D&D 4E In 4E Asmodeus will be a god!

[Dykstrav]

Lolth started out as a Demon Princess back in OD&D, didn't she?

Yeah, which is the big reason why I don't really have a problem with this. D&D canon allows for powerful critters to become gods. I don't remember anyone complaining when Vecna was promoted to a deity from lich-hood in 3E. And if I remember correctly, Orcus attained godhood as Tenebrous before his current incarnation. Even mortals can rise to godhood in D&D (witness Saint Cuthbert).

As far as 4E causing a new wave of anti-occultism... I honestly don't think it'd happen. As one of ENWorld's policies restricts discussion on real-life religion, I won't delve too deeply into that particular pool. Suffice to say that I'm an active Christian myself in addition to being a gamer, and I realize that characters in D&D are quite seperate from our real-life personalities. I'd no more expect people to become devil-worshippers through playing D&D than to start adopting feudalism or to become armorsmiths because of the game.
Quite bluntly, I think most people would realize that there are bigger and more pressing social/theological concerns than a big scary red thing with horns illustrated in a gaming book.

 

[mhacdebhandia]

I recall plenty of complaints about Vecna becoming a deity . . . but I don't disagree with you.

 

[Valiantheart]

I'm not really sure why this is a surprise. Asmodeus' write up has always hinted that he was once one of the mightiest beings in the entire multiverse before being 'cast down'. His body makes up most of the 9th layer and spontaneously births Pit Fiends to enforce it.

The refined devil seen in the 3.5 books was just a projection he used to interact with others. There was no chance of any of the other Devil lords unseating him. He simply played them against each other and gave them that false hope.

 

[pawsplay]

At this rate, there won't be any archdevils or archdemons left. If I were in charge of 4e, I would instead have demoted Lolth and Tiamat.

 

[Mouseferatu]

I don't mind seeing Asmodeus as a god, though I'm curious how it's going to impact the rest of the fiendish hierarchy. I agree that I'd like to see Tiamat and Bahamut "demoted" back to unique, nigh-godlike dragons that aren't actually gods. I'm ambivalent about Lolth; she can be a demon or a god, IMO. I'd also like to see Vecna stripped of godhood. I liked him better as a demigod-like lich.

 

[William Ronald]

I don't mind seeing Asmodeus as a god, though I'm curious how it's going to impact the rest of the fiendish hierarchy. I agree that I'd like to see Tiamat and Bahamut "demoted" back to unique, nigh-godlike dragons that aren't actually gods. I'm ambivalent about Lolth; she can be a demon or a god, IMO. I'd also like to see Vecna stripped of godhood. I liked him better as a demigod-like lich.

Tiamat in Babylonian mythology was a deity slain by the god Marduk. Also, I think that Bahamut and Tiamat, like the demon princes and archdevils in 1st Edition, could have worshippers and grant spells.

I prefer Vecna as a demigod like lich, as he seems to be the most extreme example of power creep for NPCs in different editions.

 

[pawsplay]

I liked Asmodeus as an archdevil, principally because it was unknown what his true power was or his nature. If he's a god, however, we'll know what tier of god he is, and have some rough idea of his abilities compared to other gods.

I'm annoyed by the probability there will be an in-setting explanation for the change, rather than just observing that the difference between "god" and "archdevil" is semantic.

 

[Hammerhead]

I'd no more expect people to become devil-worshippers through playing D&D than to start adopting feudalism or to become armorsmiths because of the game.

You can play D&D without adopting feudalism or smithing armor? Huh. News to me.

Especially when D&D is about killing demon worshipers and then moving up to the demons themselves.

I just can't see much of the split between demon lord / archdevil and deity; I mean, you have worshippers of each one. They're all phenomenally powerful.

 

[Shemeska]

This isn't a problem if his divinity is something alongside and in addition to his status as an archfiend, but if it's presented as being "better" than archfiend status, then it warps the nature of archfiends on the cosmic stage versus deities.

Gods can be evil, but archfiends -are- Evil. Gods are powerful, but they're relatively young inhabitants of the planes, and they lack the innate connection to the lower planes that the archfiends possess. There are tons of evil gods in Baator for instance, but only nine Lords of the Nine. There are many evil gods in the Gray Waste, but only one Oinoloth. Many evil gods in Carceri, but only one Apomps at its core who created the whole plane in the first place.

Gods are powerful, but they know their place on the lower planes, and they avoid getting involved in the fiends' inner politics and the Blood War because when they have, they've been punished, usually in a severe manner.

3e's false dichotomy between archfiends and gods was a serious step back for the cosmology, and it will pain me if 4e further perpetuates this by presenting a divine asmodeus as a god beyond touch, yet some of his Abyssal equivalents as just big monsters for high level players to beat up for XP. The archfiends, and other such planar lords, are physical manifestations of bedrock elements of the cosmos, something gods are not. Archfiends might be able to attain divinity in addition to their status as archfiends, but it doesn't supercede their nature as archfiends, it just gives another set of restrictions, obligations, and liabilities alongside power that isn't largely restricted to their native plane.

If we're going back to a 2e notion of divine Lords of the 9, and some abyssal lords likewise having embraced divinity, this is a good thing, but it's a disturbingly poor move in my opinion if it promotes this hideous notion of a two-tiered system between big monsters and gods, when the balance of power between them is much more complex and incredibly situational.

 

[I'm A Banana]

Asmodeus is the name of a demon in real-world mythology. To assign said being divine status, even in the context of the game, strikes me as inappropriate. In fact, I'll go one further: as a Christian gamer, I am offended by this decision.

I don't understand...

D&D has always cherry-picked real world terms for their own hodge-podge creations. "Asmodeus" is just a name. A devil-god by any other name would be the same D&D "Asmodeus." Just like I wouldn't expect the D&D Hades or Thor to really resemble the real-world myth, the D&D Asmodeus doesn't really resemble any actual real-world figure, despite sharing a name.

So why do you have a problem with a fictitious being being a fictitious deity in a land of make believe? D&D Asmodeus quite obviously isn't the same beast as any Real-World Asmodeus...

I ask because I really would like to understand where the objection is coming from, not from any flamebait or anything.