D&D 5E Monsters of Many Names - Wandering Monsters (Yugoloth!)

[the Jester]

I do think that precedent should carry substantial weight in D&D lore, just because there are bound to be long-running campaigns that have evolved to include that precedent as a major element. I know that most campaigns aren't the twenty-year running type, but some are, and D&D shouldn't give them the finger by changing the lore without a compelling reason.

 

[steeldragons]

So you don't want to understand my point?

Yeah, I guess there's not much point to this convo then. Unless you're going to give me pie.

I would LOVE to understand your point! What is it?

Cuz from where I'm sitting all you're saying is "this is how I think things should be organized and the lore I think is 'better' and so it should be the core game assumptions. My views are somehow more valid or 'correct' or substantial than anyone else's saying something different."

""Kender" is a bucket of a lot of ideas..." Come. on. You know that's not what anyone is talking about here. This isn't about some esoteric 'symbollic yugoloth' that transcends genres and media.

Among all of this theoretical gobblety gook, please, explain to me what is your point?

Then...and only then....maybe...just maybe, you can have some pie.

 

[Stoat]

Notwithstanding a few instances of creatures that were specifically created to be divine servitors (e.g. the 4E angels), there aren't really any specific categories of creatures whose raison d'etre is to serve deities. Most deities are simply able to attract some members of like-minded planar species to their banner, much in the same way they attract like-minded mortals to be their clerics, paladins, etc.

This is a thing that's always bugged me a little about D&D's cosmology. I'd be happier if the various evil gods had their own custom-built servitors.

I'm vaguely unsatisfied with D&D's demons for the same reason. On the one hand, the game includes at least dozen fully-fleshed out demon lords, each with its own personally, portfolio, and schemes. On the other hand, there are very, very few demons unique to each demon lord. There's just a small group of generic demons. I'd like it better if Baphomet, Dagon, Demogorgon, Orcus, etc., etc. each had a stable of unique servitor demons working for them.

 

[I'm A Banana]

I would LOVE to understand your point! What is it?

If you read the article, it may help you understand why the distinction between "core" and "setting" material is artificial. If you've still got questions when you're done, I'm happy to shed some more light on it.

Cuz from where I'm sitting all you're saying is "this is how I think things should be organized and the lore I think is 'better' and so it should be the core game assumptions. My views are somehow more valid or 'correct' or substantial than anyone else's saying something different."

I'm afraid you misunderstand.

""Kender" is a bucket of a lot of ideas..." Come. on. You know that's not what anyone is talking about here. This isn't about some esoteric 'symbollic yugoloth' that transcends genres and media.

Among all of this theoretical gobblety gook, please, explain to me what is your point?

That monsters in 5e shouldn't be re-concepted to invalidate previous lore.

 

[Echohawk]

I think there was a kender in Beyond the Moons too.

Ravenloft also has kender vampires, so there is precedent for them in at least the Planescape, Forgotten Realms, Spelljammer and Ravenloft settings, as well as in Dragonlance.

And technically, the SAGA RPG was Dragonlance, but not Dungeons and Dragons, so perhaps the Venn diagram should have the kender circle entirely contained inside the combined Dragonlance/D&D circles, but with part of it falling only within the Dragonlance circle, and part of it falling only within the D&D circle.

 

[steeldragons]

Meant to respond to this earlier...

I'm confused, so D&D should cater only to "your" campaign?

Apparently you are, because I said nothing of the sort.

Halfling does not exist in two of my homebrews, guess I should start telling to everybody else to alter their games to include that race.

Huh? You mean to not include it? And, again, I said nothing of the sort. Halfings are part of the core of D&D. If you don't want to use them in your games, that's your prerogative. Minotaurs are part of the core of D&D. Minotaurs as pirate pcs...no. But they are a part of Dragonlance's core. Again using either as a pc, even if you're not playing in Krynn, is again your prerogative.

What about Dragonborn, should we get rid them too and tell 4E fans to alter their games?

oy. could we try to stay on topic. No one gives two hoots about what you do with your dragonborn. That has nothing to do with what the discussion is.

I disagree. 4E did it right, giving a lot of races for us to play, including minotaurs.

You disagree with what, exactly? Something I didn't say? Who's talking about how many races are in the game?

 

[avin]

Huh? You mean to not include it? And, again, I said nothing of the sort. Halfings are part of the core of D&D. If you don't want to use them in your games, that's your prerogative. Minotaurs are part of the core of D&D. Minotaurs as pirate pcs...no. But they are a part of Dragonlance's core. Again using either as a pc, even if you're not playing in Krynn, is again your prerogative.

Well, if you're saying that minotaur pirates aren't part of "core" D&D the same way that Halfling pirates aren't part of core D&D I misread your post.

This is not a class issue, nor a race issue, or even core vs setting subject. It's a matter of character roleplaying choice.

 

[steeldragons]

Ravenloft also has kender vampires, so there is precedent for them in at least the Planescape, Forgotten Realms, Spelljammer and Ravenloft settings, as well as in Dragonlance.

And technically, the SAGA RPG was Dragonlance, but not Dungeons and Dragons, so perhaps the Venn diagram should have the kender circle entirely contained inside the combined Dragonlance/D&D circles, but with part of it falling only within the Dragonlance circle, and part of it falling only within the D&D circle.

Aw cripes...Ok..so...Dragonlance overlaps Planescape and Ravenloft is inside PS and PS is inside D&D and EVERYTHING goes into Kender.

EUREKA! The answer to lifem the universe and everything...<shudder> is KENDER!!! aw crap.

 

[avin]

That monsters in 5e shouldn't be re-concepted to invalidate previous lore.

Yes! DDN should embrace them all. Even when a edition did a better job than other (like 4E Fomorians, IMO), things should not be set in stone in Core books, just suggested, hinted... options to DMs.

 

[Alzrius]

I think there was a kender in Beyond the Moons too.

Oh yeah, Gaeadrelle Goldring, the half-kender girl Teldin meets at the Rock of Bral and who later becomes a powerful psionicist. She doesn't appear in Beyond the Moons, making her debut in book three (The Maelstrom's Eye) and returning in book six (The Ultimate Helm). I had forgotten about her.

Also, the vampiric kender of Sithicus that Echohawk mentioned. I guess those little guys really do get everywhere!