Hordes of the Abyss.

[M.L. Martin]

I take it there's no mention of the Abbot-Dolor or whatever that race of Demons that Grazz't was supposed to be?

Even though I'm sure it was only mentioned in the Gord novels...

They can't use stuff from the Gord novels--the later ones, at least. Those were published by New Infinities Productions, and thus the rights to them remain outside WotC's purview.

Matthew L. Martin

 

[Shemeska]

"If Ahm is correct, demons manifest as extensions of chaos and evil left in the Abyss after the deities, devils and other powers had "ascended" to other palnes.

If that's presented as fact rather than legend and theory, that's a pretty gigantic deviation from any of the prior origin myths of the Tanar'ri. The notion of the Tanar'ri being the byproducts of yugoloth purification at the direction of the Baernaloths (intentional or not) was pretty firmly established. Plus, the idea of deities being there before the Tanar'ri is just bizarre (and contradictory to the Blood War timeline in Hellbound).

Though if this new theory is presented as the Tanar'ri take on their own origins, I'm fine with that, it's racial propaganda, and an interesting take on things. Theories biased by self promotion are cool, and are more important when you're embroiled in something like the Blood War. But if it's intended to rewrite the material from Hellbound, Faces of Evil, etc, not so cool. I'll have to read the section myself to really say for sure.

Of course if FC:I and FC:II both have their own biased origin legends, tilted to favor their specific planes' inhabitants, that's cool. Tanar'ri histories tend to be nonexistant or nonsensical, and Baatezu histories tend to be political propaganda and historical revisionism taken to its furthest extremes. The 'loths have the oldest histories, and apparently the most comprehensive ones, but they don't like to share and what has leaked out they tend to not comment on, and when they do... hard to trust them at face value given what they are.

Some notes towards the back when dealing with the history of the Abyss and good old Queen of Chaos and Miska the Wolf-Spider, the first "Prince of Demons." The old denizens, the obyriths, are pretty much dead and dying. Very similiar to the race from Green Ronin's book. The Loumaras on the other hand are newcomes that are "the byproduct of the plane's attempt to digest the fitful last dreams of a dying pathenon of evil gods." Good writing there! Perfect for Exalted!

Does it address the Queen of Chaos as not being from the Abyss? (I generally hold the QoC and Miska as pure, unadulterated cheese, but hopefully the book can redeem them somewhat. I'll have to read it over though to see if I like the angle it takes with them or not).

The Obyriths and Loumaras I like. I tentatively like them a lot.

Among the abyssal lords, Pale Night is probably the one that snags my attention the most, and FC:I placing her explicitely as one of the Obyriths was a nice touch that links very well with her writeup in FoE. Kudos on that addition to the lore of the Abyss.

 

[Shemeska]

So yeah, those weak stats do NOT rerpesent them outside their lairs, but represents them as they are.

That's... unfortunate.

*cough*

But getting beyond that, some more questions:

On layer 377, the Plains of Galenshu, is there any mention of the now obliterated civilization of the Varrangoin that was alluded to in Planes of Chaos?

Are Bebeliths mentioned at all?

Are the Ships of Chaos mentioned during the discussion of the layer of Twelve Trees?

Is the bloodline between Grazzt, Vucarik, and Lupercio described or elaborated upon (with Pale Night being their mother)?

 

[Mercule]

the quarter page on improving the demon lords

So... Joke, it is, then.

If you're being literal with a quarter page (half column?), then anyone who points that out to those unhappy about the demon prince treatment isn't being helpful, they're mocking.

Edit: If they did, somehow, manage to cram something worthwhile into such a small space, I'll willingly eat crow.

 

[heirodule]

While the book doesn’t include any new PrCs, it does not which ones are appropriate and what source they come from. It covers recent books like the Fiendbinder from Tome of Magic as well as older books like the Book of Vile Darkness for the Thrall.

Arrgh. I don't want to buy the BoVD (esp since the demons are all reprinted now), and I wanted this book to reprint the thrall PrCs (and update for 3.5)

 

[MadMaxim]

I must admit that my interest in the book has somewhat cooled down after I saw all this (mainly the weaker demon lords), but I'll probably still get it. We can't have too much information on demons after all. And thanks for the review so far, Joe. It's proving to be rather enlightning.

 

[BOZ]

Posted on Dicefreaks in reaction to the new CRs of the demon lords:

Juiblex: Cower, mortal! I am Jubilex, and the doom of thy world is at hand!
Cleric: There is only one recourse now! Oh heavens, I cry out to thee for aid! Miracle!
Some Random Solar: *busts in through the ceiling with awesome slo-mo and smoke effects* The Heavens heed your call, good mortal! Direct me unto the evil that it might be desoh crap, Jubilex!
Juiblex: Oh crap, a Solar!
Solar: Wuh? Why are you scared? I haven't even fetched one of the celestial paragons yet.
Juiblex: It's three-point-fifth edition.
Solar: Ah. Statblocks?
Juiblex: They said it would be so good for our image! Dragons and Aberrations got books and everyone loved them! And the Dragon articles went down a treat! It was going to be the dawn of a new era for the Abyss! But Demogorgon didn't read the contract properly and now... and now...
Solar: Are... are you crying?
Juiblex: *sniff*
Solar: Uh... well... er... it's not so bad! I mean things aren't working out so well on the Prime Material, but you can still go back to the Abyss and push some Balors around, right? Pathetic nonunique demons, nothing compared to a full-blown Lord of the Abyss like you, right?
Juiblex: ...
Solar: Oh.. oh my god. I'm so sorry.
Juiblex: *breaks down in tears on Solar's shoulder, leaving a nasty burn mark*

heheh. just had to share that...

I don't personally care much about what CRs the various demon lords are set at, though I do have to wonder why any would be considered less of a challenge than a lowly-by-comparison balor? Even outside of its realm? I thought they were just fine as they were and I don't understand the lowering.

But, eh, like I said, that's not the part that bothers me about the CRs given in Joe's review. I do like the explanation of, say, having these stat blocks as the minimum for the given lords, and upgradable using a special table in the book. In fact, I say, genius. The part that gets me is that we have intentionally alternate stat blocks between this new book, and previous (in some cases, very recent) sources. Why do we need that? Initially, I had reservations at all that lords featured in the Demonomicon articles even needed to have stat blocks in a new book already, but James Jacobs' assertions that all the iconic lords should be statted in the book brought me around. Still... Why not have just the stat blocks in one place, instead of having two blocks that in different places that disagree with one another? I can't see the logic in that.

Still, in the end, I can live with whatever happens. Like many others have said in this thread, it's not going to stop me from buying the book just because I don't agree with what was done and why. If you want tougher demon lords, you always have the ToH1, and if you want 'em tougher than that, you have Dicefreaks.

As for the Klurchir, folks need to keep one thing in mind. When the Balor was first redesigned for 3.0 the MM, it had a measly 13-HD and was a CR 18 creature. So yes, making a 20-HD, CR 25 critter makes sense, and would seem to be able to scare the piss out of a balor. However, shortly after the printing of the Fiend Folio, we have the 3.5 MM - in which our good ol' Balor went up to 20 in both HD and CR. Suddenly, the Klurchir as written doesn't seem so tough, at least to the bumped-up balor. You have two choices - either keep the Klurchir as-is and lower its CR, or raise its stats to make the CR and description accurate. Since the FC1 crew wasn't going to be working with the Klurchir, lowering the CR seemed like the right choice.

As for the "all archfiends in 2E didn't have stats, except for Graz'zt and Pazzy, which doesn't fit in with anything else anyway" well... here's my take on that. it's not that all archfiends were beyond stats. The *gods* were beyond stats. Yes, archfiends were considered Powers, but I'm fairly sure that I saw in the definition of the term "Powers" that not all Powers were actually gods. In 2E, Demogorgon, Juiblex, Yeenoghu, Baphomet, and Kostchtchie became (at least until archdemons were reintroduced in BoVD) gods. Thus, they did not have stats. Who did have stats? Graz'zt, and Pazzy (that nickname covers both versions of his name, heh), who were *never*, as I understand it, considered gods or even placed on the same level as gods. You could counter that by saying Fraz-Urb’luu, Pale Night, Zuggtmoy, and the Abyssal Lords introduced in Planescape never got statted out, making Graz and Paz the deviations from the norm. I say... the designers just never got around to giving them stats. Perhaps they wanted to devote the space to other things. Perhaps they figured Graz and Paz were enough. Perhaps they thought some folks would balk at the idea of having any more Abyssal lords with game stats. Or maybe, as some around here seem to think, the designers decided that having stats for Graz and Paz in the first place was a mistake they didn't want to repeat. I don't know. I wasn't working for TSR. when I look at archdemons, I think of them on about the same tier of power as altraloths, archomentals, and slaad lords. And all of those guys, plus Graz and Paz, did have game stats, in 2E. now that Demo, Juib, Yeen, Baph, and Kost have been de-godded, they have stat blocks. As far as I see it, all is right with the world again.

Time for me to re-read this thread again, and find some other posts to make comments to.

 

[Razz]

The desginers said there's a 1/3 of a page info on upgrading the demon lords to epic level. What're they? They said it was bullet styled.

 

[BOZ]

The "Advancng a Demon Lord" section is about 1/3 of a page, and consists of 8 or so bullet points that add on to the more general monster advancing rules detailed at the end of the Monster Manual. It's not a HUGE section, but then again it doesn't have to be since most of the heavy lifting for advancing monsters is already done in the Monster Manual.

was this what you were looking for Razz?

 

[BOZ]

And they reuse art like the cover from Dungeon and the old Orcus piece.

I'll agree, this is not exactly cool. Not terrible, but not cool either. Perhaps the designers submitted these pieces in the art order as samples of what to do, and the art department got lazy, saying, "hey, these are perfectly good pieces, why do new ones?" well, except for the BoVD orcus - what's up with that? fat slobby orcus is da man! Yeenoghu and Juiblex in BoVD were OK, but at least they did not reuse the Demogorgon from that book. what actual percentage of the book's art is recycled?

I haven't found any of WotCs 3e fiendish additions to be that interesting, but found their ommissions and modifications vexing. Weak ultroloths? Four armed nycoloths?

with any luck, maybe they will hire you on as a consultant for FC3.

One of the nice things is that it does include a 'master' list of demons that have appeared in varous products including the abyssal drake of the draconomicon!

kickass! how long is this list? like as in, percentage of a page? it's in the appendix i'm assuming? that's one of the cool things that the folks around here helped contribute to.

I know off the top of my head that Pale Night is there. She's seen as a 'mother' figure but mother of what varies depending on whose telling the tale.

Faces of Evil: The Fiends, page 61:

"The Mors Mysterium Nominum book says she is also the mother of Graz'zt, Lupercio, and Vucarik of Chains."

This is the only quote I'm aware of, linking Pale Night as the mother of any specific demons. OK, a reference book makes a possibly dubious claim, but especially when you are talking about shifty ol' demons, this does not necessarily make it a true fact. I like the way she's presented in FC1.

It's easier to weaken a creature than to make it stronger.

no... it simply isn't. the MM has a whole chapter dedicated to increasing a creature's power level. it says nothing at all about making a creature weaker, so if you want to do that, it's DIY.

Because I love lying to people and I particularly enjoy upsetting you, my sweet.

eh heh heh heh heh heh! if you won't have Piratecat, i could make myself available!

Another question: Do the arrow and sorrowsworn demons from MMIII get a more "demony" name in this book? As it stands, on a list of demons, they stick out like sore thumbs. :\

good question, old pal. those names are very off-putting for me as well.

And now one question for the DDM fans out there: are any minis from the upcoming Blood War set hinted at/mentioned in the book? The blurb on WotC site says Blood War will contain minis from FC1.

another good question! it would be so neato keen to have some demon lord minis.

It seems like a good end-boss for a 20th level game would be a powerful balor with a few class levels. I thought that was what balors were for in 3.5 - to provide appropriate threats to 20th level characters.

Makes sense to me.

actually, i'll agree with you there. balors were ramped up quite a bit to make them basically the toughest non-unique demons on the block (as well they should be). it seems to make sense that even the lowliest of demon lords should have notably more power. but oh well, to each his own.

Now if they are to appear again in Complete Demon, well...

if that ever comes to be, it better damn well be a sequel to FC1 instead of yet another rehashing...

As a reminder, even H4 (Throne of Bloodstone) assumed the characters would be 100th level before duking it out with Orcus. Now, 100th level characters from that time certainly wouldn't convert to 3.x 100th level characters - but they wouldn't be level 20 either, for sure.

just to pick nits... as i understand it, H4 did not expect or require PCs to be 100th level, just that the module was able to *accommodate* 100th level PCs. i think you did have to be a minimum of 20th level though. i speak from ignorance and hearsay though, as i have not read the module through.

5) What is mentioned regarding Charon as a yugoloth lord, and what context is he mentioned in.

IIRC, i think Erik suggested that he was only mentioned incidentally as a note for the River Styx, that he was the best navigator or something. i don't expect Joe to find it easily, as it is probably a sentence or two at most, and fairly obscure.

I seem to remember in Dead Gods when there's the confrontation against Orcus/Tenebrous in Agathion, should the PCs be too late in destroying the wand (something really difficult to do, as one PC would likely have to sacrifice their life inorder to do that), it says he'll just simply kill the PCs unless they use some sword to delay him for 1d3 hours. No stats there, just a mention that they'll die anyways, because he knows the Last Word and wants them dead.

yep, the Last Word is some powerful s---. i mean, it killed a few gods, plus a lesser archomental and Primus, among others no doubt. what mortal, no matter how powerful, is going to stand up against something as devastating as that?

The canon-fans should note that a LOT of canon research went into this book (just ask BOZ). But canon is not, and IMO should not, be the design criteria that trumps all design criteria.

why thank you, Alan. and i'll agree with your second sentence as well.

i'd like to think that our research made an impact in the book, and from Erik and James' comments as we posted more and more bits of info, i can only assume that it did. especially upon hearing that there would be in the appendix a list of all known demon lords, and all known Abyssal layers (IIRC).

speaking of which, oh, Joe!!

any hints on which demon lords, besides the main 14, were given mention and further info in the book? James said something like 80 - could you get us at least a partial list when you have the time?

and could you see if you have the chance to list which Abyssal layers are described?


now, to get back to finishing on re-reading the rest of the thread...