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]

Having trouble formatting in Windows Phone:

The point, for me, is that Traits-flaws-bonds are more effective as character descriptors than the traditional alignment system, because they are more *real*, and as such more relatable than the Gygaxian cosmic goofiness; which, at the same time us huge, goofy fun.

 

[Imaro]

Well, that is exactly the issue with ontological discussion in philosophy: you can have something as solid as arithmetic or geometry, but throwing in a "Detect Mathematical Soundness" spell...radically changes the epistemological context. Which is what [MENTION=42582]pemerton[/MENTION] is saying.

But [MENTION=42582]pemerton[/MENTION] and a few others seem to be going on the basis that these spells are infallible when from 3e on-wards... detect alignment spell(s) either don't exist or aren't infallible (I'm not sure about earlier editions).

 

[I'm A Banana]

Norse myths of Valhalla and Hel, and Greek myths of Olympus existed in absence of Judeo-Christian values that inform the D&D Alignment system. My interpretation is that outer planes can (and IMO should) exist on their own merits, and not because someone needed to plug in a plane for Lawful-Neutral-Good or whatever to fill in a missing peg on the alignment wheel, but I betray my biases by saying that.

The PS idea is that a plane of Lawful-Neutral-Good only exists because people in the setting believe that it exists. So it doesn't exist on its own merits per se, but it also doesn't exist just to fill in a peg on an alignment wheel.

Not that this is the way the game has to be, of course, just that this is a way the game can be.

I think that there is some miscommunication going on here, for which I apologize. I do not question the fun you are having. Go at it, I LOVE the whole Great Wheel; partly because it's incoherent, which is my point. It's bonkers, and I don't mind the insanity, O have fun with it as well.
...
The point, for me, is that Traits-flaws-bonds are more effective as character descriptors than the traditional alignment system, because they are more *real*, and as such more relatable than the Gygaxian cosmic goofiness; which, at the same time us huge, goofy fun.

Can't disagree with any of that! Thanks for clarifying. I think "it's not what D&D *is*" probably just triggers my Edition Wars PTSD.

 

[Imaro]

Having trouble formatting in Windows Phone:

The point, for me, is that Traits-flaws-bonds are more effective as character descriptors than the traditional alignment system, because they are more *real*, and as such more relatable than the Gygaxian cosmic goofiness; which, at the same time us huge, goofy fun.

See I find either, depending on the type of fantasy fiction one is trying to model, pretty easy to relate too within genre conceits... Now when speaking to modeling actual real life they are both too simplistic and equally "goofy" to model the reality and complexity of most real life people's behavior, patterns, beliefs, etc...

 

[Parmandur]

The PS idea is that a plane of Lawful-Neutral-Good only exists because people in the setting believe that it exists. So it doesn't exist on its own merits per se, but it also doesn't exist just to fill in a peg on an alignment wheel.



Not that this is the way the game has to be, of course, just that this is a way the game can be.







Can't disagree with any of that! Thanks for clarifying. I think "it's not what D&D *is*" probably just triggers my Edition Wars PTSD.

Heh, I cut loose about when the edition wats started. To be honest, I think five friends who were up to it could do that sort of thing with *any* game if they dedicate to the RP side; when I said that, I referred not to rules so much as the cosmology: when they did the 1E Manual of the Planes, what were they doing? Creating high level adventuring (as in, killing things and taking their stuff) locations. What Planescape does with it is perfectly valid: but I doubt Gygax was thinking along those lines originally, so it is a latter gloss on what was, by design, a little tongue in cheek stylistically.

Doesn't mean ot is *wrong*, just that history makes it mighty peculiar (that peculiar seems to me to be the fun part!).

 

[Parmandur]

See I find either, depending on the type of fantasy fiction one is trying to model, pretty easy to relate too within genre conceits... Now when speaking to modeling actual real life they are both too simplistic and equally "goofy" to model the reality and complexity of most real life people's behavior, patterns, beliefs, etc...

Fair enough. It seems to me that [MENTION=42582]pemerton[/MENTION] takes issue with the setup because of the logical coherence issues which would prevent it from being workable, which as I just stated in my previous post is a feature,not a big, of the Great Wheel.

 

[I'm A Banana]

Heh, I cut loose about when the edition wats started. To be honest, I think five friends who were up to it could do that sort of thing with *any* game if they dedicate to the RP side; when I said that, I referred not to rules so much as the cosmology: when they did the 1E Manual of the Planes, what were they doing? Creating high level adventuring (as in, killing things and taking their stuff) locations. What Planescape does with it is perfectly valid: but I doubt Gygax was thinking along those lines originally, so it is a latter gloss on what was, by design, a little tongue in cheek stylistically.

Doesn't mean ot is *wrong*, just that history makes it mighty peculiar (that peculiar seems to me to be the fun part!).

Yeah, I totally agree that what PS did with the thing is a different take than their original Gygaxian purpose. That's part of why I'd say that a Planescape game is not just a Greyhawk or Dragonlance or FR game on the planes (anymore than a Ravenloft game is just a Greyhawk or FR or Dragonlance game with vampires), but kind of its own beast that uses Greyhawk's wheel as a starting point.

 

[Parmandur]

Yeah, I totally agree that what PS did with the thing is a different take than their original Gygaxian purpose. That's part of why I'd say that a Planescape game is not just a Greyhawk or Dragonlance or FR game on the planes (anymore than a Ravenloft game is just a Greyhawk or FR or Dragonlance game with vampires), but kind of its own beast that uses Greyhawk's wheel as a starting point.

Absolutely; so, then what I see is you and [MENTION=42582]pemerton[/MENTION] talking in circles, comparing the original 1E setup to the 2E Planescape, which are extremely different, complicated by how D&D of all stripes cuts off the basis for real world discussions of epistemology.

 

[Shasarak]

See I find either, depending on the type of fantasy fiction one is trying to model, pretty easy to relate too within genre conceits... Now when speaking to modeling actual real life they are both too simplistic and equally "goofy" to model the reality and complexity of most real life people's behavior, patterns, beliefs, etc...

Not to call out anyone in particular but to me DnD alignment seems a lot less "goofy" then some actual real life peoples beliefs.

 

[Parmandur]

Not to call out anyone in particular but to me DnD alignment seems a lot less "goofy" then some actual real life peoples beliefs.

Well, not delve into politics or religion, I will just say with no fear of exaggeration, across the board, that every belief system and philosophy ever subscribed to by actual human beings (not figuratively; literally every single one) is more coherent than the nine-point alignment setup. It is crazy incoherent when actually scrutinized, hence why this discussion always devolves this way. But, it makes a very interesting short hand for acting, which is useful for creating a quick and dirty character...until it doesn't or you get a player who thinks Chaotic Neutral is grounds for being an in game rapist or something...