Changes to Devils and Demons

[DarthDiablo]

Because they should be more than just generic EVIL PLANAR GUYS who happen to be in a war against each other. Yeah, yeah, there's three metric tons of earlier edition splats which go into history, culture, organisation, personalities and shoe size detailing just how demons and devils are different. But then your character shouldn't know that stuff either, right?

I can see that if you were confronted by some misshapen, multilimbed monstrosity with claws and fangs and drooling spittle from its gigantic maw, you might not know which particular demon it was. But the first instinctive thought for most people on seeing something like that would be "it's a demon" and that's something which is quite reasonable. There's no reason, whether from an ingame or out-of-game PoV, to start playing games like "OTOH, it could be a devil...".

The greatest point of difference, really, between demons and devils as they stand right now is that one side is CE and the other LE. Since it appears that they're going to be deemphasising the role of alignment, that no longer becomes sufficient. So there's a need to find other ways to make them mechanically and thematically distinct from each other.

They're all evil. That's all that really matters. How they are evil is really more for flavor. Does the Demon/Devil just want to saly everything in sight, or does it want to manipulate you to slay everything in sight? Which is the greater evil? The force of destruction or the force of corruption?

IMO there should only be 3 alignments: Good, Neutral & Evil. How you play each alignment shouldn't have a strict bearing in terms of Law/Chaos. I think most of us have seen the Paladin that has been shoehorned into a boring character because of the way his alignment was played. A good Paladin should be able to bend the rules (law) for the greater good. By the 9 alignment rule, that would make him NG, a clear violation of his LG restriction. Of course anyone who has played for a long time & has some commen sense will use alignment as a tool, not a restriction, but in my experiences, those people are few & far between.

Maybe the 4E rules will change that.

 

[hong]

They're all evil. That's all that really matters. How they are evil is really more for flavor. Does the Demon/Devil just want to saly everything in sight, or does it want to manipulate you to slay everything in sight? Which is the greater evil? The force of destruction or the force of corruption?

So what you're saying is that the distinction between demon and devil is unimportant, and they should just have one set of bad guys, let's call them "fiends" or something. Which is also fine by me.

 

[Elsenrail]

I don't really think the whole "devils" is a good idea. The term "devil" describes a single persona, not a race. The devil is the chief od demons in christian religion, the primordial manifestation of evil (and the other religions also have a single entity as the badass of the universe). Frankly, I dislike the whole alignments thing. To the Hells with it!

 

[delericho]

Because they should be more than just generic EVIL PLANAR GUYS who happen to be in a war against each other. Yeah, yeah, there's three metric tons of earlier edition splats which go into history, culture, organisation, personalities and shoe size detailing just how demons and devils are different. But then your character shouldn't know that stuff either, right?

The thing is, though, that most players aren't going to care that Devils are fallen angels, while Demons are alien monstrosities, any more than they currently care about them being manifestations of primordial Law and Evil (or Chaos and Evil). To most players, Evil is Evil is Evil, and all they're interested in is how best to kill it.

Now, previously, they would have the Cleric roll Knowledge(the planes), and then break out either the silver and electricity spells, or the cold iron and sonic spells. (Or, actually, they break out the holy weapons and the sonic spells, since those work equally well in both cases.) In the new edition, all they need to do is determine whether it's humanoid or not, and then do the same. Either way, the fight goes down in much the same way.

No, in order to make the encounters feel different, you need something more. Perhaps Devils act in a unified manner (and have powers and abilities to aid them in working together), while Demons are a howling mob (but have the summoning ability). Or something.

But once you have something that sets them apart other than "is humanoid and uses weapons" or "is not humanoid and doesn't use weapons" then you don't need that as a distinction. And that's good too - it means that the PCs who bothered investing in that skill actually get to use it in a meaningful manner.

 

[hong]

The thing is, though, that most players aren't going to care that Devils are fallen angels, while Demons are alien monstrosities, any more than they currently care about them being manifestations of primordial Law and Evil (or Chaos and Evil). To most players, Evil is Evil is Evil, and all they're interested in is how best to kill it.

If that's the endpoint of what they care about, then they also won't care about the current setup. So complaints about breaking canon become irrelevant.

Now, previously, they would have the Cleric roll Knowledge(the planes), and then break out either the silver and electricity spells, or the cold iron and sonic spells. (Or, actually, they break out the holy weapons and the sonic spells, since those work equally well in both cases.) In the new edition, all they need to do is determine whether it's humanoid or not, and then do the same. Either way, the fight goes down in much the same way.

From the game-mechanical viewpoint, every monster is simply a collection of hit points, attacks and abilities to be defeated by the appropriate use of skills and expenditure of resources. That applies whether you're talking about demons, devils, dragons, or Joe Orc the 1st level warrior. Your point is...?

No, in order to make the encounters feel different, you need something more. Perhaps Devils act in a unified manner (and have powers and abilities to aid them in working together), while Demons are a howling mob (but have the summoning ability). Or something.

But once you have something that sets them apart other than "is humanoid and uses weapons" or "is not humanoid and doesn't use weapons" then you don't need that as a distinction.

There are plenty of things that fit the description "is humanoid and uses weapons". Not all of them are devils.

And that's good too - it means that the PCs who bothered investing in that skill actually get to use it in a meaningful manner.

By this argument, every monster should be an amorphous blob. That way, only the use of abstract in-game skill ranks can be used to distinguish different monsters, thus rewarding players who invest in those abstract in-game skill ranks rather than lazily relying on DMs to give meaningful descriptions of encounters.

 

[avin]

IMO there should only be 3 alignments: Good, Neutral & Evil.

And make every game a Black & White good vs evil campaign? No, thank you sir. But I can agree with you to something: let's get rid of chaos and law if we get rid of good and evil too.

It's all about motivation, IMO.

 

[Doug McCrae]

And make every game a Black & White good vs evil campaign? No, thank you sir. But I can agree with you to something: let's get rid of chaos and law if we get rid of good and evil too.

Tolkienesque D&D only has good, evil and maybe neutral. It's a simple bipolar universe - goodies vs. baddies. Moorcockian D&D has three alignments - law, chaos and balance (previously known as True Neutral). Swords & sorcery D&D should have no alignment system.

 

[Lonely Tylenol]

So what you're saying is that the distinction between demon and devil is unimportant, and they should just have one set of bad guys, let's call them "fiends" or something. Which is also fine by me.

I can't speak for him, but that's not what I'm saying. I like the idea of multiple kinds of fiends, but with different unifying themes. Demons can be the lunatic, tear-you-apart monsters; devils can be the human-looking manipulative plotters; and daemons can be infernal power brokers and crooked salesmen of forbidden secrets. But alignment doesn't have to enter into it. I can imagine a lawful evil demon warlord, or a capricious chaotic evil devil. But so long as they're recognizable as demons and devils and daemons, or whatever, alignment can get scrapped as the defining characteristic.

 

[Aloïsius]

But so long as they're recognizable as demons and devils and daemons, or whatever, alignment can get scrapped as the defining characteristic.

Yup. Alignment has always been problematic once you start drawing complex personality. The proof ? Start a thread (on another board...NOT one ENWORLD) about what is the alignment of a government, a corporation, or an historic or mythical figure. For fun just try to define what was Hitler or Gengis Khan alignment : most people will agree on the Evil vs Good axis, but the Law vs Chaos axis will be much more problematic...

 

[delericho]

If that's the endpoint of what they care about, then they also won't care about the current setup. So complaints about breaking canon become irrelevant.

Agreed. But if one group of people prefer one solution over the other, and a second group don't care, then the solution to go with is the one preferred by the first group, even if they are by far a minority.

It is true, however, that there is a third group here - those who prefer the new arrangement. Whether they are numerous enough, and whether they care enough, to justify casting aside the existing canon is an open question.

From the game-mechanical viewpoint, every monster is simply a collection of hit points, attacks and abilities to be defeated by the appropriate use of skills and expenditure of resources. That applies whether you're talking about demons, devils, dragons, or Joe Orc the 1st level warrior. Your point is...?

That the difference between monsters is in the arrangement of those powers, and in how they are used. If you want Demon encounters to feel different from Devil encounters, you need more than "humanoid and used weapons" vs. not. It's also not enough to simply vary the energy resistances.

A far better idea is to set up your Devils as having abilities to work closely together (Improved Flank, or whatever), while giving Demons abilities that better fit the 'undisciplined horde' motif.

Alternatively, as I discussed in an earlier post in this thread, assign the Devil the role of mastermind, and the Demon that of brute. Advise DMs that the best use for a Devil is as a more powerful lone creature, while the Demon fits better in a horde of weaker creatures.

And so, the balanced encounter for a 20th level party might be a lone CR22 Devil, or a CR18 Demon and half a dozen of his CR14 minions.

There are plenty of things that fit the description "is humanoid and uses weapons". Not all of them are devils.

No, but when the DM says, "You see this", and plunks down the miniature of the Glabrezu, most players will be able to narrow it to Evil Outsider pretty quickly. Once you're there, getting to Demon or Devil will now be a matter of looking at the shape.

By this argument, every monster should be an amorphous blob. That way, only the use of abstract in-game skill ranks can be used to distinguish different monsters, thus rewarding players who invest in those abstract in-game skill ranks rather than lazily relying on DMs to give meaningful descriptions of encounters.

Alternatively, those DMs should be describing the activities of the Demon in a manner consistent with their alignment (or other stated behaviour, if we're insistent on de-emphasising alignment even for creatures for which it makes sense not to do so), and as being distinctly different from the activites of Devils. Players should be paying attention to the previous encounters that they have had with creatures of these types, and therefore be drawing the conclusion based on what they have previously experienced.

Rather than saying, "oh, it's got weapons - break out the lightning bolts."