Demon Lords and Princes: How *Bad* Should They Be?

[coyote6]

So....the later dragon age categories. Wyrm, great wyrm, in a few cases even Ancient....they are worthless, right? Or should be squeezed down into CR 21ish for you?

Not necessarily. A group of 21st level PCs might be able to take a great wyrm red dragon, with careful preparation.

If you want a 20th level encounter with a demon, use a balor.

Please don't tell me what to do in my campaigns.

 

[Kain Darkwind]

Not necessarily. A group of 21st level PCs might be able to take a great wyrm red dragon, with careful preparation.



Please don't tell me what to do in my campaigns.

Please don't whine and snivel when I make generalized comments or suggestions in the form of a statement. It is immature and petty.

 

[Ripzerai]

Not necessarily. A group of 21st level PCs might be able to take a great wyrm red dragon, with careful preparation.

Then a higher-CR Demogorgon wouldn't be useless. Kain's point was that if a higher-CR Demogorgon is useless, so's the great wyrm. If the great wyrm's not useless, neither would Demogorgon be.

 

[Kain Darkwind]

From a flavor standpoint, yes.

Ok...so you what you are advocating is that the FLAVOR of all monsters and such be reduced to 20th level as well. So that the powerful dragons should NOT be written as more powerful than CR 20 (with advancement allowing those who wish to play epic to use dragons in their campaigns as well)

Totally don't agree with you, but this seems to make more sense than a metagame reasoning behind reducing stats. I think it would be difficult to create a believable world or cosmos with that design philosophy, especially when it comes to gods and such. 20 levels can't really fit EVERY thing in, not using the DnD 3.5 system.

Depends.
However, an appropriate base level must be achieved, from which the sliding scale would descend from. Now, do you have HotA? Are you reading it now? Because it seems like some of those who have the book are saying that these stats are calculated as if the Lord were off his or her lair. Others are saying, no it's not written that way.

Now, since I don't have the book, I can't really judge. However, let's go with the assumption, that these are their stats on plane or off plane. Now, if each one had a CR higher than the average Balor's, then I'd say that an appropriate 'base line' has been achieved (not accounting for the fact that CR isn't very good at power assessment). This way, the demon lords are above (not much) the 'average' Balor and can be advanced until you reach whatever power level you desire. Sure it takes work, but it's better than having stats that are completely useless or having no stats at all (assuming you want stats).

From my understanding of the information, the stats are presented as if they were the real deal. (And will probably be what is used at the end of the upcoming Dungeon Adventure Path with Demogorgon) Other people, who have disagreed with the low base-line, have offered the idea that the stats only reflect an aspect of the archfiend, and that the real one would be advanced more. That's a good idea, and I respect that. What I don't agree with, is labeling these low baselines as the actual stats, and that IS how the book presents it. Not as aspects, not as minor avatars, but as the real deal.

Or you can be a 2e baernaloth.

Heh. In 1e, Demogorgon had 200 hp. Thor had somewhere around 300. In 3.5 edition, Thor has 60HD, and Demogorgon doesn't even hit 30.

It's a game, anyone can play however they wish. If someone really wants to play that way and everyone is having fun, how can you dump on their play style? I don't want to play that way, but maybe someone does. It's not bad-wrong.

Again, I'm not dumping on play styles, I'm dumping on design styles. If you want to play the game with a 5HD demogorgon, that's cool. But I'd like to know how you can justify your campaign world's flavor. Does this 5HD Demogorgon have the same history as the one from DnD? Do 20HD balors still exist, subservient to him? Are demons still chaotic evil and constantly challenge the rule of this being, who puts them in their place time and again?

Play style is one thing, and that differs from group to group. But world building is the same as a story, and you can't have a half-arsed suspension of disbelief in a good book. It is a story's job to make you believe, and an internal consistancy is needed. Same with a cosmos, a world, a campaign setting. If you give me a book that says a balor is CR 20, and some specimens reach CR 41, and another book saying that a demon prince rules balors, I'm going to expect something capable of pimping the CR 20s, and at the very least, holding its own against the CR 41s. If you hand me something showing me that the demon prince is CR 19, and weaker than a balor, I'm going to ask why. I'm going to ask for justification. And when I know that justification is not coming, I'm going to decry the idea as half-baked.

Not a very good comparison.
You're comparing a mere mechanic (a Jump check) to a creature with past and flavor to it (a demon lord).

Everything tangible in the entire world is a mechanic. Only intangibles like personality aren't covered. An owlbear has a certain baseline. A bear does. A bridge. Whether you use those mechanics to run from it, kill it, or conquer it, the mechanics are what allow you to do so. Changing the mechanics of a Jump check is the same as changing the mechanics of a bugbear.

Actually, it's my game, I can really do whatever I want in it, but that's really beside the point.

Even moreso, because I'm using you in a generalized sense. When did everyone become so sensitive and tremble lipped over someone saying "you do this"? I am speaking from a design perspective. 'You' refers to the designers. Dry your eyes, I'm not coming over to police your games.

Nitpick, Demo doesn't rule the Abyss.

Touche. I could respond with "HE DOES IN MY WORLD!!!! DON'T TELL ME HOW TO RUN MY GAME!!!!!". But that would be hypocritical. Abysm then. The ruler of Abysm.

Regardless of what I may be saying, I do agree with you that the status quo power level should be maintained. I'm just arguing that, as seen all over the internet, NO ONE AGREES ON HOW POWERFUL THEY SHOULD BE. Which is why I advocate the Advancing the Archfiends idea, using an 'appropriate' base power level established. Since I don't have the book, I don't really know if the stats would or do represent an appropriate base power level. I'll find out when I get it.

Which is why we have these delightful conversations and debates about how powerful they should be. But that's a flavor perspective. I'm not attacking the idea of advancing them perse. I'm attacking the idea of suggesting that their baseline of CR 19-23 is appropriate for them in ANY cosmos where they don't get gangbanged by balors on a constant basis.

 

[ashockney]

I'm definitely in the camp that would prefer to see CR's for demon lords scale from perhaps as low as 22 up to as high as 60.

Using the core game as it's been presented, we have three key "levels" to the game. Standard DnD which is from 1st - 20th level.
Epic DnD which is from 21st - 40th level.
Immortal DnD which is from 41st - 60th level.

I will make a few broad sweeping generalizations based upon MY personal experience:
The basic game breaks down considerably from 12th to 20th level.
Epic DnD has flaws nearly too numerous to mention. Surprisingly, if you whether the storm, it actually does play (with great tinkering) pretty well from 20th to 30th.
I've never seen any material on immortal DnD presented in format that was referenceable other than "as reference", but nothing really playable as a game without a TON of work.

If this is the game, as it's been presented, demon lords should be represented broadly across this full (60 level) spectrum. I, too, agree that the players should be able to battle a demon lord at the end of their campaign. It would be ok, however, if this were not Demogorgon. There should be many powerful/advanced demons, perhaps hundreds, in the CR 20 - 30 range. One of the reasons that people should be so scared to encounter them.

I do not begrudge the authors from wanting to make "accessible" to the greater market, the concept that by 20th level or so, you're trying to take out Llolth herself, on her home plane. This fantasy sword and sorcery adage dates back to the original GDQ series of modules, one of the first published for the game. When your group has truly traversed the untold perils that await them in these highest levels, and bested a "named" demon queen. It is a story they can, and should, regale other gamers with for many years to come.

However, to make the most notable and powerful of the demon lords, all within reach of the basic game, demeans the game for any of those who desire to play the game to it's fullest.

It is akin to making a 60th level EQ raid, killable only by the most veteran players, in groups of 60 or more, with the most powerful equipment, something that a party of 50th level characters could best. Were EQ to do it, they would lose a significant part of their consumer base.

 

[bastrak]

IMO Demon Princes and Devil Lords should be in the CR 25-30 range.

 

[delericho]

In general, it's much easier to scale creatures up in power in D&D than it is to scale them down. That being the case, a relatively low CR for demon princes is more useful than a higher one.

The majority of game groups play at non-Epic levels (or Dungeon would feature Epic adventures far more often than once per year). Therefore, stats for any creature that cannot be realistically defeated by a 20th level party are useless to the majority of groups (and, yes, that does include Great Wyrm Red Dragons). Make the Demon Lords CR 30+, and they're useless to the majority of groups.

Make the Demon Lords CR 20ish, and they're a lot more use to the majority of groups (although I do think that's a bit low). But they're also of use to groups who want more powerful Demon Lords - just scale them up. Advancing the creatures by 20 hit dice and/or adding a bunch of levels isn't that hard. Especially since the flavour of the abilities is already there for you, so the choices should be quite easy.

 

[coyote6]

Then a higher-CR Demogorgon wouldn't be useless. Kain's point was that if a higher-CR Demogorgon is useless, so's the great wyrm. If the great wyrm's not useless, neither would Demogorgon be.

I said, "stats that ~20th-21st level PCs can challenge" -- notice that there are no CR values mentioned there; I certainly didn't say "CR 20-21 stats" or anything like that. I also said CR 30+ aren't very useful for me -- because I reckon that CR 30+ aren't things that level 20-21 PCs can tackle with any realistic chance of success*. A CR 27 great wyrm is not CR 30+ -- that's self-evident, isn't it? Thus, I never excluded great wyrms as possible ending villains (which would have been very silly and contradictory of me, given how I expect one of my current campaigns to end).

A battle against a CR 27 Demogorgon could very well be a viable epic ending for a campaign of mine; it would depend on the specific stats (of both the creature and the PCs), I imagine. Not all CR 27s are the same, and a group of PCs can have capabilities that make a particular threat more-or-less threatening than it would be to another group of PCs (e.g., a group with an undead-turning-optimized cleric with the Sun domain will likely find a battle against a powerful vampire or the like much easier than a group without all the turning power); IME, this effect can be stronger at higher levels.

*(Or without a lot of outside factors that favor the PCs, which would make it a lower EL encounter; perhaps I should say "EL" rather than "CR"?)

 

[Kain Darkwind]

In general, it's much easier to scale creatures up in power in D&D than it is to scale them down. That being the case, a relatively low CR for demon princes is more useful than a higher one.

The majority of game groups play at non-Epic levels (or Dungeon would feature Epic adventures far more often than once per year). Therefore, stats for any creature that cannot be realistically defeated by a 20th level party are useless to the majority of groups (and, yes, that does include Great Wyrm Red Dragons). Make the Demon Lords CR 30+, and they're useless to the majority of groups.

Make the Demon Lords CR 20ish, and they're a lot more use to the majority of groups (although I do think that's a bit low). But they're also of use to groups who want more powerful Demon Lords - just scale them up. Advancing the creatures by 20 hit dice and/or adding a bunch of levels isn't that hard. Especially since the flavour of the abilities is already there for you, so the choices should be quite easy.

But then this brings up the question, does 'use' matter? Would you advocate that same concept be applied to gods? Should greater gods have a CR of, oh say, 24, and then have a method where you can 'scale them up' to keep them at least a level higher than the party cleric? What about high level NPCs like Larloch or Elminster? Should he be CR 20 or below because he is 'no use' to the bulk of DnD games?

Great Wyrm Dragons aren't useful to games of sub-20th level, AS ADVERSARIES. You shouldn't be basing the use of a creature though (much less a unique NPC) based on how many people's parties can roll initiative and walk away the victors.

Great Wrym Dragons should be at the CR they are at. They ARE that powerful. If that means that you can't use them in your games as a combat, that's ok. They don't need to be a combat. Not all creatures in the game exist only to convert into XP for the PCs.

Same with the demon lords, only on a higher scale. They rule layers of the Abyss. Entire layers that are larger than the planets that some campaigns are set on. infinite layers, if you believe that idea. Just because you aren't going to be able to beat them at a high level doesn't mean they should be that high level.


Everything in the world does not need to exist for the PCs to kill. A CR that is higher than they will ever be capable of matching doesn't make the creature/entity that it is attached to useless.

 

[Ripzerai]

A battle against a CR 27 Demogorgon could very well be a viable epic ending for a campaign of mine; it would depend on the specific stats

Can we establish a consensus that an Abyssal Prince should be at least CR 27, then? Even among the "epic/divine creatures are useless" crowd?