-
NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.
The Lords of the Nine Hells
- Thread starter BOZ
- Start date
Voadam
Legend
Tiamat seems the biggest unexplained issue, so looking at other sources on her might add some info. I know she's in the 1e MM and Manual of the Planes, but there is also the Babylonian Mythos in Deities and Demigods, 2e's Legends and Lore, Monster Mythology, probably the Draconomicon, and there is the FR god book with stuff on her, I forget whether it is Faiths and Avatars or Powers and Pantheons that has the Mulhorandi pantheon stuff.
In 3e I'd look at the FR god book, Deities and Demigods, and Draconomicon for more info on her.
In 3e I'd look at the FR god book, Deities and Demigods, and Draconomicon for more info on her.
victorysaber
First Post
What would be the EL of fighting the Lords of the Nine together, given FC2 stats?
Shemeska
Adventurer
Voadam said:
I'm not sure that it's an unexplained issue really. In-game, Tiamat was never a Lord of the 9, though some mortal sages might have mistaken her to have held that title and position. I could very easily see devils in the service of other noble Baatezu opposed to Zariel, and later Bel, spreading false information on the power structure of Avernus to stunt any efforts by the Lord of the 1st to develop mortal cults on the prime material. After all, if your potential targets falsely believe Tiamat to be lord of Avernus, you're going to have a devil of a time recruiting them to worship you, even if you could likely boot Tiamat out of Baator if push ever came to shove.
But mortals who held that belief might have honestly just misread the evidence. Tiamat is a diety yes, and she's on Avernus, and her deific domain is perched atop the portal to Dis. She has importance on that level, even if her relations with the Baatezu has been frosty at times. Still, she has fared much better as a deity on Avernus than Gruumsh and Maglubiyet fared (who were forcibly ejected from Baator into Acheron).
Out of game, the removal in 2e and 3.x of Tiamat from the role she briefly had in 1e clears up the extreme awkwardness of having someone who was both a true deity and also a non-baatezu being among the ranks of the archdevils.
Desdichado
Hero
Wow, that's kinda interesting. I didn't remember that 1e's Hell was so different. I guess it's been a long time.
Although not official, I'd like to at least mention Chris Pramas (since he wrote officially on it in 2e) take on Hell in Legions of Hell where Bel is Baal and is a unique devil, not a fancy pit fiend (a position I think makes a lot more sense), in place of Levistus we have Leviathan--the gigantic unique devil whale creature--and in place of Malagarde or Glasya either one we have Lilith, which has a Judeo-Christian folklore paternity that is unshakable.
My own preferred version of Hell is a combination of the Fiendish Codex II version and this Legions of Hell set-up. Bel and Baal are alternate spellings of the same idea, and I prefer archdukes be unique devils, so I'd just change my Bel to Baal in appearance and name and otherwise use his stats (if ever needed) as is. FC2 seems to strongly imply that Levistus being put back in charge was a distraction while Asmodeus worked on getting Glasya where she is today and that now he's worried that his usefulness is at an end. This opens the door for Levistus being taken out of the picture and replaced by Leviathan. Glasya and Lilith are similar enough in concept to assume I wouldn't worry about coopting Lilith--I might go so far as to consider it an alternate name for Glasya, although FC2 does mention a Lilith as a second consort of someone in one of the courts of the archdukes. Can't remember where exactly.
That way, I get the best of both worlds, and I can actually make the "official" stance work in my campaign--just advance the timeline and introduce a few minor changes. Legions also posits Baalzubul and Belial as fallen celestials rather than baatezu per se, which I think is a cool idea, but not important at the end of the day. After all, the Pact Primeval myth has all of the devils as fallen celestials if you go back to ur-time. I do like the idea that Baalzebul overcoming his slugform punishment too. The idea of all these archdukes being publicly punished but left in charge of their layers strikes me as a bit bizarre, so I'd either remove the punishments or remove the archdukes depending on how I wanted it to go.
Anyway, sorry--I know the thread is about the official position, not what we do in our own campaigns. I'll shut up now.
Although not official, I'd like to at least mention Chris Pramas (since he wrote officially on it in 2e) take on Hell in Legions of Hell where Bel is Baal and is a unique devil, not a fancy pit fiend (a position I think makes a lot more sense), in place of Levistus we have Leviathan--the gigantic unique devil whale creature--and in place of Malagarde or Glasya either one we have Lilith, which has a Judeo-Christian folklore paternity that is unshakable.
My own preferred version of Hell is a combination of the Fiendish Codex II version and this Legions of Hell set-up. Bel and Baal are alternate spellings of the same idea, and I prefer archdukes be unique devils, so I'd just change my Bel to Baal in appearance and name and otherwise use his stats (if ever needed) as is. FC2 seems to strongly imply that Levistus being put back in charge was a distraction while Asmodeus worked on getting Glasya where she is today and that now he's worried that his usefulness is at an end. This opens the door for Levistus being taken out of the picture and replaced by Leviathan. Glasya and Lilith are similar enough in concept to assume I wouldn't worry about coopting Lilith--I might go so far as to consider it an alternate name for Glasya, although FC2 does mention a Lilith as a second consort of someone in one of the courts of the archdukes. Can't remember where exactly.
That way, I get the best of both worlds, and I can actually make the "official" stance work in my campaign--just advance the timeline and introduce a few minor changes. Legions also posits Baalzubul and Belial as fallen celestials rather than baatezu per se, which I think is a cool idea, but not important at the end of the day. After all, the Pact Primeval myth has all of the devils as fallen celestials if you go back to ur-time. I do like the idea that Baalzebul overcoming his slugform punishment too. The idea of all these archdukes being publicly punished but left in charge of their layers strikes me as a bit bizarre, so I'd either remove the punishments or remove the archdukes depending on how I wanted it to go.
Anyway, sorry--I know the thread is about the official position, not what we do in our own campaigns. I'll shut up now.
Shade
Monster Junkie
I've never been a big fan of Bel, either. My personal taste is for the archfiends to be a bit more unique than just a slightly better pit fiend. Besides, the devils change forms through ascending through the ranks, so why shouldn't a pit fiend change form when becoming an archdevil?
I was never fond of the Hag Countess, either, but FCII remedied that nicely.
Now if FCIII will just oust Mydianchlarus and replace him with one of the other more unique altraloths (or return his predecessor to power)....
I was never fond of the Hag Countess, either, but FCII remedied that nicely.
Now if FCIII will just oust Mydianchlarus and replace him with one of the other more unique altraloths (or return his predecessor to power)....
J-Dawg said:
That's another change worth pointing out. In Planescape, in Dragon #223, Bel was a unique fiend.
"Bel has only recently discovered how to create an avatar. The avatar takes the form of a burly humanoid with a jutting chin and powerful arms. The avatar's skin is slightly tinged with red, and his brooding scowl and the promise of rage held barely in check dissuades many from offending the representative of the Lord of the First."
In other words, he had begun to evolve into a unique form and no longer looked like a pit fiend.
This was something that was ignored by Chris Pramas in Guide to Hell, and by all writers since then, so most people think "Bel is pit fiend of unusual power" and not "Bel is a former pit fiend who appears as a burly, red-skinned man."
Similar Threads
