DiabloFans

June sounds great, but I'm betting it will be pushed back. Probably to 2012. Seeing as how Virtual Reality failed, Blizzard will kick it up a notch, and release Diablo 3 in Actual Reality, bringing about the 2012 apocalypse predicted on the Mayan Calendar.

In all seriousness, I see it coming sometime next year.

Quote from PhrozenDragon

Quote from Elder

Whilst we don't necessarily have examples of all of these things taking place (although their are some), I'm merely referencing character. You tell me, based off of this, which one is more likey to respect Death and the Dead.

I agree with that. But more likely does not necessarily mean true.

Still, you raise an strong indication in support of this, and I cannot say that I have an alternative to present at this point.

Fair enough. Also, if Blizzard comes out and says that he's not the Angel of Death, I'll happily and humbly change my tune.

On that note, two other possible titles came to me, although I still think Death works better. Mourning and/or Remorse. Neither of them explain his intimidation factor though.

As for Imperius, whilst my first reaction is "Angel of War," Unlike Death, I have never heard of an Angel of War. It does seem a bit odd. I can see it being possible, as they say that religion has caused more wars than anyone, and his demeanor fits, and the Angels seem to have a much better organized military, but I'm not anywhere near certain on this one.

Maybe Wrath. I've heard of an Angel of Wrath before, although it may not fit as well. I hope we get official word on the titles of the Angiris Council. Would be a good thing to bring up at the Lore panel at Blizzcon (/hint hint wink wink nudge nudge).

Quote from Eldritch

Not strange in fictions very cosmologically different from this one.

Maybe so, but the point still stands. If more benign groups like the Valar or the Angels from Abrahamic Religions can have someone representing Death, why can't these Angels? Kelemvor, the God of Death is Lawful Neutral. If you were to put the Angels of Diablo into a D&D alignment system, where would they fall? Lawful-Good to Lawful Neutral (you might even be able to put an arguement forward to put Imperius in the Lawful Evil crowd, but I wouldn't try to push that one too hard).

Furthermore, why should what we know about Diablo's cosmology, (which is admittedly not as much as we'd like) interfere with there being an Angel of Death? The first time we see that Angels have specific domains is when we meet the Angiris Council, of which Malthael is a part (correct me if I'm wrong). This council, including Malthael, are the ones setting the precedence of what domains Angels have.

Quote from Ullion

This has nothing to do with "respecting the dead", no offense - but I don't really see how that influences the point that Angels are more appropriately fitted to Death than Demons. They respect it more? BOTH sides dabble in death. In different forms? Yes - as you've proven several times already. Angels respect and honor death, whereas the demons ejoy killing and ravaging anything that lives and defling those that have died. Personally, I would rather not give an Angel a title if it focused only on one aspect of what their title implies. That's just my opinion, though.

I never said Angels only focused on that aspect of Death. I was pointing out an aspect of death that Angels value more than Demons. The others still apply.

Killing: Angels have done plenty of killing, and will continue to do such. Whether they like it or not, it's part of what they've been doing for eternity. Don't forget they were actively contemplating Genocide. Intentions mean nothing compared to actions.

Dying: As I've pointed out before, Angels are probaby more willing to die for a cause than demons (with the exceptions of those who do so under duress and those who are simply designed to die, which need not be mutually exclusive).

The Dead: Angels have more respect for them, where as Demons only value them so much as they can use them (both for fodder, be it cannon fodder or just plain fodder, or fun).

By your logic, Angels have more to do with Death than Demons if you take all three aspects into account. The only aspect of Death that Demons really go into more than Angels is Undeath, which is more of a perversion and defiance of Death rather than an Aspect thereof.

Also, while you may not give the title of Death to an Angel, plenty of others have, as I've pointed out before. Tolkien gave it to Mandos, the Vala (for those who aren't schooled in the Lore of Tolkien, the Valar are somewhere between Demi-Gods and Arch-Angels), and the Valar seem to be somewhat more benevolent than Diablos Angels. The writers of Forgotten Realms gave it to the god Kelemvor, who was LN (closer to Angels than to Demons). Islamic, Jewish, and Christian culture all have Angels of Death, some Good some Evil. Does this prove that the Diablo Franchise has done it? No, nor does it need to. It has done it already by the rule of a duck (If it looks like an Angel of Death and sounds like an Angel of Death, and feels like an Angel of Death, it probably is one, and if you disagree, find a shoe that fits better). These just prove that it's really not all that strange.

Quote from PhrozenDragon

Quote from Elder

Aah, but Tyrael is the Angel of Justice, not Death. Just because they are part of the same organization, doesn't mean they necessarily agree on things (as has been referenced before). Undeath can actually serve justice sometimes. That and Tyrael has been shown to be somewhat more tolerant in some cases than his brethren.

True enough. My earlier points still stand though, particularly the fact that angels and demons are immortal and thus would not see death of old age as a natural cause: only conflict would bring about their deaths.

Perhaps, but as I said earlier, it stands to reason that any Angel would probably be very willing to die for a cause, whilst most Demons would probably rather not (there are two exceptions that I can think of: the demons that explode, and demons that, whilst they don't particularly want to die, they'd rather that then face the wrath of their masters; the two need not be mutually exclusive). There's a lot more to death than killing, even for Angels and Demons. There's dying, and resting in peace(hopefully), both of which can easily be associated with Angels.

EDIT: Let me put it for you this way. Which side is likely to do what with their dead (or even their enemies in certain circumstances)?

Angels are more likely to perform last rites for the dead (assuming such a thing exists), as well as give them a proper burial, including some sort of monument, be it anywhere from a tombstone to a statue, protect the remains from defilement, and at the very least, remember their own dead and honor them.

Demons are likely to defile the remains of either theirs or their enemies, raise them as zombies, raise them for the sport of torturing them, eat the corpse, and/or forget about those whom have died who are of no use to them.

Whilst we don't necessarily have examples of all of these things taking place (although their are some), I'm merely referencing character. You tell me, based off of this, which one is more likey to respect Death and the Dead.

Quote from PhrozenDragon

Quote from Elder

Angels of Death are still prevalent in fiction and religion. They aren't farfetched at all.

Which does not prove however that such is the case in Diablo.

Quote from Elder

Furthermore, Whilst a Demons interest in death is probably rooted in the amount of pain it can cause, they probably have no respect for it as a law of the Universe. In the mean time their use of necromancy defies death and is generally considered desecration (what with Mephisto being the Lord of the Undead). In the mean time, I imagine Malthael, as Angel of Death, probably is the guardian of Death in that he is against things like Necromancy.

Still, Tyrael willingly utilizes Achilios in the books. True, he did not actually raise the archer, but he did nevertheless benefit from his undead existence.

Aah, but Tyrael is the Angel of Justice, not Death. Just because they are part of the same organization, doesn't mean they necessarily agree on things (as has been referenced before). Undeath can actually serve justice sometimes. That and Tyrael has been shown to be somewhat more tolerant in some cases than his brethren.

Oh, and whilst an Angel would probably be more than willing to die for a cause, I doubt the same can be said for most demons (with the exception of either the ones that explode or the ones who know that their master torturing them for failure would be worse than death).

Angels of Death are still prevalent in fiction and religion. They aren't farfetched at all. Furthermore, Whilst a Demons interest in death is probably rooted in the amount of pain it can cause, they probably have no respect for it as a law of the Universe. In the mean time their use of necromancy defies death and is generally considered desecration (what with Mephisto being the Lord of the Undead). In the mean time, I imagine Malthael, as Angel of Death, probably is the guardian of Death in that he is against things like Necromancy.

Oh, and a religious fellow wanting to be reunited with his God has less to do with pain and more to do with hope.

Quote from Ophion

You forget that angels and humans are, by demon definition, good.

Humans could become the weapon the demons needed to at last seize total victory from the sanctimonious angels, yet the tendency toward good in them might make them ally themselves with the High Heavens…until the piousness and rigidity of the winged warriors sickened their stomachs as much as it did the demons.

Said by Astrogha. Taken from the article.

When you say that death can be good, I assume you mean when it can relieve you from the pains of life, such as torture. Examples of that is displayed numerous times in the novels when someone is in pain and would prefer death over torture. That is actually plausible. He could be the Angel of Mercy. Creepy mercy, but mercy nevertheless.
The death of a "bad guy" is still bad in the eyes of many, that is what I mean by enjoying death or not. The outcome doesn't matter, but the act. Humans in Sanctuary for example do enjoy some extreme forms of death, such as when Uldyssian kills Lucion, a really bad guy. The question is if angels can enjoy death like that, or if they simply do their duty and enjoy the outcome. We know for a fact that demons enjoy the act of killing, just look at the morlu ^^

Even without torture involved, death can be welcomed. For the old Widow/Widower, Death can be a reunification with lost loved ones. For a devoutly religious person, Death can be the opportunity to meet one's God and be relieved of a world of sin. It can be relief from a long hard life. It can be the next great adventure. Death can take many forms. In the end, Death is something that everyone deals with in their own way. Whilst I am in no hurry to die, I hope to face death without fear, but rather looking forward to what is to come.

At any rate, Angels of Death are not at all uncommon. For Blizzard to have one would be neither a stretch or a leap.

In Malthael's case, Death is characterized as the law that all must fallow. It is inevitable, dispationate, takes the rich, the poor, the bond, the free, the good and the bad, and takes them when it is their time. It's an enemy to some, an old friend to others. Sounds like an Angel in the Diablo Franchise to me. I'm not saying Angels like death, but as law they respect and honor it.

Quote from Ophion

Natural order? Nah, they just want complete control of all creation. The "Order" they live by is more likely structure.


There is a big difference between being ok with death and liking death. It is also different between being ok with killing and enjoying killing. Demons enjoy killing and death, they even have a Prime Evil with the title "Lord of Destruction".

If Tyrael had the job to deal with Justice, he would probably send a bunch of people to death. He might even enjoy some of it, but probably not because of the actual death, but because it serves justice.

Giving an angel the title of Death is imo like giving one the title of Destruction. Demons are so far given all of the "bad" titles, and angels all of the "good". I believe it will stay like that.

Again you forget that, as this article has outlined, these angels aren't necessarily good, at least not by our standards. Also, you, like many, mis-characterize death as bad. Death is death. It can be good, it can be bad, but in the end, it takes both. Whether you be religious or atheist, or of any creed, death is a fact of life, not necessarily an enemy. In many cases, Death is only as bad as the lives of those it takes, or the inverse thereof.

And again, the concept of an "Angel of Death" is ancient and prevalent. It can be found in Judaism, Islam, and Christianity, in good, evil and neutral forms. It can be found in fantasy in Lawful to Good forms.

Angel of Death really isn't a stretch at all, and considering that the book in which we meet this character is the first time we see Angels with specific domains, we really don't have any precedence that says what domains they can and can't have.

For what it's worth, "Destroying Angels" have been around for a while as well.

Quote from Ophion

Demons doesn't like dying, but they enjoy killing, they eat humans, and they sacrifice a lot. Angels doesn't enjoy killing for the sake of killing, but rather as a way to do their "duty".

Who says all death is killing? Death covers a broad spectrum beyond murder and malice. I imagine angels would want to uphold the natural order, and that order includes death.

Also, you forget that these Angels aren't necessarily benevolent (although some of them are). It seems they prize order. They're closer to Lawful or Lawful Good and not so much Neutral good (with the exceptions of maybe Auriel and Itherael). Therefore, I don't think they have any problems with death and people dying. They were actively contemplating wiping out a whole world, and Malthael didn't oppose it.

Anyway, as I said earlier, death being personified as lawful is nothing new. Blizzard certainly wouldn't be original in making death an angel.

I disagree in that "Angel of Death" is plenty appropriate. There are plenty of examples of Death being considered a heavenly or at least neutral force in literature and in religion. For examples, there's Exodus, where god sent the "Angel of Death" in to take the firstborn of the Egyptians. There's also Kelemvor (a more balanced personification of Death than his predecessors) from Forgotten Realms. That and in deep Tolkien Mythos there's Mandos, the Vala (or Angel) who's portfolio is that of death and doom (or destiny).

Whilst Demons do deal in death, they also are against the natural order. That order includes death. That's why demons occasionally employ necromancy. I sincerely doubt that Malthael would ever touch Necromancy. He probably likes death to be final (similar to Kelemvor). He probably wouldn't think much of the balance oriented necromancers either. He's the lawful representation of death: inevitable and final.

Good article. I very much enjoyed it.

Quote from "zeroRooter" »

"America" is definitely not the greatest country of all. (Don't flame me, it's my opinion) I've been around italy, I live in canada, and ive been around the US and i did not like it :S. Too much violence especially in philadelphia.

Reallife incident: The bus i was on to philadelphia left me off right infront of a fistfight between the cops and this random idiot in phili :P. Too much...

To continue going off topic, I'd say Phili is a poor example to judge the rest of us by. I have never once seen a fist-fight at the bus stop, and I've lived in a wide variety of neighborhoods. Try somewhere that's not a huge city with a large murder-rate-per-capita. There are plenty of them.

Quote from "Jaycub" »

plus shes a 10 :thumbsup:

Yes she is!

Quote from "SFJake" »

You didn't mention your daughter. This is quite different. The way you phrased it at first didn't help either.

Its perfectly understandable now. Sorry for my previous, blunt comment but I speak my mind without hesitation, even if I don't have all the information I should before doing so

No need to apologize. I wasn't very clear in my first post. I didn't take offense at all. I hope I didn't come across as if I did.