Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Bregh" data-source="post: 1333380" data-attributes="member: 9285">I doubt the creatures of the Abyss bother with these designations, nor with any that are comprehendable to Prime Material mortals. The classifications are those given by Wizards and sages, undoubtedly--based on criteria relevant to them, not the demons. Such individualistic Chaos must have every Vrock screeching with insistance that there was no other creature like it on all the planes. I diasgree. :shrug: No big thing, as far as I can see. The glory of the game is that two different DMs can a approach the situation from two opposite ends, as we obviously have.Not so much a &quot;loose style of play&quot; as no established canon being required or sought in these matters. Six Type VIs are &quot;known&quot; to exist--rather like six of anything rare or marvellous being &quot;known&quot; to exist. At the time of the MM there were only ten &quot;known&quot; dragon types--no shadow dragons, faerie dragons, cloud dragons, mist dragons, gem dragons. Certainly, from a campaign perspective, these didn't spring into existence overnight. The drow weren't &quot;known&quot; to exist as of the MM, either. Such an adherence to the letter written (and not necessarily to the spirit of what was meant) seems unnecessarily limiting.And you would be quite far off the mark in assuming the MotP was the planes as envisioned by EGG. And you need not take it from me, as he has opined so many times, including the &quot;Q&amp;A&quot; thread on this board. (Which isn't to slam the MotP, its author, or its fans.) Indeed, Moore's Astral Plane article in Dragon and DCS's Queen of the Demonweb Pits present remarkably different views of the Planes than what was served up in The Dragon early on by EGG, or in the PHB, or by Kuntz and Ward in the DDG. What's a DM to do? Pick which one(s) work best for him or her and go with it, of course. Which seems to be what you and I are doing.&nbsp; <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f60e.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":cool:" title="Cool&nbsp; &nbsp; :cool:"&nbsp; data-smilie="6"data-shortname=":cool:" /></blockquote>

[QUOTE="Bregh, post: 1333380, member: 9285"] I doubt the creatures of the Abyss bother with these designations, nor with any that are comprehendable to Prime Material mortals. The classifications are those given by Wizards and sages, undoubtedly--based on criteria relevant to them, not the demons. Such individualistic Chaos must have every Vrock screeching with insistance that there was no other creature like it on all the planes. I diasgree. :shrug: No big thing, as far as I can see. The glory of the game is that two different DMs can a approach the situation from two opposite ends, as we obviously have. Not so much a "loose style of play" as no established canon being required or sought in these matters. Six Type VIs are "known" to exist--rather like six of anything rare or marvellous being "known" to exist. At the time of the MM there were only ten "known" dragon types--no shadow dragons, faerie dragons, cloud dragons, mist dragons, gem dragons. Certainly, from a campaign perspective, these didn't spring into existence overnight. The [i]drow[/i] weren't "known" to exist as of the MM, either. Such an adherence to the letter written (and not necessarily to the spirit of what was meant) seems unnecessarily limiting. And you would be quite far off the mark in assuming the [i]MotP[/i] was the planes as envisioned by EGG. And you need not take it from me, as he has opined so many times, including the "Q&A" thread on this board. (Which isn't to slam the [i]MotP[/i], its author, or its fans.) Indeed, Moore's Astral Plane article in [u]Dragon[/u] and DCS's [u]Queen of the Demonweb Pits[/u] present remarkably different views of the Planes than what was served up in [u]The Dragon[/u] early on by EGG, or in the [u]PHB[/u], or by Kuntz and Ward in the [u]DDG[/u]. What's a DM to do? Pick which one(s) work best for him or her and go with it, of course. Which seems to be what you and I are doing. :cool: [/QUOTE]

Verification