Talk:Asmodeus (Dungeons & Dragons)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is part of WikiProject Dungeons & Dragons, which collaborates on Dungeons & Dragons-related articles. To participate, help improve this article or visit the project page for details on the project.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on the quality scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

Contents 1 World Serpent 2 Introduction 3 Asmodai 4 Sources

[edit] World Serpent

I've gone ahead and deleted the part of the article that claimed that Jazirian's background as an aspect of the World Serpent was canonically questionable. There were two 2e books, "Monster Mythology", and the Forgotten Realms supplement "Powers and Pantheons", which established that Jazirian was an aspect of the World Serpent. So, the World Serpent origin for Jazirian was clearly around long before "Serpent Kingdoms". Zigra (talk) 00:28, 22 December 2007 (UTC)Zigra

The question of canonicity isn't so much related to the Monster Mythology and P&P take on Jazirian and the World Serpent, but the association of that motif/mythology with the entirely seperate Guide to Hell use of Asmodeus and Jazirian.

The material regarding Jazirian as an aspect of the World Serpent doesn't have any real connection to the material claiming Asmodeus and Jazirian as a dualistic LE/LG pairing. In fact the original World Serpent sources you mention also IIRC have other serpentine gods and entities like Mershaulk and Shekinster as aspects of a putative World Serpent, which doesn't mesh at all with GtH's later use.

That said, I agree with your edit actually, but looking at it a bit more, I'd suggest removing those lines it applies to entirely, because the material doesn't have a connection to the GtH Asmodeus/Jazirian mythos; it's its own seperate mythos entirely that just happens to include Jazirian (but pointedly, not Asmodeus). Before I make an edit though, I'm curious about your take on the issue, and anyone else for that matter.Shemeska (talk) 03:46, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

I agree with your assessment, Shemeska. I just didn't like the way that part of the article had been worded because for two reasons- 1) it made the not-so-subtle implication that the World Serpent story of Jazirian's origins was non-canon to 2e Dungeons and Dragons in general and 2) whoever wrote that bit sounded as if they were unaware that there were two major 2e books which supported the World Serpent backstory for Jazirian, and that it wasn't just invented for 3rd Edition.

What I'd propose is pointing out that there is an alternate story for Jazirian's origins that conflicts with the story of Asmodeus and Jazirian as twins, and that it is uncertain which is the truth, or if they should be considered seperate coninuities in D&D material. Zigra (talk) 05:26, 23 December 2007 (UTC)Zigra

[edit] Introduction

I've changed the wording "Ninth Plane of Hell" to the "Ninth Layer of Hell". Hell is the plane, which just happens to have nine layers. - DDSaeger

[edit] Asmodai

Do we really need the blurb at the top of this article? "For the Judeo-Christian demon, see Asmodai." After all, anyone searching for that subject will probably never use "Asmodeus (Dungeons & Dragons)" as a search term. It seems to be little more than clutter at this point.--Robbstrd 01:42, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

I don't really have a strong preference either way. Given the way Wikipedia is archived by search engines and mirror sites, there's no surefire way for us to know how readers will find their way to this or any other Wikipedia article, and the hatnotes are in my opinion a useful navigation/disambiguation aid for readers. However, reviewing the various discussions about hatnotes (e.g., WP:D talk, proposed guideline talk) there doesn't seem to be much consensus about when and where to use them, so I'll remove them for now. --Muchness 03:03, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Just FYI, I found this entry by googling for "asmodean" after reading about him in the Fiendish Codex II at a Borders. I clicked on a wikipedia result that took me to the Wheel of Time Asmodean article. From there I clicked on Judeo-Christian article about Asmodai. I went to the discussion page and found the section on "Asmodai in fiction" which linked to this article. Kind of convoluted, but thats the path that brought me here. Hope it helps. Patrickriggs 00:38, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

I've added a dab link back to certain articles in an attempt to stave off a content dispute with JarlaxleArtemis (talk · contribs), who feels the target articles are potentially useful to readers. I'm open to other suggestions – maybe a see also, or a section (if we can find sources) explaining how the D&D names are derived from/inspired by preexisting terms. --Muchness 01:14, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Sources

Why is there still a request for sources tag at the start of the article? Does anyone feel that the Book of Vile Darkness, Codex of the Nine Hells, and other sources aren't enough? Those two books are, I believe, the primary source of info on Asmodeus in D&D 3rd edition. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Halloween jack (talk • contribs) 02:55, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

I think the trouble are the notability guidelines, which demand secondary sources (i. e. not the gaming products themselves). If these guidelines were strictly applied, I fear that an immense number of articles dealing with persons or objects in fiction would be deleted. I have included a source [1] that uses Asmodeus as one example of an evil Christian mythologic figure that gave rise to criticism of D&D. I wonder if this is enough to satisfy the notability requirement. Maybe the Dragon Magazine has articles about Asmodeus' importance for D&D (instead of in-game details only)? Daranios 14:41, 19 October 2007 (UTC)