• NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.

Hordes of the Abyss: Q&A

Not surprisingly, I completely agree with James.

The one thing I avoided outright, in the manner you suggest for how you'd handle the gods of the illithids, was the whole debate over whether or not certain demon lords were ever gods, whether or not they are tougher than gods, etc. I guess I just don't care, so leaving out the details allows everyone to have their cake and eat it too.

Other than that, the Abyss has been mercifully untouched by designers over the last few decades, so I didn't feel hemmed in by what I consider "unfortunate" design choices.

I couldn't say the same of the Nine Hells, so I am relieved that I was not asked to participate in that project.

--Erik
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Couple of questions for the designers:

1) I like the idea of new demons, the loumara and obyriths, but doesn't that make things a little too tight for future supplements? Now instead of tanar'ri or non-tanar'ri demons for the Abyss, it's going to be stretched to "Should we add a new non-tanar'ri, tanar'ri, obyrith or loumara to this book?" Will we be seeing more of these demons? Quite possibly, Demonimicon or even an entire article spewing forth say "12 new demons, 6 obyrith and 6 loumara" article for Dragon Magazine would be a wonderful suggestion for you guys.

2) I noticed in the Introduction chapter that there was supposed to be an inclusion of new PrC, but it sort of got cut for space I assume (I wish this book was the same page count as Draconomicon...why was that idea scrapped?). What were they supposed to be, if any was cut that is?

3) I assume the Pazuzu article should be errata'd, sort of. Change his subtype from tanar'ri to obyrith and rearrange his special qualities to match the subtype I assume?
 

1) I think that there's plenty of room to keep developing new demons, be they tanar'ri, loumaras, obyriths, just plain demons, or something else altogether. I'd love to see them further expanded upon, personally, but the tanar'ri remain the most common and most populous demons in the Abyss. Personally, I see the tanar'ri as manifestations of the failings of humanity, loumaras as evil parasites that prey on humanity, and the obyriths as evil and chaos personified that would exist with our wtihout humanity. Or, to put it less confusingly: tanar'ri are human-shaped, loumaras are invisible and possess things, obyriths are Lovecraftian.

2) We'd originally intended to include some prestige classes, but most of the obvious ideas were already done in other books. Plus, there just wasn't any room in the project for them. Personally, I think there's probably enough prestige classes as there is; for a new one to be justified, it must rise naturally from the flavor rather than the other way around. In any case, no new prestige classes were ever written for (and then cut from) the book. As far as I know.

3) If I remember correctly, the Pazuzu article doesn't give him a demonic race type at all, tanar'ri or otherwise. Mostly because at the time I hadn't fully gelled the idea of the obyriths in my head... all I knew was that Pazuzu was older than the tanar'ri race. In any event, since he's a "missing link" between the two races, his stats need no adjustment, apart from giving him the obyrith subtype (which, in his case, doesn't really mean much anymore).
 


Nice idea on the Obyriths, though. Brings the evil chaos of the Far Realm back to where it belongs in the cosmology (not that I don't like the far realm, but this is better IMO).

Question for those who have the book. I've seen the 'Terrible Transformation' artwork on the official site and I'm incredibly curious. Is this the transformation of a lost soul into a demon or a method for demons to manifest on the material plane a la Van Richten's Guide to Fiends?
 

Ipissimus said:
Nice idea on the Obyriths, though. Brings the evil chaos of the Far Realm back to where it belongs in the cosmology (not that I don't like the far realm, but this is better IMO).

To each his own....I'm having trouble with the concept or at least wrapping my head around it. I prefer to have my Far Realm be beyond morals and the Abyss by its nature has morals...Choatic evil morals.

What I've decided to try for my games is to have even the Demon Lords (Dagon - in particular) to be avatars of Far Realm creatures....so I've got a Dagon in the Far Realm, a Dagon in the Abyss, an avatar of Dagon, and an aspect of Dagon floating around the universe.

I was doing something similar for Tiamat already, so it isn't much of a stretch. I had Tiamat (Far Realm) [similar to the Summerian destroyer version], Tiamat (Avernus), avatar of Tiamat, and an aspect of Tiamat.
 

Erik Mona said:
Other than that, the Abyss has been mercifully untouched by designers over the last few decades, so I didn't feel hemmed in by what I consider "unfortunate" design choices.

I couldn't say the same of the Nine Hells, so I am relieved that I was not asked to participate in that project.

--Erik

Is there anything in particular you're referring to here? I could be missing something really obvious, but I don't recall that much difference between some of the Planescape material on Baator and the material today.
 

Kunimatyu said:
Is there anything in particular you're referring to here? I could be missing something really obvious, but I don't recall that much difference between some of the Planescape material on Baator and the material today.

He's talking 1st edition versus 2nd edition, not Planescape versus 3e. In 1e (after the MMII), the Hells were ruled by Tiamat, Dispater, Mammon, Belial, Geryon, Moloch, Baalzebul, Mephistopheles, and Asmodeus.

Early 2e (pre-Planescape) eliminated all references to the archdevils, mentioning only the Dark Eight, a group of pit fiends who were, as far as even the wisest sages knew, the highest-ranking baatezu rulers, some of whom had been previously mentioned as working for the archdevils.

Later on, Colin McComb snuck the unique fiends back in, but wasn't allowed to use Biblical names, and he elected to (or was forced to? I don't know) redesign them entirely instead of making them barely disguised versions of the 1e archdevils. The only one who managed to get through completely unmolested was Dispater, and only because he had already appeared in the Planescape adventure Fires of Dis. (And he had been mentioned by name in the Planescape boxed set, the only 1e archdevil who could claim that). This set off a firestorm of criticism among long-time fans of the plane; Erik Mona has said it showed a great disrespect for prior canon. Personally, I think the Lords of the Nine are a lot more interesting than their one-dimensional predecessors, but I can't deny it was an extreme change that makes it difficult to use 1e canon directly.

In response to the criticism, Colin McComb backtracked quite a lot in Faces of Evil (which was published by the easier-going Wizards of the Coast, and very vague about the Nine in any case), bringing in a lot of references to 1st edition fiendish nobles and hinting strongly that the Lords of the Nine were only the 1st edition archdevils under different aspects.

Monte Cook, in A Paladin in Hell, also made a stab at reconciling the two sets of diabolic lords, but he went in a very different direction, introducing a civil war in Hell (eons ago - the standard 2e assumption was that the 1e cosmological stuff was true or mostly true, but was accurate for a time centuries or millennia before the present day; Throne of Bloodstone happened centuries ago with regard to Planescape, and Moloch and Geryon have been gone for much, much longer). Guide to Hell, by Chris Pramas, embraced Monte Cook's explanation and gave the war a name: the Reckoning. During the Reckoning, Geryon and Moloch were cast from their positions and many other lords were transformed into new forms.

Book of Vile Darkness, again by Monte Cook, continued the Reckoning narrative into 3e. By this point, it seems irreversable. The fact that all the 1e material on the Nine Hells is now on the other side of a major civil war and countless millennia of cutthroat politics means that, while it can be alluded to, it can't be used completely as it was in anything new written on the plane. 3e even aggravated the situation by, in the Manual of the Planes, introducing yet another coup and purging in Mephistopheles' court (in Guide to Hell, Molikroth was assumed to still exist as one of Mephistopheles' aspects, rather than as a now-discarded charade as in 3e). So all of the pit fiends and many of the nobles who formally worked for Mephistopheles are now destroyed after the unmasking of Molikroth. Tome of Magic sealed the matter by killing Geryon off.

If they had gone in the direction of the Faces of Evil retcon and said things like "Moloch sometimes appears in the form of a withered old hag; Geryon, sometimes known as Levistus, was for a time imprisoned in a glacier" they could have phased out McComb's versions of the Nine altogether. Too late now. I think all of this adds an interesting new dimension and texture to Baator, but I completely understand that some people dislike it.
 
Last edited:


One thing's for sure: no matter what approach the authors of FC2 take, they are bound to piss someone off. Which is why Erik didn't want the job.

Personally, I hope they stick with a mixed Faces of Evil/Guide to Hell approach, although IMC, the Hag Countess is really Lilith (as per Dicefreaks), and Mephistopheles is likewise not a pyromaniac.
 

Into the Woods

Remove ads

Top