Cook already explained part of his overarching rationale. To him, it's important to have high-powered evil foes that PCs can fight. He referred to these kinds of opportunities in 1ed and decided to stat these guys out as non-divine for this reason. With 2ed, this was not possible since gods and god-like entities weren't statted; only the avatars were (which is also why they dumbed down Graz'zt and Pazuzu/Pazreal to Abyssal Lords).IceBear said:
3ed has returned to the philosophy that everything can be statted, including gods. Indeed, arguably the heart of D&D is essentially rooted in 1ed concepts, ideas, and presentation. Gods can once again be killed and defeated. For whatever reason, though, Cook and co. decided not to extend this concept to the arch-fiends, who in 1ed were ranked as Lesser gods. I reiterate that his argument rests on parties being able to battle and defeat them at the end of a long campaign.
My problem with this argument is that the gods were also statted out in 1ed and were often killed/defeated by gamers. Cook and co. never clarified why there should be a difference now between the gods and archfiends (and I would include other Planar entities) in that everything has stats. Simply put, the decision made was inconsistent on two fronts. First, it disregards the fact that even gods in 3ed have stats and can be defeated by sufficiently high-level characters. Second, it's not consistent with the general trend regarding the "homage" and "nostalgia" paid to 1ed in handling these particular entities... which, as evidenced by these debates that have been raging for over a year, are extremely popular.
The best option, in my mind, would have been the olive branch WotC offered to those proponents of 2ed's concepts of gods (myself formerly included). In Deities and Demigods, a DM can use the stats of the gods provided as the real god, powerful avatars, and so on. This would please those interested in having official, multiple options. It also allows for those who want to have earlier encounters. A group of 20th level characters could conceivably fight the avatar of Tiamat as written. Then, they could travel to Hell and battle the actual goddess as 50th level epic characters.
The archfiends should have been handled in a similar fashion. It would have been consistent with 1ed and would have pleased all parties without requiring too much additional work for most. Provide divine stats, avatar stats, and a caveat about which one could be used for the actual fiend if a person didn't see them as a god or divine. Those who agree with Cook (I happen to agree with his perspective, but not the specifics and his ultimate conclusion) that the fiends can be fought and defeated would have options in handling this without isolating any one group.
As for applying earlier editions to 3ed... I disagree with you. I think that looking back on the editions is one of the most important elements in the redesign of the game. Many of the concepts in earlier editions are the fuel used for this edition.
). If the options presented allow for better customization (although the root taken in DDG would have been better) then great. If not, then I think that an enhancement for the archfiends with full divine powers at the Lesser god level (still too weak for me, but it would fit in with the entire throw-back to 1ed concepts) would be in order. If they did that in the first place, I don't think we'd see half the arguments on this matter.
That's too bad. Sorry if that's the way you feel about my arguments and position, but I don't believe I'm being short sighted or selfish (see below). 
