As was foretold, we've added advertisements to the forums! If you have questions, or if you encounter any bugs, please visit this thread:
We're funding a new Acquisitions Incorporated series on Kickstarter right now! Check it out at

Depths and Delvers Heroes of the Forgotten Bulge



  • DoobhDoobh She/Her, Ace Pan/Bisexual 8-) What's up, bootlickers?Registered User regular
    Rainfall wrote: »
    Dubh wrote: »
    I think they's ugly and boring in 4e. Different strokes.

    Well they're definitely ugly. I like the scions of a fallen infernal empire deal, though. It's a neat twist on a concept that admittedly did not need a twist.

    The Dragonborn have the same fallen empire dealio.
    Dichotomy wrote: »
    what happened to tieflings is a pretty tidy metaphor for everything that happened with 4e that I thought was great

    namely vagueness being more rigidly codified and organized

    also more cleavage because cleavage is a defining trait of 4e tieflings

    Unfortunately, I already a clear mental image of tieflings before they decided to codify it. I also thought it was weird that the Aasimar vanished from the picture. Though, given the style that 4e went with, Divas are pretty much the substitute.

    Miss me? Find me on:

    Twitch (I stream most days of the week)
    Twitter (mean leftist discourse)
  • AntimatterAntimatter Devo Was Right Gates of SteelRegistered User regular
    yeah, Devas are literally Aasimar with a different name as far as I can tell. a better one, imo, i like the usage of sanskrit.

  • DichotomyDichotomy Registered User regular
    but how could you build up a mental image of pre-4e tieflings in the first place

    their entire business was "infernal blood manifests in different ways. some have weird skin colors, some have horns, some have tails, some have one hoof, there are no shared traits"

  • StraightziStraightzi Here we may reign secure, and in my choice, To reign is worth ambition though in HellRegistered User regular
    Devas were just a different thing in pre-4e.

    Also I am part of the preferring 3.x tieflings party. I like distant descendant of a tainted bloodline trying desperately to cover it up a lot more than... whatever is going on in 4e.

  • StraightziStraightzi Here we may reign secure, and in my choice, To reign is worth ambition though in HellRegistered User regular
    I think 3.x was a lot heavier with the certain races are always certain alignments thing, which, while I didn't like it, made for some neat tiefling business.

  • Der Waffle MousDer Waffle Mous Blame this on the misfortune of your birth. New Yark, New Yark.Registered User regular
    Rainfall wrote: »
    Dubh wrote: »
    I liked Tieflings before 4e. The demony thing was less structured, with more divergence on what weird qualities express themselves.

    4E Tieflings are still cool, but the 3.5/Pathfinder ones really get the whole demonspawn devil child feel across a lot better.

    Which is wierd because those already exist and are called Cambions.

    Steam PSN: DerWaffleMous Origin: DerWaffleMous Bnet: DerWaffle#1682
This discussion has been closed.