Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Hezrou demon redesign
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 7899684" data-attributes="member: 4937"><p>I've never really liked the artistic or mechanical or even lore direction that demons took in D&D, so my personal preference would be to scrap the whole concept.</p><p></p><p>The first edition monster manual introduced us to 'Type 1' through 'Type VIII' demons. There are several aspects of this presentation where I think the ultimate intention was lost, and where I also think Gygax thought better of his original design. The first thing that I think was lost, was Gygax never intended the demons to be hierarchical, with Type 1 being the weakest and ascending to stronger and stronger types. A careful reading of the 1e AD&D stats does not show a linear progression in power from Type 1 to Type 8. There is an overall progression, but some lower numbered types have more HD or other superior abilities to higher numbered types. The further we've gotten from the original MM, the more hierarchy has been introduced. And the second thing that I think was lost was that I don't think Gygax really intended any particular type to be numerous and pervasive. Each type was I think intended to represent a relatively small number of individuals, many of which would be named. I think he intended there to be an infinite number of types, which by now might be publishing type 60's or type 90's with the clear indication that there were many more types not yet described.</p><p></p><p>By the time the DMG was written, I think Gygax had hit upon a better scheme than publishing stat blocks for demons, and that appeared along with several other ideas that he'd hit upon between writing the MM and the DMG, in the Appendixes. In the Appendix, he presents a template for generating a very large number of random fiendish beasties, and I think that and not what we ended up with, is what should have been the model for future demons. Further, as these ideas got integrated into the 'Great Wheel' cosmology, I think they should have moved a bit from their occult origins into something that actually made more sense in the 'Great Wheel' cosmology.</p><p></p><p>As for the Hezrou, I'd want to tie them to some theme I thought particularly chaotic, evil, and gruesome. The primary impulse of CE is "Everything that is should be mine." and in its purest fashion "Everything that is should be me." The traditional Hezrou is little more than a bulked up Troglodyte meant to be a pure melee opponent once Ogres and the like are no longer really viable threats. Thematically, it's just a medieval toad scaled up to the demonic, with warty poisonous skin and a bite. This is the black magic wizard's toad familiar turned into a combat brute. The focus on combat brute is I think needless and distracting. I think the idea of demons leading or commanding other demons is just missing the point entirely.</p><p></p><p>Personally, I think the 'Summon Insect' is very on point, as the creature is a creature of plague and calamity and so it should be associated with plagues and calamities, of devouring up prosperity, and of change and transformation that is always for the worst. Similarly, producing flame is again associated with devouring up prosperity, as uncontrolled fire is the great devourer of things, transforming what is vibrant and valuable into things that are worthless and sterile.</p><p></p><p>I don't give a flying flip about its combat role being coherent. I want the thing to be reeking evil.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Celebrim, post: 7899684, member: 4937"] I've never really liked the artistic or mechanical or even lore direction that demons took in D&D, so my personal preference would be to scrap the whole concept. The first edition monster manual introduced us to 'Type 1' through 'Type VIII' demons. There are several aspects of this presentation where I think the ultimate intention was lost, and where I also think Gygax thought better of his original design. The first thing that I think was lost, was Gygax never intended the demons to be hierarchical, with Type 1 being the weakest and ascending to stronger and stronger types. A careful reading of the 1e AD&D stats does not show a linear progression in power from Type 1 to Type 8. There is an overall progression, but some lower numbered types have more HD or other superior abilities to higher numbered types. The further we've gotten from the original MM, the more hierarchy has been introduced. And the second thing that I think was lost was that I don't think Gygax really intended any particular type to be numerous and pervasive. Each type was I think intended to represent a relatively small number of individuals, many of which would be named. I think he intended there to be an infinite number of types, which by now might be publishing type 60's or type 90's with the clear indication that there were many more types not yet described. By the time the DMG was written, I think Gygax had hit upon a better scheme than publishing stat blocks for demons, and that appeared along with several other ideas that he'd hit upon between writing the MM and the DMG, in the Appendixes. In the Appendix, he presents a template for generating a very large number of random fiendish beasties, and I think that and not what we ended up with, is what should have been the model for future demons. Further, as these ideas got integrated into the 'Great Wheel' cosmology, I think they should have moved a bit from their occult origins into something that actually made more sense in the 'Great Wheel' cosmology. As for the Hezrou, I'd want to tie them to some theme I thought particularly chaotic, evil, and gruesome. The primary impulse of CE is "Everything that is should be mine." and in its purest fashion "Everything that is should be me." The traditional Hezrou is little more than a bulked up Troglodyte meant to be a pure melee opponent once Ogres and the like are no longer really viable threats. Thematically, it's just a medieval toad scaled up to the demonic, with warty poisonous skin and a bite. This is the black magic wizard's toad familiar turned into a combat brute. The focus on combat brute is I think needless and distracting. I think the idea of demons leading or commanding other demons is just missing the point entirely. Personally, I think the 'Summon Insect' is very on point, as the creature is a creature of plague and calamity and so it should be associated with plagues and calamities, of devouring up prosperity, and of change and transformation that is always for the worst. Similarly, producing flame is again associated with devouring up prosperity, as uncontrolled fire is the great devourer of things, transforming what is vibrant and valuable into things that are worthless and sterile. I don't give a flying flip about its combat role being coherent. I want the thing to be reeking evil. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Hezrou demon redesign
Top