The Call of the World Builder

[katahn]

On the Demogorgon thing.

Look, I'm simply repeating canon here. I didn't make this up. Demogorgon became prince of demons by kicking the ass of every demon that challenged him.

But, seriously, if you think that demons, the lords of the chaotic abyss would actually bend knee to someone because they talk better, AND, you think that Demogorgon is the one to do this, more power to you. Me, I think that the Abyss is a place where, if you are weaker, you are fodder. The strongest survive and rule.

Considering that's how Chaotic Evil is defined in the game, I'm really wondering how you define it.

Personal power isn't just being a bad-ass fighter though. A gang can be run by someone other than the absolute best and most powerful fighter. Personal charisma and ability to manipulate others would also count for a lot, also the type of terrain or other resources one has. Also knowing the weaknesses and flaws of your enemies counts for a lot and possibly Demogorgon has an ability that allows him to see the weak spots in other demons.

"But wouldn't such an ability be listed in the MM?" No necessarily, players aren't demons.

Another possibility is that back in the day when Demogorgon became the defacto "big baddy" of the demons he was more powerful than he is now. Maybe he's gotten weak/soft and possibly other demons are conspiring to whittle away his base of support among those demons that still buy into his "celebrity" status as it were.

The point is don't get hung up on how things are "right now", there's no reason to believe they always were exactly the same. There's no specific reason to assume that the chaotic-evil demons are somehow less capable of forming some kind of society/culture than the chaotic-evil drow were. Sure it will be subject to more overt internal strife and conflict than a lawful society would be, but if Demogorgon or any demon is referred to as a leader among demons then that implies they have subjects to lead which in turn implies some kind of society.

 

[Hussar]

Personal power isn't just being a bad-ass fighter though. A gang can be run by someone other than the absolute best and most powerful fighter. Personal charisma and ability to manipulate others would also count for a lot, also the type of terrain or other resources one has. Also knowing the weaknesses and flaws of your enemies counts for a lot and possibly Demogorgon has an ability that allows him to see the weak spots in other demons.

"But wouldn't such an ability be listed in the MM?" No necessarily, players aren't demons.

Another possibility is that back in the day when Demogorgon became the defacto "big baddy" of the demons he was more powerful than he is now. Maybe he's gotten weak/soft and possibly other demons are conspiring to whittle away his base of support among those demons that still buy into his "celebrity" status as it were.

The point is don't get hung up on how things are "right now", there's no reason to believe they always were exactly the same. There's no specific reason to assume that the chaotic-evil demons are somehow less capable of forming some kind of society/culture than the chaotic-evil drow were. Sure it will be subject to more overt internal strife and conflict than a lawful society would be, but if Demogorgon or any demon is referred to as a leader among demons then that implies they have subjects to lead which in turn implies some kind of society.

Wow.

For the third time. I'm NOT MAKING THIS UP. I've got Dragon 357 sitting in front of me as I type this. In it, we have a Demonomicon article detailing the history of Demogorgon in the default setting. Now, unless James Jacobs didn't do his homework, THIS IS HOW IT IS IN D&D. Not in your game, maybe not in my game, but in the DEFAULT SETTING.

In the DEFAULT SETTING, Demogorgon became the most powerful demon by kicking the ass of everyone around him. Maybe Orcus and Grazzt could team up and take him down, but, they're too busy stabbing eachother in the back to get the job done.

But, at the end of the day, Demogorgon became top dog (baboon?) by force. Not by talking, not by trickery, not by some special Kryptonite power. By kicking everyone else's ass.

But, this is entirely besides the point I was trying to make. What I was trying to say is that from a world building point of view, a weak Demogorgon makes no sense. Not when non-unique demons can be advanced, by RAW, to be far and away more powerful. Never mind balors, you can advance pretty much any of the "Type" demons (to use a 1e term) past CR 23. Remember, the listings in the MM are supposed to be the weakest of the type, not the average.

It doesn't make a whole lot of world building sense for the prince of demons to be only a smidgeon stronger than the weakest of his underlings.

But, from a game perspective, it makes perfect sense.

THAT'S the point I've been trying to get across.

 

[Pinotage]

Things in this thread that I agree with, even though it may seem like I don't if you read me uncharitably:

1. Monsters need some seed in their monster manual entry for DMs to take and grow into a plotline.
2. The game needs predictable rules so that players can interact with it.
3. Things that a player character is likely to do, and which are likely to be done by a player character, generally need rules to represent them.

I agree with all of those principles. But they are all matters of degree.

Yip. Well summarized. Different people like different degrees of the same thing. That's not to say it isn't there, just that some people like a little and others a lot. It's a personal preference.

Pinotage

 

[I'm A Banana]

It doesn't make a whole lot of world building sense for the prince of demons to be only a smidgeon stronger than the weakest of his underlings.

But, from a game perspective, it makes perfect sense.

There's nothing stopping it from making sense in a world-building sense, either.

THAT'S why your point doesn't really hold up.

 

[Pinotage]

That's where the pretending to be elves part steps in. It's quite fun, even (especially?) when you're 13.

Sure. But whether you pretending to be an elf while killing things or not pretending to be an elf while killings things, you still end up spending your time killings things. The good thing about D&D is that it is not only about killing things - it's also about great stories and RP. If I wanted to just kill things, I'd play a video game that'd likely do it better. Likewise if I only wanted a good story, I'd read a novel. If I only wanted RP, there are avenues to explore that. Point is, D&D combines them all together and that's what makes it fun. Only one of its own can get boring very quickly.

Pinotage

 

[Lacyon]

Sure. But whether you pretending to be an elf while killing things or not pretending to be an elf while killings things, you still end up spending your time killings things.

Only some of the time is spent killing things. The rest of the time is spent pretending to be an elf.

The good thing about D&D is that it is not only about killing things - it's also about great stories and RP. If I wanted to just kill things, I'd play a video game that'd likely do it better. Likewise if I only wanted a good story, I'd read a novel. If I only wanted RP, there are avenues to explore that. Point is, D&D combines them all together and that's what makes it fun. Only one of its own can get boring very quickly.

This is exactly what I said. "Pretending to be an elf" is just shorthand for the not-killing-things activities, taken in whatever dosages or flavors the individual and/or group prefers.

 

[Pinotage]

This is exactly what I said. "Pretending to be an elf" is just shorthand for the not-killing-things activities, taken in whatever dosages or flavors the individual and/or group prefers.

Ah. Still, if your adventures as a 13 year old sucked as much as mine did (and I have the copies somewhere to prove it!), there wasn't a lot of this 'pretending to be an elf' and any story business. The game was about killing things. At least that was my experience as a 13 year old. It was good fun and all, but then I stopped playing D&D for more than 10 years when I was 15.

The point is, is that to make D&D longterm viable to the younger generation, I think it needs to do its best to enhance story elements and RP, rather than focusing only on combat. I'm not saying 4e does this, but that any games system, 4e included, can do well by motivating those things that have long term appeal, particularly to the current video game generation. If that means including more story elements in the MM, then good. As has been mentioned, some like more detail, others less. I think having more ideas to spark the imagination is better than having less ideas. The former may be more constrictive, but it provides, I think, an easier stepping stone to getting the imagination and hence good stories going. And that's what'll hook the younger generation.

Pinotage

 

[I'm A Banana]

"Pretending to be an elf" is just shorthand for the not-killing-things activities, taken in whatever dosages or flavors the individual and/or group prefers.

Wait, ya lost me...I'm not pretending to be an elf when I'm pretending to be an elf kiling things?

 

[katahn]

Wow.

For the third time. I'm NOT MAKING THIS UP. I've got Dragon 357 sitting in front of me as I type this. In it, we have a Demonomicon article detailing the history of Demogorgon in the default setting. Now, unless James Jacobs didn't do his homework, THIS IS HOW IT IS IN D&D. Not in your game, maybe not in my game, but in the DEFAULT SETTING.

In the DEFAULT SETTING, Demogorgon became the most powerful demon by kicking the ass of everyone around him. Maybe Orcus and Grazzt could team up and take him down, but, they're too busy stabbing eachother in the back to get the job done.

How does "by kicking the ass of everyone around him" automatically mean "in a fair one-on-one fight where everyone was prepared"? Is it so beyond the realm of possibility that a super-intelligent and unremittingly evil demon lord might have used trickery, surprise, or any other means of making sure the fight was tilted as heavily as possible in his favor?

How does the fact that in the past he kicked their asses (however it was done) automatically mean it is impossible he could either be weaker now (and presumably hiding that fact) or in the past he had some favorable circumstance such as the alignment of stars, the support of some evil god, had rallied enough supporters to help him, or whatever else that he might not have today?

And before one dismisses the idea of followers/soldiers helping him win, do you really think any demon lord is going to allow a rival to just walk up to their front door and let them in for a fair and honests duel for supremacy? I'd find that idea fairly ludicrous. It makes considerably more sense to me that him "kicking their asses" involved a conflict between the forces each commanded and maybe Demogorgon is just that much better of a strategist and tactician.

But, at the end of the day, Demogorgon became top dog (baboon?) by force. Not by talking, not by trickery, not by some special Kryptonite power. By kicking everyone else's ass.

The Allies "kicked the ass" of the Axis during WWII, but I'm pretty sure the Allied generals didn't personally punch the Axis generals in the face. I'm pretty sure the Marines that captured Sadam Hussein in Iraq were more than a match for the deposed dictator in personal combat, as were quite probably most of the military Sadam commanded. Despite this, Sadam was (until we intervened) the dictator of that nation.

If such things can play out like that in the real world, how is it that they couldn't possibly play out like that in a fantasy one?

But, this is entirely besides the point I was trying to make. What I was trying to say is that from a world building point of view, a weak Demogorgon makes no sense. Not when non-unique demons can be advanced, by RAW, to be far and away more powerful. Never mind balors, you can advance pretty much any of the "Type" demons (to use a 1e term) past CR 23. Remember, the listings in the MM are supposed to be the weakest of the type, not the average.

I disagree. From a world building point of view it makes complete sense to me that a leader may not be as physically powerful as the beings it leads. When that is the case then clearly said leader maintains his power due to some other combination of factors. It is simply that those other combination of factors are left to the whim and imagination of the indivual DM.

It doesn't make a whole lot of world building sense for the prince of demons to be only a smidgeon stronger than the weakest of his underlings.

But, from a game perspective, it makes perfect sense.

THAT'S the point I've been trying to get across.

Why doesn't it? Demons are chaotic, not stupid. A leader isn't always the strongest in every possible form of conflict or interaction. A leader is the one who through wit and charisma and power is able to maintain their position.

 

[Lord Mhoram]

In other words, it appears that your world building will actually be far less constrained by the mechanics than it was in 3e. It has to be since the 4e mechanics are less concretely defined.

So, why are all the world builder's here pissed off?

Coming in late to the thread (have read/scanned it all), and wanted to answer the question.

I'm a "Rules are the physics of the world" kind of guy. Whatever the structure of the rules are, it determines what kind of world it is going to be. When the world/fluff don't match the system, then there is a disconnect. That makes me a type of simulationist, which has been demonstrated in earlier discussions is not the target audience for 4th (I'm still going to get it - I like D&D even if it isn't perfect or completely to my tastes).

If something is done (especially major things like a succubus and the king) my reaction is "How?". If there isn't any mechanical groundwork, then it's just disconnected stuff made up and dropped in and has no basis in the game world reality.

I personally loved the approach (even if it caused problems in gameplay) of 3rd in that respect. PCs NPCs and Monsters were all build almost the same, and they all had access to the same kind of abilities and such. Different rules for building monsters and PCs is something I have long hated*.

So for me, the whole getting rid of mechanics impedes world building, because in my mind, I need to have the rule there to define what is happening. And yes, I loved that aspect of Eberron.

* My primary system is HERO where everything is defined by the structure of the rules, and you can do just about anything with it. And everything (monsters, weapons, PCs, NPCs and such) are build using the same system.