Fiendish Codex III: Yugoloths poll

[Shemeska]

Be still my beating black heart. I'd love to see a 'loth article, *nudges the query stack*, but I might go all twitching and foaming at the mouth if Dragon did a an entire 'loth issue.

But a hardcover would still be optimal, all depending on who WotC had writing it (Ideally some of the Paizo crew, or some of the authors who'd worked on the Planescape material). The book would really hinge on if the folks involved did their homework on the topic (FCI and II thus far have been very very good in that respect).

 

[Desdichado]

We'll never know how popular they are or how demanding they can be if WotC doesn't release a book that covers everything old/updated/new about them!

That's completely back-asswards. You have to anticipate demand first and then make a product to fill that demand, not make a product first in the hope that there's demand for it.

I can pretty much guarantee that a Yugo book would sell considerably lower numbers than a devil or demon book. Would I probably buy it? Yeah, sure. Am I really all that interested in it though? Not particularly.

To be honest with you, the indignant proselityzing of some yugo fans on this board--and heck, even in this thread--kinda turns me off from them. And they've never really felt like they had a definite place in the standard D&D cosmology to me. They were made as an afterthought--a byproduct of the twin axis alignment system--not because they filled any compelling need in the game.

 

[Desdichado]

As another aside--why this insistence that a yugo book be so closely tied to 2e Planescape products? WTF? Whyever for? Neither of the other Fiendish Codex books did that (to their benefit) so I don't see any reason why a putative yugo book should.

The demands that it do so reek of unwavering fanboyism rather than reasonable expectations.

 

[BOZ]

Failing a hardcover treatment, I'd love to see this. The Paizo guys do right by fiends, so in some ways it might be preferable (unless they get the Paizo guys onboard for FCIII).

that would work for me as well, and in all likeliness that might be about all that would happen. FC3 is a cool idea, but it's anyone's guess as to whether it's going to happen or whether Fiendish Codex was meant to stop at 2.

 

[Shemeska]

As another aside--why this insistence that a yugo book be so closely tied to 2e Planescape products? WTF? Whyever for? Neither of the other Fiendish Codex books did that (to their benefit) so I don't see any reason why a putative yugo book should.

Because that's where the majority of the material on them was developed (referring to the 'loths here). Their 2e pagecount dwarfs that in 1e and 3e combined.

And if you don't think that FC:I and II heavily incorporate material from 2e/Planescape, you might want to read them again. A great deal of the planar material for D&D was developed, or evolved further during those years. For instance compare the 1e Lords of the 9 versus the 2e Lords of the 9, and see which resemble the 3e ones. Look at the layer listings in FC:I and compare them to the layers listed in Planes of Chaos for instance. Etc.

I just want any potential FC:III to be well researched across all the various sources, regardless of edition. It's just that a great deal of that information happens to come from a number of 2e sources (Faces of Evil, Hellbound, Planes of Conflict).

 

[Shade]

To be honest with you, the indignant proselityzing of some yugo fans on this board--and heck, even in this thread--kinda turns me off from them. And they've never really felt like they had a definite place in the standard D&D cosmology to me. They were made as an afterthought--a byproduct of the twin axis alignment system--not because they filled any compelling need in the game.

That's part of their appeal, at least for me. They took something that was "throwaway", and made it incredibly interesting. Many of the monsters that have achieved "traction" had similiar origins. It doesn't matter why the thing was created, but what the designers did to make it compelling.

As another aside--why this insistence that a yugo book be so closely tied to 2e Planescape products? WTF? Whyever for? Neither of the other Fiendish Codex books did that (to their benefit) so I don't see any reason why a putative yugo book should.

The demands that it do so reek of unwavering fanboyism rather than reasonable expectations.

You're kidding, right? Both nearly completely adhered to both 1E and 2E material.

 

[Desdichado]

Yes, I know that Planescape contributed a lot of material that carried forth into 3e on the other fiends, but my point was that it wasn't slavishly followed. The whole concept of the obyriths, for instance, was a great idea--one of the better ones to happen to demons in years, IMO, and it "retcons" a fair amount of Planescape backstory, or at least makes no reference to it at all.

The Nine Hells book also made no mention of the "ancient baatorians", and it completely recast one of the leaders of a circle of Hell (again)--and again--to the book's benefit. It was a much better book because it didn't slavishly follow the path that Planescape blazed, but went off on it's own path.

 

[BOZ]

i agree - it was cool to see glasya supplant the hag countess, who i never particularly cared for.

 

[Shade]

Yes, I know that Planescape contributed a lot of material that carried forth into 3e on the other fiends, but my point was that it wasn't slavishly followed. The whole concept of the obyriths, for instance, was a great idea--one of the better ones to happen to demons in years, IMO, and it "retcons" a fair amount of Planescape backstory, or at least makes no reference to it at all.

Of course the concept of the obyriths was present in Planescape. I'm not sure where you're coming from. I haven't seen any of the so-called "fanboys" of Planescape complaining about the obyriths. If anything, they are championing them harder than other folks. I'm an unabashed fanboy of fiends throughout the editions, and I absolutely love what they did with the FCs, and don't see them as deviations from the evolution of the fiends throughout the editions.

The Nine Hells book also made no mention of the "ancient baatorians", and it completely recast one of the leaders of a circle of Hell (again)--and again--to the book's benefit. It was a much better book because it didn't slavishly follow the path that Planescape blazed, but went off on it's own path.

While it didn't reference the ancient baatorians, it also didn't do anything to deny their existence. I'm not sure how that was to the book's benefit...it simply passed over them, didn't present anything to replace them. I believe they were a victim of page count more than a design decision. As to replacing one of the Lords of the Nine, I see that as natural evolution, much as Planescape did with the 1E archdevils. It wasn't a major shakeup, anyway.

 

[Sharn]

Not really interested in a book of Yugoloths but I can see it getting a lot of attention from other RPGers.