running flavor thrown out to achieve it.

 

[Desdichado]

Yeah, it's a heck of a lot of work. First, you have to change the creature type itself from devil to demon. You need to know all the traits of both creature types so it matches up. If the succubi has traits associated with the Hells, such as "hellfire touch" or somesuch, that will need to be removed. If fiends can still summon other fiends in 4e, obviously that would need to be changed. Now I'm real comfortable with monster design, so I'm sure I could pull that off, but since the new version is being geared towards folks who don't want to devote that amount of prep time, this is a real blow to them.

Nah, you don't have to do any of that. Use the stats you have and don't worry about the type matching up. Why does that matter? Fluff is free.

 

[heirodule]

Does this mean that demons and devils are no longer bound to a specific alignment? After all, to say that all lawful evil planars are humanoids while all the chaotic ones cannot be is rather rigid.

Likewise, the poor succubus shouldn't lose chaotic evil status just to fit into this new archetyping game.

Agreed. Its rather chaotic to undermine the institution of marriage by seduction. Seriously.

 

[Simia Saturnalia]

Do we know if devils and demons will actually be distinct creature types? Given what's been said about alignments in 4e, I'm doubting that there will be much - if any - difference between lawful evil outsiders and chaotic evil outsiders in terms of stats or game mechanics. I'm guessing the distinction will pretty much be all fluff and no crunch (which would work just fine for me).

I'm left with the opposite impression from the article; devils are called out as being generally humanoid, usually fighting with weapons, and often wearing armor. Which suggests to me, given the care with which releases are worded, that demons are typically non-humanoid, or at least monstrously different if so shaped, and more reliant on their own natural weapons and physiology for combat.

 

[Terraism]

I see many cries for simplification from long-time gamers on the boards, but I'd wager most of them wouldn't like the long-running flavor thrown out to achieve it.

I honestly don't think that D&D's legacy of lore and cut-and-paste, wedge-the-square-peg-into-the-round-hole mythos actually does do the game any favours. In fact, I think it's quite the opposite - that it alienates, or at least confuses, newcomers. So, for my part, yes. Throw the 30 years of flavour out the window - those of us who want it can put it back in, and it makes the game more accessible.

 

[Wormwood]

Throw the 30 years of flavour out the window - those of us who want it can put it back in, and it makes the game more accessible.

That's all I'm asking for---a clean slate.

 

[Desdichado]

I honestly don't think that D&D's legacy of lore and cut-and-paste, wedge-the-square-peg-into-the-round-hole mythos actually does do the game any favours. In fact, I think it's quite the opposite - that it alienates, or at least confuses, newcomers. So, for my part, yes. Throw the 30 years of flavour out the window - those of us who want it can put it back in, and it makes the game more accessible.

So, to borrow from Marvel comics, 4e is the "Ultimate" D&D cosmology?

 

[heirodule]

I don't like having races who are "evil by birth" in my games (smacks of too much racism to me), but a group of beings who are supposed to be the true "incarnations of evil"? That's a set of villains I can sink my teeth into.

I never get this. It seems to me you just said the same thing twice. You don't like naturally evil intelligent creatures except when you do.

 

[Shade]

So, to borrow from Marvel comics, 4e is the "Ultimate" D&D cosmology?

More like the "What if...?" cosmology. :\

 

[Terraism]

So, to borrow from Marvel comics, 4e is the "Ultimate" D&D cosmology?

I don't really follow comics all that closely, but if that's got anything to do with the Joss Whedon ones, sure!

In more seriousness, I'm guessing that was a content/history reboot? In that case, sure. The thing that baffles me is the idea that this change is going to carry over into published settings apart from the core - the presence of pseudo-Greyhawk deities in the 3x PHB certainly didn't drop Vecna, Heironeous, or Kord into Eberron and the Forgotten Realms, after all.