Extraplanar D&D/PF creatures and you. Looking for feedback on your use of them. :)

[Shemeska]

I originally posted this over on the Paizo forums, since I was largely looking for feedback regarding outsiders that have appeared in their Bestiary I, II, TGB, and the two Books of the Damned, but the question is broader really so I'll ask folks here on Enworld as well.

Allow me to pick your collective brains if you don't mind, but *raises a hand* I like planar monsters. I've created a number of them over the years, and I'd love to snag some feedback from folks as to which extraplanar creatures you've used in your campaigns and in what capacity, and more specifically which planar monsters you really like or really don't like (and why/why not). You get bonus points for talking about any newer outsiders like agathions, azata, proteans, etc.

Humor me if you would (or quasits will come after you. Little known fact: I have a small, trained army of them).

(FWIW this isn't directly related to any current writing projects of mine)

 

[BOZ]

Agathions are new?

 

[pemerton]

The agathion is from AD&D MM2 - I just had a look to remind myself - and if I ever used one, it was over 20 years ago.

I've used a lot of extraplanar creatures over the years - all sorts of devils and demons from D&D sourcebooks, Rolemaster sourcebooks, Palladium sourcebooks, etc (and treating daemons as demons well before 4e, except for charonodaemons which I've always treated as free agents according to the guidelines in MM2), a wide range of shadow creatures, lots of voidal/Far Realms creatures (using mostly the ones from RM's Creatures and Treasures II, authored by Monte Cook, but also the slaad lords from Fiend Folio), constables of hell (from AD&D Oriental Adventures - the Lawful Neutral Oni) and angels as well.

I don't think I've ever used a Lammasu, Shedu or Ki-Rin but could be wrong about that. I think I used a Hollyphant once a long time ago. I have used Shirokinukatsukami (from Oriental Adventures) and may have used an Opinicus.

As to what I look for in an extraplanar monster - some sort of connection to, or evocation of, thematic content that will engage my players. If an extraplanar creature doesn't link to the mythic history of the gameworld in a way that drives the story forward, it may as well be a mundane monster.

So Far Realm/voidal creatures evoke insanity, dissolution or the illusory nature of reality (depending on one's perspective). Demons evoke destruction and dissolution. The way I have generally used devils and angels (including constables of hell) is to reflect notions of duty/obligation/obedience (because both gods and devils are bound by cosmic agreements that transcend the concerns and interests of mere mortals). And creatures like the Shirokinukatsukami (and Lammasu, Shedu etc if I was to use them) I use as free agents sympathetic to the heroes (and to humanity more generally).

 

[Gilladian]

You may not care about my point of view, but I'm going to throw it in anyway - I almost never use extraplanar monsters. If I do, I convert them to not being extraplanar. I almost always run low-level adventures (E6) and don't care for the far realmsian kind of thing...

But, a really cool monster with some nice abilities can always be an aberration or magical beastie. So I'm not a "hater" of your type creature - I just have to do a little work to make them useful to me.

 

[Alzrius]

I never really cared much for outsiders of LN, N, or CN alignments. Really, the idea of portraying creatures that are beings of "pure" law, chaos, or neutrality between all extremes is something I think has always been done awkwardly.

This awkwardness isn't necessarily the fault of authors who've written these creatures (though in some cases it is), but rather is due to the fact that there's no general consensus on how - as an overarching theme - these creatures act/think/function in the game world. We all have a general idea of what it means to be "good" or "evil," and can add law or chaos as afterthoughts to those.

But removing good and evil from the equation, what does it mean to be a creature that is "lawful" or "chaotic?" I don't know, and most other people seem to be similarly at a loss; plenty of people have ideas, to be sure, but that's a debate, not a consensus.

So yeah, I find them hard(er) to use, and don't generally use them too much.

 

[Shemeska]

Agathions are new?

Agathions as the general name for a group of NG outsiders in PF's cosmology, rather than the single type of aasimon from 2e.

 

[TarionzCousin]

I won't try to sell you on the 'loths, Shemeska; I used plenty of Demons and Devils, too, but the 'loths make the best planar adversaries, in my humble opinion. I like that they are intelligent and worked both sides of the Blood War. They were also mysterious and seemed to have more room to maneuver than demons and devils did. PC's were never exactly sure what they were planning.

I also have used Red Shroud many times. Putting a Succubus on the top plane of the Abyss was a great idea. Everyone (or at least, all of my players) had to visit her first to get started learning the lay of the land.

The so-called "Inevitables" were fun, too. It was easy to throw in a Marut out for Justice--but that was a good short-term element.

I also made good use of hags. In fact, the planar monsters I enjoyed most were the ones that the PC's didn't encounter solely for combat reasons. They had to negotiate with Lillends; bargain with and run quests for night hags; and negotiate the political minefield of Sigil's Factions.

Since PF came out, I haven't run any planar games. When my 4E group gets up a few levels, I might lob a Keketar Protean at them. Those guys are very cool (good job) and the artwork is impressive.

 

[Tinker Gnome]

Hmmmm, I like Elemental creatures a lot, and I frequently get the PCs to go to the Elemental Plane of Air whenever I am GMing a game.

I would like to see more creatures from the Positive and Negative Energy Planes.

 

[Dice4Hire]

Pre-4E, I rarely used them, except for elementals and the odd creature form another place for plot purposes.

In 4E, I have used a lot more of them, from more planes and of more types. The 4E cosmology just makes more sense to me, and that makes it easier for me to use planer elements in my games.

 

[SkredlitheOgre]

Personally, I like extraplanar creatures, but I don't use them that often. As was said before, they have to fit into the adventure/world.

I have a pdf of a bunch of 3.5 templates and I use those if I have a non-extraplanar creature I like and add a template to it, if I feel the need. For example, I'm running a campaign in the 2nd Edition world of Thunder Rift and there's a large swamp called the Gloomfens. What the players don't know, assuming none of them read this, is that there's a cerebrotic blot (a whole in reality that goes to the Far Realm; Dragon Magazine #330) somewhere in there and the influence of the blot has warped the world to create the swamp (and it's horrible smell) as well as changing some of the animals in the swamp. To set this up, they have already been NEAR the Fens to smell them and they just encountered several portals to the far realm, where things like a half-fiend silvertail infinipede, a voidmind gorilla, and a mineral warrior wolverine appeared. Once the characters reach high enough level, they'll venture into the Fens. That should be a good time.