Excerpt: Archons (merged)

[Hussar]

D&D has long survived lots and lots of creatures that look pretty darn similar. Heck, thirty years of balors and pit fiends that looked pretty much identical wasn't a problem, why is this?

 

[Yaezakura]

D&D has long survived lots and lots of creatures that look pretty darn similar. Heck, thirty years of balors and pit fiends that looked pretty much identical wasn't a problem, why is this?

Very true. Heck, if you couldn't find a demon and devil that looked like brothers in earlier editions, you really weren't trying very hard.

I don't really see the Angels and Archons as being similar. They share some minor surface similarities, and Angels can use elemental attacks. If the two are not different enough for your tastes, it would seem every vaguely humanoid creature would need to be redesigned.

Elves, eladrin, dwarves, halflings, all out the door, because they look too human. We can't have more than one species of dragon, otherwise all the dragons start looking alike--they'd all have claws and tails and wings and teeth and scales and breath weapons, after all. In fact, probably 90% of all monsters ever conceived would have to be rebuilt from the ground up to have no similarity whatsoever to any other.

This is, of course, a horrible idea. The point is: Where do you draw the line? How similar is too similar? That line is, of course, in a different place for everyone. But if you're saying Archons and Angels look too much alike, you cannot say differently about Humans and Elves with a straight face (or any of the other humanoid races--by gods, they're even called humanoid). And I don't hear anyone clamoring for elves to be visually reconcepted.

 

[catsclaw227]

D&D has long survived lots and lots of creatures that look pretty darn similar. Heck, thirty years of balors and pit fiends that looked pretty much identical wasn't a problem, why is this?

This.

Was that sarcasm or are you seriously arguing that the new angels don't look somewhat elemental and very similar to archons?

Actually, I am having a hard time understanding the argument that the new angels look too much like archons. They have different abilities, different attack energy types, different appearances, are from different sources and seem to serve completely different sets of beings. How much more different do you want them?

 

[pawsplay]

Ice Archon Rimehammer is offically the first 4e name that rules.

Word to your moms I came to drop bombs
I got more rhymes than the bible's got psalms
And just like the Prodigal Son I've returned
Anyone stepping to me you'll get burned
Cause I got lyrics and you ain't got none
So if you come to battle bring a shotgun
But if you do you're a fool, cause I duel to the death
Try and step to me you'll take your last breath
I gots the skill, come get your fill
Cause when I shoot ta give, I shoot to kill

 

[Blackeagle]

Are you sure? Let A be a Rimehammer and X be the unlucky target, and * be an ice square:

*****
*AXA*
*****

X cannot shift because all of his options are difficult terrain. X has a move of 2, so he can at most move 1 square in any direction (provoking 2 OAs in the process).

I think the Leaf on the Wind power from the new Tiefling Warlord pregen provides a nice example of how a power could get you out of this (a first level power, no less). Leaf on the wind allows you to switch places with an enemy on a successful hit (as well as pasting them for 2d8+3). So, use Leaf on the Wind to swap places with the archon on the left. Now that the archon's moved, the leftmost squares are no longer within the radius of the archon's Icy Ground, so shift away.

 

[hong]

Ice, ice archon hammer time!

 

[ForbidenMaster]

Ice, ice archon hammer time!

My brain cant even process what you just wrote.

 

[Scholar & Brutalman]

I don't have any problem with the Archons looking a lot like Angels: according to their fluff, they were created as cheap knock-offs of Angels by the Primordials.

I don't think they're really that interesting as monsters, though.

 

[Yaezakura]

I don't have any problem with the Archons looking a lot like Angels: according to their fluff, they were created as cheap knock-offs of Angels by the Primordials.

I don't think they're really that interesting as monsters, though.

Conceptually, they're not that interesting. They're just elemental humanoids in armor who deal damage of their innate element.

The execution, though, I thought was brilliant. The Ice Archons really seem the epitome of Ice-based soldiers. The Hailscourge's name is all too fitting, between it's Hail Storm spell and the fact it throws icy shurikens, and overall really makes them seem like the incarnation of a biting blizzard. And the Rimehammers just seem cruel, especially if they manage to team up on someone and guarantee one gets the +2d6 damage every turn. And the fact they freeze the ground around them? Both amusing and fitting for their role as front-line warriors. Their mere presence makes it harder for opponents to reach their long-ranged support units like the Hailscourge.

Even if the basic concept behind them is boring and done a million times before, the execution of that concept is amazing. I look forward both to putting them against players and having them come up against me. And it should say something about a monster when it looks like fun from both sides of the table.

 

[Jhaelen]

The first words uttered by every angel that appears in the bible are, roughly, "don't be afraid." Call me nuts, but I hardly think this means they're inoccuous looking.

Absolutely! Some of the Old Testament angelic types would fit right in with the D&D creatures from the Far Realms...