Changes to Devils and Demons

[IanB]

The big positive for me here is he never uses the words Baator or Baatezu. I'm hoping we're back to just calling devils devils and the Nine Hells the Nine Hells.

The succubus/erinyes thing in there is really the only thing that bothers me, mostly because of the impact on the whole Demonomicon series (and the Savage Tide Adventure Path.)

 

[Shade]

For some. A good, good one for others.

I'm failing to see how the benefits of this move can possibly outweigh the drawbacks.

Retconning creatures that have belonged to a specific type since 1e (or pre-1e) causes numerous problems for anyone wishing to continue campaigns or use materials from past editions.

This is a huge blow to backward compatibility. The Fiendish Codices and Demonomicon series of articles (both wildly popular and well-respected) have just been rendered flawed for reference in 4e.

I don't mind changes to the origin, or what-have-you, but changing creature types is problematic. Why not just leave them out and create something new, achieving the same end result without any of the resulting chaos? Telling me that succubi won't be included will disappoint me, but I can still hold out hope that they will be added later or can convert them myself. Telling me succubi are now devils is far more work to undo.

 

[Relique du Madde]

However, I felt a disturbance in the force, as if millions of Planescape's fan suddenly cried in horror...

This is just the first of many disturbances in the force which will be caused by the screams of Planescape fans in regards to the changes that are being made in 4e. I'm expecting that the next retconn would involve Lady of Pain or Sigil itself.

 

[Glyfair]

I think that the new direction for the game is putting less emphasis on keeping "story" elements consistent with previous editions. Much like there is little emphasis on keeping mechanics elements from a previous edition just for the sake of them being "sacred cows".

In fact, in one of the GenCon interviews one of the main designers stated they were told to design the game without being concerned about breaking the "sacred cows." Obviously that included the "profane cows."

For example, these changes aren't going to impact Eberron much at all because Eberron has:

* No Asmodeus
* No Nine Hells
* Not really much of a distinction between devils and demons anyway

Plus, WotC has avoided any serious coverage of the planes in Eberron. We have Keith giving his point of view, but that's not "canon" and we might end up with a different point of view when we see such a book.

 

[an_idol_mind]

So...is Graz'zt a demon or devil now? Because he certainly takes a humanoid appearance...

 

[Frostmarrow]

I think they are setting down the pawns so that they will act in a way to spur interesting things and adventures happen to the PCs.

Devils look humanoid so that they may make infernal deals with PCs and plot-NPCs Faust-style. (Whitout provoking initiative.)

Demons look horrible and strange so that they can scare the living daylights out of the players. (So to invite gratuitous viloence.)

I'll bet we'll see more of these changes. I.e. In the Points of Light implied setting heavy taxes are commonly exerted on the populace. Why? So that the PCs can play Robin Hood. Angels will be real powerful but they will be restrained from meddling in the Prime Material due to some hokey contract. Why? So that they must ask PCs to do the work for them.

 

[TwinBahamut]

I don't mind any changes to devils or demons myself. I never liked Great Wheel cosmology, and I always thought the demon/devil distinction as it stood was very strange. This change makes it move a bit closer to making sense. Also, I am glad the Erinyes has been folded into the Succubus. The Erinyes of myth is nothing like its classic D&D version. The ones of Greek myth are not even necessarily evil, let alone demonic or devilish, and they certainly arn't beautiful devil women with wings. They are monsterous women with beastial faces.

However I can't say that I really like this article as a whole. It simply does not go far enough. It implies the continuation of the Great Wheel as core, which seriously undermines the wonderful genericness of their "Points of Light" concept. It continues the highly confused and flawed "Polyhteism, except every god has angels serving him and acts like a Monotheistic deity" nonsense that has filled D&D so far.

I would prefer it if they just abandoned all the specifics like the Nine Hells or background story for the origins of demons entirely, and left the Monster Manual as generic and setting-free as possible. In fact, I would prefer it if there was no assumption of other planes and planehopping in the core books.

 

[Charwoman Gene]

To clarify, I would almost be surprised if there were no fundamentalist group that latched onto the whole, " We killed God " aspect of the devils background. Yes, similar things happened in other religions, but there aren't exactly a lot of devout followers of the Olympians running around. It's like asking for a resurgence of anti-D&D movement.

Please don't ascribe actions to overly jumpy Christians. The devils killed their god. They didn't kill God. Someone who can't make that distinction is not likely to need to go this far into the books to find better stuff to object to.

 

[Charwoman Gene]

Great Wheel now belongs to Greyhawk.

 

[TerraDave]

*Cha-Ching*

Is it on purpose?