There's Powerful Deviltry at Work Here...

[Vigilance]

The existence of characters with demonic blood does not equate to an emphasis on evil PCs.

Looking at my comics collection, I see Ghost Rider, Son of Satan and Satanna, all of whom had demonic blood or origins and all of whom were heroes.

Demonic does not equal evil.

It does however, equal cool to the 13 year old inside me who's WAY INTO THE DEVIL!

 

[Li Shenron]

Game answer:

I prefer evil PC being an occasional deviation to the norm rather than allowed by default. I don't actually ban evil PCs from our games, but I make sure to tell anyone that they should create PCs that stay happy together, and if there is a conflict, it's the evil PC that gets out.
Therefore while I wouldn't particularly like (much less need) an increase of evil stuff in the core books, I don't think it's going to be a problem, since I will just keep going like nowadays.

Social answer:

I care nothing about how a bunch of mildly-insane people that see the devil everywhere would react to a game. They probably see the devil also in half of the movies at the theatre, most of tv channels, most of rock music, perhaps even in the shape of their food. It's their problem, not mine. Especially since those mildly-insane people seem to be on the other side of the ocean from here

 

[Najo]

I am a little bit concerned for different reasons:

1) I really like the concept of the Teifling, but I feel they are not appropiate for all campaigns and including them in the main player's handbook might be going to far.

2) I think not including the druid is a mistake. I think the whole nature connected priest is important to the core ideals of fantasy roleplaying.

I think the options in the core rulebook should focus on heroic characters fighting against evil. I also think that is what D&D should look like, whether edgy or dark fantasy, it still should be good guys fighting against the darkness.

Now, I think the multi alignment Paladin is a good thing. I think losing the monk is a good thing. I think the bard should be a prestige class or put into the game later. I think including the warlock is good. The idea of a dark sorcerer/ wizard type character who makes pacts with supernatural forces is a good archetype for the core book.

I think instead of tieflings I would put in planar touched or planar blooded creatures and have both good and evil blooded creatures in one race with different traits.

I think it is important for any one to pick up D&D and see adventure, intense fantasy with the forces of darkness being fought against by a band of heroes. Outsiders to the hobby shouldn't see a game that promotes "evil" and they should be able to see the connection to Lord of the Rings through the artwork and flavor text. I think D&D should be more than that, but it needs at least that in it to help it sell to the mainstream.

 

[Anthtriel]

A "darker" setting makes playing heroes more easy and rewarding in my experience.

For example, you don't need to be a saintly paragon to be a hero in the Warhammer universe, but you still get a lot more of the underdog vibe than in the classical High Fantasy scenario, where you only need to slaughter the evil "Overlord/Wizard/Dragon" to make sure that everyone lives happily ever after, and where being good is the default assumption.

Likewise, my players played nicer and more heroic characters in Ravenloft than in the Forgotten Realms.

 

[Aloïsius]

I care nothing about how a bunch of mildly-insane people that see the devil everywhere would react to a game. They probably see the devil also in half of the movies at the theatre, most of tv channels, most of rock music, perhaps even in the shape of their food. It's their problem, not mine. Especially since those mildly-insane people seem to be on the other side of the ocean from here

QFT.
I don't feel concerned by social stigma about devils in a game... *reminds me one of most funny game was Magna veritas/In Nomine where we played crazed sociopatic demons guys*

 

[Baby Samurai]

Game answer:

I prefer evil PC being an occasional deviation to the norm rather than allowed by default. I don't actually ban evil PCs from our games, but I make sure to tell anyone that they should create PCs that stay happy together, and if there is a conflict, it's the evil PC that gets out.
Therefore while I wouldn't particularly like (much less need) an increase of evil stuff in the core books, I don't think it's going to be a problem, since I will just keep going like nowadays.

Social answer:

I care nothing about how a bunch of mildly-insane people that see the devil everywhere would react to a game. They probably see the devil also in half of the movies at the theatre, most of tv channels, most of rock music, perhaps even in the shape of their food. It's their problem, not mine. Especially since those mildly-insane people seem to be on the other side of the ocean from here

Yeah, baby!

 

[Plane Sailing]

Does anyone else feel that 4e may be putting too much of an emphasis on evil, even diabolical character options in the initial PHB?

Judging by some earlier threads, you are not alone in your feelings here. Thanks for putting them so rationally and expressing yourself clearly too.

I'll just make a pre-emptive request that everyone else who contributes to this thread matches up to Roberts already high standard, since I've seen this subject get rather emotive before.

Thanks,

 

[Derren]

Evil is "cool", thats why its so prominent in 4E.

Its really simple. The next D&D Edition will feature those things which the target audience like most. And this time those things include dark, brooding characters and wuxia fighting styles. And currently everyone loves "the underdog". Thats why good is "loosing".
That alignment looses its importance does also support evil PCs (although the old alignment rules were a problem anyway but imo that was more of a player problem than a rules problem).

 

[Baby Samurai]

Evil is "cool", thats why its so prominent in 4E.

Its really simple. The next D&D Edition will feature those things which the target audience like most. And this time those things include dark, brooding characters and wuxia fighting styles. And currently everyone loves "the underdog". Thats why good is "loosing".
That alignment looses its importance does also support evil PCs (although the old alignment rules were a problem anyway but imo that was more of a player problem than a rules problem).

See post above yours...

 

[Klaus]

As I've said before, I think fiends are replacing dragons as a pervasive influence on the game. In 3.x we had the heyday of dragon-powered sorcerers, half-dragons, dragon shaman, dragon aspirants, dragonblooded, etc. It seems that draconic influence is on the wane and replaced by devils and (to a lesser extent) demons.