Fiendish Codex I - What do you want to see in it?

[BOZ]

Right in her stat write-up in the box set. Couldn't be anymore clear-cut.

okely dokely... don't know that i've ever looked at her original stat block, so that's a surprise to me. *very* interesting and informative!

 

[Shemeska]

Why would they do this? And are they even able to exile creatures at their own power level(as she most likely is)?

Because they're true CN exemplars of Chaos, and the Queen of Chaos appears to have been tainted by evil*. And also because Ygorl and Ssendam are hideously self protective against -anyone- that might conceivably have any remote threat to themselves and the status quo that they forced upon the Slaadi race via the Spawning Stone.

I wouldn't doubt that they could have forced her into exile, but I'm also not convinced that the Queen was ever quite at the same power level as those two are. *shrug*

*Ignoring that Death Slaadi are now CE in 3.x for no reason that I can fathom.

 

[Shemeska]

I want oldschool style archdemon amulet rules, something where at a certain level of power a demon can actually seperate his soul from his physical form and put it into a phylactery (like a lich or something) like in 1E. I houseruled this for my own game, but Id like to see something like it from actual game designers.

AFAIK, demon amulets were never touched upon after 1E, but subsequent 2e material made them almost superfluous with the boost that they gave to archfiends w/ respect to how they interacted with their layers, how hard as hell it was to screw with them within their native plane and personal layers, etc. On some level the archfiends and their layers were very nearly the same thing, and if 'killed' outside of there they had a tendency to reform (without needing an item to do so), and subsequently be very unhappy with you.

Lacking body/soul duality also might make anything remotely like the 1e amulet things a bit difficult, though I could see arguments that worked around this. However, I'd prefer that anything like this was more tied to the basic nature of an archfiend, as an archfiend, rather than linked to an item like a mortal derived lich. Having Grazzt in a symbiotic relationship with Azzagrat, continually linking it to his will and reshaping it at his whim, and blurring the distinction between fiend and layer, it just strikes me as more evocative than having a fiend with what amounts to a phylactery. *shrugs*

 

[Gold Roger]

Actually I'm one of the few people that like the relatively low power level of the archfiends in 3rd edition. I want the PC's to be able to fight fith Archfiends, but also I want my Campaigns to cap out at level 20. Why? Because that's exactly the end point I'd love to see for a long going Campaign: The heroic PC's have earned a amount of power unkown to most primes and go up defeating one of the greatest evils in the multiverse in a epic and deadly fight that might very well leave them all dead in the end.
So for that purpose I'd actually love to see the stats of a few more archfiends. But that said I also want them to be given together with the same basic asumptions I'd use such a Archfiend. Those are:
1. A fiend slain on an other plane than his homeplane isn't slain, only weakened, barred from leaving it for some time and possibly demoted. That's one of the defining traits of fiends for me
2. A Archfiend on his hometurf is basically undefeatable, with power only limited locally, no other way. The given stats are only for a Archfiend that has been somehow "drawn out" of his realm.
3. Because there is no other way to defeat them there need to be rules for summoning and then either imprisoning or binding Archfiends. This is supposed to be hard. Summoning should still need at least something like the fiends truename and binding or imprisoning should still need a epic battle, either because the needed ritual takes quite some time or because the fiend has to be slain under certain circumstances to be "bottled up". No way it goes:
"Mage casts bind archfiend-Demogorgon fails save- Demogorgon bottled up"

Sure I can make this kind of stuff up myself, but I'd love to see something official on it and I'm sure the demand for this kind of stuff is high enough to warant it.
However, got a little carried away, because this stuff aplies to all Archfiends. But yeah for the codex I I'd like to see:
-As stated a few more Archfiend stats
-Updated Bar-Luga and Shadowdemon
-Rules for getting power from demons. Warlocks are a nice idea and excelent class, but they don't check up with the actual rules for D&D fiends (Why does my Warlock get abilities from his demonic pacts no demon has, but can't get even their most basic abilities? Why do Arcanaloths, Rakshasa etc. have sorcerer spellcasting and no warlock abilities, why has no fiend eldritch blast)
-Lots of stuff on the true essence of chaotic evil that may push the book into the mature line, without slipping into BoVD "gross and repelling=utter evi"l galores.

 

[Pants]

*Ignoring that Death Slaadi are now CE in 3.x for no reason that I can fathom.

Read the flavor text in the PSMCI. Pretty good explanation for why they made the jump to evil.

 

[Ripzerai]

Read the flavor text in the PSMCI. Pretty good explanation for why they made the jump to evil.

I always hated that particular line of flavor text; I prefer my death slaadi neutral.

But the Queen of Chaos didn't need to be exiled - preoccupied as she was with her war, she might well have left voluntarily, or just slowly drifted into the Abyss.

It also occurs to me that Miska the Wolf-Spider isn't necessarily a tanar'ri - he, like the oculus demons and the varrangoin, could have been a member of an earlier Abyssal race.

 

[Shemeska]

It also occurs to me that Miska the Wolf-Spider isn't necessarily a tanar'ri - he, like the oculus demons and the varrangoin, could have been a member of an earlier Abyssal race.

I presume he was, because the Spyder fiends that he and the Queen of Chaos produced were specifically Tanar'ri. I'd check on him specifically in the Rod of 7 Parts box but I don't have a copy handy.

 

[Pants]

I always hated that particular line of flavor text; I prefer my death slaadi neutral.

Which is fine, I'm just showing that the 3.0 change to evil isn't without some precedent.

It also occurs to me that Miska the Wolf-Spider isn't necessarily a tanar'ri - he, like the oculus demons and the varrangoin, could have been a member of an earlier Abyssal race.

As for whether Miska is a Tanar'ri or not, the module is rather vague:

"Once restored, Miska can be slain just as any other tanar'ri can..."

Which reveals... nothing, other than Miska has similar tanar'ri-like qualities.

The spyder fiends are also described as being a sub-race of tanar'ri.

 

[Shemeska]

Which reveals... nothing, other than Miska has similar tanar'ri-like qualities.

The spyder fiends are also described as being a sub-race of tanar'ri.

The wording is key there I think. Saying "...just as any other tanar'ri can" is an inclusive statement. Had they not meant for Miska to be Tanar'ri they would have said that he could be killed '...just like Tanar'ri can be' which wouldn't have been an inclusive statement.

Plus, the fact that the Spyder fiends are specifically made out to be a tanar'ri sub-race adds to it.

 

[Kunimatyu]

Just out of curiousity, what's the flavor text that suggests the Death Slaad are evil?