Fiendish Codex III: Yugoloths poll

[Aus_Snow]

I like the treatment they (daemons anyway) are given in the Book of Fiends, from Green Ronin.

But yes, I would love to see the third Fiendish Codex. I would happily place it next to the other two on one of my RPG shelves. . . when it's not in use.

And yeah, it would see a good amount of use.

 

[reanjr]

If FCI-III were all sitting on the shelf and I could only afford one, FCIII would be my choice. Lumping them in with other fiends would be an atrocity.

 

[Shemeska]

All I'll say....

Barring that pipedream, and barring the rehiring of various authors who have been out of the industry for a while *cough*McComb*cough*, I think it really would come down to who was picked to write the book, and if they really went out of their way to compile the relevant sources before sitting down to write a single word.

I can think of a few guys who would be up to the task, and likewise a few people I'd want to keep away from the book if at all possible. The book could be made or broken by the style that went into it, and the faithfulness to previous work. We already had some nice token references and some undercurrents on the Baernaloths sprinkled into FC:I, so it'd be nice to see any potential FC:III serve to bridge some of the prehistory in FC:I to the myths in FC:II and the IC and OOC mythology from 'Faces of Evil' and 'Hellbound'.

 

[Shemeska]

And a book on the 'loths would need to also be a book on the Demodands/Gehreleths because of their common origin. The dysfunctional little family tree of theirs and their mutual hatred to the exclusion of virtually anything else, is something that was sorely (and inexplicably) lacking from the demodand writeup in the 3e FF. It's a topic ripe for exploration.

 

[The Forsaken One]

My favorite fiends, and 3rd favorite outsiders after the formians and rilmani.

 

[Waldorf]

Yugoloths simply don't have the name recognition to the fan on the street to make the numbers happen. Personally, I would love to see it. Do I think it has a shot? Not in the least.

 

[Razz]

Yugoloths simply don't have the name recognition to the fan on the street to make the numbers happen. Personally, I would love to see it. Do I think it has a shot? Not in the least.

But that's the problem. When will it ever get a chance to shine if it doesn't receive a chance at all?

From what I've gather in past editions, yugoloths were as prominent as the other 2 major fiends, but for some strange reason WotC did not carry this over into the 3rd Edition.

 

[Cthulhudrew]

I voted yes, but only if they go back to calling them Daemons, with Yugoloth as a "subtype" like the Demons/Tanar'ri and Devils/Baatezu. That way, all three can be near one another in the MM, and they might get more use.

 

[ivocaliban]

I'd love it. I just finished reading Fiendish Codex II: Tyrants of the Nine Hells and found it preferable to the first book in the series. My first thought afterwards: "Wouldn't it be nice if the yugoloths had their own book." I'm not generally one to want a book for every creature under the sun, but there seems to be comparatively little information on yugoloths. The only resource I have regarding them is the Manual of the Planes, which leaves much to be desired.

So, I'm all for it. In the past year the only books I've bought are the two codices. So far, I've seen very little to entice me next year (outside of perhaps the Magic Item Compendium) and a Fiendish Codex III would certainly change that fact.

Much preferred to more about drow...

 

[ivocaliban]

I voted yes, but only if they go back to calling them Daemons, with Yugoloth as a "subtype" like the Demons/Tanar'ri and Devils/Baatezu. That way, all three can be near one another in the MM, and they might get more use.

Excellent point. I couldn't agree more!