The 'Wonderland'-Inspired Faces of the RAGE OF DEMONS

Take a peek at some of the art from D&D's upcoming Rage of Demons storyline. This art is by Richard Whitters, who is the art director for D&D and used to work as a concept artist for Magic: the Gathering. WotC's Chris Perkins has indicated that one of the influences on Rage of Demons was Alice in Wonderland, and I think the influence is clear when you look at the characters below.

OUGALOP, kuo-toa cave cricket catcher extraordinaire.

YUK YUK and SPIDERBAIT, goblin adrenaline junkies.

THE SOCIETY OF BRILLIANCE, the Mensa of the Underdark.

GLABBAGOOL, awakened gelatinous cube.

RUMPADUMP and STOOL, myconid followers.

PRINCE DERENDIL, a quaggoth who thinks he's elven royalty.

TOPSY and TURVY, svirfneblin wererat siblings.

THE PUDDING KING, svirfneblin devotee (i.e., flunky) of Juiblex the Faceless Lord.

D&D's "Legion of Doom." What a wonderful bunch of malcontents.
​

 

[Parmandur]

I take great exception to that.



You can also kill monsters with axes, fireballs, daggers, trees, fists, harsh language, arrows, and all sorts of other implements.

True; the broad, metaphorical sword.

 

[Parmandur]

Except for the actual core books of certain editions...





Alignment in 3.x "Alignment is a tool for developing your character’s identity. It is not a straitjacket for restricting your character. Each alignment represents a broad range of personality types or personal philosophies, so two characters of the same alignment can still be quite different from each other. In addition, few people are completely consistent."





Alignment in 5e "A typical creature in the worlds of Dungeons and Dragons has an alignment which broadly describes it's moral and personal attitudes... These brief summaries of the nine alignments describe the typical behavior of a creature with that alignment. Individuals might vary significantly from that typical behavior, and few people are perfectly and consistently faithful to the precepts of their alignment."








So tell me again how alignment is always as objective as 2+2= 4...

On the one hand it says that, on the other the Great Wheel keeps on turning. [MENTION=42582]pemerton[/MENTION] has gone into this in detail before.



Both positions, incidentally, are absurd as applies to D&D: because D&D is really not the forum for dealing ethics, epistemology or metaphysics so much as killing things and taking their stuff.

 

[Imaro]

On the one hand it says that, on the other the Great Wheel keeps on turning. @pemerton has gone into this in detail before.

Yeah... yeah I've seen pemerton's arguments and remain unconvinced... I'll stick with the actual books... you know the original source you cited earlier in the thread.

Both positions, incidentally, are absurd as applies to D&D: because D&D is really not the forum for dealing ethics, epistemology or metaphysics so much as killing things and taking their stuff.

Well I'll keeping playing in the Planescape setting and you keep running combats with treasure...

 

[Parmandur]

Yeah... yeah I've seen pemerton's arguments and remain unconvinced... I'll stick with the actual books... you know the original source you cited earlier in the thread.



Well I'll keeping playing in the Planescape setting and you keep running combats with treasure...

Don't get me wrong; not saying you are having badwrongfun, have at it. But that is...not really what D&D was designed around, nor does the Planescape philosophical exploration mean much from a philosophy point of view. As somebody who enjoys beer and pretzel D&D and serious philosophical investigation, the attempted mixture does not really take off. Neither fish nor fowl.

 

[Hussar]

I have to admit, I'd play Planescape, but, not with the D&D system. There are all sorts of systems out there that deal with metaphysical ethics and morality much, MUCH better than D&D. Paramandur might be a bit facile in his description, but, I don't think he's wrong. Saying that D&D is four-color fantasy isn't a huge leap here, is it?

 

[Parmandur]

Don't get me wrong; not saying you are having badwrongfun, have at it. But that is...not really what D&D was designed around, nor does the Planescape philosophical exploration mean much from a philosophy point of view. As somebody who enjoys beer and pretzel D&D and serious philosophical investigation, the attempted mixture does not really take off. Neither fish nor fowl.

Again, not to say that you and yours don't enjoy it; I'm sure it is fun. But it is not coherent metaphysics.

 

[Parmandur]

I have to admit, I'd play Planescape, but, not with the D&D system. There are all sorts of systems out there that deal with metaphysical ethics and morality much, MUCH better than D&D. Paramandur might be a bit facile in his description, but, I don't think he's wrong. Saying that D&D is four-color fantasy isn't a huge leap here, is it?

I used that description because @pemerron did: D&D was designed as a small scale wargame to pretend to be Conan or the Grey Mouser, not explore metaphysics or epistemology. As someone interested in epistemological concerns for real, I wouldn't explore them In any sort of RPG, even one more well suited like Runescape. And not saying to do so is badwrongfun, but that's not pizza night material for me.

 

[Fralex]

Hence why my "Detect" spells only register supernatural good or evil. Demon or angel? Ping ping ping....

Evil (as per society and values) cannibal shopkeeper... silence on the radar screen.

Unless of course he manages to get supernaturally tainted...cause if you've seen Time Bandits, you know there ARE chunks of pure evil out there...

I really like the fact that the Detect Evil and Good spell in 5e is more like Detect Foreigners. That is, after all, a classic medieval (and sadly, modern) definition of Good and Evil, and it can be objectively defined in no uncertain terms. The idea that philosophical concepts are actual forces pervading the multiverse always just sorta weirded me out. But I can totally get behind the idea that different planes are home to creatures with similar moral philosophies, although I wish we had more diversity than just a big ol' wheel of Good, Evil, Law, and Chaos. Why can't we have a Plane of Existentialists, or Realm of Objectivism? Or how about Realist Heaven or Egaltarian Nirvana? Come on, this would totally be a cool idea!

 

[Parmandur]

I really like the fact that the Detect Evil and Good spell in 5e is more like Detect Foreigners. That is, after all, a classic medieval (and sadly, modern) definition of Good and Evil, and it can be objectively defined in no uncertain terms. The idea that philosophical concepts are actual forces pervading the multiverse always just sorta weirded me out. But I can totally get behind the idea that different planes are home to creatures with similar moral philosophies, although I wish we had more diversity than just a big ol' wheel of Good, Evil, Law, and Chaos. Why can't we have a Plane of Existentialists, or Realm of Objectivism? Or how about Realist Heaven or Egaltarian Nirvana? Come on, this would totally be a cool idea!

I am so glad 5E took a step away from quantifiable "alignment as element" as a model. That's the incoherence at plat: Good, Evil, Law and Chaos as separate, concrete cosmic principles...

 

[Fralex]

Actually, a "Plane of Existentialists" would be pretty hilarious, since a common theme in existentialism is that there is no afterlife. Some of these philosophies would probably need to be modified to work in a fantasy setting, but they could still work with some tweaking.

Philosophies that deny the existence of gods and such could be translated into "OK, yeah, gods exist, but if you think any of them really care about us you're a fool," or maybe "Well, they say they're gods, but they might be stuffing their resumes a bit in terms of how strong or unique from mortals they really are."