Armies of the Abyss

[Kaptain_Kantrip]

Just bought this today. I'm pretty happy with it, and recommend it as giving good value for the $14.95 price tag.

Most of the demons, demon lords and demon princes are great additions to the game. Each seems very distinct in personality and interests, and enough details are given as to their mortal cults to inspire any DM into fiendish action. This book is even better than Legions of Hell in this regard. The demonic rulers motives now seem more understandable--and thus more useful--to the DM.

I was very appreciative that the book included adult subject matter and didn't shy away from it. This helped bring out the corruption, seductiveness and perversity of these fiends and their followers. I was actually a bit surprised at just how far the book went to describe some of these details.

The new (demonic) domains for priests are great and can be used for a variety of different gods beyond those in the Abyss.

Most of the art was good. The book's cover and binding were much nicer than Legions of Hell. I think the book is longer than Legions, though I loaned out my copy and can't compare the two at the moment.
___________

One thing I wished, and I realize why it wasn't included (WoTC PI/IP), was more details on Demogorgon, Juiblex, Orcus, etc. However, the book does include mentions of them by other, easily recognizable names (Vaz'ht for Graz'zt, Lord of Many Forms for Juiblex, etc.), and even gives info on their domains and interests in a helpful full page sidebar.
____________

A couple things I didn't like:

Qlippoths: The nearly extinct demonic race that created the Tanar'ri... they look goofy (bad art), sound goofy (silly name) and while they read much better than they sound, still don't quite do it for me. They seemed totally unnecessary... why not just give us more demons instead? That's why we're buying the book!

Thaumaturge core class: This is the same as a cleric, except you lose all armor proficiencies, get a d6 HD, and a familiar, and your spells are based off Charisma... You also lose your soul when you die. In exchange, you get a required daily obesience (such as dissolving human noses in vials of acid for Juiblex), and eventual mutations like body odor, bad breath, ice cold bodily fluids, a vestigal tail and glowing red eyes (to name a few of the possible corruptions you must randomly roll for at certain levels). This seems like a lot to lose for minimal gain... You would always be better off being a cleric or multi-classed cleric/sorcerer of a demon prince than a thaumaturge, so what's the point? Great concept, but poor execution. The corruptions themselves, however, could easily be used for the Black Wizard penalties in a d20 Lankhmar campaign.

The thaumaturge feats seem cool but they inflict yet more corruptions on the poor thaumaturge for taking them! This is too much pain for too little gain, IMO. Haven't they been punished enough already?

 

[Lady Dragon]

I like the Qlippoth idea I think it gives the tarnari yet another possible problem to deal with They have the celestials,the devils,each other and now the qlippoth to deal with to keep them in control.

 

[drnuncheon]

Thaumaturge core class: This is the same as a cleric, except you lose all armor proficiencies, get a d6 HD, and a familiar, and your spells are based off Charisma... You also lose your soul when you die.

After looking at it for a good long while I've come to the conclusion that the Thaumaturge is actually supposed to be an NPC class like the Warrior or Expert. There's really no other explanation for it - you also get weaker BABs and weaker saves than a cleric, and a good number of corruptions reduce your charisma (and thus your spellcasting ability).

I think the Influence Chaos Warp feat is pretty much a must for any Thaumaturge - you can usually avoid the worst effects with it.

Oh, also, the name 'qlippoth' is not Erik Mona's fault. It's from the Kaballistic tradition, and translates variously as "evil" and/or "empty shell". Just another sign that the man did his research!

J

 

[Crothian]

I like the qlippoth. THe class does seem NPC only. Perhaps someone will create a powerful version more suited for PCs. Otherwise I'm really happy with this book.

 

[Psion]

Just bought this today. I'm pretty happy with it, and recommend it as giving good value for the $14.95 price tag.

Concur.

Most of the demons, demon lords and demon princes are great additions to the game. Each seems very distinct in personality and interests, and enough details are given as to their mortal cults to inspire any DM into fiendish action. This book is even better than Legions of Hell in this regard.

Do not agree. There are some ideas in here, but it is not as richly laced with interesting ideas as LOH is.

The new (demonic) domains for priests are great and can be used for a variety of different gods beyond those in the Abyss.

I thought they were good except for the phantasmal lover thing, which was both misplaced and overpowered.

Most of the art was good. The book's cover and binding were much nicer than Legions of Hell. I think the book is longer than Legions, though I loaned out my copy and can't compare the two at the moment.

Nope. They are the same length. AoA has less whitespace, but makes up for it with the thaumaturge.

Qlippoths: The nearly extinct demonic race that created the Tanar'ri... they look goofy (bad art), sound goofy (silly name) and while they read much better than they sound, still don't quite do it for me. They seemed totally unnecessary... why not just give us more demons instead?

Um. they ARE demons, just a different type of demon. Just like Tanar'ri are, in 3e, just a type of demon.

Scott Green seems to miss this point, too.

You would always be better off being a cleric or multi-classed cleric/sorcerer of a demon prince than a thaumaturge, so what's the point?

Agreed. They did a beter job of a "scary servant of darkness" with OA's Maho Tsukai.

 

[Pramas]

I like the qlippoth. THe class does seem NPC only. Perhaps someone will create a powerful version more suited for PCs. Otherwise I'm really happy with this book.

Armies is a book for DMs and the thaumaturge is largely meant to be used by the DM as a villain.

On the page count, Armies is 66 to Legions 64. I only say that because people are quick to say Freeport is 158 pages because they don't consider the 2 pages of ads there part of the page count. Well, not only are there no ads in Armies, we had to print on the inside covers as well, and still had to cut the Abyssal Dragon Template! So I'm taking credit for 2 extra pages, baby!

 

[Kaptain_Kantrip]

Re: Re: Armies of the Abyss

Oh, also, the name 'qlippoth' is not Erik Mona's fault. It's from the Kaballistic tradition, and translates variously as "evil" and/or "empty shell". Just another sign that the man did his research!

J

Ok, but just because there is a historical precedent for the name doesn't mean it's "cool" sounding! And the art for them didn't get me excited about using qlippoths in my game. The intestine monster one looked like a children's hand puppet from Sesame Street or something, LOL.

Overall, Erik did a great job on the book--there are some rough spots, to be sure--but the book seems like a solid investment. I had fun reading it and can't wait to use some of the demons (like the incubus) in my game! Of course, I also enjoyed Legions of Hell but after a year have only gotten to use a couple of critters from it!

 

[7thlvlDM]

Hmm... I don't think I like the idea of NPC classes. If a class is balanced for players to play, it'll also work as an NPC/villian class. But if a class is designed as an "NPC class", it usually means it's not balanced for PC play.

 

[Kaptain_Kantrip]

Hmm... I don't think I like the idea of NPC classes. If a class is balanced for players to play, it'll also work as an NPC/villian class. But if a class is designed as an "NPC class", it usually means it's not balanced for PC play.

I agree with this. I don't use any of the NPC classes in the DMG, and think they are a waste of time. They don't present a challenge and the ones that seem like they might be interesting to play are grossly underpowered compared to the core classes. To me, NPC only classes are a dumb idea left over from previous editions of the game. Everything should be balanced for PC use.

 

[Isawa Sideshow]

I agree with this. I don't use any of the NPC classes in the DMG, and think they are a waste of time. They don't present a challenge and the ones that seem like they might be interesting to play are grossly underpowered compared to the core classes. To me, NPC only classes are a dumb idea left over from previous editions of the game. Everything should be balanced for PC use.

So, a first-level commoner should be able to go toe-to-toe with a first-level fighter? Or a first-level aristocrat versus a first-level monk? The whole point of NPC classes is that they represent people who aren't generally heroic, and that don't spend their time learning new and better ways to disembowel, disable, and discombobulate enemy hordes. Of course they're not balanced compared to PCs - they're not supposed to be; they're not supposed to be a challenge, combat-wise.

However, story-wise, even a low-level aristocrat can be a match for a high-level party if he knows the right strings to pull and the right pawns to move. A guild full of merchant experts could make the characters' lives a living hell if they have enough connections. And if you think commoners aren't anything to be concerned about, try a full-blown peasant revolt on for size. Sure, they may not be all that powerful, but there's an awful lot of them.

NPC classes add a lot of flavor and depth to a world. Otherwise, everyone is either totally unskilled (0-level characters) or everyone's got the same kind of training you do. "Yeah, that farming village over there? Don't go there - every farmer is trained in 15 different ways to kill a man."