There's Powerful Deviltry at Work Here...

[an_idol_mind]

On the one hand, I think it would be a mistake to cater the game to the BADD crowd, just like it was a mistake to do so in 2nd edition.

On the other hand, I do think the demons and devils thing is currently being played up as a bit too prominent for my liking. I'm not a big fan of warlocks, although I can see their place in the core system. I'm going to miss tieflings a lot, as the planetouched creatures that had fairly subtle ties to the outer planes are going away to make room for what are basically half-demons. The whole Asmodeus as a god thing doesn't do anything for me, and the fact that there seems to be a huge focus on demons and devils doesn't appeal to me mainly because I don't think those creatures are all that interesting.

Demons and devils are by definition bad guys through and through, which bugs me because I prefer evil that is either more subtle (such as the machinations of a noble in court) or more complex (such as the enigmatic philosophies of a dragon). I also find the demonic focus a bit of a shame because the near-removal of the alignment system helps loosen up the black and white morality that has dominated the D&D game for so long. But then when you introduce creatures that are definitively evil and make them a huge focus on the setting, then it goes back to being straight out black and white morality.

So, as with many things that have been presented so far in 4th edition previews, what WotC is doing is not to my liking. That said, I don't see anything wrong with what they're doing from a business or design standpoint. It just doesn't appeal to me specifically.

 

[Baby Samurai]

I'm one of those nuts myself who think there is a corellation between D&D's height of popularity in the early 1980's, and the height of the "D&D is evil" scare right at the same time.

Thank god that was mainly an American phenomenon.

 

[Baby Samurai]

They may be putting a bit more focus on fiends or what have you, but what I'm really jazzed about is it looks like there will finally be more focus on Fey!

…Yay!

 

[The Merciful]

I also find the demonic focus a bit of a shame because the near-removal of the alignment system helps loosen up the black and white morality that has dominated the D&D game for so long. But then when you introduce creatures that are definitively evil and make them a huge focus on the setting, then it goes back to being straight out black and white morality.

It has been the lawfull/chaotic axis of the aligment system that I have found problematic, not good/evil axis. So removing aligment but making the assumed setting black and white is not contradictory at all.

 

[Nebulous]

Sure, D&D has had evil parties before, but generally even evil PC clerics were just worshiping fictional villains like Vecna, not demons who some people genuinely believe exist(ed) like Asmodeus. ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Asmodai )

I'm not going to condemn WotC for this choice, nor has it turned me against 4e, I'm just curious if anyone else is uncomfortable with this sort of thing.

I just want to comment on this aspect from the OP. D&D has a long, long history of incorporating real world demons into its mythology. Pazuzu being one that immediately springs to mind, and i'm sure there are others. That was actually a part of the game i shied away from when younger, partly because of my mother terrifying me with the religious repercussions of tampering with the unknown. As a young teen, i remember her flying into a tantrum because of partial nudity in the old DMG. She's mellowed out since (and i'm all grown up!) but my point is that there is a whole new generation of parents who might be sensitive to "sex and evil" in their child's life. And it can certainly make playing this game more difficult in such families, if not impossible.

I'm not saying that WotC should do it any different though. Change is needed, and this dark, diabolical slant to D&D is something that i personally find appealing. Devils, to me, are more fun than Dragons. Although Dungeons & Devils would be a marketing disaster.

One should also take into consideration how much of this demonic heritage is considered "real." Many people toss it off as superstition. Others are ambivalent, saying "maybe demons are real," and others are wholeheartedly in agreement that unseens worlds and spirits do exist and can interact with humans. I have had a long-standing interest in the occult, and D&D was -- without a doubt -- my gateway for further exploration. It piqued an interest.

Personally, i don't think it is a problem adding some of these obscure names from the Lesser Key of Solomon into a roleplaying product. Most people wouldn't even know the difference. I think Tome of Horrors even had "Lucifer" as a monster. If WotC starts adding seals, evocations and banishing rituals, then we could have a problem.

 

[Nebulous]

Demons and devils are by definition bad guys through and through, which bugs me because I prefer evil that is either more subtle (such as the machinations of a noble in court) or more complex (such as the enigmatic philosophies of a dragon).

You'd be surprised by how many ritual magicians (whether it's real or in the magician's fevered imagination) who summon negative spirits for the express purpose of learning from them. And how many demons are attributed to vast resources of knowledge and specialties that aren't considered necessarily "evil".

 

[Lurks-no-More]

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

No, evil makes for good villains, and that's cool.

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".

If the forces of good have been pushed back in the implied PoL setting... that makes them the underdogs, doesn't it? A world that's under assault by dark forces needs heroes to help save it; your characters can shine brighter against the darker background.

Whether those characters will be conflicted, brooding, or tempted by things like devil-offered power or demonic blood, or stand as examples of the incorruptible honor, shining as beacons of hope in a dark land, is a matter of taste; both possibilities offer tremendous dramatic potential.

To summarily condemn the 4e as only trying to cash in on devils and demons is IMO very premature, and ignores the roleplaying and setting possibilities inherent in the PoL setup.

 

[BadMojo]

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

Yeah. Rock and roll! I'd be doing a wicked air guitar riff right now if people weren't watching me.

I'm not at all concerned with the new game elements, but I don't need to really care what anyone else thinks about the game. Nobody to explain it to except my wife who just points and laughs.

I suspect, as others mentioned, that the tieflings, warlocks, etc. tested well in WotC market research AND the designer's inner 13 year olds are also doing some awesome air guitar.

 

[Jack99]

I don't think he's saying it is. I'm one of those nuts myself who think there is a corellation between D&D's height of popularity in the early 1980's, and the height of the "D&D is evil" scare right at the same time. If it's seen as a little edgier than, say, the next version of Halo, it may not be a bad thing.

Aye, and the forbidden fruit is even more seductive than 25 years ago. If WotC can start an anti-DND hype because of too many demons and devils in it, they will get a lot of new players.

 

[JosephK]

I've always despised wizards/tsr for caving to the soccer-mom and Christian right lobby, back when they changed devils/demons to the baatezu/tanari (and all the other stuff they changed in that respect).

The 'evil' (demonic or similar) stuff, has always been part of the fantasy genre (from Tolkiens balrogs, to the Conan demons, Elric and so forth), and imo brings alot of atmosphere and nuance to the game. The notion that D&D is somehow better, if the players are all cartoon heros, fighting cartoon villains, with nothing in between is imo a huge failing.

I like that warlocks and thieflings are available 'roles' in the game, it adds more room for various forms of moral ambiguity for veteran (or gifted) roleplayers to explore, in various forms (not saying it cant be done without demonic pacts and so forth, but I do think it adds more cool options for that sorta stuff).