D&D: Devils don't have to be evil
(nitter.net)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (41)
sorted by:
This shit has been going on a loooooong time.
AD&D 2nd edition stopped explicitly calling Angels and Devils Angels and Devils. 3rd edition removed racial requirements for classes, and also drastically dumbed down ability requirements in general. 4th edition removed (most) negative racial features.
2nd edition changed the names do to a push from the religious right, despite making no sense but it never changed the idea of good and evil and everyone still knew demons were called tanar'ri and devils were named baatezu. More then that you could find them as demons and devils in adventures, it was like yea demons are called tanarri. Never did it imply that devils or demons are not evil, it was core part of the game.
The removal of racial requirements for classes was a change I did not personaly like but it was to be expected. It made little sense that some races could not be a certain class and the truth was that a lot of GMs would not implement race restrictions, including max level for AD&D.
Not all changes are the same, changes for gameplay vs changes do to modern day moral relativism. I'm one of those that hated the trend that villains are misunderstood and had some tragic reason for their actions.