Hordes of the Abyss.

[Staffan]

As for the revised CRs for the MM2 and FF demons, is there any chance that that will show up as errata?

 

[Banshee16]

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.

You're correct....I just finished running that campaign with my group earlier this year. However, the difference is that at that point, Tenebrous was an undead *Power*, not an archfiend. He was of a level of power greater than he had been as Orcus. Plus, he had the "Last Word", as you mentioned, which let him destroy anything automatically.

I'm concerned about the lower stats for demon lords, as I don't see them as a monster to be beaten at the end of a dungeon. These creatures should be epic...I mean, making them CR 21 makes them no tougher than a puny great wyrm dragon or something, right? But they're demon lords.....the leaders of entire planes where the detritus of evil mortals passing on from the material plane, and congealing into the pure essence of evil......they're even beyond dragons...

I'm interested in knowing what else they've got in the book though. Really looking forward to it, aside from the demon lords issue.

Banshee

 

[Matafuego]

I am very dissapointed to hear that about the Demon Lords.
For me the problem is not making them CR 20 but instead that the rest of the world doesn't work "well" with that approach.

MadCultist: I'm going to summon Demogorgon and you'll be doomed!!!
Cleric: Just go ahead... I'l summon a Solar... any Solar... and we'll be saved (or a Gold Great Wyrm or anything good that there are many and is more powerful or just as powerful than... a Demon Lord)

Or how can something like that rule over... 10 balors?
I know its supposed to be outside its plane but if I were them then I'd never leave my house in fear of "the good police".

As someone already said before me, if I end my campaign by level 10 (which I used to do) I can't expect my players would be beating Balors or Mariliths without SERIOUS help. Same goes for ending the campaing at level 20 and pretending to beat major demon lords.

 

[Zarnam]

Joe ?? Joe, where art thou ??

You still haven't answered my itty bitty question about which Demon Lords are included in the book

My curiosity is strangling me at the very moment, so please, help save a life

 

[GQuail]

My archfiends will remain god slaughtering beings without stats, thank you very much.

If that's your campaign, then so be it. But there's a difference between "in my campaign it should be like this" and what some people see to be saying (or at least implying) which is "Demon lords under this CR are /wrong/ and I can't believe these idiots didn't do them at my level!"

I agree that the Demonomicon and the Fiendish Codex having differing stats for the same thing is irritating: it does seem to send mixed messages, and with that line about "weaker stats for off plane" being missing it's going to confuse some people. Still, I know it now, as does everyone who reads this thread, so hopefully that'll solve that problem. ;-)

I can't fault the logic behinds Hordes of the Abyss' stat blocks. There is a long tradition of archfiends being slayable, and referring to OOP campaign settings which had differing views doesn't change the fact that most people's D&D games probalby still treat them as they did in day 1: in theory killable, but high enough level that they're way out of the league of all but the greatest heroes Featuring such core D&D beings at a level they can actually be used far outstrips the priority of "treating them with respect" or what have you.

Contrary to the extolations of epic level play by some people (Razz in paticular) and the fact I quite like playing higher level games myself (my first PDF purchase was the Immortal's Handbook bestiary, and I've been known to stat out the gods of my campaign world ) it's just a fact of life that most people don't play D&D at higher levels. Saying how great it is to fight a CR 32 Orcus doesn't change the fact that most people here are never going to face off against anything CR32: but a CR21 becomes useable, even if it's an aspect/off-plane version/unpsionically charged/whatever version of the Amazing Unstopable Orcus!!1!!!!111!!one! some people feel must exist.

Also, contrary to Razz's statements on the topic, it's absoutely not easier to weaken a monster than to strengthen it: 3.X is full of ways to increase the power level of enemies, using HD, class levels or templates, bt trying to work out what to take off to make a CR 32 a CR 24 is no fun whatsoever.

Following the mocking that stats in D&DG got from some of the same people in this thread, I think it's clear that official stats for things of this nature will never please everyone. But I do think that aiming lower and providing hints for powering them up is a good idea: though without seeing the book I obviously can't say if they provide enough hints to my liking. Still. I'm sure my players wouldn't mind if I decided that Pazuzu could use five levels of Rogue and the Paragon template....

Anyway, this all seems to ignore the fact that the monster stats are a minor part of the book. I'm quite interested to see it when it comes out, and even if I don't like thst ats, it's what, 20 pages out of the book? 20 pages in which there's still fluff and other stuff going on as well. To throw the book out based on that as "ruining the awesome legendary strength I want to place in my games." seems more than a little melodromatic.

 

[Psion]

I am very dissapointed to hear that about the Demon Lords.
For me the problem is not making them CR 20 but instead that the rest of the world doesn't work "well" with that approach.

MadCultist: I'm going to summon Demogorgon and you'll be doomed!!!
Cleric: Just go ahead... I'l summon a Solar... any Solar... and we'll be saved (or a Gold Great Wyrm or anything good that there are many and is more powerful or just as powerful than... a Demon Lord)

Or how can something like that rule over... 10 balors?
I know its supposed to be outside its plane but if I were them then I'd never leave my house in fear of "the good police".

As someone already said before me, if I end my campaign by level 10 (which I used to do) I can't expect my players would be beating Balors or Mariliths without SERIOUS help. Same goes for ending the campaing at level 20 and pretending to beat major demon lords.

If that's the way you feel, then advance them in your game. They tell you how to do so. I think the book is extremely accomodating that way. But if I want players in my game to challenge demon lords at 20th level, then that's on me. Personally, as I have said in another thread, I'll probably peg the more significant ones at 25-27 or so.

I can't see how accomodating the needs of different campaigns can be perceived as bad, unless, well, you are hung up on how other people play.

 

[Razz]

Also, contrary to Razz's statements on the topic, it's absoutely not easier to weaken a monster than to strengthen it: 3.X is full of ways to increase the power level of enemies, using HD, class levels or templates, bt trying to work out what to take off to make a CR 32 a CR 24 is no fun whatsoever.

What makes a monster unique, cool, awesome, and sometimes scary and powerful? It's their special attacks and special qualities.

If you read the ELH's monsters, you'll notice some really mighty special attacks and qualities. Abilities you don't see monsters in any other WotC book with new monsters possess. That's what I mean by it is harder to upgrade a monster than to downgrade one. When the developers design a monster at CR 21, they give it abilities suitable against CR 21 characters. You won't see "energy drain touch attack; 5 negative levels" stuff or "40d12" breath weapons that shoot out 300 feet. Spell resistance will be mockingly low still when you upgrade a creature by HD. You can add 20 HD to a creature, that SR remains at SR X. Though, technically, I think it's assumed (though not stated anywhere how to increase SR) that the SR should increase by 1 per +1 CR. It's only assumed.

That's all I meant by it's hard to make a creature more powerful. Anyone can up their Hit Dice, but would you give a CR 20 or 21 creature the abilities Pazrael has from Demonomicon? Would a CR 21 demon lord have a 300 ft. radius of antimagic, or have a touch attack disintegrate affect at will? Not if they're CR is low, because the designers won't be thinking on such a scale. (though they should).

Of course, nothing is stopping DMs from adding in their own special attacks and qualities to a demon lord. It's just the matter of determining the CR afterwards, however.

Personally, I think when making a creature of CR 21+, the designers should look at the ELH monsters and take their ideas from the abilities those baddies have.

 

[Shemeska]

If that's your campaign, then so be it. But there's a difference between "in my campaign it should be like this" and what some people see to be saying (or at least implying) which is "Demon lords under this CR are /wrong/ and I can't believe these idiots didn't do them at my level!"

With the exception of 'Planes of Chaos', that's how they were handled over the print run of the Planescape material. That's where the planes got the majority of their detail, where the fiends themselves got the majority of their detail, and the lack of X level stat blocks didn't hamper things then. I prefer the design ideology of that material, it's not just some fluke of my own personal campaign here.

The 'long tradition' of the archfiends being slayable is pretty much 1st edition and the 1st ed nostalgia that reasserted itself with the 3e stats. I don't care for that particular way of approaching the archfiends, I feel that it cheapens them by comparison to the way they were approached during the mid to late 2e material. Others will see this differently, be it purely for childhood nostalgia, or simply wanting to have them as boss monsters in a campaign that won't reach above some level. I accept that, even if I don't share the motivations behind such an approach, but it rings a bit false to label my approach as just something from my own game without precident in DnD at large.

But the stat blocks aren't the reason I'm going to be getting the book, those things are entirely superfluous to the lore on the beings themselves and their layers that I'd like to digest and use directly or as inspiration for my own stuff. I am mildly dissappointed, and disturbed, on some level that the qualifying statements for the relatively weak stats may have been cut by one of the editors. Won't stop me from buying the book though, it's only 23 pages of the whole thing.

 

[Psion]

With the exception of 'Planes of Chaos', that's how they were handled over the print run of the Planescape material. That's where the planes got the majority of their detail, where the fiends themselves got the majority of their detail, and the lack of X level stat blocks didn't hamper things then. I prefer the design ideology of that material, it's not just some fluke of my own personal campaign here.

I prefer a design ideology that is accomodating to the way that many different people play to one that fixates on a singular answer or vision of canon.

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.

 

[BryonD]

I prefer a design ideology that is accomodating to the way that many different people play to one that fixates on a singular answer or vision of canon.

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.

Is this coming from the same Psion that complained so much about 3.5 DR rules and devil/demon builds not fitting well with the Blood War?


As for what they've done in this book, shrug, if they really think they have cast the widest possible net, then good for them. But it is a false argument to suggest that disappointment that the book doesn't serve to my game means that I would be opposed to supporting other people's games. (And no, 1/3 of a page of advancement notes isn't going to clear it up)