D&D Alumni Article on Devils

DiTerlizzi's work on Planescape gave it an onirical quality which I liked very much.

And Cat Lord is one of the best female portraits I've ever seen.

Psion -> Didn't you like Cat Lord, Ghaele Eladrin, Aasimar, Tiefling, Khastaa and the Rilmani (the latter were much better in Planescape than in the Fiend Folio).
 

log in or register to remove this ad

CRGreathouse said:
What ever are you talking about, Psion? From the article:
"1st editions horned devils (malebranche) have since split into two distinct devils, the horned devils (cornugon) and malebranche."

I think you misunderstand. I don't like that particular futzing with the canon (among others.)
 

Klaus said:
Psion -> Didn't you like Cat Lord, Ghaele Eladrin, Aasimar, Tiefling, Khastaa and the Rilmani (the latter were much better in Planescape than in the Fiend Folio).

How many of those are fiends, now? ;)

That said, I disagree on the Rilmani score. In PS, they were "tall guys with bushy mustaches". At least the FF version makes some attempt to portray them as something other than human.
 

Psion said:
I don't think that's true.

It's true enough. There were plenty of generic AD&D books without a setting label on them, but that didn't mean that Planescape was part of some ivory tower seperate from the rest of the game. The Planescape map of the planes appeared in the revised 2e DMG, even (though I wasn't happy about that).

Planescape was a coherent setting, but it was also "core AD&D." Its monster books defined how those monsters were treated in every setting (when fiends lost the ability to teleport in Planescape, for example, they lost it everywhere, and revised Planescape XP values were applied in other settings), and its take on the planes was the same take Forgotten Realms and generic books (and even Birthright and Ravenloft, for all that they were cut off from planar matters) had.

That said, Dark Sun had its own cosmology in later 2e (though it didn't in early 2e, and Athas also existed in the Planescape cosmology, and the whole thing was somewhat unclear), and the "Historical Reference" series had their own seperate cosmologies most of the time. So it's a little more complicated than Shemeska was implying, but his main point is still completely valid.

Also, Tony DiTerlizzi was and remains a freaking brilliant designer and technician. Even his where I don't like his approach, I have to admire his style.
 
Last edited:


CRGreathouse said:
Oh, so you were just complaining about that aspect of 3E -- not about the article. Right? :confused:
Yeah, I didn't know what he was talking about, either. (Maybe it was the "failure to recognize" statement that threw me...)
 

The Lords of Nine don't look that scary in that picture (yes it was DiTerlizzi's) they had in Planes of Law. Even though three of them in the back were sort of obscured and shadowy. Dispater looked like a funny-looking old man, Fierna looked alright, and Mephistopheles as Molikroth looked silly, but I think that was part of the point behind his disguise.

The picture of Mammon or Viscount Minauros in Faces of Evil, that Adam Rex did looks better than either the BovD or FCII pictures. Though as far as alternate names go, why did Mammon pick the name of his layer as one, wouldn't it have been better to have the layer renamed as Mammon instead? Well I guess only Dispater really has a layer named after himself.
 

Klaus said:
pih.jpg

I like it! Thanks! Who is the artist? Something Foster?
 


Pets & Sidekicks

Remove ads

Top