There's Powerful Deviltry at Work Here...

[Aaron2]

I think the OP has brought up some valid concerns. Especially considering WotC's obvious desire to bring more people into the hobby by targeting at younger people, it seems rather risky to be putting demonic people on the covers of their new books. Given the increasingly christian fervor of the U.S. public, that seems a bit risky.

Its not risky at all. A renewed anti-D&D movement will be great for D&D sales. I don't think it will happen. D&D is just to old and familiar to spark any sort of reaction.

Besides, from what I've seen, the game in just including action-movie evil, not anything as bad as the real world. AFAICT, the only reason for including the tieflings is to have lots of pictures of hot chicks with horns.

 

[Wyrmshadows]

I, for one, think it's a much harder thing for a person to use evil to do good than for someone to be a paladin. Paladins know that when they die, they go on to blissful eternity in Elysium or Mount Celestia or wherever. The Infernal Pact Warlock type that uses his powers for good *knows* that because of what he's done he's going to Hell when he dies, no matter how many good and noble things he accomplishes, yet he still uses his powers for the betterment of civilized races everywhere. I'd go further and say that the afore mentioned Warlock is *more* of a hero because he damned himself to save the world.

tl;dr - It takes bigger stones to save the world at the cost of your eternal soul than it does to save the world by being Lawful Good.

-TRRW

I have to disagree strongly.

The individual making the inernal pact was acting in a selfishly evil manner in order to gain said powers and likely benefitted from this pact before he or she ever played at being hero. I doubt very many warlocks are going to be doing good for goodness' sake and instead for some form of personal redemption. I'm not a cynical person, but I think that only the most foolish individual wouldn't be working toward some form of personal redemption while acting as one of the good guys if their soul was at stake. I'm not saying this character wouldn't be a hero, but to say that he is more heroic than the paladin when ultimately he is, in large part, attempting to save his own soul, is IMO incorrect.

Any warlock who is good and is using evil to fight evil and is NOT trying to save his own arse from the fires of hell is an idiot.

IMC good warlocks are going to be very, very rare, the same way good drow, good chromatic dragons, good orcs, etc. are very very rare.



Wyrmshadows

 

[Wormwood]

I would also like a little electric jazz fusion.

Too anime.

 

[Lonely Tylenol]

Externalized angst sells.

And IMHO, Tiefling Warlocks have a lot more interesting potential than Drow Rangers.

So I'm good with the proposed changes -- so long as it's just as easy to play a strong servant of Pelor as it is to play an equally puissant pawn of Asmodeus. If evil is just plain better (like it is in Magic of Incarnum, for example), then I'll have a problem.

Cheers, -- N

I like it when evil is better. It makes it worthwhile to be evil. Take Dark Sun's defilers, for example. Nasty, but really effective spellcasters.

The "quick route to power" thing is a staple for villains in fantasy fiction, and I don't mind it at all. It means that good people need to be extra vigilant, because evil is broken.

 

[Wormwood]

AFAICT, the only reason for including the tieflings is to have lots of pictures of hot chicks with horns.

*wipes away tear*

Bless you, Wizards!

 

[Wormwood]

IMC good warlocks are going to be very, very rare, the same way good drow, good chromatic dragons, good orcs, etc. are very very rare.

PCs are always exceptional, so I see no disconnect here.

 

[Klaus]

I'd like to thank WotC for bringing the METAL to the table.

That's all well and good, but where's the class that vanquishes foes with an ear-splittin' guitar solo? Y'know, just one guitar... to blow them away... just one guitar...

 

[Nahat Anoj]

With the pervasiveness of demonic imagery in video games these days, I'd say that D&D has nothing to worry about. In addition, there many more people that have been exposed to D&D, so they know what it's about. Times have changed since the early 80s, and their are bigger fish for the "Oh my god it's demonic!" people to fry.

 

[WayneLigon]

I do rather worry, however, that there will be some public backlash to this new direction WotC is taking.

I used to worry about such things, but I haven't for many years since I realized that such opposition is merely a paper tiger: all roar and no bite. The climate you speak of is mostly an illusion. There could be a backlash comparable to that against video games, which is much more pervasive than it ever was against D&D, and it would affect us as much. Which is to say 'not at all'.

I don't think that WOTC is chasing the high school crowd; by 'younger gamers' we're generally talking about people in their 20's when in the typical case any hold that parents or institutions have on them is nil.

 

[theredrobedwizard]

I have to disagree strongly. (other stuff)

That's fine. The character I'm talking about is the "quick route to power" type mentioned above. The world needs saving *right now* from some dark group of yahoos or whatever. The warlock I was referring to would be the type that'd be making bargains because of the *right now* aspect of it. Sure, he could save the world being all goody-two-shoes and whatnot, but more people would probably die (from his point of view, anyway) because the paladin route is slower.

More power, right now, frak the cost to me. Self-sacrificing characters of that nature are what I strive to have in my games. Faustian Pact to save a loved one's life (or to bring one back from the dead)? Good times. So long as the pact only takes the soul of the one who made the pact, and not the one who the pact saved.

-TRRW