Elder Evils

Derren said:
What has an army of cultists to do with convincing the PCs to do something?
Evil cultists don't look like ninjas in a Wolverine comic. That duke? Cultist. The emperor's advisor? Cultist? Your church? Riddled with cultists. Pretty sure they can manipulate you.

These guys are meant to be campaign-spanning threats, not the EPL Monster Manual.

Obviously, if you two want to use it this way, it's going to be dissatisfying for you. I'd recommend the Avadnu epic monster book instead.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

A year ago, I absolutely would have picked up this book. However, I've bought my last 3.5e book (and perhaps my last D&D book, period).
 

Whizbang Dustyboots said:
Evil cultists don't look like ninjas in a Wolverine comic. That duke? Cultist. The emperor's advisor? Cultist? Your church? Riddled with cultists. Pretty sure they can manipulate you.

These guys are meant to be campaign-spanning threats, not the EPL Monster Manual.

And they fail at being campaign-spanning threats. Insane cultists lose to highly organized, well established group of Hextor worshippers (say). Add in the *extreme* difficulty of long term infiltration of a remotely competent, powerful DnD organization and you have a laughable sideshow.
 



Whizbang Dustyboots said:
No one seems to be commenting on the multiple Elder Evil previews up on wizards.com. What's everyone think of them? People liked the concept in Lords of Madness, as I recall, so what's the feeling about the Big Book of Baddies?

Is there more than the spotlight interview? Where are people getting sample stats for them from?
 


Whizbang Dustyboots said:
Why can't they be just as organized and established? What a strange objection.

Because a group of people bent on destroying all of existence, who pose a credible threat, will be destroyed by everyone before ever becoming established. People would pay attention to weak apocalyptic flunkies, and go on vermin extermination campaigns if they ever became significant.

Small group vs. multiverse ends very, very poorly for statted-up (killable) small groups.

(I'm of the opinion that high level characters don't normally interfere with low level adventures because they need successors. HLCs may, in fact, act as agents provocateurs if adventuring opportunities for the lowbies don't show themselves. Planet-killing threats, however, would not be considered hands-off. By anyone.)
 

Kraydak said:
Because a group of people bent on destroying all of existence, who pose a credible threat, will be destroyed by everyone before ever becoming established. People would pay attention to weak apocalyptic flunkies, and go on vermin extermination campaigns if they ever became significant.
This is certainly true of very stupid cults. Most successful conspiracies aren't stupid, though.
 

Zargon!

Zargon, baby, Zargon!!!

Like delericho (above), I was pretty sure I had bought my last 3.5e book... but it's within the realm of possibility that I'll buy Elder Evils for that one chapter alone. B4 - The Lost City is my favorite all-time module, and a really good treatment will be worth the price of entry.

I've run the entire Age of Worms campaign, but I'm still also moderately interested in Kyuss as well.

As for the rest...? I'll keep an open mind. Atropus is certainly... different. Some of the others sound like they're worth a read as well. It's a shame they didn't pull from a bit more established D&D fluff. I would've loved to have seen a treatment on, say, Kas (as in Sword of Kas... Kas and Vecna). Or Saint Kargoth the Betrayer (first of the death knights... or even Lord Soth). The return of Azalin (uber-lich from Ravenloft setting). The demigod (?) Arik, from B3 - Palace of the Silver Princess. Iuz the Old (too Greyhawk specific?). That nihilistic rubbish-heap from the Realms called Moander... or even the return of Bhaal (god of murder; who I feel is under-treated given his central role in the best-selling Baldur's Gate games).

So many options, just mining the classics...
 

Pets & Sidekicks

Remove ads

Top