# Hordes of the Abyss: Q&A



## JoeGKushner (May 30, 2006)

The original thread seems to have become a demon prince of strife in it's own right.

In that vein, I'm opening up a new thread for specific questions and answers.

I'll take down some notes today and try to have some replies tomorrow.


----------



## BryonD (May 30, 2006)

JoeGKushner said:
			
		

> The original thread seems to have become a demon prince of strife in it's own right.




With the new stats that thread will kick the butt of any other demon prince.


----------



## Mr.Black (May 30, 2006)

Would you please post the CRs of the non-unique demons?  

Could you list which of the new demons are not Tannari?  

Also, could you list the CRs of the demons that had their CRs changed (from MM2 and Fiend Folio).  Of special interest are the klurichir, myrmixicus, alkilith, maurezhi (at all advancements), wastrilith, kelvezu, jarilith, and jovoc.

Thank you!


----------



## Shade (May 30, 2006)

Could you give a brief synopsis of Dagon?  What's he look like, who are his main enemies and allies, etc.

Are cambions and alu-fiends mentioned (as opposed to simply "half-fiends")?

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. :\ 

Thanks!


----------



## Imruphel (May 30, 2006)

Is there an explanation given as to why tanar'ri are immune to electricity when it seems to be an energy type that is not particularly prevalent in the Abyss (frex, fire or acid would have made more sense).


----------



## jester47 (May 30, 2006)

I am very interested in the *possession rules* and if the *shadow demon* is present under a different more demony name...


----------



## enworldatemylogin (May 30, 2006)

Does the book use the new stat block format, bah!, or the good ol' format?


----------



## JoeGKushner (May 30, 2006)

Shade said:
			
		

> 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. :\
> 
> Thanks!




I'll double check on this but gut says No.


----------



## JoeGKushner (May 30, 2006)

enworldatemylogin said:
			
		

> Does the book use the new stat block format, bah!, or the good ol' format?




It uses the new stat block formula.


----------



## JoeGKushner (May 30, 2006)

jester47 said:
			
		

> I am very interested in the *possession rules* and if the *shadow demon* is present under a different more demony name...




I'll check onto the possession rules for a summary but for shadow demon, I'm pretty sure, no.


----------



## Derringer (May 30, 2006)

*Tiefling Beguiler*

Hello,

Very interested in the Heritor feats for my upcoming Tiefling Beguiler (don't want to play a super evil guy...just questionable, so vile stuff is out for me).  Can you give us a little more information on them?

Thanks!


----------



## JoeGKushner (May 30, 2006)

Derringer said:
			
		

> Hello,
> 
> Very interested in the Heritor feats for my upcoming Tiefling Beguiler (don't want to play a super evil guy...just questionable, so vile stuff is out for me).  Can you give us a little more information on them?
> 
> Thanks!




Not doing a complete breakdown.

What do you want to know specifically? They are tied to the abyss. The more you have of them the more powerful they become, but they're realitvely minor unless you have three or more at which point the pick up seems pretty solid but the exchange is three feats.


----------



## Psion (May 30, 2006)

JoeGKushner said:
			
		

> Not doing a complete breakdown.
> 
> What do you want to know specifically? They are tied to the abyss. The more you have of them the more powerful they become, but they're realitvely minor unless you have three or more at which point the pick up seems pretty solid but the exchange is three feats.




So essentially comparable to the feats in Lords of Madness where the more feats you have in the chain, the more powerful each becomes?


----------



## JoeGKushner (May 30, 2006)

Psion said:
			
		

> So essentially comparable to the feats in Lords of Madness where the more feats you have in the chain, the more powerful each becomes?




Or the Form feats in Player's Handbook II.


----------



## Derringer (May 30, 2006)

Yes, I really enjoyed the ones from Lords of Madness.  My last guy had tentacles.

Well, we do have the list from the TOC over on the Wizard's Site.  I am looking to see if something will mesh nicely with the Beguiler Class.  Bonuses to bluffing, hiding, illusion or charm DC's.  Looking through the names of the feats  - I can dream that "Demonic Sneak Attack" grants a Babau-like sneak attack ability.  I am really missing that with taking Beguiler instead of Rogue...and I would certainly be willing to give up 3 feats to get a couple d6 sneak (but I guess that granting sneak attack as a feat is probably too much).  What does Demonic Sneak actually do?

And is the Brand of Evil a prereq for all the others or was that just the vile feats?  Is there some other prereq feat for the Heritor...even if you had Abyssal Blood like a Tiefling?

I am sure I can manage to get my hands on the book before the campaign starts, but I am just hoping to get an early read on the applicability of the feats to see how hard I have to work to get the book before we start.


----------



## Joshua Randall (May 30, 2006)

Does the book contain ideas / examples of demonic plots and scheming, that can be used to make demony-fresh adventures? (demony-fresh? maybe demony-rank?)


----------



## JoeGKushner (May 30, 2006)

Derringer said:
			
		

> And is the Brand of Evil a prereq for all the others or was that just the vile feats?  Is there some other prereq feat for the Heritor...even if you had Abyssal Blood like a Tiefling?




The Brand is for the vile feats. It's the first in a chain.

I could be misremembering, but I don't think that you need Abyssal Blood for the Heritor  feats. The Heritor feats are proof of your blood, not the other way around.


----------



## JoeGKushner (May 30, 2006)

Joshua Randall said:
			
		

> Does the book contain ideas / examples of demonic plots and scheming, that can be used to make demony-fresh adventures? (demony-fresh? maybe demony-rank?)




There are two scenarios dealing with the cult.

There are a few planes with built in hooks.

There are four roles characters can take, as well as ideas on how to use demons.

But in this vein, I think Goodman Game's Demon Hunter's Handbook does a better job as that's one of the points of focus on the book for GM's. Using demons in the game. This book is more of a grab bag and suffers a little for it in terms of it's relatively low page count.


----------



## lkj (May 30, 2006)

Though I've got NO interest in the debate of the 'right' or 'wrong' of the demon lord CR's, I am very curious about what the 'advancement of demon lords to epic levels' section entails. I get the impression that it builds on the MM advancement rules. Wondering, roughly, what the guidelines are.

Thanks much.

AD


----------



## JoeGKushner (May 30, 2006)

Talks about advancing them and what they get per hit die and how to calculate the new CR from it.

Not a lot of detail and from the top of my head, no examples provided.


----------



## Nightfall (May 30, 2006)

Any chances in the Vile feats (like Evil brand) and what is the chain using Evil Brand?

So I take there's no new Pr-classes in this book huh? 

Spells that stand out for an Orcus lover like me? (You know, new necromancy spells?)

Any mention of FR events regarding Orcus' demise or not?


----------



## Shemeska (May 30, 2006)

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)?


----------



## Erik Mona (May 30, 2006)

Shemeska said:
			
		

> 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?




The original turnover included a short description of this layer, but the whole "short descriptions of minor layers" section was cut, presumably for space. So I'm not sure the varrangoin are mentioned at all.



			
				Shemeska said:
			
		

> Are Bebeliths mentioned at all?




Yes, of course.



			
				Shemeska said:
			
		

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




Yes, as well as in the section describing how to get around on the Abyss. They are not statted up, but they're given some detail and associated adventure hooks.



			
				Shemeska said:
			
		

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




It is mentioned within the context of Pale Night herself, but is not elaborated upon further.

--Erik


----------



## Shemeska (May 30, 2006)

Erik Mona said:
			
		

> The original turnover included a short description of this layer, but the whole "short descriptions of minor layers" section was cut, presumably for space. So I'm not sure the varrangoin are mentioned at all.




Sooo.... Mr Mona... Erik... my buddy, my pal.... any chance of mentioning what was intended for that if it did indeed get cut?

And that cut section would make an awesome web enhancement, especially if the short descriptions would have expanded upon previous material.


And a trio of 'very cool' 's for the three other questions I had.


----------



## Shemeska (May 30, 2006)

**with a flutter of fiendish lashes**

More questions:

With respect to the origins of the Tanar'ri, is that presented as legend, fact, in character speculation from a biased source? 

And is there any mention, or even a mention of, the Baernaloth/Yugoloth creation myth for the Tanar'ri, even if just as another competing myth?

Is Dweirgus the Chrysalid Prince mentioned anywhere in the book? The teasers about him in the Baphomet article in Dragon really picked a spot in my brain.


----------



## JoeGKushner (May 30, 2006)

Shemeska said:
			
		

> More questions:
> 
> With respect to the origins of the Tanar'ri, is that presented as legend, fact, in character speculation from a biased source?




I believe it's legend, from the Black Scrolls. The section on the history of the Abyss also seems to indicate something else as the Tanar'ri aren't the first inhabitants of the plane either.


----------



## Mouseferatu (May 31, 2006)

Erik Mona said:
			
		

> The original turnover included a short description of this layer, but the whole "short descriptions of minor layers" section was cut, presumably for space. So I'm not sure the varrangoin are mentioned at all.




Dang. That probably included the only mention of Turaglas's home layer, didn't it? Oh, well...


----------



## Erik Mona (May 31, 2006)

Shemeska said:
			
		

> Sooo.... Mr Mona... Erik... my buddy, my pal.... any chance of mentioning what was intended for that if it did indeed get cut?
> 
> And that cut section would make an awesome web enhancement, especially if the short descriptions would have expanded upon previous material.




I've suggested to WotC that the material would be good for the web enhancement or even a follow-up Dragon article, but I haven't heard back from them yet. We'll see.

--Erik


----------



## Erik Mona (May 31, 2006)

Shemeska said:
			
		

> With respect to the origins of the Tanar'ri, is that presented as legend, fact, in character speculation from a biased source?




The whole business about everything coming from the Abyss is in an excerpt from the Black Scrolls of Ahm, and written in character, in italics. That history is pretty much invalidated by the introduction to the "Into the Abyss" section (which I wrote) that categorically states that the obyriths predate mortals, and that the Inner Planes existed before the Outer Planes (you'll have to read this in context to understand what I mean). So my advice would be not to take the Black Scrolls too seriously, and to choose whatever works best for your campaign.



			
				Shemeska said:
			
		

> And is there any mention, or even a mention of, the Baernaloth/Yugoloth creation myth for the Tanar'ri, even if just as another competing myth?




Of course. Here's the text in question:

"Obyriths: The rusting iron fortresses of the eldest demons crowd the Plain of Infinite Portals, crumbling testaments to a near-forgotten age. Before the first mortal was born, the obyriths ruled the Abyss, and their political ambitions and plots have seldom extended beyond the plane of their origin. Certain blasphemous texts of incalculable antiquity claim that the obyriths and a proto-race of ancient Baatorians were the spawn of a greater fiendish race called the baernoloths, but this unified creation myth enjoys few proponents outside Gehenna and the Gray Wastes of Hades."

And, you know, EN World. 



			
				Shemeska said:
			
		

> Is Dweirgus the Chrysalid Prince mentioned anywhere in the book? The teasers about him in the Baphomet article in Dragon really picked a spot in my brain.




James turned in his Baphomet article about a day before I made my official turnover, so I only had time to mention Dweirgus in the list of demon lords in the appendix.

--Erik


----------



## Erik Mona (May 31, 2006)

Mouseferatu said:
			
		

> Dang. That probably included the only mention of Turaglas's home layer, didn't it? Oh, well...




Nope. Turaglas was only ever mentioned in the appendix, and is still there.

--Erik


----------



## Gold Roger (May 31, 2006)

So far this all really sounds like the book suffered from a too small format.

Here's my questions:

Does it mention anywhere that demon princes have control of their layer more or less at their will?

Any way you could elaborate on the new kinds of demons?

Anything elaborate on summoning/binding demons?


----------



## Erik Mona (May 31, 2006)

The book mentions that demon lords control their layers more or less at will several times. The layers have the "divinely morphic" trait from the MotP, and for these purposes the demon princes who control a layer qualify as "divine."

--Erik


----------



## Mouseferatu (May 31, 2006)

Erik Mona said:
			
		

> Nope. Turaglas was only ever mentioned in the appendix, and is still there.
> 
> --Erik




Cool. The ego is safe for another day, then.


----------



## Mouseferatu (May 31, 2006)

Erik Mona said:
			
		

> The book mentions that demon lords control their layers more or less at will several times. The layers have the "divinely morphic" trait from the MotP, and for these purposes the demon princes who control a layer qualify as "divine."
> 
> --Erik




Can I quote this, in bold, bright red itallics, in the thread where people are arguing about the demon lords being too weak?  This right here makes a _huge_ difference.


----------



## Shemeska (May 31, 2006)

Erik Mona said:
			
		

> The whole business about everything coming from the Abyss is in an excerpt from the Black Scrolls of Ahm, and written in character, in italics. That history is pretty much invalidated by the introduction to the "Into the Abyss" section (which I wrote) that categorically states that the obyriths predate mortals, and that the Inner Planes existed before the Outer Planes (you'll have to read this in context to understand what I mean). So my advice would be not to take the Black Scrolls too seriously, and to choose whatever works best for your campaign.




Of course, you do realize that as you type this stuff, and I read it, we're doing a pretty good impression of Pavlov and a drooling dog respectively.

Context aside, I'm not surprised I suppose since the inner planes were already widely rumored to have been there before the outer planes, with the latter either just not existing prior to the prime, or existing in a much less defined, and likely immaterial state before they solidified with mortal belief.

At least that's how I've interpereted it myself in my campaigns, though I've been partial to the notion that the abstract beings referenced by the Baernaloth legends might themselves exist outside of the Great Wheel in some fashion, and the heralds of those alignments might not so much have been formed out of the raw stuff of the forming planes of the Great Wheel, but sent there from 'outside'. I've also been partial to the idea that when the outer planes of the Wheel first formed, Sigil was already there waiting for them with its Bladed Queen a mystery even then.

But regardless of the way I've gone with planar proto-history in my stories and campaign, I'm curious to see where exactly you took this. If there are ideas that tempt me, I'll shameless adapt them if they fit. Yummy stuff.




> Of course. Here's the text in question:
> 
> "Obyriths: The rusting iron fortresses of the eldest demons crowd the Plain of Infinite Portals, crumbling testaments to a near-forgotten age. Before the first mortal was born, the obyriths ruled the Abyss, and their political ambitions and plots have seldom extended beyond the plane of their origin. Certain blasphemous texts of incalculable antiquity claim that the obyriths and a proto-race of ancient Baatorians were the spawn of a greater fiendish race called the baernoloths, but this unified creation myth enjoys few proponents outside Gehenna and the Gray Wastes of Hades."
> 
> And, you know, EN World.




*fiendgasm*

There, as much as I've objected to the archfiend CR issue on the other thread, you've likewise earned some praise on the fluff here. 










> James turned in his Baphomet article about a day before I made my official turnover, so I only had time to mention Dweirgus in the list of demon lords in the appendix.
> 
> --Erik




Drat. Oh well. I've already tossed his name out in my own campaign regardless, in the context of having some vague relation to Pale Night (whose own exact nature has been something lurking in the background for the last four years of two campaigns now). The way James described Dweirgus was just nifty enough to really put some hooks into me, so regardless of any other stuff on him forthcoming, I'll probably go my own way with him. Unless of course you guys are open to an article pitch. 

Eventually I hope to actually get something in with you guys. *cough* But anyways, thanks for the answers Erik, I really appreciate it.


----------



## Nightfall (May 31, 2006)

Yep thanks for the replies Erik.


----------



## zoroaster100 (May 31, 2006)

Cool stuff.  I hope WOTC approves a Dragon article or web enhancement with the "short descriptions of minor layers" information.  That is one piece that would have been really useful to have in the book, which I'll miss because it was cut.


----------



## Shade (May 31, 2006)

_Here lies Shade,
the flavor of the Codex was too sinfully fiendish for his mortal form._

<Save vs. death throes>


----------



## Soel (May 31, 2006)

Any mention of the tanarri living fortresses from Dragon? (PS era)


----------



## JoeGKushner (May 31, 2006)

CR 1: mane
CR 2: abyssal maw, abyssal skulker, dretch, nashrou, quasit
CR 3: abyssal ravager, maurezhi (5-6 HD), rutterkin
CR 4: abyssal evicerator, ekolid, guecubu, maurezh (7-8 HD), skulvyn
CR 5: bar-lgura, jovoc, maurezhi (9-10 HD), juvenile nabassu, skurchur, water demon
CR 6: artaaglith, babau, broodswarm, maurezhi (11-12 HD), uridezu
CR 7: armanite, arrow demon, succubus, maurezhi (14-14 HD), zovvur
CR 8: dybbuk, palrethee, maurezhi (15-16 HD), shadow demon, yochol
CR 9: abyssal drake, bulezu, vrock, maurezhi (17-18 HD)
CR 10: alkilith, bebilith, cerebrilith, chasme, maurezhi (19-20 HD)
CR 11: hezrou, retriever, wastrilith
CR 12: ghour, lilitu
CR 13: glabrezu, jarilith
CR 14: blood fiend, kelvezu, nalfeshnee
CR 15: nabassu, sibriex
CR 16: goristro
CR 17: klurichir, marilith, sorrowsworn
CR 18: deathdrinker, myrmyxicus
CR 19: molydeus
CR 20; balor

that covers crs of creatures in book and other resources.


----------



## Shade (May 31, 2006)

It's interesting that the water demon is on the list, but the other elemental demons are not.   I wonder if they were all orginally there, and were cut for space, or if "water demon" is a placeholder for a different demon that didn't make the cut.


----------



## Mr.Black (May 31, 2006)

JoeGKushner said:
			
		

> CR 1: mane
> CR 2: abyssal maw, abyssal skulker, dretch, nashrou, quasit
> CR 3: abyssal ravager, maurezhi (5-6 HD), rutterkin
> CR 4: abyssal evicerator, ekolid, guecubu, maurezh (7-8 HD), skulvyn
> ...




Impressive!  It looks like we have a variety of demons to terrorize at all levels. I particularly like the revised CRs.

Alkilith I thought looks like more of a CR 8.  It only has 82 hp and weak physical attacks, although its' enveration at will and teleport can make it a nasty long ranged monster.  It also has the chance to summon a Hezrou.  Blasphemy for everyone!  

Jarilith stays at CR 13.  I think it should have been dropped to a CR 12 with its limited variety of attacks, but it's still a good CR.  

Jovoc stay at CR 5.  I think it could be CR 3 or 4.  It deals very little damage.  However, masses of these guys at higher levels can be interesting.  

The 20hd Maurezhi...whoa!  While it has an average of 108 hp (128 with improved toughness) this thing has a +29 with it's bite and a +27 with its claws.  It also has a 30 AC.  Pretty good for CR 10!  

Wastrilith is another terror at CR 11.  Blasphemy at 15 level is pretty scary and so is its' ability to summon Elder Elementals (and dispel any Protection from Evil spells on the PCs).  

Myrxmicus makes an acceptable CR 18, although I'd have to see it in action.  

Klurichir is THE toughest demon at CR 17.  

Kelvezu at CR 14?  That's a tough one.  It really is a strange demon because it can deal so much damage but only has 90 hp and a +16 with its best attack.  Still, it can wipe out a 14th level wizard before he even has a chance to go, which is probably its preferred tactic.  I would have made it CR 13 due to its weaknesses but its equipment is so expensive that you can't really make its' CR lower because the PCs will get way too much stuff.  

Any thoughts from the designers on the revision of the demon CRs?  

BTW, where is the Deathdrinker from?

Overall, the vision of a demon horde is coming along nicely.  I can see masses of Jovocs spearheaded by frenzied Bulezau or Murezhi.  Vrocks use telekinesis from overhead to hurl a dozen weapons at a time from a distance, while arrow demons rain arrows onto the field.


----------



## JoeGKushner (May 31, 2006)

Don't see a source for the Death Drinker.


----------



## Upper_Krust (May 31, 2006)

Hey there! 

What Demon Lords/Princes are detailed in the book? Thanks.


----------



## Sammael (May 31, 2006)

Baphomet (CR 20)
Dagon (CR 22) 
Demogorgon (CR 23) 
Fraz-Urb’luu (CR 21) 
Graz’zt (CR 22) 
Jubilex (CR 19) 
Kostchtchie (CR 21) 
Malcanthet (CR 21) 
Obox-ob (CR 22) 
Orcus (CR 22) 
Pale Night (CR 21) 
Pazuzu (CR 22) 
Yeenoghu (CR 20) 
Zuggtmoy (CR 21)


----------



## jester47 (May 31, 2006)

possession...


----------



## qstor (May 31, 2006)

FYI My FLGS said the release date if June 13th. I'll get one after work that day   

Thanks Erik for the time put into this, looking forward to it!

Mike


----------



## James Jacobs (May 31, 2006)

To be honest, a few of the demons from MM2 and Fiend Folio need a little bit more work to fit their actual CR scores; the example of the klurichir's ability to summon balors is a perfect example. But for the most part, the revised CRs fairly accurately peg a demon's power level in the 3.5 rules. For recasting these demons into their new CR slots, we looked at how their hit points, AC, attack rolls, average damage, saves and special ability save DCs stacked up against average monsters in the 3.5 monster manual.

For example, in the klurichir's case, it's hit points would peg it at about CR 15, while its AC set it closer to CR 16 or 17. It's saving throw bonuses are actually fairly weak, about equal to CR 12. It's attack sequence is pretty tough, equal about to a CR 19 creature, but with its lower AC and hit points it's not going to be around as long as a CR 19 monster with 340 hit points and AC 38. Add in its vorpal attack, and even though it's kinda got a glass jaw physically, it seems to sit well at CR 17. I'd recomend giving it tanar'ri summoning powers on par with a maralith; unfortunately we just didn't have room in the book to do a more detailed revision of the creature.


----------



## Shemeska (Jun 1, 2006)

Shade said:
			
		

> It's interesting that the water demon is on the list, but the other elemental demons are not.   I wonder if they were all orginally there, and were cut for space, or if "water demon" is a placeholder for a different demon that didn't make the cut.




*blink* Wait... what in Gehenna is a 'water demon' in the first place? That's got to be some sort of goofy placeholder. Is there actually a 'water demon' in some source I'm apparently not familiar with?


----------



## BOZ (Jun 1, 2006)

went over to the other thread and got some questions that were missed among all the other chatter:



			
				JoeGKushner said:
			
		

> 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.  


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?  


i'm assuming that the broodswarm, dybbuk, ekolid, guecubu, lilitu, and sibriex are new?


does the book have stats for any non-demon monsters?  does the index of all printed demons have info on all Abyssal inhabitants, or just demons?


i wanted to write a Wikipedia stub for Obox-ob, but i know nothing about him other than his name.  i added ones for Malcanthet and Dagon, and all the other 14 main lords already had one.

What is the deal for Obox-ob?  He's the only one of the big 14 that I really know nothing about.  What is he the demon lord of?  What # layer of the Abyss does he live on?  Give me a sentence or two, at least.  




			
				JoeGKushner said:
			
		

> Appendix I: Lords of the Abyss, provides a breakdown of different demon lords with name, title, concerns, and layer. This includes those detailed here, as well as those mentioned in previous books, but not detailed. For example, Rhyxali is the Queen of Shadow Demons on layer 49, Shaddonon.




Good deal.    Does this appendix contain the majority of the lords listed here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demon_lord_(Dungeons_&_Dragons) ?  any omissions?  Any new lords not on that wiki list?


----------



## Ripzerai (Jun 1, 2006)

Shemeska said:
			
		

> *blink* Wait... what in Gehenna is a 'water demon' in the first place? That's got to be some sort of goofy placeholder. Is there actually a 'water demon' in some source I'm apparently not familiar with?




Dragon #306 had an article called _By Evil Bound_ by Mike Mearls. It included six non-tanar'ri demons, six yugoloth creations, and six non-baatezu devils. 

The elemental demons were supposed to be the raw material of the Abyss animated by patchwork souls left behind from the remnants of a great Blood War battle. They included air demons, ash demons, earth demons, fire demons, ice demons, and water demons. As I said, they weren't tanar'ri: they were more like Abyssal mephits.


----------



## BOZ (Jun 1, 2006)

rip, were those the same elemental demons found in Dragon Compendium 1?


----------



## Ripzerai (Jun 1, 2006)

BOZ said:
			
		

> rip, were those the same elemental demons found in Dragon Compendium 1?




Sounds likely. I've never seen a copy of that book.


----------



## Psion (Jun 1, 2006)

Ripzerai said:
			
		

> Dragon #306 had an article called _By Evil Bound_ by Mike Mearls. It included six non-tanar'ri demons, six yugoloth creations, and six non-baatezu devils.
> 
> The elemental demons were supposed to be the raw material of the Abyss animated by patchwork souls left behind from the remnants of a great Blood War battle. They included air demons, ash demons, earth demons, fire demons, ice demons, and water demons. As I said, they weren't tanar'ri: they were more like Abyssal mephits.




It'd be odd to reprint those (or were they just printing the CRs?) since the demons at least were reprinted in Dragon Compendium.

Incidentally, I never did dig that they made mephits non evil in 2e/3e. IMC, I give them the fiendish template and make them formed of outer planar matter, much like this.


----------



## Echohawk (Jun 1, 2006)

BOZ said:
			
		

> rip, were those the same elemental demons found in Dragon Compendium 1?




Yes


----------



## Kobold Avenger (Jun 1, 2006)

So is there any mention of the living Abyssal fortresses?

What about any mention of Broken Reach, the fortress on the first layer that has the portal from the Outland's gate town of Plague-Mort?

Who is Obox-Ob?  That seems to be one of the names that's unfamiliar to me.

Who is Dagon?  I'm asuming it's not the Chthulhu mythos Dagon, and nothing like the Amorite God of grain and agriculture.

Is Malacanthet the Demon Lord that's sort of the 'matron lord' of Succub?  Much the same way Pazuzu is the 'patron lord' of the Vrocks, Baphomet is to the Bulezau, and Jubilex is the Alkiliths.

In fact do they link certain demon types to certain demon lords.


----------



## Li Shenron (Jun 1, 2006)

Some more questions:

- how much of the descriptions about the Abyss and its layers is reprinted from Manual of the Planes?

- how's the artwork, especially that of demon lords: are they illustrated, and how differently from BoVD (what kind of heads for Demogorgon this time?   )

- what is said generally about demon physiology? does the book try to explain everything, does it make them similar to living beings?


----------



## Mr.Black (Jun 1, 2006)

It's perplexing that the death drinker is listed in the book and yet has no reference.  Perhaps it was cut from the final product?


----------



## Shade (Jun 1, 2006)

Mr.Black said:
			
		

> It's perplexing that the death drinker is listed in the book and yet has no reference.  Perhaps it was cut from the final product?




If so, it'll probably pop up in MMIV.


----------



## JoeGKushner (Jun 1, 2006)

My book is out on loan so it'll be a few days before I have it.


----------



## Ripzerai (Jun 1, 2006)

Mr.Black said:
			
		

> It's perplexing that the death drinker is listed in the book and yet has no reference.  Perhaps it was cut from the final product?




Nabassu are "death eaters." Maybe the death drinker is an advanced nabassu?


----------



## Ripzerai (Jun 1, 2006)

Kobold Avenger said:
			
		

> Who is Obox-Ob?  That seems to be one of the names that's unfamiliar to me.
> 
> Who is Dagon?  I'm asuming it's not the Chthulhu mythos Dagon, and nothing like the Amorite God of grain and agriculture.




Obox-ob and Dagon were mentioned in the list of undefined demon lords in the original MMII. Yes, Malcanthet is the queen of succubi.


----------



## BogusMagus (Jun 1, 2006)

Obox-ob: Prince of Vermin. Obyrith. Shaped like Scorpion/Spider/Human mixed–up. Was once the Prince of Demons, but was killed once by the Queen of Chaos. Rules Zionyn (663th). Worshipped by some cults.

Dagon: Prince of the Depth. Obyrith. Looks like Fish/Octopus crossbreed. Rules Shadowsea (89th). Served by aquatic demons (esp. Wastrilith) & worshipped by aquatic races (Kraken, Chuuls, Sea Hags, Water Nagas, Kuo-toa, etc.). 

Malacanthet: Queen of the Succubi. Tanar’ri. Rules? Shendilavri (570th)(Somehow, she and her layer are missing from Appendix 1&2.). Served by Incubi, Succubi, Lilitus.


----------



## Shade (Jun 1, 2006)

BogusMagus said:
			
		

> Obox-ob: Prince of Vermin. Obyrith. Shaped like Scorpion/Spider/Human mixed–up. Was once the Prince of Demons, but was killed once by the Queen of Chaos. Rules Zionyn (663th). Worshipped by some cults.




Sweet!


----------



## Ripzerai (Jun 1, 2006)

BogusMagus said:
			
		

> Obox-ob: Prince of Vermin. Obyrith. Shaped like Scorpion/Spider/Human mixed–up. Was once the Prince of Demons, but was killed once by the Queen of Chaos. Rules Zionyn (663th). Worshipped by some cults.




So "Prince of Demons" is a title given to the consort of the Queen of Chaos? And the order is Obox-ob > Miska the Wolf-Spider > Demogorgon? 

Intriguing.


----------



## BogusMagus (Jun 1, 2006)

About pictures of Demon Lords. 
First, they are smaller than those of BoVD. I guess they wanted to save space? (Well, text is smaller too.)
When I say “new” below, it means it’s different from BoVD. They maybe reprint from somewhere else.

(You won’t mind if I used your list, Mr.Kushner?)

Baphomet (CR 20)
Dagon (CR 22) 
Demogorgon (CR 23): New pic. (Baboon heads!)
Fraz-Urb’luu (CR 21) 
Graz’zt (CR 22): New pic. 
Jubilex (CR 19): New pic. 
Kostchtchie (CR 21) 
Malcanthet (CR 21) 
Obox-ob (CR 22): (The pic looks familiar, but I can’t remember. Maybe I’m just hallucinating.) 
Orcus (CR 22): Same pic. 
Pale Night (CR 21) 
Pazuzu (CR 22) 
Yeenoghu (CR 20): New pic. (I like the old one better.) 
Zuggtmoy (CR 21) (She looks totally different from ToEE. Is it Dragon Mag look?)


----------



## sckeener (Jun 1, 2006)

Do any of the Demon lords besides Orcus cast spells  (not spell-like abilities)  Are any wizards like Orcus?


----------



## Knight Otu (Jun 1, 2006)

Shade said:
			
		

> If so, it'll probably pop up in MMIV.



Interesting point. Any mention of MM IV at all in the book?


----------



## Kobold Avenger (Jun 1, 2006)

Is Zzyczesiya actually a demon lord included somewhere in the appendex, or just some throw-away name that a blue slaad made-up?


----------



## Shemeska (Jun 2, 2006)

Who drew the pictures for Pale Night and the other Abyssal Lords, assuming each of them gets an image?

What is the backstory the book gives to the Queen of Chaos? I'm only familiar with her from the tiny bit she gets in the Rod of 7 Parts box, and it left me very underwhelmed, especially as how she looked like Ursula from the Little Mermaid. Gimme dirt on how FC:I does its best to redeem her in my eyes and fit into my ever so loftly expectations, and I hope and expect it will in a big way. More specifically, is she classified as an Obyrith, because prior material had indicated that she specifically wasn't a Tanar'ri and hinted that she was wasn't native to the Abyss at all. I'd always pegged her as a Slaad lord fallen to CE from CN and exiled by Ygorl and Ssendam, or some other early creature from Limbo or Pandemonium.


----------



## Razz (Jun 2, 2006)

Death Drinker? Maybe that's a new demon from MM4?


----------



## Shade (Jun 2, 2006)

From WotC's Site:

"For the D&D website, we’re planning a horde of content to coincide with Fiendish Codex 1. For starters, R&D came to the website team with a request; while the FC1 sourcebook contains a number of demon lords (just take a look at the Table of Contents to find out which ones), R&D wanted a fair representation of their aspects. These will appear on the website throughout the month – 11 aspects in all.

Material cut from the sourcebooks due to space considerations often make ideal web enhancements; unfortunately, not every book has this available. This month, however, we have been given such “cutting room floor” material for FC1—including a new monster, a new detailed abyssal layer, and several short layer descriptions. Plus, we’ll offer a look at the artwork of D&D’s demons throughout the editions, tactics & tips for combating various demonic foes, and even more specialized half-fiend templates."

That last paragraph gets my heart all a'flutter.


----------



## Razz (Jun 2, 2006)

So what exactly are the new rule for the upgrading of the Demon Princes? James Jacobs stated it was actually extended material to the Monster Upgrades in the MMI. Do they talk about how to increase Spell Resistance and such?


----------



## sckeener (Jun 2, 2006)

Shade said:
			
		

> From WotC's Site:
> Plus, we’ll offer a look at the artwork of D&D’s demons throughout the editions, tactics & tips for combating various demonic foes, and even more specialized half-fiend templates."




meow.  

I'd like to see the art work throughout the editions.  Think they'll include other sources such as Dragon? or even past campaign settings?  Planescape tieflings?

The more specialized half-fiend templates sound sweet.


----------



## Imruphel (Jun 2, 2006)

Yep, specialised half-fiend templates would rock.

On the subject of art, has WotC continued its recent trend of staying away from Dennis Crabapple and Jeremy Jarvis? Please say yes.


----------



## Psion (Jun 2, 2006)

Imruphel said:
			
		

> Yep, specialised half-fiend templates would rock.




How sad. People live in the times of plenty for d20, and don't even realize the bounty that surrounds them.   

Get thee to thy gaming outlet of choice and get Green Ronin's _Aasimar & Tiefling_, available in print or PDF (on the Green Ronin site or RPGnow)! About 1/3 to 1/2 of the book is rules for crafting your own planetouched races, with examples.


----------



## JoeGKushner (Jun 2, 2006)

Psion said:
			
		

> How sad. People live in the times of plenty for d20, and don't even realize the bounty that surrounds them.
> 
> Get thee to thy gaming outlet of choice and get Green Ronin's _Aasimar & Tiefling_, available in print or PDF (on the Green Ronin site or RPGnow)! About 1/3 to 1/2 of the book is rules for crafting your own planetouched races, with examples.




Ah, but you see, it lacks the coveted official stamp.


----------



## Shade (Jun 2, 2006)

Plus, we're talking half-fiends, not planetouched.


----------



## Sammael (Jun 2, 2006)

JoeGKushner said:
			
		

> Ah, but you see, it lacks the coveted official stamp.



And it also costs money, whereas the WE will be free.

I made my own specialized half-fiends about half a year after 3.0 came out.


----------



## Psion (Jun 2, 2006)

Shade said:
			
		

> Plus, we're talking half-fiends, not planetouched.




The A&T rules makes half-fiends as well. Most of the examples fall in that range.


----------



## Imruphel (Jun 2, 2006)

Psion said:
			
		

> How sad. People live in the times of plenty for d20, and don't even realize the bounty that surrounds them.
> 
> Get thee to thy gaming outlet of choice and get Green Ronin's _Aasimar & Tiefling_, available in print or PDF (on the Green Ronin site or RPGnow)! About 1/3 to 1/2 of the book is rules for crafting your own planetouched races, with examples.




Actually, I do have that but it is more for planetouched/tiefling-types rather than true half-fiends (plus the book is 7,000+ kilometres away in my other house). I was actually planning on doing my own half-fiends based on some ideas from Green Ronin's excellent _Advanced Bestiary_ but having them done for me by WotC wouldn't hurt.

Notwithstanding that, thanks for the suggestion.


----------



## Psion (Jun 2, 2006)

Sammael said:
			
		

> And it also costs money, whereas the WE will be free.




Yes. Yes it will.

I wasn't suggesting that you not download the web enhancement.  I was more, y'know, saying "dude, you've been missing out."


----------



## Psion (Jun 2, 2006)

Imruphel said:
			
		

> Actually, I do have that but it is more for planetouched/tiefling-types rather than true half-fiends




Again, that's not true. The rules even show you how to make a half fiend and half celestial with the rules.

But if you have it, and better yet, the Advanced Bestiary (the amalgam rules work great for fiendish taint to your favorite creatures), then you're sitting pretty on top of fiend mountain.


----------



## jester47 (Jun 2, 2006)

Anyone with a copy:

I would love to hear about the rules for POSSESSION.


----------



## Servitor of Wrath (Jun 3, 2006)

I, too am looking forward to finding out where that deathdrinker is statted.

And please, please, PLEASE no art by Dennis! 

_This month, however, we have been given such “cutting room floor” material for FC1—including a new monster_
Hmmm. Maybe that's the deathdrinker.


----------



## Ripzerai (Jun 3, 2006)

Psion said:
			
		

> Again, that's not true. The rules even show you how to make a half fiend and half celestial with the rules.




He's right, it does.


----------



## BogusMagus (Jun 4, 2006)

Kobold Avenger said:
			
		

> Is Zzyczesiya actually a demon lord included somewhere in the appendex, or just some throw-away name that a blue slaad made-up?



It's in the lists of Appendix 1&2.
Zzyczesiya: "The Ungrasped", rules The Forgotten Land (3rd). Concerns; confused & malevolent ignorance.

I can't find any details, and there probably isn't any.
Maybe something in the short description of the minor layers? (To be WE?)


----------



## BogusMagus (Jun 4, 2006)

jester47 said:
			
		

> Anyone with a copy:
> 
> I would love to hear about the rules for POSSESSION.



Looks like the rules from BoVD. Mostly reprint, with a few additional details.


----------



## BogusMagus (Jun 4, 2006)

Razz said:
			
		

> So what exactly are the new rule for the upgrading of the Demon Princes? James Jacobs stated it was actually extended material to the Monster Upgrades in the MMI. Do they talk about how to increase Spell Resistance and such?



I posted this on the “main” thread, but it is okay if I repost it here?

*Making Epic Demon Lords*
* Advance lord’s HD by an amount appropriate for your campaign’s needs. The lord BAB, saves, skills, feats, ability scores should increase as an Outsider.
* CR increase by 1 for every HD added.
* Add “epic” to DR requirement.
* New SR = CR+13
* Ability scores all increase 2 for every 5HD added.
* Gain Spell-like abilities (at will): Blasphemy (or Word of Chaos for obyrith.), Plane Shift, Shapechange, Unholy Aura. Feel free to add more, but remember not to over do it.


----------



## BogusMagus (Jun 4, 2006)

All the Demons & Lords get a pic.

According to the credits;
Cover: Sam Wood
Interior: Thomas M.Baxa, Carl Critchlow, Erik Gist, Ralph Horsley, William O’Connor, Ted Pendergraft, Wayne Reynolds, Ann Stokes, Arnie Swekel, Frank Vohwinkel. 
(Sorry if I missed someone or misspelled.)


----------



## BogusMagus (Jun 4, 2006)

I have a request.

I haven’t got the time to read the whole book yet, and I’m not an expert of planar lore
So if you could narrow your question down, I might be able to help you sooner.
(Although if you wait long enough, Mr.Kushner or someone else will probably answer you anyway.)

More specifically, if you can specify the Lord or the Layer, I will go look for it.


----------



## Ripzerai (Jun 4, 2006)

BogusMagus said:
			
		

> It's in the lists of Appendix 1&2.
> Zzyczesiya: "The Ungrasped", rules The Forgotten Land (3rd). Concerns; confused & malevolent ignorance.




Hee hee.


----------



## Kobold Avenger (Jun 4, 2006)

BogusMagus said:
			
		

> It's in the lists of Appendix 1&2.
> Zzyczesiya: "The Ungrasped", rules The Forgotten Land (3rd). Concerns; confused & malevolent ignorance.



Xanxost wasn't making anything up!?  Now I guess this means Zzyczesiya will be detailed in 4e's Fiendish Codex.


----------



## Sammael (Jun 4, 2006)

Great Asmodeus, NOT BAXA. Argh.


----------



## Kobold Avenger (Jun 4, 2006)

So what's on layer 666?  And are any layers past 666 detailed?


----------



## Nightfall (Jun 4, 2006)

Bogus,

Just to confirm, is the Pic of Orcus the same as the one in BoVD or is that only on the cover?

(Hopes Bogus knows who Orcus is...)


----------



## Erik Mona (Jun 4, 2006)

Kobold Avenger said:
			
		

> So what's on layer 666?  And are any layers past 666 detailed?




Layer 666 is not detailed (so you can make it as eeeeeevul as you want). I also retconned the two existing post-666 layers by changing their first digit to "5", so there are no longer any official layers beyond 666. There are hundreds of "available" layer slots from 1-666, so there's really no reason to push beyond that number, other than to piss off long-time players.

So says I. 

--Erik


----------



## Knight Otu (Jun 4, 2006)

BogusMagus said:
			
		

> Zzyczesiya: "The Ungrasped", rules The Forgotten Land (3rd). Concerns; confused & malevolent ignorance.



So, basically, he's the demon lord of forum posters? *runs and hides*

Off-hand, I'm not sure what kind of pictures Baxa did, but at least it seems that there's no Cramer/Crabapple in the book.


----------



## Sammael (Jun 4, 2006)

An example of Baxa's "artwork," the Fiend Folio demodands (gehreleths):


----------



## Ripzerai (Jun 4, 2006)

I love Baxa's work.


----------



## Sammael (Jun 4, 2006)

That's not a sentiment shared by many. I prefer creature illustrations to at least have a semblance of realistic proportions and musculature. Baxa, on the other hand, draws shapeless blobs.


----------



## Knight Otu (Jun 4, 2006)

Sammael said:
			
		

> An example of Baxa's "artwork," the Fiend Folio demodands (gehreleths):



Well, they look fiendish, as I recall, they don't contradict the description (or not too much, I do seem to recall some size problems now), so my opinion is that this example doesn't leave much reason to worry for me.


----------



## Shemeska (Jun 4, 2006)

Sammael said:
			
		

> An example of Baxa's "artwork,"[/IMG]




Baxa's artwork has grown on me over time. I didn't particularly care for his style at first, but I've come to appreciate it since then. My drooling is however reserved for Steve Prescott, Adam Rex, Tony Di, and Arnie Swekel.


----------



## Ripzerai (Jun 4, 2006)

Sammael said:
			
		

> That's not a sentiment shared by many. I prefer creature illustrations to at least have a semblance of realistic proportions and musculature. Baxa, on the other hand, draws shapeless blobs.




Debating the merits of artwork isn't the purpose of this thread, so I'll just let the folks at home browse his website and make up their own minds.


----------



## M.L. Martin (Jun 4, 2006)

I've long been a fan of Baxa's line art.  His painted work, though, doesn't tend to be as appealing.  One of the losses of the 'all color, all the time' approach of the current gaming industry, I suppose.

     Matthew L. Martin


----------



## Sammael (Jun 4, 2006)

You are right, Rip. Sorry for the derailment. There are actually some pieces on his site that I like.

To return to the topic at hand, how detailed is the demon physiology section? Does it take into account that 3.x demons, being outsiders, do not need to eat or sleep? What about reproduction? I thought that the way Planescape handled the reproduction of evil outsiders was one of its weakest points, so I'm curious as to how the FC1 approaches this subject.


----------



## BOZ (Jun 4, 2006)

BogusMagus said:
			
		

> It's in the lists of Appendix 1&2.
> Zzyczesiya: "The Ungrasped", rules The Forgotten Land (3rd). Concerns; confused & malevolent ignorance.
> 
> I can't find any details, and there probably isn't any.
> Maybe something in the short description of the minor layers? (To be WE?)




LOL!  looks like Erik must have dug Colin McComb's idea: http://www.enworld.org/showpost.php?p=2711184&postcount=174


Hey Bogus, does this appendix contain the majority of the lords listed here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demon_lord_(Dungeons_&_Dragons) ?

any lords from that wiki list omitted from the FC1 appendix?  Any new lords from the FC1 appendix not on that wiki list?


----------



## BOZ (Jun 4, 2006)

JoeGKushner said:
			
		

> My book is out on loan so it'll be a few days before I have it.




death to the infidel!



			
				Ripzerai said:
			
		

> Obox-ob and Dagon were mentioned in the list of undefined demon lords in the original MMII.




actually, Dagon did get a slight bit of definition, at least more of the other lords listed on that same page:

"Some layers of the Abyss are devoid of most of the typical inhabitants of other levels. The liquid plane ruled by Dagon, for instance, does have hezrou (type II) and a form of dretch, but the other inhabitants are octopi, squids, kraken, sea snakes, eels, weird fish, and horrible fish-monsters."




			
				BogusMagus said:
			
		

> Obox-ob: Prince of Vermin. Obyrith. Shaped like Scorpion/Spider/Human mixed–up. Was once the Prince of Demons, but was killed once by the Queen of Chaos. Rules Zionyn (663th). Worshipped by some cults.
> 
> Dagon: Prince of the Depth. Obyrith. Looks like Fish/Octopus crossbreed. Rules Shadowsea (89th). Served by aquatic demons (esp. Wastrilith) & worshipped by aquatic races (Kraken, Chuuls, Sea Hags, Water Nagas, Kuo-toa, etc.).
> 
> Malacanthet: Queen of the Succubi. Tanar’ri. Rules? Shendilavri (570th)(Somehow, she and her layer are missing from Appendix 1&2.). Served by Incubi, Succubi, Lilitus.






			
				Shade said:
			
		

> Sweet!




indeed!  
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obox-ob
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dagon_(Dungeons_&_Dragons)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malcanthet




			
				BogusMagus said:
			
		

> Zuggtmoy (CR 21) (She looks totally different from ToEE. Is it Dragon Mag look?)




Possibly.  does she look like this?: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zuggtmoy



			
				Shade said:
			
		

> From WotC's Site:
> 
> "For the D&D website, we’re planning a horde of content to coincide with Fiendish Codex 1. For starters, R&D came to the website team with a request; while the FC1 sourcebook contains a number of demon lords (just take a look at the Table of Contents to find out which ones), R&D wanted a fair representation of their aspects. These will appear on the website throughout the month – 11 aspects in all.
> 
> ...




again - sweet!    think that player layers WE will be up before or after the book is widely available?  and good going to Erik for pitching that idea to the staff!



			
				Shemeska said:
			
		

> Baxa's artwork has grown on me over time. I didn't particularly care for his style at first, but I've come to appreciate it since then.




yeah, that's basically my stance as well.  he's still not my preferred artist in most cases, but i'm no longer annoyed to see his work.


----------



## Psion (Jun 4, 2006)

I've come to associate Baxa with Dark Sun. I really don't like his work anywhere else.


----------



## BryonD (Jun 5, 2006)

Erik Mona said:
			
		

> Layer 666 is not detailed (so you can make it as eeeeeevul as you want). I also retconned the two existing post-666 layers by changing their first digit to "5", so there are no longer any official layers beyond 666. There are hundreds of "available" layer slots from 1-666, so there's really no reason to push beyond that number, other than to piss off long-time players.
> 
> So says I.
> 
> --Erik



So, am I the only one that finds this post vastly ironic?

I mean, couldn't they have just detailed Layer 666 at around an evil quotient of 21 and provided guidelines for advancement?

And they don't want to piss off long-time players, so they focus on the number of layers in the abyss.  But they nerf demon lords without a pause.

 :\


----------



## Erik Mona (Jun 5, 2006)

BryonD said:
			
		

> So, am I the only one that finds this post vastly ironic?
> 
> I mean, couldn't they have just detailed Layer 666 at around an evil quotient of 21 and provided guidelines for advancement?
> 
> ...




Nice attitude.

The book had three authors and a bunch of editors. 

--Erik


----------



## Alzrius (Jun 5, 2006)

Erik Mona said:
			
		

> The book had three authors and a bunch of editors.




And yet, by your own admission it was you who decided to snip the number of layers back to 666, flying in the face of all of the 3E and 2E work for a relatively minor 1E notation.

How is the plane supposed to be called the Infinite Layers of the Abyss if you just nixed the "Infinite" part?


----------



## Psion (Jun 5, 2006)

fnord


----------



## Erik Mona (Jun 5, 2006)

Alzrius said:
			
		

> And yet, by your own admission it was you who decided to snip the number of layers back to 666, flying in the face of all of the 3E and 2E work for a relatively minor 1E notation.
> 
> How is the plane supposed to be called the Infinite Layers of the Abyss if you just nixed the "Infinite" part?




You misunderstand me.

The plane is still infinite. In the same sentence that explains that some scholars believe there to be 666 layers, I also say that it seems likely that there are many more. 

The plane remains infinite.

Since only a small portion of the layers have thusfar been numbered, and since only two insignificant ones went past 666 anyway, I thought (and think) it made sense to renumber them below 666. That way, the numbers work for everyone no matter what their opinion on the matter.

I'm not saying the layer is finite.

--Erik


----------



## Ripzerai (Jun 5, 2006)

Wow.

The art gallery sold me on the book. 

I take back anything negative I might have said about it. Which I didn't. But if I had. 

Actually, the broodswarm alone hooked me, but then the hooks kept coming; look at Pale Night, or Woeful Escarond. Or the Grand Abyss, previously only seen on a poster map, or the Plain of Infinite Portals itself. Vucarik of Chains himself couldn't have hooked me harder.

Here's a tiny Baxa painting. Another one, less tiny.

Not one, but three Graz'zts. He is the pretty one, after all. Here's one of the furnaces that serve as portals in his realm (if you're lucky), surrounded by his patented viper trees. Graz'ztgasm! Orgraz'zt! 

And finally, here's Demogorgon getting his tail kicked by a balor, proof the flavor and stats _do_ match (I'm sure it's actually intended to be Orcus, but it looks like a balor to me).


----------



## Sammael (Jun 5, 2006)

Can't wait for it to appear on Amazon. I just have to figure out which _other_ WotC book to get along with it to save up on shipping costs. PH2?

And yes, the art is gorgeous. The third pic of Graz'zt by WAR is just... wow.


----------



## BogusMagus (Jun 5, 2006)

Nightfall said:
			
		

> Bogus,
> 
> Just to confirm, is the Pic of Orcus the same as the one in BoVD or is that only on the cover?
> 
> (Hopes Bogus knows who Orcus is...)



Same as BoVD. (as Servitor of Wrath)

I don't know what you mean by "is that only on the cover?"


----------



## Rystil Arden (Jun 5, 2006)

Sammael said:
			
		

> Can't wait for it to appear on Amazon. I just have to figure out which _other_ WotC book to get along with it to save up on shipping costs. PH2?
> 
> And yes, the art is gorgeous. The third pic of Graz'zt by WAR is just... wow.



 The third one is Graz'zt and Iggwilv pulled directly off the cover of Dungeon #121.  But that doesn't stop it from being an awesome pic!


----------



## BogusMagus (Jun 5, 2006)

BOZ said:
			
		

> Possibly.  does she look like this?: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zuggtmoy



Yes, yes! (Now, I vaguely remember the talk it's from ToEE PC game, is that so?)

The titles in WotC's art gallery are messed up.
Zuggtmoy's in page 3, last row, 3rd pic. (Yochlol)
http://www.wizards.com/dnd/images/fc1_gallery/98469.jpg


----------



## Shemeska (Jun 5, 2006)

Ripzerai said:
			
		

> Wow.
> 
> The art gallery sold me on the book.




*GLEE*

That rocks so incredibly much.


----------



## BogusMagus (Jun 5, 2006)

Rystil Arden said:
			
		

> The third one is Graz'zt and Iggwilv pulled directly off the cover of Dungeon #121.  But that doesn't stop it from being an awesome pic!



It's a full page picture too.

BTW, I think there a few other pics from the Dragon/Dungeon magazines, but they are all good ones.


----------



## jester47 (Jun 5, 2006)

BogusMagus said:
			
		

> Same as BoVD. (as Servitor of Wrath)
> 
> I don't know what you mean by "is that only on the cover?"




The pic of Orcus in the art gallery is not the pic that is in the BoVD.  Agreed it could be that the pic from the BoVD was not put in the on line art gallery, but the pic in the art gallery is one of the best I have seen aside from the one in ToH.


----------



## jester47 (Jun 5, 2006)

Also, one of the pages in the art gallery has the names off by one.


----------



## demiurge1138 (Jun 5, 2006)

jester47 said:
			
		

> Also, one of the pages in the art gallery has the names off by one.



Yeah, that caught me off guard for a bit. I thought the demon queen of succubi had really let herself go (Malecanthet does not equal manes).

But yeah, amazing art in there. So pretty. In a grotesque and terrifying sort of way.

Demiurge out.


----------



## jester47 (Jun 5, 2006)

BogusMagus said:
			
		

> Looks like the rules from BoVD. Mostly reprint, with a few additional details.




Thats what I suspected.  The thing that made those rules disappointing was that it did not go into enough detail.  

I may have to house rule possession.  I will have to give the book a good once over before purchase in a few months.

One thing that I did not get about the possession rules is why they did not use a version of the ghost's malevolence (essentially magic jar).


----------



## Zarnam (Jun 5, 2006)

Ok, sorry, i'm blind and all...


----------



## Nightfall (Jun 5, 2006)

Bogus,

I think you might need to look at the art again.


But yeah that Pic of Orcus on the Art gallery, A+ folks. I like it. And you know I'm a tough Orcus fan to please. (The fight between Orcus and Demogorgon was a tad...off.) But the one of Orcus himself, wow. Great stuff! Art work makes it all worth while. I was worried. Now I'm not.


----------



## Wycen (Jun 5, 2006)

That art gallery is killed.  Awesome.  Can't wait for the book.

But notice page 3, the bottom row has several mistakes, naming the picture one to the left.  Actually the first and second rows looks wrong as well, this http://www.wizards.com/dnd/images/fc1_gallery/98463.jpg can't be a picture of Orcus.  Looks like they forgot the Lilitu or Malcanthet pic and so the descriptions are off.


----------



## BogusMagus (Jun 5, 2006)

BOZ said:
			
		

> Hey Bogus, does this appendix contain the majority of the lords listed here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demon_lord_(Dungeons_&_Dragons) ?
> 
> any lords from that wiki list omitted from the FC1 appendix?  Any new lords from the FC1 appendix not on that wiki list?



I copy & pasted the following list from the wiki list, so it might be a little hard to read.	

I'm just looking at the Appendix for this, so the "not listed" might be mentioned elsewhere.
(Especially the Deities & the destroyed.)

*FC1?	/	Known demon lords*
yes	/	Abraxas: Demon prince. Mentioned in Monster Manual II (1983), page 35.
yes	/	Adimarchus: Demon prince of madness. Antagonist of the Shackled City Adventure Path modules published in Dungeon. Detailed in Dungeon #116, page 61.
yes	/	Ahazu: Demon lord. Mentioned in Monster Manual II (1983), page 35.
yes	/	Ahrimanes: Demon prince. Mentioned in Monster Manual II (1983), page 35.
yes	/	Aldinach: Female demon lord. Mentioned in Monster Manual II (1983), page 35.
yes	/	Alrunes: Female demon lord. Mentioned in Monster Manual II (1983), page 35.
yes	/	Alvarez: Demon lord. Mentioned in Faces of Evil: the Fiends, p60.
yes	/	Alzrius: Demon lord. Mentioned in Hellbound: The Blood War, "The Dark of the War", p25.
yes	/	Anarazel: Demon prince. Mentioned in Monster Manual II (1983), page 35.
yes	/	Ansitif: Demon prince. Mentioned in Monster Manual II (1983), page 35.
yes	/	Ardat: Female demon lord. Mentioned in Monster Manual II (1983), page 35, revealed to be Demon Queen of Harpies in Dragon #341 "Demonomicon of Iggwilv", page X.
yes	/	Areex: Demon prince. Mentioned in Monster Manual II (1983), page 35.
no	/	Arlgolcheir: Demon lord. Mentioned in Dragon #116 "Rogue Stones and Gemjumping", page 55; said to have been destroyed.
yes	/	Arzial: Mentioned in Dungeon #13, "The Ruins of Nol-Daer".
yes	/	Aseroth: Demon prince. Mentioned in Monster Manual II (1983), page 35.
yes	/	Asima: Demon lord. Mentioned in Monster Manual II (1983), page 35.
yes	/	Astaroth: Demon prince. Mentioned in Monster Manual II (1983), page 35.
yes	/	Azael: Demon lord. Mentioned in Monster Manual II (1983), page 35.
yes	/	Azazel: Demon prince. Mentioned in Monster Manual II (1983), page 35.
yes	/	Baltazo: Demon lord. Mentioned in Monster Manual II (1983), page 35.
yes	/	Baphomet: Demon lord. Mentioned in Lost Caverns of Tsojcanth; Monster Manual II (1983), page 36; Dragon #341 "Demonomicon of Iggwilv".
yes	/	Barbu: Female demon lord. Mentioned in Monster Manual II (1983), page 35.
yes	/	Bayemon: Demon lord. Mentioned in Monster Manual II (1983), page 35.
yes	/	Bechard: Demon lord. Mentioned in Monster Manual II (1983), page 35.
yes	/	Cabiri: Demon lord. Mentioned in Monster Manual II (1983), page 35.
yes	/	Charun: Demon lord. Mentioned in Monster Manual II (1983), page 35.
yes	/	Dagon: Demon prince. Mentioned in Monster Manual II (1983), page 35.
yes	/	Demogorgon: Demon prince. Mentioned in Monster Manual (1977) p16; Wrath of the Immortals boxed set; Monster Mythology, page 88; Book of Vile Darkness, page 125.
no	/	Doresain, King of Ghouls: Demigod. Libris Mortis p 16
yes	/	Dwiergus: The Chrysalis Prince, mentioned in Dragon #341 "Demonomicon of Iggwilv".
yes	/	Eblis: Demon prince. Mentioned in Monster Manual II (1983), page 35.
yes	/	Eldanoth: Demon lord. Mentioned in Faces of Evil: the Fiends, page 60.
yes	/	Eltab: Mentioned in Dreams of the Red Wizards; Spellbound; Champions of Ruin, page 130.
no	/	Ereshkigal: Demon prince. Mentioned in Monster Manual II (1983), page 35.
yes	/	Fraz-Urb'luu: Demon prince. Mentioned in Lost Caverns of Tsojcanth; Monster Manual II (1983), page 39; Faces of Evil: the Fiends, page 60; Dragon #333 "Demonomicon of Iggwilv", page 21.
yes	/	Graz'zt: Demon prince. Lost Caverns of Tsojcanth; Monster Manual II (1983), page 39; Book of Vile Darkness, page 130.
yes	/	Gresil: Demon lord. Mentioned in Monster Manual II (1983), page 35; Living Greyhawk Journal 10; Dragon #294.
yes	/	Haagenti: Lord of Alchemy. Mentioned in Dragon #337 "Demonomicon of Iggwilv", page 47.
yes	/	Ilsidahur: Mentioned in Dungeon #10 "The Shrine of Ilsidahur".
yes	/	Juiblex: Demon lord. Mentioned in Monster Manual (1977), page 17; Monster Mythology, page 67; Book of Vile Darkness, page 134; Dragon #337 "Demonomicon of Iggwilv", page 47.
yes	/	J'zzalshrak: Female demon lord. Mentioned in Dungeon #64, "Bzallin's Blacksphere", page 29.
new?	/	Kardum
yes	/	Kerzit: Demon lord. Mentioned in Mordenkainen's Fantastic Adventure; Dungeon #112, pages 13, 52, 96.
yes	/	Kostchtchie: Demon lord. Mentioned in Lost Caverns of Tsojcanth; Monster Manual II (1983), page 40; Monster Mythology, page 82.
yes	/	Lamashtu: Demon Queen of Monstrous Births and Deformity. Mentioned in Dragon #329 "Demonomicon of Iggwilv", page 67.
yes	/	Laraie: Demon lord. Mentioned in Monster Manual II (1983), page 35.
yes	/	Lazbral'thull: Demon lord of torture and bloodletting. (Dungeon #122: Root of Evil).
no	/	Lindyrm: Mentioned in The Deva Spark.
yes	/	Lissa'aere: Female demon lord. Mentioned in Hellbound: The Blood War, page 25.
yes	/	Lolth: Demon queen of spiders. First debut in module D3: Vault of the Drow and more prominently, in Q1: Queen of the Demonweb Pits. Went on to appear in many other supplements such as first edition Fiend Folio and Deities and Demigods (all three editions).
yes	/	Lupercio: Demon lord. Mentioned in Faces of Evil: the Fiends, page 60.
yes	/	Lynkhab: Female demon lord. Faces of Evil: the Fiends, page 61.
no	/	Maelfesh: featured in Rose Estes' Greyhawk novels.
no	/	Malcanthet: The mother of succubi. Mentioned in Dungeon #112, page 48, and #124, page 95.
yes	/	Malgarius: A demonic plant that once controlled a layer of the Abyss, but which was defeated by the demon lord Lazbral'thull. (Dungeon #122: Root of Evil).
no	/	Malgoth, The: A "terrible entity" that ruled over several layers of the Abyss eons ago. Defeated by a consortium of seven demon lords, who led a fantastic assault on his haunted realm. The victorious demons scattered the Malgoth's essence across the Abyss, only to be deposed and ultimately destroyed by underlings on their home layers. (Dungeon #117: Touch of the Abyss).
yes	/	Mastiphal: Demon prince. Mentioned in Monster Manual II (1983), page 35.
no	/	Miska the Wolf-Spider: Demon prince. Mentioned in Dungeon #124, page 17. Detailed in 2e adventure Rod of Seven Parts.
yes	/	Munkir: Demon lord. Mentioned in Monster Manual II (1983), page 35.
yes	/	Nekir: Demon lord. Mentioned in Monster Manual II (1983), page 35.
no	/	Nergel: Demon lord. Mentioned in Monster Manual II (1983), page 35.
yes	/	Nocticula: Demon princess. Mentioned in Monster Manual II (1983), page 35.
no	/	Nql: mentioned in Eldritch Wizardry, in the "Codex of the Infinite Planes" entry.
yes	/	Obox-ob: Demon prince. Mentioned in Monster Manual II (1983), page 35.
yes	/	Orcus: Demon prince. Mentioned in Eldritch Wizardry; Monster Manual (1977), page 17; Dead Gods; Dungeon #89; Book of Vile Darkness, page 136. Was the prominent villain of the Bloodstone series.
yes	/	Pale Night: Female demon lord, mother of Grazzt, Lupercio, and Vucarik. Consort of Baphomet. Mentioned in Faces of Evil: the Fiends, page 61; Dragon #341 "Demonomicon of Iggwilv"; Manual of the Planes (3rd edition), page 100.
yes	/	Pazuzu: Demon prince. Mentioned in Monster Manual II (1983), page 41; Dragon #329 "Demonomicon of Iggwilv", page 56; Book of Vile Darkness web enhancement.
yes	/	Rhyxali: Demon princess. Mentioned in Book of Vile Darkness web enhancement.
yes	/	Sch'theraqpasstt: Mentioned in Dragon #151
yes	/	Sess'innek: Demon lord. Mentioned in Monster Mythology, page 102; Serpent Kingdoms.
yes	/	Shaktari: Marilith demon lord. Mentioned in Dungeon #60, "Nemesis", page 32.
yes	/	Shami-Amourae: Queen of succubi. Mentioned in Dungeon #5, "The Stolen Power", page 27.
yes	/	Siragle: Mentioned in Dungeon #28, "Sleepless".
yes	/	Socothbenoth: Demon prince. Mentioned in Monster Manual II (1983), page 35; mentioned in Dragon #333,"Demonomicon of Iggwilv", page 29.
yes	/	Soneillon: Female demon lord. Mentioned in Monster Manual II (1983), page 35.
yes	/	Tharzax: Patron of poisonous things that creep and crawl. (Dungeon #123: Salvage Operation).
yes	/	Thralhavoc: Demon lord. Mentioned in Hellbound: The Blood War, "War Games", page 56.
yes	/	Turaglas the Ebon Maw: Mentioned in Dragon #312.
yes	/	Ugudenk: Lord of Worms and Hungry Parasites. Mentioned in Dragon #333 "Demonomicon of Iggwilv", page 39.
yes	/	Verin: Demon lord. Mentioned in Monster Manual II (1983), page 35; Faces of Evil: the Fiends, page 62.
yes	/	Volisupula: Mentioned in Planes of Chaos, in the "Chaos Adventures" booklet.
yes	/	Vucarik: Demon lord. Mentioned in Hellbound: The Blood War, page 26.
no	/	Xazivort: Mentioned in From the Ashes.
yes	/	Yeenoghu: Demon prince. Mentioned in Monster Manual (1977), page 19; Monster Mythology, page 83; Book of Vile Darkness, page 140.
yes	/	Yibyiru: Female demon lord; Rancid Lady of Bitter Bile. Mentioned in Dragon #337 "Demonomicon of Iggwilv", page 48.
no	/	Zanassu: Mentioned in Empires of the Sands, reported dead in Demihuman Deities.
yes	/	Zuggtmoy: Demoness Lady of Fungi. Mentioned in Temple of Elemental Evil; Dragon #337 "Demonomicon of Iggwilv", page 37.
yes	/	Zzyczesiya: Demon lord. Mentioned in Faces of Evil: the Fiends, page 60.


----------



## Nightfall (Jun 5, 2006)

Wycen said:
			
		

> That art gallery is killed.  Awesome.  Can't wait for the book.
> 
> But notice page 3, the bottom row has several mistakes, naming the picture one to the left.  Actually the first and second rows looks wrong as well, this http://www.wizards.com/dnd/images/fc1_gallery/98463.jpg can't be a picture of Orcus.  Looks like they forgot the Lilitu or Malcanthet pic and so the descriptions are off.




I think that's Pale Night, not Liltu or Malcanthet. 

In any case, you are right Wycen, the Art for this book KILLS.


----------



## BogusMagus (Jun 5, 2006)

jester47 said:
			
		

> The pic of Orcus in the art gallery is not the pic that is in the BoVD.  Agreed it could be that the pic from the BoVD was not put in the on line art gallery, but the pic in the art gallery is one of the best I have seen aside from the one in ToH.



http://www.wizards.com/dnd/images/fc1_gallery/98462.jpg
I can't find the pic in the book. (Unfortunate, because I like that picture.)
At least the pic to go with the Orcus entry is the one form BoVD. And Thanatos layer does not have a pic of him.


----------



## BogusMagus (Jun 5, 2006)

Nightfall said:
			
		

> I think that's Pale Night, not Liltu or Malcanthet.
> 
> In any case, you are right Wycen, the Art for this book KILLS.



Yes, you are right, that's Pale Night.

The mistakes start at the last pic of the second page.
http://www.wizards.com/dnd/images/fc1_gallery/98456.jpg
That's Lilitu.

And ends at the 2nd to last pic on the 3rd page.
http://www.wizards.com/dnd/images/fc1_gallery/98470.jpg
That's "Mialee summons a nalfeshnee", from the Magic section in Chapter 4.
(BTW, isn't that a reprint from somewhere else?)


----------



## Nightfall (Jun 5, 2006)

Not surprised they didn't feature Orcus in Thantos. It might be his realm but doesn't mean he shows up every time some random adventurer happens to land in his world.

Unless they are there to try to kill him...


----------



## Rystil Arden (Jun 5, 2006)

Nightfall said:
			
		

> Not surprised they didn't feature Orcus in Thantos. It might be his realm but doesn't mean he shows up every time some random adventurer happens to land in his world.
> 
> Unless they are there to try to kill him...



 Or maybe they already killed him?


----------



## Nightfall (Jun 5, 2006)

Only to see Tenebrous RISE again!


----------



## Rystil Arden (Jun 5, 2006)

Nightfall said:
			
		

> Only to see Tenebrous RISE again!



 Maybe 

Of course, I doubt Orcus could pull that trick a second time.  And if he's anything like his non-buddy Juiby, he's going to be dying a whole lot more often now.


----------



## Nightfall (Jun 5, 2006)

Well I was thinking more like his Tome of Horror version. Now that's pretty bad ass.  

Besides, being undead god once doesn't preclude you from doing that again, especially if you're Orcus.


----------



## Rystil Arden (Jun 5, 2006)

Nightfall said:
			
		

> Well I was thinking more like his Tome of Horror version. Now that's pretty bad ass.
> 
> Besides, being undead god once doesn't preclude you from doing that again, especially if you're Orcus.



 With the ToH version, I'd be _scared_ to be those adventurers in Thanatos 

I guess if anyone could become an undead god twice, it would be Orcus.  But it would definitely lose him style points if he can't think of something new and equally creatively evil to do this time.


----------



## Nightfall (Jun 5, 2006)

Well I think in this case while he might lose the style points, he'd say "Hey if it's not broke why fix it?" I mean if it worked once, why not again?

But yeah ToH version Orcus = rules mightly the Abyss!


----------



## Rystil Arden (Jun 5, 2006)

Nightfall said:
			
		

> Well I think in this case while he might lose the style points, he'd say "Hey if it's not broke why fix it?" I mean if it worked once, why not again?
> 
> But yeah ToH version Orcus = rules mightly the Abyss!



 It worked well the first time because nobody expected it.  This time, his enemies will surely have contingencies because they remember last time


----------



## Nightfall (Jun 5, 2006)

Yeah well just cause people EXPECT it, doesn't mean they actually expect it. Look at Butch and Sundance. They did just fine robbing the same train numerous times.


----------



## Rystil Arden (Jun 5, 2006)

Nightfall said:
			
		

> Yeah well just cause people EXPECT it, doesn't mean they actually expect it. Look at Butch and Sundance. They did just fine robbing the same train numerous times.



 It's true, but they would be looking out for it.  Now, if he shunted his essence into his Wand at the last second and then possessed the one who defeated him, slowly corrupting the essence of their body, mind, and soul until it becomes a vessel for his rebirth, people wouldn't be expecting that because it's new.


----------



## Nightfall (Jun 5, 2006)

Well who says he can't do that AND become an undead god?


----------



## Rystil Arden (Jun 5, 2006)

Nightfall said:
			
		

> Well who says he can't do that AND become an undead god?



 That's true.  Let's compromise--he becomes a lichlike undead god and uses his wand as his phylactery, slowly corrupting his defeater until he can rise again at his full power from his new vessel.


----------



## Nightfall (Jun 5, 2006)

Works for me.  It certainly has the novelty of being totally in character of Orcus.


----------



## Mouseferatu (Jun 5, 2006)

Bah. You're both wasting your time. Demogorgon's going to eat him and suck his essence dry anyway.


----------



## Nightfall (Jun 5, 2006)

You're just mad cause you didn't think of it first Ari.


----------



## Rystil Arden (Jun 5, 2006)

> Works for me.  It certainly has the novelty of being totally in character of Orcus.




True that 



> Bah. You're both wasting your time. Demogorgon's going to eat him and suck his essence dry anyway.




Oh yeah...well...uhhh...A Solar could beat them both at the same time! 

By the way, it's almost time for my obligatory obscure Eyros reference, so replace the Solar with Taufenacht and it's still true 



> You're just mad cause you didn't think of it first Ari.




He just doesn't like Orcus because Orcus doesn't have a moose head


----------



## glass (Jun 5, 2006)

BogusMagus said:
			
		

> *Making Epic Demon Lords*
> * Ability scores all increase 2 for every 5HD added.



Huh? Is that instead of the 1-every-4-HD increase, or as well?


glass.


----------



## Nightfall (Jun 5, 2006)

Rystil Arden said:
			
		

> Oh yeah...well...uhhh...A Solar could beat them both at the same time!




Yeah if we're talking about these weaker versions of Orcus and Demogorgon. But I'm just sticking with ToH for now.



			
				Rystil Arden said:
			
		

> He just doesn't like Orcus because Orcus doesn't have a moose head




*chuckles* Yeah well I'm not going to touch that one...


----------



## glass (Jun 5, 2006)

Nightfall said:
			
		

> But yeah ToH version Orcus = rules mightly the Abyss!



What's the CR of the ToH version?


glass.


----------



## Nightfall (Jun 5, 2006)

Pretty sure he's a CR 36. I know he casts spells as both a 35th level sorcerer AND a 35th level cleric.

That's on top of everything else he gets.


----------



## Rystil Arden (Jun 5, 2006)

Nightfall said:
			
		

> Pretty sure he's a CR 36. I know he casts spells as both a 35th level sorcerer AND a 35th level cleric.
> 
> That's on top of everything else he gets.



 I also remember CR 36 and the double casting at CL 35.  It's a pretty solid 35, too, unlike many high CR monsters that are actually pushovers to a full party for the XP they give.


----------



## Nightfall (Jun 5, 2006)

Yeah well with the spell-like abilities, the ability to summon BOTH undead and demons, plus the Wand being a DC 42 (or at least above DC 35), along with the spell casting powers, makes Orcus truly worthy of taking down solars by the group. (Not necessarily a horde but there you are.)


----------



## Rystil Arden (Jun 5, 2006)

Nightfall said:
			
		

> Yeah well with the spell-like abilities, the ability to summon BOTH undead and demons, plus the Wand being a DC 42 (or at least above DC 35), along with the spell casting powers, makes Orcus truly worthy of taking down solars by the group. (Not necessarily a horde but there you are.)



 Yup.  DC 42 isn't very impressive at that CR though.  But it's a nice cherry on top for dealing with "mere mortals"


----------



## Nightfall (Jun 5, 2006)

Well not at level 35 granted, but dealing with say most CR 20s (below 25 anyway) it's easy to watch them fall to your power. Usually.


----------



## Rystil Arden (Jun 5, 2006)

Nightfall said:
			
		

> Well not at level 35 granted, but dealing with say most CR 20s (below 25 anyway) it's easy to watch them fall to your power. Usually.



 Right--hence my comment about 'mere mortals'


----------



## Kobold Avenger (Jun 5, 2006)

I can see why Ereshkigal and Nergal aren't Demon Lords, because they're actually Sumerian deities...  

Ereshkigal being a primal goddess of darkness and the underworld and likely a greater deity, and Nergal likely being and intermediate deity.

In fact the demon lords off that list with a no, are mostly deities and don't apply to being demon lords.


----------



## Kobold Avenger (Jun 5, 2006)

So is the Lilitu much like a greater version of the Succubus?


----------



## Mr.Black (Jun 5, 2006)

The artwork is pretty good.  I wish there was less Baxa, but the work he contributes is tolerable.  

I especially like the references to the non MM3.5 demons in this book.  There's a picture of an Arrow demon here, and a half formed Klurichir.  

Lots of nice Nalfeshnees in this book, particularly the picture of the three Nalfeshnees together.  Baxa also did a decent Glabrezu.  

I'm thinking that the most hideous new demons are obyriths:  the dybbuk, ekolid, and the siberix.  The only one that seems to be a loumara at the moment looks to be the guecubu.

I found the last picture (the one with of the demonic landscape with an orange sun)  to be particularly good.  It feels lonely and terrible at the same time.


----------



## ericlboyd (Jun 5, 2006)

BogusMagus said:
			
		

> I
> no	/	Malcanthet: The mother of succubi. Mentioned in Dungeon #112, page 48, and #124, page 95.




This is an omission from the table only, as she receives a full write-up in the book.

--Eric


----------



## Razz (Jun 5, 2006)

Kobold Avenger said:
			
		

> I can see why Ereshkigal and Nergal aren't Demon Lords, because they're actually Sumerian deities...
> 
> Ereshkigal being a primal goddess of darkness and the underworld and likely a greater deity, and Nergal likely being and intermediate deity.
> 
> In fact the demon lords off that list with a no, are mostly deities and don't apply to being demon lords.




You're right about Nergal. In fact, he was in the Forgotten Realms campaign setting under the Untheric Pantheon. He died during the Orcgate Wars, in fact. Well, died in FR only that is.


----------



## Imruphel (Jun 5, 2006)

Razz said:
			
		

> You're right about Nergal. In fact, he was in the Forgotten Realms campaign setting under the Untheric Pantheon. He died during the Orcgate Wars, in fact. Well, died in FR only that is.




Yep, and he's buried beneath the Great Barrow in the Great Dale to the east of the city of Uthmere.


----------



## Rystil Arden (Jun 5, 2006)

ericlboyd said:
			
		

> This is an omission from the table only, as she receives a full write-up in the book.
> 
> --Eric



 Yeah, the lovely picture in the art gallery did seem to imply that, unless HotA decided to pull a 'Sir not appearing in this film' and showed the picture with a caption of: "Malcanthet, Demon Queen of Succubi, will not be appearing in this book.  Except that.  And that.  And that.  And that.  Anyway, take a look at this bloated Manes."


----------



## Zaukrie (Jun 5, 2006)

Great art choices. Baxa reminds me of Planescape, but isn't always my favorite. These pieces look good though.

Erik, sorry you keep getting beat up over the CR for the demon lords. I like the decision personally.

I'd ask a question, but I'll be getting the book soon...


----------



## Razz (Jun 5, 2006)

Imruphel said:
			
		

> Yep, and he's buried beneath the Great Barrow in the Great Dale to the east of the city of Uthmere.




Neat, thanks for the info. The Untheric Pantheon is one of FR's pantheons that definitely needs more info. And I hope they bring it back eventually. For one, an army of aasimar in service to Nanna-Sin just entered Unther and is helping them fight against Mulhorand.


----------



## Shade (Jun 5, 2006)

I'm loving that picture of the molydeus.


----------



## Ripzerai (Jun 5, 2006)

BogusMagus said:
			
		

> no	/	Arlgolcheir: Demon lord. Mentioned in Dragon #116 "Rogue Stones and Gemjumping", page 55; said to have been destroyed.




That looks like a pattern; dead lords don't get on the list. Makes sense.



> no	/	Doresain, King of Ghouls: Demigod. Libris Mortis p 16




Is there at least a brief mention of him in Yeenoghu's entry, though? Possibly just as the King of Ghouls? 



> no	/	Ereshkigal: Demon prince. Mentioned in Monster Manual II (1983), page 35.




This one's kinda puzzling; it just seems odd that all the other MMII lords get a mention except for Nergal and Eresh. I guess that the fact that they were also Mesopotamian deities (and, in Nergal's case, an exiled devil) was a big deal.



> no	/	Lindyrm: Mentioned in The Deva Spark.




Oh, well.



> no	/	Maelfesh: featured in Rose Estes' Greyhawk novels.




I'm not surprised, though including him would have been funny.



> no	/	Xazivort: Mentioned in From the Ashes.




Oh, well. Stupid name anyway. Unless: maybe he's Raxivort's brother or something?

Still a remarkably comprehensive roster.


----------



## Shade (Jun 5, 2006)

Ripzerai said:
			
		

> Still a remarkably comprehensive roster.




Indeed.  I'd still love to see someone do something with Nql one of these days.  That name is just too bizarre to pass up.


----------



## jester47 (Jun 5, 2006)

Kobold Avenger said:
			
		

> I can see why Ereshkigal and Nergal aren't Demon Lords, because they're actually Sumerian deities...
> 
> Ereshkigal being a primal goddess of darkness and the underworld and likely a greater deity, and Nergal likely being and intermediate deity.
> 
> In fact the demon lords off that list with a no, are mostly deities and don't apply to being demon lords.




Well, I think it might be because Nergal has a contract with Games Workshop as one of their chaos Gods that he will probably never get out of.  Besides, there seems to be less competition over there.  They only have like 4 of them over there, and all the good gods are pretty much pushovers for him.  And if he were to come over he would drop from being a god to just being a demon lord.  Hardly any incentive...


----------



## Gold Roger (Jun 5, 2006)

jester47 said:
			
		

> Well, I think it might be because Nergal has a contract with Games Workshop as one of their chaos Gods that he will probably never get out of.  Besides, there seems to be less competition over there.  They only have like 4 of them over there, and all the good gods are pretty much pushovers for him.  And if he were to come over he would drop from being a god to just being a demon lord.  Hardly any incentive...




Except, that guys name is Nurgle. (Ex-Warhammer player still knows his stuff)


----------



## Ripzerai (Jun 5, 2006)

Shade said:
			
		

> Indeed.  I'd still love to see someone do something with Nql one of these days.  That name is just too bizarre to pass up.




Is it possible that Nql is the "Uncle" mentioned in Dungeon's "Castle Maure" adventure? That's how I pronounce it, anyway.

(From Dungeon #112, page 70) "...the Maure patriarch, a mysterious and ancient figure known only as 'Uncle'..."

Actually, I think that probably was Rob Kuntz's intent. In the next paragraph he refers to "an Abyssal entity known only as 'Y'..." who is revealed to be Yeenoghu.

Incidently, we don't actually know that Nql is a demon as such. _Eldritch Wizardry_ referred to "the spell that would unlock the Way to this horde of the Fiend Prince Nql..." So presumedly Nql could be any sort of fiend, or "Fiend Prince" could just be a title and Nql might be a humanoid.


----------



## Shade (Jun 5, 2006)

Ripzerai said:
			
		

> Is it possible that Nql is the "Uncle" mentioned in Dungeon's "Castle Maure" adventure? That's how I pronounce it, anyway.
> 
> (From Dungeon #112, page 70) "...the Maure patriarch, a mysterious and ancient figure known only as 'Uncle'..."
> 
> ...




Wow...how cool would that be?     

That actually makes perfect sense.  And true, it could be a non-demon.  Interesting...


----------



## RichGreen (Jun 5, 2006)

Hi,

What a great art gallery! Some really cool, creepy demon pictures. I hope that Orcus pic is the one that's in the book - it's much better than the lousy one in BoVD. 

I really don't mind the Grazzt & Iggwilv picture being reprinted as it's one of the best Dungeon covers ever.

Looking forward to the book, low CRs or not.

Cheers


Richard


----------



## James Jacobs (Jun 5, 2006)

Ripzerai said:
			
		

> Is it possible that Nql is the "Uncle" mentioned in Dungeon's "Castle Maure" adventure? That's how I pronounce it, anyway.
> 
> (From Dungeon #112, page 70) "...the Maure patriarch, a mysterious and ancient figure known only as 'Uncle'..."
> 
> Actually, I think that probably was Rob Kuntz's intent. In the next paragraph he refers to "an Abyssal entity known only as 'Y'..." who is revealed to be Yeenoghu.




Actually... the mysterious Abyssal entity known as "Y" is _not_ Yeenoghu... that's a red herring that will be expanded a bit more in the upcoming Maure Castle installment in issue #139 of _Dungeon_. Yeenoghu _does_ still have a lot invested in the Maures though...

As for the lilitu, yeah, they're sort of a tougher version of the succubus (and in fact evolve from succubi in a particularly gruesome manner), except that their specialty lies in the corruption of clergy and faith rather than the corruption of the individual soul.


----------



## Rystil Arden (Jun 5, 2006)

> As for the lilitu, yeah, they're sort of a tougher version of the succubus (and in fact evolve from succubi in a particularly gruesome manner), except that their specialty lies in the corruption of clergy and faith rather than the corruption of the individual soul.




Based on the Akkadian night demon of the same name, I might have expected them to roam the darkened roads, seeking out pregnant women and newborn babes to slay or corrupt to the service of darkness, but that idea sounds cool too.  It seems to fit in nicely with Pazuzu's shtick of subverting faith by aiding those in need and slowly corrupting those who depend upon him until he reveals himself.


----------



## Ripzerai (Jun 5, 2006)

Ripzerai said:
			
		

> Incidently, we don't actually know that Nql is a demon as such. _Eldritch Wizardry_ referred to "the spell that would unlock the Way to this horde of the Fiend Prince Nql..." So presumedly Nql could be any sort of fiend, or "Fiend Prince" could just be a title and Nql might be a humanoid.




Actually, that's what the _Encyclopedia Magica_ volume 2 said, not _Eldritch Wizardry_. It just occured to me that the wording was probably changed to fit TSR's standards.


----------



## James Jacobs (Jun 5, 2006)

Rystil Arden said:
			
		

> Based on the Akkadian night demon of the same name, I might have expected them to roam the darkened roads, seeking out pregnant women and newborn babes to slay or corrupt to the service of darkness, but that idea sounds cool too.  It seems to fit in nicely with Pazuzu's shtick of subverting faith by aiding those in need and slowly corrupting those who depend upon him until he reveals himself.




That's more Lamashtu's thing; she's mentioned briefly here and there in _Fiendish Codex_ and in the Pazuzu installment of the Demonomicon _Dragon_ articles. At one point, Lamashtu was going to appear in the Demon Lord chapter also, but I cut her early on when it became apaprent that there wouldn't be space for her. I'm sure she'll see the light of day in print somewhere down the line, though...

But yeah. Pazuzu (and Graz'zt and Malcanthet, for that matter) certainly has a fair number of lilitu minions working for him.


----------



## Brakkart (Jun 5, 2006)

I'll admit to being a little disapointed that the spyder-fiends (a subtype of tanar'ri) didn't make the cut for this book, but I can't say I'm surprised by that. Personally I'm stoked that Carl Critchlow is one of the artists for this book. The guy who writes/draws/inks the awesomely funny Thrud the Barbarian  comic. Too cool!


----------



## Kobold Avenger (Jun 5, 2006)

Do they decribe which demons are generally found in the service of which demon lords, or describe certain demon lords as being the king or queen of certain types?

Like Vrocks, and Pazuzu's resemblance.
Or Bulezau and Baphomet.
Or Alkiliths and Jubilex.


----------



## RangerWickett (Jun 5, 2006)

Kobold Avenger said:
			
		

> I can see why Ereshkigal and Nergal aren't Demon Lords, because they're actually Sumerian deities...
> 
> Ereshkigal being a primal goddess of darkness and the underworld and likely a greater deity, and Nergal likely being and intermediate deity.
> 
> In fact the demon lords off that list with a no, are mostly deities and don't apply to being demon lords.




I just wanted to comment that I actually _could_ have used stats for Nergal and Ereshkigal. In my modern fantasy game, the PCs managed (with the aid of 4 NPCs who died in the process) to take down Namtar, a lesser Sumerian god, and messenger of Nergal and Ereshkigal. I wouldn't use them for D&D, but something about Sumerian demons makes them just perfect for modern fantasy horror.


----------



## Shemeska (Jun 6, 2006)

Razz said:
			
		

> You're right about Nergal. In fact, he was in the Forgotten Realms campaign setting under the Untheric Pantheon. He died during the Orcgate Wars, in fact. Well, died in FR only that is.




*nod* Only his manifest Avatar on Toril was killed. Nergal for various reasons just never reestablished any divine presence in FR (presumably because after his avatar's death the Imaskari barrier prevented him doing so). He was still happily lording over his domain of Nergaltos on the first layer of the Gray Waste.


----------



## BryonD (Jun 6, 2006)

Erik Mona said:
			
		

> Nice attitude.
> 
> The book had three authors and a bunch of editors.
> 
> --Erik




I said "they".

"They" = WotC.

And the irony in the post still speaks for itself.


----------



## BOZ (Jun 6, 2006)

BogusMagus said:
			
		

> I copy & pasted the following list from the wiki list, so it might be a little hard to read.
> 
> I'm just looking at the Appendix for this, so the "not listed" might be mentioned elsewhere.
> (Especially the Deities & the destroyed.)




it's not too hard to read.  was there another part of the list for destroyed demon lords, or are you just saying they were not listed in the appendix at all?



			
				BogusMagus said:
			
		

> new?	/	Kardum




so, we have at least one new lord named Kardum?    did the appendix list any more lords who were not on that wiki list?

well, given that the lords left off the appendix seem to have been skipped for a good reason, or were just too obscure to bother with in the first place, i am *quite pleased*.


----------



## BOZ (Jun 6, 2006)

Ripzerai said:
			
		

> Wow.
> 
> The art gallery sold me on the book.




i didn't need the art to sell the book to me, but it sure doesn't hurt.  

glad to see Orcus put some weight back on, and demogorgon got his heads on straight.  



			
				BogusMagus said:
			
		

> Yes, yes! (Now, I vaguely remember the talk it's from ToEE PC game, is that so?)
> 
> The titles in WotC's art gallery are messed up.
> Zuggtmoy's in page 3, last row, 3rd pic. (Yochlol)
> http://www.wizards.com/dnd/images/fc1_gallery/98469.jpg




yep, Zugg's appearance was retooled using the image from the ToEE PC game.  at first i was like, "what?  she's supposed to be butt-ugly mo-fugly!" but then, well, the new look kind of grew on me.  like a fungus.



			
				Ripzerai said:
			
		

> That looks like a pattern; dead lords don't get on the list. Makes sense.




yep, that does make sense.  at first i thought Argolcheir and Zanassu were skipped because they were FR lords, but then Eltab is listed, so i realized it must just be that they're dead.    maybe they will get a mention somewhere else in the book - Zanassu at least?  it won't be a major thing if they're not mentioned though.



			
				Ripzerai said:
			
		

> Is there at least a brief mention of him in Yeenoghu's entry, though? Possibly just as the King of Ghouls?




if not, it sure would be a strange omission...



			
				Ripzerai said:
			
		

> This one's kinda puzzling; it just seems odd that all the other MMII lords get a mention except for Nergal and Eresh. I guess that the fact that they were also Mesopotamian deities (and, in Nergal's case, an exiled devil) was a big deal.




perhaps, but not necessarily.  i mean, Orcus, Demogorgon, Dagon, and a number of others were named after real-world gods.  i guess the authors and/or editors decided to simplify matters in this case, though.  



			
				Shade said:
			
		

> Indeed.  I'd still love to see someone do something with Nql one of these days.  That name is just too bizarre to pass up.




indeed!  i just want to know how to pronounce it.    "uncool"?  "nickwill"?  "inkwell"?  "nah-quell"?  "NyQuil"?  



			
				Ripzerai said:
			
		

> Actually, that's what the _Encyclopedia Magica_ volume 2 said, not _Eldritch Wizardry_. It just occured to me that the wording was probably changed to fit TSR's standards.




indeed!    i'm pretty sure the original text said "Demon" rather than "Fiend".  just remember, at that time in TSR's history certain texts were being called the "Fiendomicon of Iggwilv".    just breaks your heart...


----------



## Kesh (Jun 6, 2006)

Ripzerai said:
			
		

> Is there at least a brief mention of him in Yeenoghu's entry, though? Possibly just as the King of Ghouls?




Sure is. In fact, you can see it right here! The big Y got himself into the latest round of Excerpts on the site. 

Though I prefer the BoVD artwork, it's good to see a new writeup. Also, I'm not terribly familiar with Maure Castle, but there's mention of it in the excerpt entry that talks about the other demon involved:



> _The enigmatic leader of the Maure family once represented his most powerful cult among humanity at the time, yet internal strife caused by rival demon lord Malcanthet saw to the ruin of this resource. Today, Yeenoghu counts the Queen of Succubi as one of his greatest enemies and periodically raids her realm. He is always turned back by her defenses, but one day he hopes to gain enough allies to see to her ruin._


----------



## coyote6 (Jun 6, 2006)

Can't wait for the book.

Though Yeenoghu's stats don't increase my love of the new stat block format. His "first action" in almost every combat is to use _bull's strength_ on himself, and "the statistics above take that into account" -- that's annoying. Between _dispels_, _disjunctions_, and _anti-magic_, spells are going to go off a lot. I know it's easier for me to remember to add +2 or +3 than remember to subtract -2 or -3, never mind wondering whether his base Strength is really 26 or 30. And spending a round buffing one's self in a fight can be bad for one's health when one doesn't have an entire party for cover.


----------



## Ripzerai (Jun 6, 2006)

BOZ said:
			
		

> if not, it sure would be a strange omission...




As Kesh pointed out, he does indeed get a mention in Yeenoghu's entry (and his layer has an official name now: the White Kingdom). I'm guessing he's not on the list because he's not a demon. 

And, if you want to get clinical, he's dead. At least, as a ghoul, his heart's not beating. 

It's a shame that they couldn't think of a better name for Yeenoghu's layer than "Yeenoghu's Realm," though, especially considering that _On Hallowed Ground_ gave it a beautiful and vivid name - the Seeping Woods (OHG, page 49).



> indeed!  i just want to know how to pronounce it.    "uncool"?  "nickwill"?  "inkwell"?  "nah-quell"?  "NyQuil"?




"Uncle" (I said, smiling).


----------



## demiurge1138 (Jun 6, 2006)

BOZ said:
			
		

> so, we have at least one new lord named Kardum?    did the appendix list any more lords who were not on that wiki list?



Kadum was one of the Titans in the Scarred Lands. Maybe it's a reference.

Demiurge out.


----------



## BogusMagus (Jun 6, 2006)

ericlboyd said:
			
		

> This is an omission from the table only, as she receives a full write-up in the book.
> 
> --Eric



How stupid of me!
I even posted this myself;


			
				BogusMagus said:
			
		

> Malacanthet: Queen of the Succubi. Tanar’ri. Rules? Shendilavri (570th)(Somehow, she and her layer are missing from Appendix 1&2.). Served by Incubi, Succubi, Lilitus.


----------



## BogusMagus (Jun 6, 2006)

glass said:
			
		

> Huh? Is that instead of the 1-every-4-HD increase, or as well?
> 
> 
> glass.



As well.

*Making Epic Demon Lords*
(I don’t feel like writing out these words for words, but I will try not to leave out anything.)
* Advance lord’s HD by an amount appropriate for your campaign’s needs. The lord’s BAB, saves, skills, feats, ability scores, should increase as an Outsider.
* CR increase by 1 for every HD added.
* Add “epic” to DR requirement.
* New SR = CR+13
* Ability scores all increase 2 for every 5HD added *(in addition to increase due to HD)*.
* Gain Spell-like abilities (at will): Blasphemy (or Word of Chaos for obyrith.), Plane Shift, Shapechange, Unholy Aura. Feel free to add more, but remember not to over do it.


----------



## Nightfall (Jun 6, 2006)

Kadum was indeed an SL titan but the difference between a Titan and a demon prince is kind of considerable in my view.


----------



## Ripzerai (Jun 6, 2006)

I really like the description of the Plain of Infinite Portals, with two caveats:

1. Making it _finite_ was nothing short of idiotic. I can understand some minor layers having limited expanses, but the _first one_? There's no way to justify making Pazunia finite without making every outer plane's first layer be similarly bounded.

2. I don't like that they gave the layer to Pazuzu. He didn't have it in the 1st edition _Manual of the Planes_ (though he spent a lot of time there), in _Planes of Chaos_, or even in his Demonomicon article. Granted, he doesn't interfere with the squabbling lords and armies of the layer, but there's something fundamentally wrong about putting the gateway layer under the control of any one ruler, especially given that the article itself says, "to control Pazunia is to control the whole of the Abyss." It's a _huge_ advantage against his rivals, and he already has Torremor. 

If they dropped the bit about him controlling _all_ Abyssal skies, though (which seemed a bit excessive), I can deal with it.

I did like that they named him an obyrith, though, in homage to Gygax calling him a "proto-demon." And making him one of the few remaining lords of that earlier race, which used to control the layer, makes things make a little more sense.

Anyway, the rest of the article is superb, and as always I reserve the right to construct mountains from any molehills I might come across.


----------



## Nightfall (Jun 6, 2006)

Rip,

My only mole hill in terms of artwork was the pic of Yeenough. Otherwise the articles = fine.

I await my copy soon.


----------



## ruleslawyer (Jun 6, 2006)

Ripzerai said:
			
		

> It's a _huge_ advantage against his rivals, and he already has Torremor.



He might not have Torremor any more... which makes a kind of sense, since in 1e he didn't have an identifiable home layer at all.


> If they dropped the bit about him controlling _all_ Abyssal skies, though (which seemed a bit excessive), I can deal with it.



I have a feeling they did.


----------



## BogusMagus (Jun 6, 2006)

I added “the notes” to the list.

This list is the whole appendix. (At least my intension is. I might have omitted something by mistake.)

***********************************************************
I like this Obyrith business. I was especially surprised that Pazuzu was now made(?) Obyrith.

***********************************************************

FC1?				/	Known demon lords
yes	(		)	/	Abraxas: Demon prince. Mentioned in Monster Manual II (1983), page 35.
yes	(		)	/	Adimarchus: Demon prince of madness. Antagonist of the Shackled City Adventure Path modules published in Dungeon. Detailed in Dungeon #116, page 61.
yes	(		)	/	Ahazu: Demon lord. Mentioned in Monster Manual II (1983), page 35.
yes	(		)	/	Ahrimanes: Demon prince. Mentioned in Monster Manual II (1983), page 35.
yes	(	f	)	/	Aldinach: Female demon lord. Mentioned in Monster Manual II (1983), page 35.
yes	(	f	)	/	Alrunes: Female demon lord. Mentioned in Monster Manual II (1983), page 35.
yes	(		)	/	Alvarez: Demon lord. Mentioned in Faces of Evil: the Fiends, p60.
yes	(		)	/	Alzrius: Demon lord. Mentioned in Hellbound: The Blood War, "The Dark of the War", p25.
yes	(		)	/	Anarazel: Demon prince. Mentioned in Monster Manual II (1983), page 35.
yes	(		)	/	Ansitif: Demon prince. Mentioned in Monster Manual II (1983), page 35.
yes	(	f	)	/	Ardat: Female demon lord. Mentioned in Monster Manual II (1983), page 35, revealed to be Demon Queen of Harpies in Dragon #341 "Demonomicon of Iggwilv", page X.
yes	(	o	)	/	Areex: Demon prince. Mentioned in Monster Manual II (1983), page 35.
no	(		)	/	Arlgolcheir: Demon lord. Mentioned in Dragon #116 "Rogue Stones and Gemjumping", page 55; said to have been destroyed.
yes	(		)	/	Arzial: Mentioned in Dungeon #13, "The Ruins of Nol-Daer".
yes	(		)	/	Aseroth: Demon prince. Mentioned in Monster Manual II (1983), page 35.
yes	(	o,d	)	/	Asima: Demon lord. Mentioned in Monster Manual II (1983), page 35.
yes	(	d	)	/	Astaroth: Demon prince. Mentioned in Monster Manual II (1983), page 35.
yes	(	d	)	/	Azael: Demon lord. Mentioned in Monster Manual II (1983), page 35.
yes	(		)	/	Azazel: Demon prince. Mentioned in Monster Manual II (1983), page 35.
yes	(		)	/	Baltazo: Demon lord. Mentioned in Monster Manual II (1983), page 35.
yes	(		)	/	Baphomet: Demon lord. Mentioned in Lost Caverns of Tsojcanth; Monster Manual II (1983), page 36; Dragon #341 "Demonomicon of Iggwilv".
yes	(	f	)	/	Barbu: Female demon lord. Mentioned in Monster Manual II (1983), page 35.
yes	(		)	/	Bayemon: Demon lord. Mentioned in Monster Manual II (1983), page 35.
yes	(	o	)	/	Bechard: Demon lord. Mentioned in Monster Manual II (1983), page 35.
yes	(	o	)	/	Cabiri: Demon lord. Mentioned in Monster Manual II (1983), page 35.
yes	(		)	/	Charun: Demon lord. Mentioned in Monster Manual II (1983), page 35.
yes	(	o	)	/	Dagon: Demon prince. Mentioned in Monster Manual II (1983), page 35.
yes	(		)	/	Demogorgon: Demon prince. Mentioned in Monster Manual (1977) p16; Wrath of the Immortals boxed set; Monster Mythology, page 88; Book of Vile Darkness, page 125.
no	(		)	/	Doresain, King of Ghouls: Demigod. Libris Mortis p 16
yes	(		)	/	Dwiergus: The Chrysalis Prince, mentioned in Dragon #341 "Demonomicon of Iggwilv".
yes	(		)	/	Eblis: Demon prince. Mentioned in Monster Manual II (1983), page 35.
yes	(		)	/	Eldanoth: Demon lord. Mentioned in Faces of Evil: the Fiends, page 60.
yes	(		)	/	Eltab: Mentioned in Dreams of the Red Wizards; Spellbound; Champions of Ruin, page 130.
no	(		)	/	Ereshkigal: Demon prince. Mentioned in Monster Manual II (1983), page 35.
yes	(		)	/	Fraz-Urb'luu: Demon prince. Mentioned in Lost Caverns of Tsojcanth; Monster Manual II (1983), page 39; Faces of Evil: the Fiends, page 60; Dragon #333 "Demonomicon of Iggwilv", page 21.
yes	(		)	/	Graz'zt: Demon prince. Lost Caverns of Tsojcanth; Monster Manual II (1983), page 39; Book of Vile Darkness, page 130.
yes	(		)	/	Gresil: Demon lord. Mentioned in Monster Manual II (1983), page 35; Living Greyhawk Journal 10; Dragon #294.
yes	(		)	/	Haagenti: Lord of Alchemy. Mentioned in Dragon #337 "Demonomicon of Iggwilv", page 47.
yes	(		)	/	Ilsidahur: Mentioned in Dungeon #10 "The Shrine of Ilsidahur".
yes	(		)	/	Juiblex: Demon lord. Mentioned in Monster Manual (1977), page 17; Monster Mythology, page 67; Book of Vile Darkness, page 134; Dragon #337 "Demonomicon of Iggwilv", page 47.
yes	(	f	)	/	J'zzalshrak: Female demon lord. Mentioned in Dungeon #64, "Bzallin's Blacksphere", page 29.
new?	(		)	/	Kardum
yes	(		)	/	Kerzit: Demon lord. Mentioned in Mordenkainen's Fantastic Adventure; Dungeon #112, pages 13, 52, 96.
yes	(		)	/	Kostchtchie: Demon lord. Mentioned in Lost Caverns of Tsojcanth; Monster Manual II (1983), page 40; Monster Mythology, page 82.
yes	(	f	)	/	Lamashtu: Demon Queen of Monstrous Births and Deformity. Mentioned in Dragon #329 "Demonomicon of Iggwilv", page 67.
yes	(		)	/	Laraie: Demon lord. Mentioned in Monster Manual II (1983), page 35.
yes	(		)	/	Lazbral'thull: Demon lord of torture and bloodletting. (Dungeon #122: Root of Evil).
no	(		)	/	Lindyrm: Mentioned in The Deva Spark.
yes	(	f	)	/	Lissa'aere: Female demon lord. Mentioned in Hellbound: The Blood War, page 25.
yes	(	f	)	/	Lolth: Demon queen of spiders. First debut in module D3: Vault of the Drow and more prominently, in Q1: Queen of the Demonweb Pits. Went on to appear in many other supplements such as first edition Fiend Folio and Deities and Demigods (all three editions).
yes	(		)	/	Lupercio: Demon lord. Mentioned in Faces of Evil: the Fiends, page 60.
yes	(	f	)	/	Lynkhab: Female demon lord. Faces of Evil: the Fiends, page 61.
no	(		)	/	Maelfesh: featured in Rose Estes' Greyhawk novels.
yes*	(		)	/	Malcanthet: The mother of succubi. Mentioned in Dungeon #112, page 48, and #124, page 95.
yes	(		)	/	Malgarius: A demonic plant that once controlled a layer of the Abyss, but which was defeated by the demon lord Lazbral'thull. (Dungeon #122: Root of Evil).
no	(		)	/	Malgoth, The: A "terrible entity" that ruled over several layers of the Abyss eons ago. Defeated by a consortium of seven demon lords, who led a fantastic assault on his haunted realm. The victorious demons scattered the Malgoth's essence across the Abyss, only to be deposed and ultimately destroyed by underlings on their home layers. (Dungeon #117: Touch of the Abyss).
yes	(		)	/	Mastiphal: Demon prince. Mentioned in Monster Manual II (1983), page 35.
no	(		)	/	Miska the Wolf-Spider: Demon prince. Mentioned in Dungeon #124, page 17. Detailed in 2e adventure Rod of Seven Parts.
yes	(		)	/	Munkir: Demon lord. Mentioned in Monster Manual II (1983), page 35.
yes	(		)	/	Nekir: Demon lord. Mentioned in Monster Manual II (1983), page 35.
no	(		)	/	Nergel: Demon lord. Mentioned in Monster Manual II (1983), page 35.
yes	(	f	)	/	Nocticula: Demon princess. Mentioned in Monster Manual II (1983), page 35.
no	(		)	/	Nql: mentioned in Eldritch Wizardry, in the "Codex of the Infinite Planes" entry.
yes	(	o	)	/	Obox-ob: Demon prince. Mentioned in Monster Manual II (1983), page 35.
yes	(		)	/	Orcus: Demon prince. Mentioned in Eldritch Wizardry; Monster Manual (1977), page 17; Dead Gods; Dungeon #89; Book of Vile Darkness, page 136. Was the prominent villain of the Bloodstone series.
yes	(	o	)	/	Pale Night: Female demon lord, mother of Grazzt, Lupercio, and Vucarik. Consort of Baphomet. Mentioned in Faces of Evil: the Fiends, page 61; Dragon #341 "Demonomicon of Iggwilv"; Manual of the Planes (3rd edition), page 100.
yes	(	o	)	/	Pazuzu: Demon prince. Mentioned in Monster Manual II (1983), page 41; Dragon #329 "Demonomicon of Iggwilv", page 56; Book of Vile Darkness web enhancement.
yes	(		)	/	Rhyxali: Demon princess. Mentioned in Book of Vile Darkness web enhancement.
yes	(		)	/	Sch'theraqpasstt: Mentioned in Dragon #151
yes	(		)	/	Sess'innek: Demon lord. Mentioned in Monster Mythology, page 102; Serpent Kingdoms.
yes	(		)	/	Shaktari: Marilith demon lord. Mentioned in Dungeon #60, "Nemesis", page 32.
yes	(		)	/	Shami-Amourae: Queen of succubi. Mentioned in Dungeon #5, "The Stolen Power", page 27.
yes	(		)	/	Siragle: Mentioned in Dungeon #28, "Sleepless".
yes	(		)	/	Socothbenoth: Demon prince. Mentioned in Monster Manual II (1983), page 35; mentioned in Dragon #333,"Demonomicon of Iggwilv", page 29.
yes	(	f	)	/	Soneillon: Female demon lord. Mentioned in Monster Manual II (1983), page 35.
yes	(		)	/	Tharzax: Patron of poisonous things that creep and crawl. (Dungeon #123: Salvage Operation).
yes	(		)	/	Thralhavoc: Demon lord. Mentioned in Hellbound: The Blood War, "War Games", page 56.
yes	(		)	/	Turaglas the Ebon Maw: Mentioned in Dragon #312.
yes	(	o	)	/	Ugudenk: Lord of Worms and Hungry Parasites. Mentioned in Dragon #333 "Demonomicon of Iggwilv", page 39.
yes	(		)	/	Verin: Demon lord. Mentioned in Monster Manual II (1983), page 35; Faces of Evil: the Fiends, page 62.
yes	(		)	/	Volisupula: Mentioned in Planes of Chaos, in the "Chaos Adventures" booklet.
yes	(		)	/	Vucarik: Demon lord. Mentioned in Hellbound: The Blood War, page 26.
no	(		)	/	Xazivort: Mentioned in From the Ashes.
yes	(		)	/	Yeenoghu: Demon prince. Mentioned in Monster Manual (1977), page 19; Monster Mythology, page 83; Book of Vile Darkness, page 140.
yes	(	f	)	/	Yibyiru: Female demon lord; Rancid Lady of Bitter Bile. Mentioned in Dragon #337 "Demonomicon of Iggwilv", page 48.
no	(		)	/	Zanassu: Mentioned in Empires of the Sands, reported dead in Demihuman Deities.
yes	(	f	)	/	Zuggtmoy: Demoness Lady of Fungi. Mentioned in Temple of Elemental Evil; Dragon #337 "Demonomicon of Iggwilv", page 37.
yes	(		)	/	Zzyczesiya: Demon lord. Mentioned in Faces of Evil: the Fiends, page 60.

*Not in the Appendix, by mistake.  (d=presumed dead, f=female, o=obyrith.)


----------



## BogusMagus (Jun 6, 2006)

Ripzerai said:
			
		

> As Kesh pointed out, he does indeed get a mention in Yeenoghu's entry (and his layer has an official name now: the White Kingdom). I'm guessing he's not on the list because he's not a demon.



I just noticed that Appendix 1 does not have Doresain in it, but Appendix 2 (Layers of the Abyss) does.
421/The White Kingdom/Doresain

Now that I look at the Appendix 2 more closely, I see that there are Deities listed on this list, if they are the rulers of the layer.



			
				Ripzerai said:
			
		

> It's a shame that they couldn't think of a better name for Yeenoghu's layer than "Yeenoghu's Realm," though, especially considering that _On Hallowed Ground_ gave it a beautiful and vivid name - the Seeping Woods (OHG, page 49).



The Seeping Woods is the name of an area in Y's Realm.


----------



## Ripzerai (Jun 6, 2006)

ruleslawyer said:
			
		

> He might not have Torremor any more...




That seems unlikely, considering how much detail Mr. Jacobs gave it in the _Demonomicon_. I suspect he would have protested if someone suggested symbolically throwing all that effort away.


----------



## BogusMagus (Jun 6, 2006)

BOZ said:
			
		

> it's not too hard to read.  was there another part of the list for destroyed demon lords, or are you just saying they were not listed in the appendix at all?



See my updated list.
But I *think* the Appendix 1 only lists those destroyed (relatively) recently. 

Then again, since there is at least one entry missing from the list, maybe there are some more missing by mistake.



			
				BOZ said:
			
		

> so, we have at least one new lord named Kardum?    did the appendix list any more lords who were not on that wiki list?



No (unless I missed some by mistake).

Kardum / Lord of the Balors / Balor, Fire / 21: The Sixth Pyre


----------



## BogusMagus (Jun 6, 2006)

BOZ said:
			
		

> yep, Zugg's appearance was retooled using the image from the ToEE PC game.  at first i was like, "what?  she's supposed to be butt-ugly mo-fugly!" but then, well, the new look kind of grew on me.  like a fungus.



I see.
Thanks, BOZ!


----------



## Rystil Arden (Jun 6, 2006)

James Jacobs said:
			
		

> That's more Lamashtu's thing; she's mentioned briefly here and there in _Fiendish Codex_ and in the Pazuzu installment of the Demonomicon _Dragon_ articles. At one point, Lamashtu was going to appear in the Demon Lord chapter also, but I cut her early on when it became apaprent that there wouldn't be space for her. I'm sure she'll see the light of day in print somewhere down the line, though...
> 
> But yeah. Pazuzu (and Graz'zt and Malcanthet, for that matter) certainly has a fair number of lilitu minions working for him.



 Ah yes, that was the mythological Lamashtu's shtick as well--lots of ancients seemed to share some sort of 'L' initialled she-demon for this purpose.  Lamia too, among the Greeks.

In any case, considering that I created a unique templated succubus in my game to perform similar functions, I would say that it definitely fills a fun vacant niche in the demonic hierarchy.


----------



## Ripzerai (Jun 6, 2006)

BogusMagus said:
			
		

> Kardum / Lord of the Balors / Balor, Fire / 21: The Sixth Pyre




Oh!  Ha!

It's an anagram for Marduk. He Zagygged a Gygaxism!

(_Marduk was the Lord of Fire Demons, and one of the six Monarchs of Demonium, in the later Gord the Rogue books_).


----------



## Rystil Arden (Jun 6, 2006)

Ripzerai said:
			
		

> Oh!  Ha!
> 
> It's an anagram for Marduk. He Zagygged a Gygaxism!
> 
> (_Marduk was the Lord of Fire Demons, and one of the six Monarchs of Demonium, in the later Gord the Rogue books_).



 Well, it's Marduk scrambled, but not exactly backwards   Now we just need Enlil, An, and Ea.  And maybe Kingu to go with our Tiamat.


----------



## RichGreen (Jun 6, 2006)

Hi,

The excerpts are great, although as Nightfall says, the picture of Yeenoghu in the BovD is better.

Wow -- that demon lord appendix is pretty impressive too.

When is the book officially coming out? We normally get them in the UK in the same week now.

Cheers


Richard


----------



## Mouseferatu (Jun 6, 2006)

Ripzerai said:
			
		

> Oh!  Ha!
> 
> It's an anagram for Marduk. He Zagygged a Gygaxism!
> 
> (_Marduk was the Lord of Fire Demons, and one of the six Monarchs of Demonium, in the later Gord the Rogue books_).




Hmm... Marduk is a god from Babylonian mythology; the one who tore Tiamat in two to form the earth and the sea, if I'm not mistaken.

I wonder why Gary chose to use that name as a demon lord? It's an unusual leap from the source material.


----------



## Rystil Arden (Jun 6, 2006)

Mouseferatu said:
			
		

> Hmm... Marduk is a god from Babylonian mythology; the one who tore Tiamat in two to form the earth and the sea, if I'm not mistaken.
> 
> I wonder why Gary chose to use that name as a demon lord? It's an unusual leap from the source material.



 Yup, Marduk defeated the chaos dragons Tiamat and Kingu in the Enuma Elish, replacing the primal female chaos of nature with the strict regimented rule of the masculine.  Thus, quite curious that Tia makes her home in Baator and backwards-Marduk in the Abyss.


----------



## Ripzerai (Jun 6, 2006)

I'm sure that's why the authors and editors of _Hordes of the Abyss_ felt obliged to anagrammize Marduk and eliminate Ereshkigal and Nergal - because a lot of people have trouble with the idea of unrelated demon lords sharing names with Babylonian deities they have little or nothing in common with.


----------



## Rystil Arden (Jun 6, 2006)

Ripzerai said:
			
		

> I'm sure that's why the authors and editors of _Hordes of the Abyss_ felt obliged to anagrammize Marduk and eliminate Ereshkigal and Nergal - because a lot of people have trouble with the idea of unrelated demon lords sharing names with Babylonian deities they have little or nothing in common with.



 Maybe, but I think it's cool to include mythological references, and at least Nergal and Ereshkigal were decently close to their mythological equivalents (and Tia is admittedly closer than Bahamut to her original source, since Bahamut is Behemoth, the hippo monster from Judeo-Christian mythology).  And we do get to keep other fun Mesopotamian demons and gods like Pazuzu, Lamashtu, and Lilitu


----------



## Ripzerai (Jun 6, 2006)

Rystil Arden said:
			
		

> Nergal and Ereshkigal were decently close to their mythological equivalents




The demon Ereshkigal was _male_ according to the MMII (and according to traditional demonology, which also turned the goddesses Astarte [who became Astaroth] and Eurynome into male demons). The "Nergel" who appeared in the _Gord the Rogue_ series was pretty different from the god, too. The tradition of badly misinterpreting mythology for the purposes of demonology is many centuries old. 

Erik Mona's original demon article might show some context. Or might not. It's worth linking to anyway.


----------



## Rystil Arden (Jun 6, 2006)

Ripzerai said:
			
		

> The demon Ereshkigal was _male_ according to the MMII (and according to traditional demonology, which also turned the goddesses Astarte [who became Astaroth] and Eurynome into male demons). The "Nergel" who appeared in the _Gord the Rogue_ series was pretty different from the god, too. The tradition of badly misinterpreting mythology for the purposes of demonology is many centuries old.
> 
> Erik Mona's original demon article might show some context. Or might not. It's worth linking to anyway.



 Still closer than turning a destructive rampaging hippo into a noble platinum dragon though   I think the inclusion in the Untheric pantheon may have been the reason that some of the Mesopotamian refugees were not included while others were.  I knew about Astarte and Astaroth, but the fact that they made Eurynome into a demon is news to me.  We are talking about the okeanid titaness Eurynome who ruled Olympus with Ophion pre-Kronos, right?  What did poor Eurynome do to them?  Or is it just the old saying, "The enemy of Eurynome is your friend."


----------



## Mr.Black (Jun 6, 2006)

More news has been posted on the Fiendish Codex.  

More Fiendish Codex I Excerpts 

Lots of crunch and fluff.  The mature nabassu is a pretty tough CR 15 with strong ties to negative energy.  I hope the rest of the demons are this good.

A lot of information on Panzuria, which is great for those interested in lore on the Abyss.


----------



## Razz (Jun 6, 2006)

Marduk is also in Forgotten Realms as one of the deities of the Untheric Pantheon. They kept the mythology somewhat similar, stating he killed Tiamat but was banished from Realmspace afterwards? Not sure exactly why. 

Of course, Unther is going to have a Sumerian/Babylonian Pantheon with twists to it match the FR Setting. Also they, and the humans that worshiped the Mulhorandi/Egyptian Pantheon, came from different time periods of the same world. After inter-breeding, being renamed the Mulan, there was still the matter of their deities. Half went to Untheric and the other to Mulhorand (pantheon names got twisted as well). Of course, since a deity's background is dependant upon their people's beliefs and legends and trying to establish fact from fiction, that got twisted all around too.


----------



## Shade (Jun 6, 2006)

I just read the Pazunia preview...

Mr. Mona and Mr. Jacobs, take a bow.

<thunderous applause>


----------



## Derringer (Jun 6, 2006)

*Abyssal Heritor Feats*

The Vestigial Wings feat looks pretty cool - a nice way to add a fiendish element to a human character if it works that way.

Anyone with the book in hand know if there are any prereqs to taking an Abyssal Heritor Feat?  Anyone willing to post a little more about some of the others...particularly Demonic Sneak Attack?

Thanks!


----------



## BOZ (Jun 7, 2006)

Ripzerai said:
			
		

> As Kesh pointed out, he does indeed get a mention in Yeenoghu's entry (and his layer has an official name now: the White Kingdom).




actually, i have seen that name before.  he appeared in Libris Mortis, so it could have been there, but i suspect Wolfgang Baur named the realm and mentioned it in one or all of his articles in Dragon #252, Dungeon #70 or #129.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_Kingdom



			
				Ripzerai said:
			
		

> 2. I don't like that they gave the layer to Pazuzu. He didn't have it in the 1st edition _Manual of the Planes_ (though he spent a lot of time there), in _Planes of Chaos_, or even in his Demonomicon article. Granted, he doesn't interfere with the squabbling lords and armies of the layer, but there's something fundamentally wrong about putting the gateway layer under the control of any one ruler, especially given that the article itself says, "to control Pazunia is to control the whole of the Abyss." It's a _huge_ advantage against his rivals, and he already has Torremor.
> 
> If they dropped the bit about him controlling _all_ Abyssal skies, though (which seemed a bit excessive), I can deal with it.
> 
> ...




i'll definitely agree that making him an Obyrith was a cool idea, and was starting to suspect that he might be.  

actually though Rip, i didn't get the idea from the Pazunia description that Pazuzu is the uncontested ruler - Pazuzu is apparenly one of at least 4 (Aldinach, Baltazo, and Mastiphal included) lords living there - he is clearly said to rule the skies, though.  i wouldn't say he has any *measurable* control over the layer, other than the immediate intimidation factor of his presence and the fealty sworn by those who share his skies.



			
				BogusMagus said:
			
		

> The Seeping Woods is the name of an area in Y's Realm.




well, that's something - at least the name is in use somehow.  

oddly enough, there's something that appeals to my sense of humor to have Yeenoghu's realm being called... "Yeenoghu's Realm".  maybe he even refers to himself in third person when talking about it.  



			
				Ripzerai said:
			
		

> Oh!  Ha!
> 
> It's an anagram for Marduk. He Zagygged a Gygaxism!
> 
> (_Marduk was the Lord of Fire Demons, and one of the six Monarchs of Demonium, in the later Gord the Rogue books_).




brilliant!  


i wonder if anyone has the new Dragon yet?    and since today is the supposed official release date of FC1, i wonder if we are about to have more than 2 people owning it?


----------



## Ripzerai (Jun 7, 2006)

BOZ said:
			
		

> i suspect Wolfgang Baur named the realm and mentioned it in one or all of his articles in Dragon #252, Dungeon #70 or #129.




The White Kingdom is a realm in the Underdark beneath the Hellfurnaces. The Doresain who rules it hails from the Negative Energy Plane (or the Plane of Shadow, depending on who you ask). This Doresain is a worshipper of Nerull. There were no connections to the Abyss or Yeenoghu in Wolfgang Baur's original articles - the only fiend was a hydroloth. 

_Libris Mortis_ claims the King of the Ghouls is the original Doresain, and the Material/Shadow Doresain is named after him.



> Actually though Rip, i didn't get the idea from the Pazunia description that Pazuzu is the uncontested ruler - Pazuzu is apparenly one of at least 4 (Aldinach, Baltazo, and Mastiphal included) lords living there




I like that interpretation.

_Armies of the Abyss_ mentioned, besides Aldinach and Baltazo, that Ahazu and Laraie also ruled fortresses on the first layer of the Abyss. And we musn't forget Red Shroud or Jaranda (marilith ruler of the town of Gallowsgate).


----------



## BOZ (Jun 7, 2006)

Ripzerai said:
			
		

> The White Kingdom is a realm in the Underdark beneath the Hellfurnaces. The Doresain who rules it hails from the Negative Energy Plane (or the Plane of Shadow, depending on who you ask). This Doresain is a worshipper of Nerull. There were no connections to the Abyss or Yeenoghu in Wolfgang Baur's original articles - the only fiend was a hydroloth.
> 
> _Libris Mortis_ claims the King of the Ghouls is the original Doresain, and the Material/Shadow Doresain is named after him.




i didn't know much about it to begin with.  apparently FC1 merges those stories together?



			
				Ripzerai said:
			
		

> _Armies of the Abyss_ mentioned, besides Aldinach and Baltazo, that Ahazu and Laraie also ruled fortresses on the first layer of the Abyss. And we musn't forget Red Shroud or Jaranda (marilith ruler of the town of Gallowsgate).




exactly.  he has plenty of challengers to his casual rule to contend with.


----------



## Shade (Jun 7, 2006)

Does the book include pronunciation guidelines for the new demon types, obyrith and loumara?  I'd like to start trying to say them correctly, if it isn't already too late.    

I'm guessing OH-ber-ith and loo-MAR-uh.


----------



## Ripzerai (Jun 7, 2006)

Beautiful map of the Demonweb. I particularly like the glowing portals. Does the book include references to Keptolo, Selvetarm, and Kiaransalee in that layer?


----------



## James Jacobs (Jun 7, 2006)

Shade said:
			
		

> Does the book include pronunciation guidelines for the new demon types, obyrith and loumara?  I'd like to start trying to say them correctly, if it isn't already too late.
> 
> I'm guessing OH-ber-ith and loo-MAR-uh.




Yup


----------



## Shade (Jun 7, 2006)

Great!  No-relearning necessary.    

Thanks!


----------



## BOZ (Jun 8, 2006)

Ripzerai said:
			
		

> Beautiful map of the Demonweb. I particularly like the glowing portals. Does the book include references to Keptolo, Selvetarm, and Kiaransalee in that layer?




man, i really dig the amount of product support this book has been getting on the official website!    and we haven't even gotten everything that's been promised yet!  *waits with baited breath*


----------



## Nightfall (Jun 8, 2006)

Agreed Boz, so far I like the maps and the artwork.


----------



## BOZ (Jun 8, 2006)

hey Bogus, or anyone else that has the book early, how does the Appendix of layers stack up to Rip's list? (scroll down a bit to see it)

i'm sure a few layers were cut (those dealing with real-world deities, for one), and i'm sure quite a few new ones were added.


----------



## Erik Mona (Jun 8, 2006)

Ripzerai said:
			
		

> Beautiful map of the Demonweb. I particularly like the glowing portals. Does the book include references to Keptolo, Selvetarm, and Kiaransalee in that layer?





Kiaransalee is mentioned fairly extensively in the Thanatos and Demonweb Pits sections, but the other gods you list are not mentioned in the book at all. The text on the Demonweb covers only the section shown on the map and the various off-plane locales attached to that section, so it is not meant to be exhaustive.

--Erik


----------



## Nightfall (Jun 8, 2006)

I hope that reference to Kiar was how Orcus chased her sorry butt of his throne.


----------



## Erik Mona (Jun 8, 2006)

Yeah. And i think some of you are going to be blown away by where she's slinked off to.

--Erik


----------



## Nightfall (Jun 8, 2006)

As long as it's not near Orcus, I'm good Erik.


----------



## Rystil Arden (Jun 8, 2006)

Nightfall said:
			
		

> As long as it's not near Orcus, I'm good Erik.



 According to the Abyssal Enquirer, she slinked away from Orcus's throne to.........Orcus's bed!

:horrified gasps!:


----------



## Nightfall (Jun 8, 2006)

Please tell me you're kidding.  Cause that's not funny.


----------



## Rystil Arden (Jun 8, 2006)

Nightfall said:
			
		

> Please tell me you're kidding.  Cause that's not funny.



 Yup, totally made it up   Did I fool you?   Seriously, all the fluff so far is looking top-notch.  You know they wouldn't do something like that


----------



## BOZ (Jun 8, 2006)

Erik Mona said:
			
		

> Yeah. And i think some of you are going to be blown away by where she's slinked off to.




heh, one of many cryptic clues that's got me curious... too bad i'll have to wait another week to get the book myself.


----------



## Pants (Jun 8, 2006)

I might pick mine up on Fri or Sat.
Hopefully.


----------



## demiurge1138 (Jun 8, 2006)

Erik Mona said:
			
		

> Yeah. And i think some of you are going to be blown away by where she's slinked off to.
> 
> --Erik



My guess? Grazzt's harem. She's trying to seduce him and get him to launch an army against Thanatos so she can take her revenge on Orcus.

Demiurge out.


----------



## Rystil Arden (Jun 8, 2006)

demiurge1138 said:
			
		

> My guess? Grazzt's harem. She's trying to seduce him and get him to launch an army against Thanatos so she can take her revenge on Orcus.
> 
> Demiurge out.



 I came this close to saying that as a joking response to Nightfall "No, no Orcus's, but..." but then I didn't.  As such, it would be quite ironic if it was actually true.


----------



## gizmo33 (Jun 8, 2006)

Mouseferatu said:
			
		

> Hmm... Marduk is a god from Babylonian mythology; the one who tore Tiamat in two to form the earth and the sea, if I'm not mistaken.
> 
> I wonder why Gary chose to use that name as a demon lord? It's an unusual leap from the source material.




What source material are you referring to?  I always assumed that Gygax's names were from medieval grimoires (not hard to find transcripts of on the internet).  Medieval demonologists probably started the confusion.  I wouldn't necessarily identify Marduk with the god.


----------



## Ripzerai (Jun 8, 2006)

Nightfall said:
			
		

> As long as it's not near Orcus, I'm good Erik.




Orcus is too busy whimpering and shivering and seeing babies crawling around on the ceiling due to "Last Word" withdrawal to notice where Kiaransalee is.


----------



## Mouseferatu (Jun 8, 2006)

gizmo33 said:
			
		

> What source material are you referring to?  I always assumed that Gygax's names were from medieval grimoires (not hard to find transcripts of on the internet).  Medieval demonologists probably started the confusion.  I wouldn't necessarily identify Marduk with the god.




Purely Babylonian myth--which I was pointed toward, ironically enough, by the original _Deities and Demigods_. 

I have no idea if Marduk appears in Medieval grimoires. If so, I'd love to see what they have to say.


----------



## BogusMagus (Jun 8, 2006)

BOZ said:
			
		

> hey Bogus, or anyone else that has the book early, how does the Appendix of layers stack up to Rip's list? (scroll down a bit to see it)
> 
> i'm sure a few layers were cut (those dealing with real-world deities, for one), and i'm sure quite a few new ones were added.



I really like the Appendix 1&2.		

The actual Appendix lists the Rulers of each layers. 
For the list below, I have cut & pasted form the original thread, and have not checked/noted the Rulers, just the names of the Layers (except 359.).

*FC1Appendix2	/	Demonic Lore Thread (red: new or changed)*

yes	/	LAYER 1: PLAIN OF INFINITE PORTALS/Pazunia
yes	/	LAYER 2: DRILLER'S HIVES
yes	/	LAYER 3: FORGOTTEN LAND
yes	/	LAYER 4: GRAND ABYSS
yes	/	LAYER 5: WORMBLOOD
yes	/	LAYER 6: REALM OF A MILLION EYES (THE GREAT MOTHER'S REALM)
yes	/	LAYER 7: PHANTOM PLANE (KEARACKININ; SESS'INEK'S REALM)
yes	/	LAYER 8: "SKIN-SHEDDER" (I)
yes	/	LAYER 9: BURNINGWATER (I)
yes	/	LAYER 10: "THAT HELLHOLE" (I)
yes	/	LAYER 11: MOLRAT (I)
yes	/	LAYER 12: TWELVETREES
yes	/	LAYER 13: BLOOD TOR (Beshaba and Umberlee's realms; F&A)
moved from 657 ->	14	: The Steaming Fen
new	17	: Death's Reward
new	21	: The Sixth Pyre
yes	/	LAYER 23: IRON WASTES (Kostchtchie's realm)
yes	/	LAYER 27: MALIGNEBULA (Lissa'aere the Noxious' realm; Hellbound)
new	32	: Sholo-Tovoth: The Fields of Consumption
yes	/	LAYERS 45, 46 AND 47: AZZAGRAT (TRIPLE REALM) (Graz'zt's realm; For Duty and Deity)
moved from 561 ->	49	: Shaddonon
new	52	: Vorganund
yes	/	LAYER 57: TORTUROUS TRUTH (Duke Alvarez's realm; FoE)
no	/	LAYER 65: LOLTH'S WEB (Lolth's realm, formerally Zanassu's realm; implied in Demihuman Deities)
yes	/	LAYER 66: THE DEMONWEB PITS (Lolth's, Selvetarm's, and Keptolo's realm)
yes	/	LAYER 67: HEAVING HILLS (Hezrou realm)
yes	/	LAYER 68: The Swallowed Void <-UNNAMED (Void) (I)
yes	/	LAYER 69: THE CRUSHING PLAIN (I)
yes	/	LAYER 70: THE ICE FLOE (I)
yes	/	LAYER 71: SPIRAC
yes	/	LAYER 72: "DARKLIGHT" (I)
yes	/	LAYER 73: THE WELLS OF DARKNESS (I)
yes	/	LAYER 74: SMARAGD (Merrshaulk and Ramenos' realms)
		Re: The Viper Pit (Sseth's realm; P&P)
		Si: The Silent Temple (Planar Handbook)
new	77	: The Gates of Heaven
new	79	: The Emessu Tunnels
yes	/	LAYER 88: THE GAPING MAW (BRINE FLATS) (Demogorgon's realm)
new	89	: The Shadowsea
new	90	: The Guttering Grove
new	92	: Ulgurshek
yes	/	LAYER 111: THE MIND OF EVIL (Realm of Sch’theraqpasstt; Dragon #151)
yes	/	LAYER 113: THANATOS (THE BELLY OF DEATH)
yes	/	LAYER 128: THE SLUGBED (Lupercio's realm; FoE)
new	137	: Outcasts' End
yes	/	LAYER 142: LIFEBANE (Chemosh's Realm, OHG)
yes	/	LAYER 148: TORRENT (Planar Handbook Web Enhancement)
yes	/	LAYER 176: HOLLOW'S HEART (Fraz-Urbluu's new realm; FoE)
new	177	: The Writhing Realm
yes	/	LAYER 181: ROTTING PLAIN (Laogzed's realm)
yes	/	LAYER 193: VULGAREA (Eshebala's realm; OHG)
yes	/	LAYER 222: SHEDAKLAH (THE SLIME PITS) (I) (Jubilex's and Zuggtmoy's realms)
yes	/	LAYER 223: RARANDRETH (OFFALMOUND) (Moander's realm; now Lolth's realm; F&A; OHG; DD)
new	230	: The Dreaming Gulf
yes	/	LAYER 241: PALPITATIA (Grankhul's and Skiggaret's realms; OHG)
yes	/	LAYER 245: The Scalding Sea <- OCEAN OF SCREAMS (Planar Handbook) 
yes	/	LAYER 248: THE HIDDEN LAYER (Eltab's domain; Champions of Ruin)
yes	/	LAYER 274: DURAO (gateway layer)
yes	/	LAYER 297: THE SIGHING CLIFFS (Lynkhab's realm; FoE)
yes	/	LAYER 300: FENG-TU (Tou Mu and Lu Yueh's realm; 1e Manual of the Planes)
yes	/	LAYER 303: SULFANORUM
yes	/	LAYER 313: Gorrion's Grasp <-UNNAMED
		Si: Illssender's Tower (Hellbound)
yes		LAYER 333: THE BROKEN SCALE (Hiddukel's realm; OHG)
moved to 359 <-		LAYER 334: UNNAMED (Eldanoth's realm; Faces of Evil)
yes	/	LAYER 340: The Black Blizzard  <- UNNAMED (A cold, desolate, voidlike place; Faction War)
new	348	: Indifference
moved from 334 ->	359	: The Arc of Eternity
yes	/	LAYER 377: PLAINS OF GALLENSHU (armanite realm)
yes	/	LAYER 399: WORM REALM (Urdlen's realm)
yes	/	LAYER 400: WOEFUL ESCARAND (nalfeshnee realm)
yes	/	LAYER 403: THE RAINLESS WASTE
		IT: Mal Arundak, the City of Confusion (Fallen archon realm; FoE)
yes	/	LAYER 421: The White Kingdom <-SALTED WOUND (Realm of Doresain, the King of the Ghouls, vassal of Yeenoghu; Libris Mortis, name from the Mimir)
yes	/	LAYER 422: Yeenoghu's Realm <-THE SEEPING WOODS (Yeenoghu's realm)
new	423	: Galun-Khur
new	452	: Ahriman-abad
new	471	: Androlynne
yes	/	LAYER 487: LAIR OF THE BEAST AND MANSION OF THE RAKE (Kanchelsis' realm; OHG)
yes	/	LAYER 489: NOISOME VALE (Tarnhem's realm; deserted; Dungeon Builder's Guidebook)
yes	/	LAYER 493: SLEEPLESS (Siragle's realm; Dungeon #28)
yes	/	LAYER 499: CARRORISTO (Hellbound)
yes	/	LAYER 503: TORREMOR (LAYER OF FLIES) (Pazrael's realm)
yes	/	LAYER 507: OCCIPITUS (Shackled City)
yes	/	LAYER 524: SHATTERSTONE (Vaprak's realm, OHG)
yes	/	LAYER 531: VUDRA (Marilith realm, Dungeon #60)
new	558	: Fleshforges
moved to 49 <-		LAYER 561: SHADDONON (Layer of Rhyxali, Princess of Shadow; Book of Vile Darkness web enhancement)
yes	/	LAYER 566: SOULFREEZE (The Inner Planes Sourcebook)
new*	570	: Shendilavri
yes	/	LAYER 586: PRISON OF THE MAD GOD (Diinkarazan's realm)
new	597	: Goranthis
yes	/	LAYER 600: ENDLESS MAZE (Baphomet's and Pale Night's realm, OHG, FoE)
yes	/	LAYER 601: CONFLAGRATUM (Alzrius' realm, Hellbound)
new	628	: Vallashan
yes	/	LAYER 643: CAVERNS OF THE SKULL (I) (Kali's realm)
new	651	: Nethuria
moved from 672 ->	652	: The Rift of Corrosion
moved to 14 <-		LAYER 657: THE STEAMING FEN (Rod of Seven Parts)
new	663	: Zionyn
no	/	LAYER 666: OPEN MAW (The Blood Wars trilogy; name by William Northern)
moved to 652 <-		LAYER 672: RIFT OF CORROSION (3e DMG; Monte Cook)

* missing from the Appendix.


----------



## James Jacobs (Jun 8, 2006)

Unfortunately, poor Malcanthet got left off of the list in the book...

LAYER 570: SHENDILAVRI (Malcanthet's realm)


----------



## BOZ (Jun 9, 2006)

BogusMagus said:
			
		

> I really like the Appendix 1&2.




i have the distinct feeling that i will, too!  



			
				BogusMagus said:
			
		

> The actual Appendix lists the Rulers of each layers.
> For the list below, I have cut & pasted form the original thread, and have not checked/noted the Rulers, just the names of the Layers (except 359.).




thanks again; you are an awesome dude.  



			
				BogusMagus said:
			
		

> yes	/	LAYER 13: BLOOD TOR (Beshaba and Umberlee's realms; F&A)
> yes	/	LAYER 142: LIFEBANE (Chemosh's Realm, OHG)
> yes	/	LAYER 223: RARANDRETH (OFFALMOUND) (Moander's realm; now Lolth's realm; F&A; OHG; DD)
> yes	/	LAYER 300: FENG-TU (Tou Mu and Lu Yueh's realm; 1e Manual of the Planes)
> yes		LAYER 333: THE BROKEN SCALE (Hiddukel's realm; OHG)




i'm very surprised - in a good way - that these layers (and less surprised for some others) were kept.    Erik really did work hard to keep as many canon references in this book as possible!  


repeating some questions i asked earlier in the thread (not sure if they were answered already):

there is a 'master' list of demons that have appeared in varous products, including the abyssal drake of the draconomicon.  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'm assuming that the broodswarm, dybbuk, ekolid, guecubu, lilitu, and sibriex are new?


does the book have stats for any non-demon monsters?  does the index of all printed demons have info on all Abyssal inhabitants, or just demons?


----------



## Shade (Jun 9, 2006)

Wow...thanks for making the effort to compile that list, BogusMagus!    

Another layer that missed the cut (probably since it didn't exist at the time of publication   ) is layer 518, which is mentioned in Dragon #344:

"Those who visit the 518th layer of the Abyss--the nesting grounds, say the sages, of chole dragons--share a singular trait upon their return:  madness.  In the infinite variables of their insane ramblings they all cry out with untellable dread the word "Melantholep" in their most fevered dreams.  Whether the name of some unknown demon prince or the given title of the layer, none but the chole dragons can say.  And none of them speak."

I figured I'd mention it for those of you who are keeping track of these things.


----------



## Shade (Jun 9, 2006)

Whoa...what's this?



			
				JoeGKushner said:
			
		

> CR 2: abyssal maw, abyssal skulker, dretch, *nashrou*, quasit


----------



## Shade (Jun 10, 2006)

Web Enhancement I is up:

Fiendish Aspects I: Juiblex, Kostchtchie, Zuggtmoy, Demogorgon 
http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/we/20060609x


----------



## dargoth3 (Jun 10, 2006)

BogusMagus said:
			
		

> I really like the Appendix 1&2.
> 
> The actual Appendix lists the Rulers of each layers.
> For the list below, I have cut & pasted form the original thread, and have not checked/noted the Rulers, just the names of the Layers (except 359.).
> ...




Hmm quite a few of those are going to be empty in the FR abyss....... 

*Wonders how much of Hordes of the Abyss will be invalid in the Realms cosmology


----------



## Ripzerai (Jun 10, 2006)

dargoth3 said:
			
		

> *Wonders how much of Hordes of the Abyss will be invalid in the Realms cosmology




Does anyone actually use the Realms cosmology? If you decide to limit your campaign like that, you only have yourself (or your DM) to blame.


----------



## dargoth3 (Jun 10, 2006)

Ripzerai said:
			
		

> Does anyone actually use the Realms cosmology? If you decide to limit your campaign like that, you only have yourself (or your DM) to blame.




So basicly your saying Hordes of the Abyss is a strictly Great wheel only book? Fair enough I wont bother getting it then


----------



## Ripzerai (Jun 10, 2006)

dargoth3 said:
			
		

> So basicly your saying Hordes of the Abyss is a strictly Great wheel only book? Fair enough I wont bother getting it then




Well, I don't have it, so don't take my word for it. I'm just saying that if you're such a purist that you think the Forgotten Realms setting needs a multiverse all to itself, then you're deliberately (and unnecessarily) limiting your game. 

I'm sure most of it will be useful even in purist games.


----------



## Razz (Jun 10, 2006)

Yeah, I don't use Realms cosmology at all. It was only a reason for WotC to bluntly state "We're absolutely never bringing back Planescape no matter how cool it was" sort of thing.


----------



## demiurge1138 (Jun 10, 2006)

BOZ said:
			
		

> repeating some questions i asked earlier in the thread (not sure if they were answered already):
> 
> there is a 'master' list of demons that have appeared in varous products, including the abyssal drake of the draconomicon.  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.
> 
> ...




1. The list is about a column or so all told. There's a few listed in it, and in the CR list, I don't recognize. Could be from MMIV, or cut from this book, or even just from Dragon. The nashrou and the deathdrinker, specifically. It's not Abyssal residents in general, though - no mention of, say, abrians and varragoins.

2. The broodswarm, dybbuk, ekolid, guecubu, lilitu and sibriex are all new. 

*Broodswarm*: Not really a demon, but instead a swarm of little CE implings formed from the flesh of a night hag. They swarm over victims for their hag master, sew their eyes, mouth and ears shut (as well as thoroughly catching them in string) and turn them over to the hag for debauchery.

*Dybbuk*: One of the loumaras, borne of the fragmented dreams of dead gods. They're incorporeal jellyfish that possess corpses and spread death in their wake while integrating themselves into mortal society.

*Ekolid*: An obyrith, ekolids are monstrously fecund Abyssal vermin, laying eggs in their hosts with six sharpened ovipositors that rapidly hatch into flesh-eating grubs. They have quickness like a choker, but limited to move actions only.

*Guecubu*: The other loumara, these wisps of thought possess people and murder their families telekinetically. An interesting way to model traditional poltergeists, but kind of boring otherwise. 

*Lilitu*: Created of a succubus who incinerates herself and an entire cult in an orgy of flame, lilitu excel at robbing the gods of both power (casting as clerics) and followers, seducing and manipulating priests of good gods above all others.

*Sibriex*: My personal favorite of the new monsters, the sibriex is a massive lump of floating flesh, so hideous that its very visage is enough to break the mind, making those who succumb to its madness see it as ultimate beauty. Sages and fleshweavers, they dominate those that attack them and turn them into flesh-grafted minions. Oh, and they have chains embedded in their flesh, which they telekinetically manipulate to walk and attack (although they don't have a land speed, oddly).

Demiurge out.


----------



## Shemeska (Jun 10, 2006)

Ripzerai said:
			
		

> I'm sure most of it will be useful even in purist games.




How is it a purist thing to run an FR campaign using a 'unique' cosmology that's a few years old and ignores, glosses over, or takes a hacksaw to several decades of planar material referencing or referenced by FR? Anecdotally speaking, all of the major hardcore FR fans I've known tend to spit nails over the cosmology retcon, not just think it was poorly conceived or carried out, they absolutely _despise_ it.


----------



## Sammael (Jun 10, 2006)

dargoth3 said:
			
		

> So basicly your saying Hordes of the Abyss is a strictly Great wheel only book? Fair enough I wont bother getting it then



Considering that the Abyss is exactly the same in both cosmologies (except in the case of Demonweb Pits), I really fail to see your point.

The funny part is that I don't think there's anybody left at WotC who actually cares about Sean's Christmas Tree cosmology. They certainly don't care enough to make it distinct from the Great Wheel in any way except the shape.


----------



## Shemeska (Jun 10, 2006)

*Trust in me and fall as well*



			
				dargoth3 said:
			
		

> So basicly your saying Hordes of the Abyss is a strictly Great wheel only book? Fair enough I wont bother getting it then




If you actually use the 3e FR cosmology, just use the Great Wheel Abyss as is, because the 'new' FR Abyss is just a carbon copy of it, just with any FR deity who in 1e or 2e had a domain in the Abyss, it's now no longer in the Abyss and is its own plane. Take the Abyss in the FC:I and strip it of some detail, then you're all set 

And heck, apparently the FC:I includes names of archfiends like Eltab who entered planar lore through their involvement with things on FR. Combine that with FR specific people like Karsus being used as Vestiges in the Tome of Magic side by side with specifically Greyhawk or Great Wheel entities, and seperate cosmology? What seperate cosmology? *grin*


----------



## Baron Opal (Jun 10, 2006)

I have a homebrew cosmology and I'm sure that this book will be greatly useful to me. I have a number of planar shards and demiplanes that the minor abyssal layers will be perfect for.


----------



## Shemeska (Jun 10, 2006)

demiurge1138 said:
			
		

> *Broodswarm*: Not really a demon, but instead a swarm of little CE implings formed from the flesh of a night hag. They swarm over victims for their hag master, sew their eyes, mouth and ears shut (as well as thoroughly catching them in string) and turn them over to the hag for debauchery.




Odd on the alignment part, but it's a nifty little thing nonetheless.



> *Dybbuk*: One of the loumaras, borne of the fragmented dreams of dead gods. They're incorporeal jellyfish that possess corpses and spread death in their wake while integrating themselves into mortal society.




Oooooh I like these. They remind me very much of the Shedim spirits from Shadowrun. I wonder if they were an inspiration? Regardless the origin story is yummy.



> *Ekolid*: An obyrith, ekolids are monstrously fecund Abyssal vermin, laying eggs in their hosts with six sharpened ovipositors that rapidly hatch into flesh-eating grubs. They have quickness like a choker, but limited to move actions only.




*insert Aliens references here* Yummy.



> *Guecubu*: The other loumara, these wisps of thought possess people and murder their families telekinetically. An interesting way to model traditional poltergeists, but kind of boring otherwise.




Ketchum and Kill 'em!



> *Lilitu*: Created of a succubus who incinerates herself and an entire cult in an orgy of flame, lilitu excel at robbing the gods of both power (casting as clerics) and followers, seducing and manipulating priests of good gods above all others.




*giggle* 'loth toys. I like.



> *Sibriex*: My personal favorite of the new monsters, the sibriex is a massive lump of floating flesh, so hideous that its very visage is enough to break the mind, making those who succumb to its madness see it as ultimate beauty. Sages and fleshweavers, they dominate those that attack them and turn them into flesh-grafted minions. Oh, and they have chains embedded in their flesh, which they telekinetically manipulate to walk and attack (although they don't have a land speed, oddly).




What subtype of fiend were these guys? If any lineage specifically.

The walking on telekinetically manipulated chains is disturbing and oh so cool.


----------



## Ripzerai (Jun 10, 2006)

Shemeska said:
			
		

> The walking on telekinetically manipulated chains is disturbing and oh so cool.




Yes, and also gives a possible origin for Vucarik other than making him half-kyton.


----------



## BOZ (Jun 10, 2006)

Shade said:
			
		

> Web Enhancement I is up:
> 
> Fiendish Aspects I: Juiblex, Kostchtchie, Zuggtmoy, Demogorgon
> http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/we/20060609x




whoo boy, those things are definitely puny.  not even half the CR of the FC1 lords.  i guess they could still be useful if you send them out in packs.  

"oh god, i'm fighting 4 Demogorgons!  they're not as tough as i expected them to be, but in a group they're pretty badass!"


----------



## demiurge1138 (Jun 10, 2006)

Shemeska said:
			
		

> What subtype of fiend were these guys? If any lineage specifically.
> 
> The walking on telekinetically manipulated chains is disturbing and oh so cool.



Forgot to mention - they're the other obyrith in the Demons chapter. The demon princes that got "promoted" to obyrith are Dagon, Obox-ob, Pale Night and Pazuzu.

The idea behind the obyrith is that they're the primordial Abyss-spawn, like the qlippoth in _Armies of the Abyss_. A combination of the Queen of Chaos' defeat on the Fields of Pesh and an invasion by eladrins nearly annihilated the race and drove it into hiding. The tanar'ri crawled out of their ashes (spawned by the baernoloths, perhaps? The book does not say, although the Black Scrolls of Ahm still maintain that the tanar'ri were birthed by the will of the Abyss itself).

Dagon managed to escape the Queen of Chaos' conscription plans by virtue of his physical power and the value of his wisdom. His special insanity causes intense phobia of deep-sea creatures, and his tactics specifically state that anyone who escapes him will be the victim of _nightmare_ spells for the rest of his life. Nice homage, I thought.

Obox-ob was the Prince of Demons, but the Queen of Chaos stripped him of his title and gave it to Miska the Wolf Spider. Obox-ob tried to fight the Queen and was destroyed, but one of his aspects festered in Zionyn and regained some semblance of his true power. He seeks, of course, to murder Demogorgon and reassert obyrith dominance.

Pale Night is kept alive, even though she is an obyrith, for some mysterious reason, perhaps because her claim to having mothered seveal extant demon princes is legitimate.

And Pazuzu is actually an obyrith that evolved into a tanar'ri in order to survive. His maddening appearance has been commuted into the aura of servile avians, and he's gained the ability to summon tanar'ri.

Demiurge out.


----------



## BOZ (Jun 10, 2006)

OK, i'm basically satisfied with any "pre-initial skimming" curiosities i've had.    i can now officially wait for the book to come out, occasionally feeding on things people post on the internet in the meantime.


----------



## demiurge1138 (Jun 10, 2006)

BOZ said:
			
		

> whoo boy, those things are definitely puny.  not even half the CR of the FC1 lords.  i guess they could still be useful if you send them out in packs.
> 
> "oh god, i'm fighting 4 Demogorgons!  they're not as tough as i expected them to be, but in a group they're pretty badass!"



Well, yeah, aspects are supposed to be weak. They let the Minis department make minis of iconic gods and demons without unbalancing the point buy system of warbands. But CR 6 for the aspect of Zuggtmoy? What'd the Queen of Fungi ever do to you guys? So sad. Even Juiblex got CR 8.

Demiurge out.


----------



## BOZ (Jun 10, 2006)

demiurge1138 said:
			
		

> Dagon managed to escape the Queen of Chaos' conscription plans by virtue of his physical power and the value of his wisdom. His special insanity causes intense phobia of deep-sea creatures, and his tactics specifically state that anyone who escapes him will be the victim of _nightmare_ spells for the rest of his life. Nice homage, I thought.




he's so lovecraftian, it's delicious.


----------



## dargoth3 (Jun 10, 2006)

Shemeska said:
			
		

> If you actually use the 3e FR cosmology, just use the Great Wheel Abyss as is, because the 'new' FR Abyss is just a carbon copy of it, just with any FR deity who in 1e or 2e had a domain in the Abyss, it's now no longer in the Abyss and is its own plane. Take the Abyss in the FC:I and strip it of some detail, then you're all set
> 
> And heck, apparently the FC:I includes names of archfiends like Eltab who entered planar lore through their involvement with things on FR. Combine that with FR specific people like Karsus being used as Vestiges in the Tome of Magic side by side with specifically Greyhawk or Great Wheel entities, and seperate cosmology? What seperate cosmology? *grin*




Well Beshaba and the Drow Pantheon are obvious differences (Both now a bide on there own plane outside the Abyss in the 3ed cosmology)

Erik was hinting that Kiaransalee is some how weakened, when this is not the case in the 3ed FR. Kiaransalee is infact stronger than shes ever been (See the COSQ WE)


----------



## Nightfall (Jun 10, 2006)

Yeah well she's weak now that Lolth is back in action. 

*still wishes Orcus would slay the entire Drow panethon and be done with it.*


----------



## Sammael (Jun 10, 2006)

Nightfall said:
			
		

> *still wishes Orcus would slay the entire Drow panethon and be done with it.*



Good grief, for once, I can agree with you on something Orcus-related. He can slaughter the entire drow race while he's at it as far as I'm concerned.


----------



## Rystil Arden (Jun 10, 2006)

> 2. The broodswarm, dybbuk, ekolid, guecubu, lilitu and sibriex are all new.




This list has a higher ratio of awesome to bland monsters than any of the recent WotC monster books.  Clearly WotC needs Erik and James to help brainstorm ideas for monster books too--but don't let them get away before FC2 _and_ FC3 are in the works


----------



## Shade (Jun 12, 2006)

demiurge1138 said:
			
		

> And Pazuzu is actually an obyrith that evolved into a tanar'ri in order to survive. His maddening appearance has been commuted into the aura of servile avians, and he's gained the ability to summon tanar'ri.
> Demiurge out.




Does he have both subtypes, or is he a full-fledge tanar'ri now?


----------



## demiurge1138 (Jun 12, 2006)

Shade said:
			
		

> Does he have both subtypes, or is he a full-fledge tanar'ri now?



No, Pazuzu is listed as an obyrith, but he has some abilities more suited to a tanar'ri (summonning, and his electricity resistance from obyrith has been upgraded to tanar'ri immunity). 

Demiurge out.


----------



## Shade (Jun 12, 2006)

demiurge1138 said:
			
		

> No, Pazuzu is listed as an obyrith, but he has some abilities more suited to a tanar'ri (summonning, and his electricity resistance from obyrith has been upgraded to tanar'ri immunity).
> 
> Demiurge out.




Interesting.  Thanks!


----------



## Shade (Jun 12, 2006)

Designer Interview  and Steal this Hook are up.

A few cool things gleaned from the interview:



			
				Erik Mona said:
			
		

> Of course there were a few I absolutely had to cover (The Demonweb, Thanatos, Azzagrat, Gaping Maw) and a few I threw in for fun but which got cut for space (The Mansion of the Rake, Woeful Escarand, Spirac),




I'm guessing there's some of our contents for the next web enhancement.    



			
				Erik Mona said:
			
		

> One of the sources I used was the first edition Deities & Demigods, as a few entities from that tome were said to live in the Abyss. I'm thinking specifically of Ma Yuan, the Chinese slayer of the gods and Dahak, an apocalyptic dragon spirit. Both are now imprisoned in the Wells of Darkness, a layer mentioned on the poster map that accompanied the Planescape Planes of Chaos boxed set. Other inhabitants of the Wells include the villain from my first ever RPGA tournament (The Ebulon Affair), plenty of folks from the infamous list of demons on page 35 of the first edition Monster Manual 2, and two demon lords from old Dungeon adventures. My section of the book dealt with the Abyss, and I'd be willing to bet that every layer I designed pulled stuff from at least five different sources. The Demonweb in particular is riddled with Easter eggs.




Very, very cool.  Ma Yuan is an old fave of mine, and I just recently statted up my own version of Dahak.


----------



## NexH (Jun 12, 2006)

Shade said:
			
		

> Designer Interview  and Steal this Hook are up.




I can't believe they actually answered the question (made in the Wizard's boards) about depopulating the abyss at 5th level.


----------



## Nightfall (Jun 13, 2006)

Thought I'd mention I too will soon be recieving a copy of FC I: Hordes of the Abyss.


----------



## Shade (Jun 13, 2006)

I got my copy today.  What a wonderful half-birthday present.    

Of what I've skimmed so far, this thing is more packed with flavor than an ice cream parlor.


----------



## Shade (Jun 13, 2006)

Erik Mona said:
			
		

> Yeah. And i think some of you are going to be blown away by where she's slinked off to.
> 
> --Erik




Consider me blown away.  Sweeeeet.


----------



## Knight Otu (Jun 13, 2006)

Okay, someone here clearly had an evilgasm.


----------



## Shade (Jun 13, 2006)

Knight Otu said:
			
		

> Okay, someone here clearly had an evilgasm.




Multiples on page 126 alone.


----------



## Shemeska (Jun 14, 2006)

Shade said:
			
		

> Multiples on page 126 alone.




You've kissed. Now tell!

I won't have my copy till tommorow morning, and it will be tempting me all during work, so spill some beans. Sympathy for the devil 'loth.


----------



## Nightfall (Jun 14, 2006)

Page 126 eh? Sure you don't mean 125?


----------



## demiurge1138 (Jun 14, 2006)

Pages 124-126 detail locations on the Demonweb Pits, like the wreck of the Faraday Queen, Eclavdra's Fane, Kiaransalee's current hiding place on the Prime world of Guldor, the Ship of Lolth, the Venomsphere Lens, the maw of Ulgurshek (a living Abyssal layer) and all sorts of other delights. So many references...

Demiurge out.


----------



## Nightfall (Jun 14, 2006)

Demi,

I'm aware of all that since I got the book today and I was like "Yeah b****! Orcus kicked you around and you liked it!" 

Sorry I was happy.


----------



## Shade (Jun 14, 2006)

Shemeska said:
			
		

> You've kissed. Now tell!
> 
> I won't have my copy till tommorow morning, and it will be tempting me all during work, so spill some beans. Sympathy for the devil 'loth.





Very well.  Spoiler tags for those who want to be surprised.    

[sblock]

All the Material Plane worlds hinted at in the old Demonweb Pits module (and more recently, in Dungeon #84's "The Harrowing") get writeups in the Demonweb entry.

Kiaransalee is hiding out in Kandelspire in the ruin kingdom of Maldev on the utterly defeated world of Guldor.  She and her quth-maren feel at home among the anguished spirits of the fallen.

The Ulgurshek Orifice, the 92nd layer of the Abyss, designated a living layer by the Fraternity of Order, is actually a draeden, one of the immortal beings from the D&D Immortals set (and a long time fav of mine).  It is so old that the Abyss actually grew around it, and now it is stuck.  Lolth sometimes consults it, as its knowledge is even older than the obyriths, in exchange for helping it locate other signs or members of its ancient race.

Other random bits of coolness:

The largest goristro ever spotted was a 200-foot-tall, 95 HD monstrosity named Bjornganal that walked around with a small village of fiendish araneas on its back and shoulders.

Trapped within the Wells of Darkness is Ma Yuan, who was finally defeated by Tou Mu and Lu Yueh on the Feng-tu.  Shami-Amourae, the previous queen of the succubi, detailed in an old Dungeon.

[/sblock]


----------



## Ripzerai (Jun 14, 2006)

The Kiaransalee thing makes perfect sense. Wow.


----------



## BOZ (Jun 14, 2006)

Shade said:
			
		

> Designer Interview




excellent!  



			
				Wizards said:
			
		

> Here's one on a more personal level, for Erik Mona. How did you manage to get on this book in the first place? Was this project inspired by work on _Dragon_ Magazine's _Demonomicon_ articles, or were those articles conversely inspired because you knew you'd be working on this book--or did both projects come about separately and happen to be a happy coincidence?




Heh, cool, that was my question (slightly edited).    and I really liked Erik's answer.  It was actually directed at him and James Jacobs, but of course James was not involved with the interview.



			
				Erik Mona said:
			
		

> One of the sources I used was the first edition Deities & Demigods, as a few entities from that tome were said to live in the Abyss. I'm thinking specifically of Ma Yuan, the Chinese slayer of the gods and Dahak, an apocalyptic dragon spirit. Both are now imprisoned in the Wells of Darkness, a layer mentioned on the poster map that accompanied the Planescape Planes of Chaos boxed set. Other inhabitants of the Wells include the villain from my first ever RPGA tournament (The Ebulon Affair), plenty of folks from the infamous list of demons on page 35 of the first edition Monster Manual 2, and two demon lords from old Dungeon adventures.




Wicked awesome!  



			
				Wizards said:
			
		

> Let's say I want to kill Orcus, but I don't want to have to wait until 20th level to do it. Will the book support campaigns that aim at tackling the Abyss at lower levels? In other words, how can PCs take on archfiends which themselves can take on deities?




All I can say is, Rip be careful what you post - you might just get an answer.  



			
				Erik Mona said:
			
		

> a few I threw in for fun but which got cut for space (The Mansion of the Rake, Woeful Escarand, Spirac)




Heh, cool!  I hope to see those in a web enhancement.  Mansion of the Rake, as in the lair of the vampire god Kanchelsis?



*****

OK, a few other questions I posted did not get answered.  Reposting them here, hoping for an answer.  

Besides full demon lords, will other significant epic demons be making appearances? Such as classics like Kerzit, or Hacamuli?

Will there be stats for any non-demon monsters of the Abyss, such as the Thunderbeast?  Anything else us old-timers might recognize?

Also, there is the question of demon lords who became gods in second edition AD&D, and are now back to being just demon lords again (Demogorgon, Baphomet, Sess'innek, Kostchtchie, Yeenoghu, Juiblex). Is there going to be an in-game explanation of how that power shift happened?

How much influence, if any, did the Gord novels play in the writing of FC1? 

Did you consult Gary Gygax, Monte Cook, or anyone else who had done significant work with D&D's demons in preparing your book?

are you including the unique Type VI, V, and IV demons from ye olde first edition AD&D? for example, the balors Alzoll, Errtu, Ndulu, Ter-Soth, and Wendonai?


----------



## BOZ (Jun 14, 2006)

Nightfall said:
			
		

> Thought I'd mention I too will soon be recieving a copy of FC I: Hordes of the Abyss.




i have to wait till Thursday at the earliest - i need my last $25 to get me through tomorrow.


----------



## Erik Mona (Jun 14, 2006)

BOZ said:
			
		

> Mansion of the Rake, as in the lair of the vampire god Kanchelsis?




The same. Some of the most obscure stuff I came up with was to fit in this section. It is a real shame that it was cut and I really hope we can get it out in the form of a web enhacement or a Dragon article or whatever.



			
				BOZ said:
			
		

> Besides full demon lords, will other significant epic demons be making appearances? Such as classics like Kerzit, or Hacamuli?




Those two are not mentioned, but there are a crapload of references to other minor demon lords in Chapter 5. 



			
				BOZ said:
			
		

> Will there be stats for any non-demon monsters of the Abyss, such as the Thunderbeast?  Anything else us old-timers might recognize?




Old timers will find more to recognize here than in most recent releases, I suspect. That said, we didn't have room for non-demon monsters. The thunderbeast was recently updated in the Shackled City Adventure Path hardcover, which is available from Paizo Publishing.



			
				BOZ said:
			
		

> Also, there is the question of demon lords who became gods in second edition AD&D, and are now back to being just demon lords again (Demogorgon, Baphomet, Sess'innek, Kostchtchie, Yeenoghu, Juiblex). Is there going to be an in-game explanation of how that power shift happened?




No.



			
				BOZ said:
			
		

> How much influence, if any, did the Gord novels play in the writing of FC1?




Not much, except that I tried not to blatantly invalidate anything on purpose. I am a great fan of Gary Gygax and my view of the D&D multiverse is definitely colored by his descriptions of it in official D&D books and elsewhere. I'd say it was a thematic influence, an influence in "tone" more than anything else.



			
				BOZ said:
			
		

> Did you consult Gary Gygax, Monte Cook, or anyone else who had done significant work with D&D's demons in preparing your book?




I have not discussed the Abyss with Gary, and since Monte is my DM every Monday night I think I may have asked him if he knew anything about one of the throw-away demons from Planescape, but not much beyond that. I've had a pretty good idea what I've wanted to do with the Abyss for a very long time (most of both appendices were written almost a decade ago), so once I got the assignment I hit the ground running.



			
				BOZ said:
			
		

> are you including the unique Type VI, V, and IV demons from ye olde first edition AD&D? for example, the balors Alzoll, Errtu, Ndulu, Ter-Soth, and Wendonai?




I mentioned at least one of the nalfeshnees in my write-up of the Woeful Escarand layer, which was unfortunately cut for space. I love the illustration for it in the online web preview. This is another thing I hope makes it out to you guys in some manner.

Glad to see some of you enjoying what I did with the Demonweb pits. If I'd thought of it in time, I would have asked that the book be dedicated to Dave Sutherland III, who was really the first person to take us into the Abyss.

--Erik Mona


----------



## demiurge1138 (Jun 14, 2006)

Erik Mona said:
			
		

> Those two are not mentioned, but there are a crapload of references to other minor demon lords in Chapter 5.



Kerzit's actually mentioned in the appendix of demon lords. His concern is, of course, the Tome of the Black Heart.

Demiurge out.


----------



## BOZ (Jun 14, 2006)

thanks for the answers!  i can't wait!


----------



## sckeener (Jun 14, 2006)

BOZ said:
			
		

> i have to wait till Thursday at the earliest - i need my last $25 to get me through tomorrow.




I feel for you.  I got mine yesterday at work early in the day....then it just sat there tempting me all day long...the clock just seemed to stop...

From what little I have read so far, I'm loving the book.

Though I wish it was a bit longer...say 240 pgs or 320 pages.


----------



## Shade (Jun 14, 2006)

Erik -

Was Dahak simply name-dropped on the map for the Wells of Darkness, or was his writeup cut for space?   Or am I just not seeing it?

So far, the Wells writeup is one of my favorite parts of the book.  Lots of interesting plot hooks there.


----------



## Razz (Jun 14, 2006)

Ok so I got the book today and read through it and noticed, of course, the difference between the Demon Lords stats in here, BoVD, and Demonomicon.

I'd like to say, what were you guys thinking with these weak demon lords, seriously?   

Ok, I'd have no problem using these guys and upgrading. None at all. But what sucks is they're inconsistent with each other when you compare the two (or three) of them between the FC1, BoVD, and Demonomicon. 

For example, they wrote Baphomet in Demonomicon with damage reduction 20/epic. But here in FC1 they write it as DR 20/cold iron and good. Then they say add Epic for the upgrade. 

So which is it? Is Baphomet's DR 20/good, cold iron, and epic or just 20/epic?

Another inconsistency are the ability scores. Baphomet, for example, has 30 Strength in Demonomicon, yet has 33 in FC1. Then it's vice versa with the Constitution score. 

Yet one more inconsistency are the abilities. They took away Graz'zt's item mastery as was given to him in BoVD. Baphomet's breath weapon deals 12d6 damage and not 20d6 as in Demoncomicon. His bestial curse ability is also gone! Another thing is the _summon tanar'ri _ abilities are changed around all weird. Baphomet summons 1d6 bulezaus or 1 goristro yet in Demonomicon it's 1d3+1 bulezau or 1 goristro (clearly, the stronger one oddly has the weaker summon?)

The rest of the book is looking good so far, but I have to say I wouldn't mind these "base level" demon lords if the writers kept their abilities consistent. 

I wonder what other abilities Pale Night was originally supposed to have, but was cut due to the "weakening"?

My uses for these guys in FC1 is simple, they're all aspects of the true demon lord going from weakest to highest: Aspects, FC1 type/BoVD type (whichever is better), Demonomicon type, and (for my games) Demonomicon type with triple Hit Dice and Paragon template as their true form...heh heh.


----------



## Erik Mona (Jun 14, 2006)

Shade said:
			
		

> Erik -
> 
> Was Dahak simply name-dropped on the map for the Wells of Darkness, or was his writeup cut for space?   Or am I just not seeing it?
> 
> So far, the Wells writeup is one of my favorite parts of the book.  Lots of interesting plot hooks there.




It's just on the map. I think I simply forgot to give Dahak a paragraph when I was writing the damn thing. 

--Erik


----------



## Erik Mona (Jun 14, 2006)

Razz,

The intent of the material as written was that the FC1 stats represent very powerful aspects of the demon lords that are best encountered off the demon lord's home plane. If you assume that the demon lord's "true" stats are significantly higher, you'll probably be much happier. The stats aren't exactly the same as the Demonomicon stats because aspects do not exactly model weaker versions of the true stats, but reflect an "aspect" of the demon lord. 

James can speak more to this, as he wrote the section, but my impression is that the one sentence that would have made the whole thing "no big deal" was either cut in editing or never written in the first place. I'm hoping something on this is addressed in the errata, and I will be playing these guys as powerful aspects in my own campaign.

--Erik Mona


----------



## Shade (Jun 14, 2006)

Erik Mona said:
			
		

> It's just on the map. I think I simply forgot to give Dahak a paragraph when I was writing the damn thing.
> 
> --Erik




Well, I suppose it'll turn up in 9th Edition.    

Any hints on what you'd considered doing with him?  Was he fated to destroy the Material Plane, and thereby imprisoned to avoid this fate?


----------



## Nightfall (Jun 14, 2006)

Erik,

Is it just me, or was there a lot of winking and nudging going on in FC I in regards to Savage Tides?


----------



## Mouseferatu (Jun 14, 2006)

> So which is it? Is Baphomet's DR 20/good, cold iron, and epic or just 20/epic?




I think this question, and others like it, point right to the crux of the matter at hand. A lot of people seem to think there's one "true" form of the demon lords in "canon" D&D, and everything else is optional or house ruled.

I don't buy that reasoning. Third edition is largely a toolkit. There is no "right" answer.

So, in response to the question, the answer is "Whichever way you prefer it in your campaign." There simply is no other possible reply.


----------



## Erik Mona (Jun 14, 2006)

Shade said:
			
		

> Any hints on what you'd considered doing with him?  Was he fated to destroy the Material Plane, and thereby imprisoned to avoid this fate?




Correct. In fact, the simultaneous opening of the Wells of Darkness is as good a trigger as any for Ragnarok. 

--Erik


----------



## James Jacobs (Jun 14, 2006)

Nightfall said:
			
		

> Is it just me, or was there a lot of winking and nudging going on in FC I in regards to Savage Tides?




Heh... it's a lot more than winking and nudging. A fair amount of FC I works as a preview for what'll be happening in the last four adventures of Savage Tide.

As for the power level of the demon lords, I've talked a bit about this elsewhere but the long and short of it is that each DM should determine the power level of the demon lords as appropriate for his own campaign. That said, they shouldn't be any LESS deadly than the stats in FC I; those stats are a "baseline" for the demon lords. You should certainly advance these stats upward in power for your own campaign if you prefer CR 25 or 30 or 50 or whatever... there just wasn't room in the book to list multiple versions of the same stat block so that the book would be useful for a wider range of gaming styles. In the end, we had to go with just one, and since it's FAR easier to increase a monster's abilities than to decrease it, we chose the method you see in the book. 

Personally, I prefer demon lords at CRs of 25–32 or thereabouts, which is what I've been setting them at in the Demonomicon articles. I think the stats in FC I work perfect for powerful avatars or astral projections; on their home planes, demon lords should be MUCH more powerful. For new stat blocks like Pale Night and Obox-ob, there are no "missing" powers that were cut. They were designed as how they appear in the book from the ground up. If and when these demon lords appear in _Dragon_ as Demonomicons, you can expect to see higher CR versions with one or two additional powers. If you can't wait that long, the book provides all the tools you need to advance them yourself.

Now, all that said, the demon lords are VERY TOUGH for their CR scores, especially when compared to a balor (which is actually a little weak for CR 20). Their CR scores may only be a couple digits beyond 20, but their stats are comperable to equal CR dragons (another creature type that tends to be tough for their CR scores).

So in the end... think of FC I as any other 3rd Edition Product; as a toolbox for you to build your campaign the way you want it. In the end, it's a LOT easier to advance Demogorgon to CR 32 than it is to build a CR 32 NPC!

And to bring this post full circle back to Savage Tide, fans of tougher Demon Lords certainly won't be disapointed by this campaign's conclusion—we don't intend on having fight after fight with CR 20 demon lords. The demon lords in Savage Tide (Demogorgon being only the most important, not the only, demon lord to the campaign's plotline) will be tough. Dragotha/Kyuss tough. They won't be creatures to fight and loot, but dangerous foes and possible allies that requie more than initiative checks to handle.


----------



## BryonD (Jun 14, 2006)

James Jacobs said:
			
		

> Now, all that said, the demon lords are VERY TOUGH for their CR scores, especially when compared to a balor (which is actually a little weak for CR 20). Their CR scores may only be a couple digits beyond 20, but their stats are comperable to equal CR dragons (another creature type that tends to be tough for their CR scores).




Why is that?

In the end low CRs just mean that characters get under-rewarded for overcoming the challenge and inexperienced DMs are more likely to accidently throw a TPK at a party.


----------



## Uder (Jun 14, 2006)

BryonD said:
			
		

> Why is that?
> 
> In the end low CRs just mean that characters get under-rewarded for overcoming the challenge and inexperienced DMs are more likely to accidently throw a TPK at a party.



An inexperienced DM running monsters with CRs in the low 20s? Yeah, it sure would suck to get up over 15-18th level and still consider the DM inexperienced. Really, when does this happen?


----------



## BryonD (Jun 14, 2006)

James Jacobs said:
			
		

> As for the power level of the demon lords, I've talked a bit about this elsewhere but the long and short of it is that each DM should determine the power level of the demon lords as appropriate for his own campaign. That said, they shouldn't be any LESS deadly than the stats in FC I; those stats are a "baseline" for the demon lords.



I completely agree with the first statement.
What is the basis of the second statement?

IMO, they shouldn't be any LESS deadly than a whole lot MORE deadly than FCI stats peg them.

I understand the reasoning of most people stop by level 20 and this puts them in reach of those games.  I think it is a bad theory, but I understand it.

But if being able to cast L9 spells puts a character on par with a demon lord, then what law states that it must end there?  
The conventional wisdom is that a great majority of games end well before 20th level.  Should groups that stop at L12 or L15 have demon lords denied them?  

It makes total sense to me to say demon lords should be more powerful than any standard character ("standard" being pretty much anything in the core 3 books, up to L20 chars).  So the minimum CR should be mid to upper 20s and probably higher.  

You can argue all day as to whether they should be CR29 or CR89 and it makes no difference.  There is a big gulf between debating just how much more powerful than a core character they should be and saying that they need not be any more powerful than core characters at all.  There is a logical dividing point there.

If Jubliex can be CR19, then why are you stating that he may not be CR18?  If he can be CR18, then why not CR17?  Where does it stop?

If you can say that being up to casting Wish is powerful enough, then I can say that being up to casting Limited Wish can be as well.  I don't believe that either of those statements really hold water within the expected mythology.  But, compared to the expected mythology, the first statement is so flawed that the difference to the second statement is negligible.

You made the statement that they should be no less powerful than presented.  I'd really like to know WHY.  Can you present a justification for that statement which does not beg the question of why they are permitted to be sub-epic?


----------



## James Jacobs (Jun 14, 2006)

BryonD said:
			
		

> Why is that?
> 
> In the end low CRs just mean that characters get under-rewarded for overcoming the challenge and inexperienced DMs are more likely to accidently throw a TPK at a party.




Because fights with dragons or demon lords shouldn't be minor encountes. They should be memorable. They should also be major encounters that the PCs know they're going into; and therefore these monsters reflect the fact that the PCs probably took the time to prepare specific spells or tactics to use against them.


----------



## BryonD (Jun 14, 2006)

Uder said:
			
		

> An inexperienced DM running monsters with CRs in the low 20s? Yeah, it sure would suck to get up over 15-18th level and still consider the DM inexperienced. Really, when does this happen?



Not all games start at 1st level.  Quite a large number do not.
Inexperienced DMs running higher levels games is quite common.

Regardless of the quantity of this, I will stick to my claim that creatures that are knowingly off from their CR is a bad thing for ALL DMs.


----------



## BryonD (Jun 14, 2006)

James Jacobs said:
			
		

> Because fights with dragons or demon lords shouldn't be minor encountes. They should be memorable. They should also be major encounters that the PCs know they're going into; and therefore these monsters reflect the fact that the PCs probably took the time to prepare specific spells or tactics to use against them.



So they should then get under-rewarded in XP?

If I use a CR10 monster as the memorable end encounter for a party of L10 characters, should I olny give them XP for a CR9 monster based on the reasoning you just presented?


----------



## Rystil Arden (Jun 14, 2006)

BryonD said:
			
		

> Not all games start at 1st level.  Quite a large number do not.
> Inexperienced DMs running higher levels games is quite common.
> 
> Regardless of the quantity of this, I will stick to my claim that creatures that are knowingly off from their CR is a bad thing for ALL DMs.



 Indeed.  In fact, I would say that there are actually a _higher_ percentage of inexperienced GMs compared to experienced who decide to jump into games that start at high levels because they don't know what they're getting into and think that GMing at those levels will be easier than it is (at least from what I've seen).


----------



## James Jacobs (Jun 14, 2006)

BryonD said:
			
		

> If Jubliex can be CR19, then why are you stating that he may not be CR18?  If he can be CR18, then why not CR17?  Where does it stop?
> 
> If you can say that being up to casting Wish is powerful enough, then I can say that being up to casting Limited Wish can be as well.  I don't believe that either of those statements really hold water within the expected mythology.  But, compared to the expected mythology, the first statement is so flawed that the difference to the second statement is negligible.
> 
> You made the statement that they should be no less powerful than presented.  I'd really like to know WHY.  Can you present a justification for that statement which does not beg the question of why they are permitted to be sub-epic?




We had to pick SOMETHING as the baseline. CR 20 seemed the most logical, for obvious reasons. CR 20 is the upper limit of non-demon lord CRs in the Monster Manual, so it seemed obvious that would make the best transition point. Now, it's not an exact transition. As you note, Juiblex is CR 19, and Yeenoghu's at CR 20. The remaining 12 demon lords are CR 21–23. 

As the Monster Manual is set up, CR 20 is more or less the cap (with a few exceptions); reducing demon lords much below this cap has an increasing host of implications. Sub CR 20 demon lords are perfectly acceptable if you're running a campaign where the PCs aren't going above 10th, or 15th, or whatever level. In such a campaign, you'll have to nerf or eliminate the tougher demons (like balors), though. And you should also nerf/eliminate similar outsiders from other realms (pit fiends, solars, etc.). And spells like greater planar ally will suddenly be able to catch demon lords, which doesn't make much sense to me. And so on.

We set CR 20 as the baseline because that's the implied baseline in the core rules.


----------



## BryonD (Jun 14, 2006)

OK,

I'll replace your statement:


			
				James Jacobs said:
			
		

> That said, they shouldn't be any LESS deadly than the stats in FC I; those stats are a "baseline" for the demon lords.




with:


			
				James Jacobs said:
			
		

> Sub CR 20 demon lords are perfectly acceptable if you're running a campaign where the PCs aren't going above 10th, or 15th, or whatever level.




The first statement jumped off the screen at me as not consistent with the current arguement.
Your second statement is consistent with that argument.


----------



## James Jacobs (Jun 14, 2006)

BryonD said:
			
		

> So they should then get under-rewarded in XP?
> 
> If I use a CR10 monster as the memorable end encounter for a party of L10 characters, should I olny give them XP for a CR9 monster based on the reasoning you just presented?




Of course not. Award them XP for a CR 10 monster if they defeat a CR 10 monster. But if that fight ended up being too tough or too simple, change the award. For example, a fight with a dread wraith is an easy fight for a group of paladins and clerics armed with ghost touch weapons, but it's a really tough fight for a band of rogues and bards. The CR of the monster stays the same, but you should probably adjust the amount of XP given.

Over the long run, CR-to-XP awards should more or less average out for the best, so as a general rule it's simplest to just award straight-up XP awards.

Just remember that the CR system is, at its core, not an exact science.


----------



## BryonD (Jun 14, 2006)

James Jacobs said:
			
		

> Of course not. Award them XP for a CR 10 monster if they defeat a CR 10 monster. But if that fight ended up being too tough or too simple, change the award.



Right, but that goes without saying.  It is only when creatures are intentionally given a bad CR that problems crop up.



> For example, a fight with a dread wraith is an easy fight for a group of paladins and clerics armed with ghost touch weapons, but it's a really tough fight for a band of rogues and bards. The CR of the monster stays the same, but you should probably adjust the amount of XP given.




Certainly.  If the party has an advantage you adjust.  Knowing that you are going to fight Orcus and getting prepared would be such an advantage.  Thus, if you fight a CR23 demon lord and prepare ahead you should get less XP, just as you would for any other monster.

BUT!!!!  In the case of demon lords, if your statement is accurate, this preparation is already built into the CR.  So if a party is not prepared they will get underrewarded.  On the other hand, if the party is prepared and the DM does the correct thing in cutting the reward, then the party will be double charged for their readiness.

The idea of building it in to the CR only works if you assume that the party will always be ready AND you assume that the DM doesn't know how to adjust experience.  A bad combination of assumptions.



> Over the long run, CR-to-XP awards should more or less average out for the best, so as a general rule it's simplest to just award straight-up XP awards.



So ignore everything else, under-reward them for demon lords and don't worry about it?



> Just remember that the CR system is, at its core, not an exact science.



Right.  Which makes intentionally wrong CRs even worse.  This system has enough quirks without new ones being built in.


----------



## Shade (Jun 14, 2006)

As someone firmly in the "demon lords should be way tougher" camp, I'll admit that I'm a bit less concerned now that I've got the book.   James means it when he says  that they are tough for their CR.

Let's look at what the toughest of the demon lords, Demogorgon, loses with his 7 drop in CR:


12 HD
66 hp
-4 AC
8 points of spell resistance
-5 Int, -7 Wis, -2 Cha
Gaze DCs -7
Rot DC -2
SLAs:  At will--deeper darkness, detect thoughts, fear, read magic, suggestion, tongues, unholy aura, wall of ice, water breathing; 1/day--symbols (all except death), shapechange
BoVD SLAs (which he may have lost anyway in retcon if not reprinted within)
Item master

He actually gains:


All natural attacks upgraded at least one die
True seeing (previously see invisibility)
Swim speed
+10 Str, +7 Con
Better (IMHO) DR:  20/cold iron and good vs. 20/epic
Energy drain DC +2
Amphibious SQ
SLAs:  at will--astral projection, project image;  3/day--feeblemind, symbol of death (upgraded from 1/day);  1/day--dominate person

Other than a few of the SLAs, he's almost scarier now.   Now, advance him back to CR 30, and he's far more powerful than before.


----------



## Mouseferatu (Jun 14, 2006)

BryonD said:
			
		

> Right.  Which makes intentionally wrong CRs even worse.  This system has enough quirks without new ones being built in.




I think there's a gray area--a rather large one, in some cases--between something being a "high CR X" and something that should be CR X+1. There's a lot of wiggle room in the CR system, and the fact that something of CR X is tougher than something else of CR X doesn't _always_ mean that one of them is of the wrong CR.


----------



## Shade (Jun 14, 2006)

James, while you're here:

Were the nashrou and deathdrinker (both listed on the CR list) cut for space, or are they from another not-yet-released supplement?


----------



## Rystil Arden (Jun 14, 2006)

Mouseferatu said:
			
		

> I think there's a gray area--a rather large one, in some cases--between something being a "high CR X" and something that should be CR X+1. There's a lot of wiggle room in the CR system, and the fact that something of CR X is tougher than something else of CR X doesn't _always_ mean that one of them is of the wrong CR.



 This is definitely true.  And different groups of PCs may be universally better or worse at beating encounters (probably not worse unless underitemed) than the CRs would indicate or more likely situationally better or worse based on what sorts of opponents appear (as James mentioned with the dread wraith and the party of rogues and bards, Olidammara watch over their souls).  Sometimes, you can change the CR dramatically simply by switching around the feat selection--especially with the high HD opponents in the MM that were lazily statted up with large numbers of iterations of Toughness.  In the end, the only way to know if the encounter's CR is about right is to playtest the encounter yourself, using the characters in your party in the playtest.


----------



## James Jacobs (Jun 14, 2006)

Shade said:
			
		

> As someone firmly in the "demon lords should be way tougher" camp, I'll admit that I'm a bit less concerned now that I've got the book.   James means it when he says  that they are tough for their CR.




Keep in mind also that the stat blocks in _Book of Vile Darkness_ were 3.0. Part of the 3.5 revision's purpose was to fix a lot of the high CR monster stat blocks; playtesting of high-level PCs wasn't quite as extensive as it was for mid or low level, and as a result, a lot of the high CR monsters in the 3.0 rules were underpowered. Check out the differences between the 3.0 and the 3.5 balor for an example.

In building the 3.5 FC I stats, I followed the same logic; using the Monster Manual monsters' hp, AC, attacks, average damage, and saves as guidelines. As a result, the FC I incarnation of any given demon lord isn't that much weaker to the stats given in the _Book of Vile Darkness_, and, as Shade points out, in some cases they're actually tougher.


----------



## James Jacobs (Jun 14, 2006)

Shade said:
			
		

> James, while you're here:
> 
> Were the nashrou and deathdrinker (both listed on the CR list) cut for space, or are they from another not-yet-released supplement?




Those two are from a not-yet-released book (which actually added two more demons beyond those two... d'oh) that is just around the corner.

In the concepting stages of FC I, when I was going through and compiling a list of the new demons and demon lords to appear in the book, I came up with a fairly over-the-top list of demons. According to that list, there were originally around 30 of each, for a total of 60 stat blocks. It quickly became apparent that there was no way I'd be able to fit that many into the book, so before the actual writing began I had to agonize over who would make the cut and who would have to go.

Even when it came to actually writing, I had to cut some. This is why the uridezu demon and the shadow demon didn't get updated (I left them off simply because they seemed to need updating the least), and why I had to cut loose a few brand new demons (like the manitou loumara, the grimorak tanar'ri, and the omothobokola obyrith, or the stats for Lamashtu). Hopefully these demons'll see the light of day somewhere... perhaps in a _Dragon_ article or something.

Anyway, from my final turnover, only one stat block ended up getting cut; the laghathti obyrith, an octopoid menace that lives in the River Styx. I have a feeling he might show up in a web enhancement, though...


----------



## sckeener (Jun 14, 2006)

Uder said:
			
		

> An inexperienced DM running monsters with CRs in the low 20s? Yeah, it sure would suck to get up over 15-18th level and still consider the DM inexperienced. Really, when does this happen?




It happens.  I've noticed it especially in the old timers that like to play 2nd or 1st edition characters converted over to 3 or 3.5.  The DM doesn't know the rules well because they've been playing other systems and then are expected to give a decent challenge like they did in the other system....instead they give TPK or a total walk in the park. 

The CRs are there to be guides for inexperienced DMs.  An experienced DM can play with CR like it is candy.


----------



## Shade (Jun 14, 2006)

James Jacobs said:
			
		

> Those two are from a not-yet-released book (which actually added two more demons beyond those two... d'oh) that is just around the corner.
> 
> In the concepting stages of FC I, when I was going through and compiling a list of the new demons and demon lords to appear in the book, I came up with a fairly over-the-top list of demons. According to that list, there were originally around 30 of each, for a total of 60 stat blocks. It quickly became apparent that there was no way I'd be able to fit that many into the book, so before the actual writing began I had to agonize over who would make the cut and who would have to go.
> 
> ...




Sweet!  You can never have too many demons.  I'm now looking more forward to MMIV.    

I was wondering about the uridezu.  Thanks for answering my question, and then some.


----------



## BOZ (Jun 14, 2006)

Erik Mona said:
			
		

> It's just on the map. I think I simply forgot to give Dahak a paragraph when I was writing the damn thing.




unforgiveable!

hey well, you can always see to it that he's worked into the Demonomicon at some point.  

and i hereby request to see Hacamuli make an appearance when Orcus gets a treatment in the article.


----------



## BOZ (Jun 14, 2006)

Erik Mona said:
			
		

> Correct. In fact, the simultaneous opening of the Wells of Darkness is as good a trigger as any for Ragnarok.




does that mean the Midgard Serpent is in there as well?


----------



## Sammael (Jun 14, 2006)

I sure hope Nidhogg is safe and sound in the Grey Waste.


----------



## Shemeska (Jun 15, 2006)

James Jacobs said:
			
		

> and why I had to cut loose a few brand new demons (like the manitou loumara, the grimorak tanar'ri, and the omothobokola obyrith, or the stats for Lamashtu). Hopefully these demons'll see the light of day somewhere... perhaps in a _Dragon_ article or something.




Manitou loumara?   



> Anyway, from my final turnover, only one stat block ended up getting cut; the laghathti obyrith, an octopoid menace that lives in the River Styx. I have a feeling he might show up in a web enhancement, though...




I hope most of the cut material will end up making its way into web enhancements, especially the fluffy stuff. Will be interesting to see, as tempted as I am to refer to it as sushi for Marraenoloths


----------



## demiurge1138 (Jun 15, 2006)

Sammael said:
			
		

> I sure hope Nidhogg is safe and sound in the Grey Waste.



The Midgard Serpent, Jormundganr, is not Nidhogg. Two different horrible dragons with connections to Ragnarok. Presumably, the Midgard Serpent is still wrapped around a Prime Material world and Nidhogg is busy chewing on Yggdrasil's roots in the Grey Waste.

Now, the Wells of Darkness would be a good place to bind Fenris.

Demiurge out.


----------



## Silveras (Jun 15, 2006)

FYI: Although Erik said there is no explanation for the transition of Demon Lords back down from deity status .... there is a note about how Clerics serving the Demon Lords get their spells .. p.88, 2nd paragraph.


----------



## Wycen (Jun 15, 2006)

Got my copy today.  One of the really nifty bits is in the appendices.  If you look, you'll see the names of some of the demon lords Erik created in Armies of the Abyss for Green Ronin.


----------



## Erik Mona (Jun 15, 2006)

Actually, they are all names from page 35 of the first edition Monster Manual 2. I was able to use them in Armies of the Abyss because all of them draw their names from real world mythology. If you want to use the Armies of the Abyss versions in your campaign that's sweet, but I must emphasize that that material is not official Dungeons & Dragons and is the intellectual property of Green Ronin. The similarity in names is coincidental.

Just to be clear.

--Erik


----------



## enworldatemylogin (Jun 15, 2006)

Erik Mona said:
			
		

> Actually, they are all names from page 35 of the first edition Monster Manual 2. I was able to use them in Armies of the Abyss because all of them draw their names from real world mythology. If you want to use the Armies of the Abyss versions in your campaign that's sweet, but I must emphasize that that material is not official Dungeons & Dragons and is the intellectual property of Green Ronin. The similarity in names is coincidental.
> 
> Just to be clear.
> 
> --Erik




Oh I would not have ever suggested any questionable behavior, in fact I suspected one way or the other you knew exactly what you were doing.


----------



## Shemeska (Jun 16, 2006)

I just picked up my copy of FC:I this afternoon, and I have two responses to Erik and James from what I've read so far. A giddy, gleeful IC response, and a more serious OOC one.

IC:

"I want to have your half-yugoloth children!"

OOC:

You guys have exceeded my expectations for this book, and I have to absolutely commend you for the work you put into it.

Just rambling off random things that made me grin after work today: the Obyriths encountering Sun-Sing in quasielemental vacuum, Pale Night's involvement on the layer of Androlynne, a nice integration of the Queen of Chaos into the context of what we knew about lower planar history from the Blood War timeline, Charon and the Marraenoloths given reference, the unified Baernaloth origin myth of the fiends given mention, and the various Factions named and their interest in the Abyss detailed.

Very very very good work guys. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





It goes without saying, but I'll be doing a full review of the book for Planewalker


----------



## Nightfall (Jun 16, 2006)

Yeah I agree with Shemmy, some very good stuff guys. Other than shooting the art director for allowing that ugly BoVD pic, I'm pretty to very pleased with FC I. Now I'm on the side of "Stronger" Demon Princes/Lords, but otherwise I'm all good with everything shown.

Well new thralls would have been nice... But eh.


----------



## James Jacobs (Jun 16, 2006)

Nightfall said:
			
		

> Well new thralls would have been nice... But eh.




Agreed, but a dozen or so thrall prestige classes would have edged out more interesting content, alas. Another reason the book should have been about 500 pages longer. And anyway, we had to leave _something_ for future Demonomicon articles, right?


----------



## Nightfall (Jun 16, 2006)

Alright just promise me a better Thrall of Orcus Pr-class some time in the near future. That's all I'm saying James. That and maybe Thralls of Malchanet(sp) and Pale Night.


----------



## Greg K (Jun 16, 2006)

Erik and James,
I looked through the book yesterday and, while I didn't have the money to buy the book on the spot, this is my first WOTC must buy since the release of the 3.0 core books!

Btw, did I overlook Lolth or was she not included? If she was not included, was there a specific reason?

Thanks.


----------



## BOZ (Jun 16, 2006)

demiurge1138 said:
			
		

> Now, the Wells of Darkness would be a good place to bind Fenris.




hmm, now that's probably even more appropriate!  wasn't fenris' release from bondage supposed to be one of the events that need to happen to cause Ragnarok?  


BTW, guess what i got today?    i need to find some time to really look over it, but the brief glances i've had so far have been tantalizing.


----------



## Erik Mona (Jun 16, 2006)

Greg K said:
			
		

> Erik and James,
> I looked through the book yesterday and, while I didn't have the money to buy the book on the spot, this is my first WOTC must buy since the release of the 3.0 core books!




I know what you mean. I had sworn off doing any more freelance until this opportunity came up, and I jumped at the chance for much the same reasons. Of course, once I was done I once again swore off doing any more freelance, reasoning that WotC had given me the coolest assignment I could hope for. 

That held for about three months, until I got my current assignment.



			
				Greg K said:
			
		

> Btw, did I overlook Lolth or was she not included? If she was not included, was there a specific reason?




Lolth's Abyssal layer, the Demonweb, is pretty extensively detailed. She does not appear in the book because doing do would essentially repeat information already in Deities & Demigods and Faiths & Pantheons. We were already re-covering a lot of ground, and since Lolth is now better termed a god than a demon, we felt like it was ok to leave her out this time.

--Erik


----------



## Mouseferatu (Jun 16, 2006)

Finally got my copy today. Haven't read _too_ much of it yet, but damn, there's some great stuff in here. Kudos, guys.

It's even enough for me to forgive the misspelling of Turaglas.


----------



## glass (Jun 16, 2006)

Got the book wednesday, but I haven't had time to go over it in detail yet (mayhem at work plus England vs Trinidad & Tobago plus gaming night last night = not much time for reading).

However, everything I have looked at in my skimmings has been brilliant!*  

(* Well, everything except the under-CRed demon lords, but that has been discussed to death, and no product is perfect).


glass.


----------



## sckeener (Jun 16, 2006)

Graz'zt's son Athux (msp?  Don't have the book in front of me.)

I know that CR and LA are different...but when I look at Athux's levels and his race, I was thinking he is pretty equal to his dad.  He's got 17 levels and then +4 LA for Half-fiend and +2 for Drow....that equals daddy Graz'zt's CR.  If Athux was a player, I'd treat his CR as character levels plus level adjustment....

Since Athux's stats aren't fleshed out in the book like Graz'zt's....is he supposed to be so close in power to daddy?  I mean...I'm not comparing other supplements to FC1....I'm just looking at FC1.  Is Athux supposed to be so powerful?


----------



## Shade (Jun 16, 2006)

Erik Mona said:
			
		

> I know what you mean. I had sworn off doing any more freelance until this opportunity came up, and I jumped at the chance for much the same reasons. Of course, once I was done I once again swore off doing any more freelance, reasoning that WotC had given me the coolest assignment I could hope for.
> 
> That held for about three months, until I got my current assignment.




You tease!    

Since I correctly guessed Fiendish Codex I when you began dropping hints, I'll take a stab at this one too.   I can only think of one thing you like more than demons...and that is Greyhawk.  Plus, you would seem to be one of the "go to" guys for such a topic.

If it isn't Greyhawk-related, I'm betting it's something concerning the planes.


----------



## Shade (Jun 16, 2006)

Shemeska said:
			
		

> Just rambling off random things that made me grin after work today: the Obyriths encountering Sun-Sing in quasielemental vacuum, Pale Night's involvement on the layer of Androlynne, a nice integration of the Queen of Chaos into the context of what we knew about lower planar history from the Blood War timeline, Charon and the Marraenoloths given reference, the unified Baernaloth origin myth of the fiends given mention, and the various Factions named and their interest in the Abyss detailed.




The Sun Sing bit was an especially nice easter egg.    

I'm also eating up all the name-dropping of unupdated old critters, like the bone colossus, draeden, and foo creatures.


----------



## Shade (Jun 16, 2006)

BTW, Fiendish Aspects II: Dagon, Malcanthet, Orcus is up.


----------



## James Jacobs (Jun 16, 2006)

sckeener said:
			
		

> Graz'zt's son Athux (msp?  Don't have the book in front of me.)
> 
> I know that CR and LA are different...but when I look at Athux's levels and his race, I was thinking he is pretty equal to his dad.  He's got 17 levels and then +4 LA for Half-fiend and +2 for Drow....that equals daddy Graz'zt's CR.  If Athux was a player, I'd treat his CR as character levels plus level adjustment....
> 
> Since Athux's stats aren't fleshed out in the book like Graz'zt's....is he supposed to be so close in power to daddy?  I mean...I'm not comparing other supplements to FC1....I'm just looking at FC1.  Is Athux supposed to be so powerful?





Yes; Athux's levels are correct. He was first introduced in _Shackled City_, although he didn't play a huge role in the adventure (he's actually never encountered by the PCs, in fact).


----------



## Uder (Jun 16, 2006)

sckeener said:
			
		

> Graz'zt's son Athux (msp?  Don't have the book in front of me.)
> 
> I know that CR and LA are different...but when I look at Athux's levels and his race, I was thinking he is pretty equal to his dad.  He's got 17 levels and then +4 LA for Half-fiend and +2 for Drow....that equals daddy Graz'zt's CR.  If Athux was a player, I'd treat his CR as character levels plus level adjustment....



As you note yourself, they're different. Try comparing effective levels as a starting point if you want to compare their relative power. Or if you insist on comparing CR's, at least use CR's for both. From your notes above, it looks like Athux is CR21 (+3 for half-fiend, +1 for drow).


----------



## johnnype (Jun 16, 2006)

James & Erik,

All this talk about content that had to be dropped makes me wonder why you didn't reduce the font size. That's what they did with the FRCS and I'm thankful every time I have to reference the book. We all know that there isn't going to be a Hordes of the Abyss II and rather than have all the wonderful info spread over countless issues of Dragon and endless web enhancements, I for one would have preferred to have it all in one place.

Just a thought.


----------



## Erik Mona (Jun 16, 2006)

The first answer is that decisions like that weren't up to us, so issues of layout, what to cut, text density, etc. were not under our control.

I will say, however, that it's pretty obvious that they made some concessions to allow for more text, at the cost of making a lot of the art smaller than it maybe should have been. The armanite in particular strikes me as very small. The art surely could have been much better, but they were trying to fit in as much as they could.

I actually turned in a little less than my assigned word count (which is unusual for me), but when you've got a topic this exciting, it's difficult not to let things get a little out of control and write write write.

In all I'm comfortable with the cuts WotC made. If they had tried to fit in more text, it would have come at the expense of the art, and that would have been unfortunate.

--Erik


----------



## BOZ (Jun 17, 2006)

Erik Mona said:
			
		

> I know what you mean. I had sworn off doing any more freelance until this opportunity came up, and I jumped at the chance for much the same reasons. Of course, once I was done I once again swore off doing any more freelance, reasoning that WotC had given me the coolest assignment I could hope for.
> 
> That held for about three months, until I got my current assignment.




verry interrrrreshting.  

if it isn't greyhawk - then, FC3?


----------



## BOZ (Jun 17, 2006)

BTW, i'm having fun looking at the old "Demonic Lore" and "Locations in the Abyss" threads to see how many of the obscure tidbits we dug up actually made it into the book.  one that i just found today: Rozvankee the lich who created the vargouilles (see the top of page 140).


----------



## Shemeska (Jun 17, 2006)

*Score two for a unified fiend creation myth *grin**

More little nuggets of joy I noticed today, this time in the writeup of Yeenoghu's realm, about the slowly dying Obyrith lord, Bechard, telling Yeenoghu about pre-Tanar'ric history and the era of his own race in the early days of the Abyss.



			
				from FC:1 said:
			
		

> "A trusted frequent visitor might eventually hear Bechard say that the demons did not originate on the Abyss but instead migrated here from elsewhere after abandoning a race of fiendish creators now lost to history."




Good stuff. Good stuff. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





And also, noticed the DL deities included in the list of layer lords this afternoon. Sweet.


----------



## NiTessine (Jun 17, 2006)

Got the book a couple of days ago. Great, excellent, beautiful stuff. My sole complaint is that it's several hundred pages too short, but that one goes for most WotC books nowadays.

Just one question, though... What's the story behind That Hellhole?


----------



## Zarnam (Jun 17, 2006)

I have a couple of questions for those lucky souls already possessing the unholy tome:

1. Are there any Ioumara demon lords ??
2. Do the Obyriths have any immunities or just resistances ??
3. Since Pale Night is an Obyrith, are any of her supposed children Obyriths (Vucarik, Lupercio) ??

Thanks !!


----------



## Wavestone (Jun 17, 2006)

Zarnam, I have an answer to your second question  - the Obyrith traits are listed in the second web enhancement, as Dagon is an Obyrith, and so is his aspect. Download it and read..


----------



## Shemeska (Jun 17, 2006)

Zarnam said:
			
		

> I have a couple of questions for those lucky souls already possessing the unholy tome:
> 
> 1. Are there any Ioumara demon lords ??




Not that I noticed, at least not named. They do talk and hint about much more powerful Ioumara lurking about in the Dreaming Gulf (layer 230) however.



> 2. Do the Obyriths have any immunities or just resistances ??




Yes, poison and mind affecting things.



> 3. Since Pale Night is an Obyrith, are any of her supposed children Obyriths (Vucarik, Lupercio) ??




No, those of her children that are listed are listed as Tanar'ri, not Obyriths. Her title of 'mother of demons' seems to be both direct and indirect.


----------



## James Jacobs (Jun 17, 2006)

The loumara are a relatively new demonic race (even though they've been around for a LONG time); they're a MUCH younger race than the tanar'ri. As a result, none have become powerful enough to be recognized as demon lords... at least, none have become recognizable and famous demon lords yet.

On a somewhat side trek: the three demon races more or less break down like this:

Loumara: Immaterial or invisible demons that act more like ghosts or undead; all loumara can possess creatures.

Obyrith: Ancient demons that rarely, if ever, have a humanoid shape. They predate mortal life and even the gods, some say, and just looking at them can drive you insane. There's a lot of Lovecraft in the obyriths. Obyriths that have evolved over time with the tanar'ri take on more recognizable shapes, like Pazuzu or Pale Night (althgouh in Pale Night's case, her "humanoid" form is merely an attempt by reality to make sense of the true nightmare of her actual form).

Tanar'ri: Classic demons; those that arose as a result of faith and humanity. They're reflections of cruelty and evil and sin, and usually have a basic humanoid shape, although there are several exceptions.


----------



## Zarnam (Jun 17, 2006)

Hmm...neato news James   

Waiting for this book is really killing me...can somebody answer two more questions of mine - one about FC 1, second about Dragon #345 ???

1. What strength has and what size Dagon is ??
2. What strength has and what size Kostchtchie is ??

Thanks !!


----------



## sckeener (Jun 18, 2006)

I just finished my first read through.  Wow  

Erik: Great writing!  I loved Chapter 5.  I found myself reading out loud portions to my girlfriend [seriously.]  Thanks for the romantic imagery (kidding.)  The attention to detail was amazing.   I want more, either official or unofficial from you...so turn over your notes!  I want some web enhancements and some 3rd party supplements.   I saw so many nods to gaming history that I was very impressed with your work ethic.  It shows that you care about the material and that you put in the effort to make this a great product...

Thanks again.


----------



## JustaPlayer (Jun 18, 2006)

So I was looking at the Map of The Wells of Darkness on page 139 and saw that 9 beings were named.  Curiously the one I was intersted in "Dahak", was the only one not given a description.  Was this cut out of the book?


----------



## qstor (Jun 18, 2006)

*question*

I just mine at my FLGS yesterday. Awesome job! Huge thanks  and praise to Erik and James. Its nice to see some of the Dragon stuff make it to hardback! I'm looking forward to other demon related WOTC or Paizo material.  

I had a quick question for Erik/James - How come no mention of Iuz in any of the lords enteries?

Mike


----------



## Garnfellow (Jun 18, 2006)

Zarnam said:
			
		

> 1. What strength has and what size Dagon is ??
> 2. What strength has and what size Kostchtchie is ??




Dagon is Gargantuan with 25 HD
Kostchtchie is Huge with 23 HD

I have been intrigued by Dagon ever since the cryptic description in the 1st edition MMII. I even statted out my own version back in second edition, but this version is so much cooler. The art for him is of this titanic being emerging from the depths, its form like one of those weird deep-sea fishes crossed with an H. R. Giger nightmare.


----------



## Zarnam (Jun 18, 2006)

Yep, Dagon, as all the other (non-evolved, like Pazuzu) Obyriths are very Lovercraftian, as James himself said several posts ago


----------



## KL (Jun 18, 2006)

*Fiendish Codex*

Okay, I have this tome for up to a week now and here is what my reaction is:

A lot of people complain about demon lords being underpowered. Yet the fact that you have the power and option to advance them and customized them make them more fearsome because they will remain an unknown quantity. I mean, in the old days, oh Lolth, she has 66 hp. Now, you can't be sure if the demon prince who is about to b-slap you is an aspect, or the real thing. I meant, think about Iggwilv. She has not been stated yet and the moment we know what class she is and what level she's at, she will lose her mystique.

Second is that I am disappointed that there aren't feats or classes to advance demons in special and unique ways.

About the demon lords, I was particularly disppointed that Aldinach is the "lady of change" when mythologically, she is an Egyptian storm demon. Soneillon is listed as a demoness concerned with rejuvenation when mythologically, she is said to tempt through hatred. What happened to Ereshkigal and Nergel? (Perhaps Return to the Keep of Borderland cemented their status as deities, not demon lords). Cabiri is well-known as a volcanic demon, and I think Erik Mona is equating him with Gygax's Shabriri (who also happens to have multiple eyes), and both are mythologically different beings (Shab is a demon from Hebrew folklore).

Although I have to give kudos to Kardum, King of the Balors, whose name is an anagram of Marduk, Gygax' Kings of the Fire Demons in his (Godawful) Gord books, and Ilsidahur is finally mentioned again.

As for the appendixes, I do noticed certain discrepancies....under Lords of the Abyss, Malcanthet was left out and so was her layer in Layers of the Abyss. The listing for demons left out (perhaps intentionally) many Dragon magazine demons, yet the CR list have skurchur, water demon (but not the other 5 elemental demons), and "Blood drinker" (huh?).

Overall, it is nice, but at 160 pages, I think 200 should be more like it.


----------



## Baron Opal (Jun 18, 2006)

A question for our esteemed authors.

What would be different if you didn't feel any obligation whatsoever to be guided by past demonic lore?

For example, I have always felt that mind flayers would be as close as atheistic as you could be in a D&D setting. They just can't conceive of submitting to any other entity beyond themselves. So, the notion of gods of the mind flayers has always been jarring for me. If I was hired to write Lords of Madness, I would prefer keep silent, at least, on the topic of illithid gods. Preferentially, I would retcon them away.


----------



## Mr Baron (Jun 18, 2006)

*oh so sweet*

What a great thread!  Many thanks to Eirk & James for their commentary...I am hoping to get my copy within the next day or so.


----------



## Wycen (Jun 18, 2006)

KL said:
			
		

> About the demon lords, I was particularly disppointed that Aldinach is the "lady of change" when mythologically, she is an Egyptian storm demon. Soneillon is listed as a demoness concerned with rejuvenation when mythologically, she is said to tempt through hatred. What happened to Ereshkigal and Nergel? (Perhaps Return to the Keep of Borderland cemented their status as deities, not demon lords). Cabiri is well-known as a volcanic demon, and I think Erik Mona is equating him with Gygax's Shabriri (who also happens to have multiple eyes), and both are mythologically different beings (Shab is a demon from Hebrew folklore).




Regarding Aldinach, consider this.  She was first mentioned in the list of lords in the first Monster Manual 2.  

Years later, along comes Legendary Adventures, by Gary Gygax.  And from that we even later get a conversion of one of those adventures, Necropolis by Necromancer Games.

In Necropolis, we find Aldinach.  Curiously, Aldinach appears as a male demon.  Why?  Because Rahotep, evil and powerful spellcaster that he is, "changed Aldinach's original form".

So, whether or not Erik took that into account or not, I see it is appropriate.  Storms can cause violent change, so its a good mesh.


----------



## James Jacobs (Jun 18, 2006)

Baron Opal said:
			
		

> A question for our esteemed authors.
> 
> What would be different if you didn't feel any obligation whatsoever to be guided by past demonic lore?
> 
> For example, I have always felt that mind flayers would be as close as atheistic as you could be in a D&D setting. They just can't conceive of submitting to any other entity beyond themselves. So, the notion of gods of the mind flayers has always been jarring for me. If I was hired to write Lords of Madness, I would prefer keep silent, at least, on the topic of illithid gods. Preferentially, I would retcon them away.




I agree completely; in my campaigns, mind flayers are completely without gods or faith. That said, their deities are here to stay, I suspect; they've got a lot of fans and have been established so that retconing them would do more damage than anything else. Fortunately, the mind flayer chapter wasn't one I wrote for _Lords of Madness_ so I wasn't faced with this conundrum, and instead I was able to scratch that itch on the aboleth chapter.

As for demons, there's not much I would abandon, to tell the truth. I've been a fan of the D&D demons and the Abyss more or less from day 1 of my D&D days, and nothing major jumps to mind. While I feel that layers of the Abyss beyond the 666th are unnecessary and I would have rather stressed more that the demon lord stat blocks are for off-plane manifestations of these powerful creatures, most everything in the book is the way I wanted it to be (and I believe Erik would agree). The Abyss is an enormous place, and there's plenty of room for new ideas in there without invalidating or abandoning anything that's come before.


----------



## Erik Mona (Jun 18, 2006)

Not surprisingly, I completely agree with James.

The one thing I avoided outright, in the manner you suggest for how you'd handle the gods of the illithids, was the whole debate over whether or not certain demon lords were ever gods, whether or not they are tougher than gods, etc. I guess I just don't care, so leaving out the details allows everyone to have their cake and eat it too.

Other than that, the Abyss has been mercifully untouched by designers over the last few decades, so I didn't feel hemmed in by what I consider "unfortunate" design choices.

I couldn't say the same of the Nine Hells, so I am relieved that I was not asked to participate in that project.

--Erik


----------



## Razz (Jun 19, 2006)

Couple of questions for the designers:

1) I like the idea of new demons, the loumara and obyriths, but doesn't that make things a little too tight for future supplements? Now instead of tanar'ri or non-tanar'ri demons for the Abyss, it's going to be stretched to "Should we add a new non-tanar'ri, tanar'ri, obyrith or loumara to this book?" Will we be seeing more of these demons? Quite possibly, Demonimicon or even an entire article spewing forth say "12 new demons, 6 obyrith and 6 loumara" article for Dragon Magazine would be a wonderful suggestion for you guys.

2) I noticed in the Introduction chapter that there was supposed to be an inclusion of new PrC, but it sort of got cut for space I assume (I wish this book was the same page count as Draconomicon...why was that idea scrapped?). What were they supposed to be, if any was cut that is?

3) I assume the Pazuzu article should be errata'd, sort of. Change his subtype from tanar'ri to obyrith and rearrange his special qualities to match the subtype I assume?


----------



## James Jacobs (Jun 19, 2006)

1) I think that there's plenty of room to keep developing new demons, be they tanar'ri, loumaras, obyriths, just plain demons, or something else altogether. I'd love to see them further expanded upon, personally, but the tanar'ri remain the most common and most populous demons in the Abyss. Personally, I see the tanar'ri as manifestations of the failings of humanity, loumaras as evil parasites that prey on humanity, and the obyriths as evil and chaos personified that would exist with our wtihout humanity. Or, to put it less confusingly: tanar'ri are human-shaped, loumaras are invisible and possess things, obyriths are Lovecraftian.

2) We'd originally intended to include some prestige classes, but most of the obvious ideas were already done in other books. Plus, there just wasn't any room in the project for them. Personally, I think there's probably enough prestige classes as there is; for a new one to be justified, it must rise naturally from the flavor rather than the other way around. In any case, no new prestige classes were ever written for (and then cut from) the book. As far as I know.

3) If I remember correctly, the Pazuzu article doesn't give him a demonic race type at all, tanar'ri or otherwise. Mostly because at the time I hadn't fully gelled the idea of the obyriths in my head... all I knew was that Pazuzu was older than the tanar'ri race. In any event, since he's a "missing link" between the two races, his stats need no adjustment, apart from giving him the obyrith subtype (which, in his case, doesn't really mean much anymore).


----------



## BOZ (Jun 19, 2006)

James Jacobs said:
			
		

> Or, to put it less confusingly: tanar'ri are human-shaped, loumaras are invisible and possess things, obyriths are Lovecraftian.




heehee


----------



## Ipissimus (Jun 19, 2006)

Nice idea on the Obyriths, though. Brings the evil chaos of the Far Realm back to where it belongs in the cosmology (not that I don't like the far realm, but this is better IMO).

Question for those who have the book. I've seen the 'Terrible Transformation' artwork on the official site and I'm incredibly curious. Is this the transformation of a lost soul into a demon or a method for demons to manifest on the material plane a la Van Richten's Guide to Fiends?


----------



## sckeener (Jun 19, 2006)

Ipissimus said:
			
		

> Nice idea on the Obyriths, though. Brings the evil chaos of the Far Realm back to where it belongs in the cosmology (not that I don't like the far realm, but this is better IMO).




To each his own....I'm having trouble with the concept or at least wrapping my head around it.  I prefer to have my Far Realm be beyond morals and the Abyss by its nature has morals...Choatic evil morals.

What I've decided to try for my games is to have even the Demon Lords (Dagon - in particular) to be avatars of Far Realm creatures....so I've got a Dagon in the Far Realm, a Dagon in the Abyss, an avatar of Dagon, and an aspect of Dagon floating around the universe.

I was doing something similar for Tiamat already, so it isn't much of a stretch.  I had Tiamat (Far Realm) [similar to the Summerian destroyer version], Tiamat (Avernus), avatar of Tiamat, and an aspect of Tiamat.


----------



## Kunimatyu (Jun 19, 2006)

Erik Mona said:
			
		

> Other than that, the Abyss has been mercifully untouched by designers over the last few decades, so I didn't feel hemmed in by what I consider "unfortunate" design choices.
> 
> I couldn't say the same of the Nine Hells, so I am relieved that I was not asked to participate in that project.
> 
> --Erik




Is there anything in particular you're referring to here? I could be missing something really obvious, but I don't recall that much difference between some of the Planescape material on Baator and the material today.


----------



## Ripzerai (Jun 19, 2006)

Kunimatyu said:
			
		

> Is there anything in particular you're referring to here? I could be missing something really obvious, but I don't recall that much difference between some of the Planescape material on Baator and the material today.




He's talking 1st edition versus 2nd edition, not Planescape versus 3e. In 1e (after the MMII), the Hells were ruled by Tiamat, Dispater, Mammon, Belial, Geryon, Moloch, Baalzebul, Mephistopheles, and Asmodeus. 

Early 2e (pre-Planescape) eliminated all references to the archdevils, mentioning only the Dark Eight, a group of pit fiends who were, as far as even the wisest sages knew, the highest-ranking baatezu rulers, some of whom had been previously mentioned as working for the archdevils.

Later on, Colin McComb snuck the unique fiends back in, but wasn't allowed to use Biblical names, and he elected to (or was forced to? I don't know) redesign them entirely instead of making them barely disguised versions of the 1e archdevils. The only one who managed to get through completely unmolested was Dispater, and only because he had already appeared in the Planescape adventure _Fires of Dis_. (And he had been mentioned by name in the Planescape boxed set, the only 1e archdevil who could claim that). This set off a firestorm of criticism among long-time fans of the plane; Erik Mona has said it showed a great disrespect for prior canon. Personally, I think the Lords of the Nine are a lot more interesting than their one-dimensional predecessors, but I can't deny it was an extreme change that makes it difficult to use 1e canon directly.

In response to the criticism, Colin McComb backtracked quite a lot in _Faces of Evil_ (which was published by the easier-going Wizards of the Coast, and very vague about the Nine in any case), bringing in a lot of references to 1st edition fiendish nobles and hinting strongly that the Lords of the Nine were only the 1st edition archdevils under different aspects.

Monte Cook, in _A Paladin in Hell_, also made a stab at reconciling the two sets of diabolic lords, but he went in a very different direction, introducing a civil war in Hell (eons ago - the standard 2e assumption was that the 1e cosmological stuff was true or mostly true, but was accurate for a time centuries or millennia before the present day; _Throne of Bloodstone_ happened centuries ago with regard to Planescape, and Moloch and Geryon have been gone for much, much longer). _Guide to Hell_, by Chris Pramas, embraced Monte Cook's explanation and gave the war a name: the Reckoning. During the Reckoning, Geryon and Moloch were cast from their positions and many other lords were transformed into new forms. 

_Book of Vile Darkness_, again by Monte Cook, continued the Reckoning narrative into 3e. By this point, it seems irreversable. The fact that all the 1e material on the Nine Hells is now on the other side of a major civil war and countless millennia of cutthroat politics means that, while it can be alluded to, it can't be used completely as it was in anything new written on the plane. 3e even aggravated the situation by, in the _Manual of the Planes_, introducing yet another coup and purging in Mephistopheles' court (in _Guide to Hell_, Molikroth was assumed to still exist as one of Mephistopheles' aspects, rather than as a now-discarded charade as in 3e). So all of the pit fiends and many of the nobles who formally worked for Mephistopheles are now destroyed after the unmasking of Molikroth. _Tome of Magic_ sealed the matter by killing Geryon off.

If they had gone in the direction of the _Faces of Evil_ retcon and said things like "Moloch sometimes appears in the form of a withered old hag; Geryon, sometimes known as Levistus, was for a time imprisoned in a glacier" they could have phased out McComb's versions of the Nine altogether. Too late now. I think all of this adds an interesting new dimension and texture to Baator, but I completely understand that some people dislike it.


----------



## Shade (Jun 19, 2006)

Also, the whole "Is Asmodeus actually a miles-long worm-thing?" idea has caused many much chagrin.


----------



## Sammael (Jun 19, 2006)

One thing's for sure: no matter what approach the authors of FC2 take, they are bound to piss _someone_ off. Which is why Erik didn't want the job.

Personally, I hope they stick with a mixed Faces of Evil/Guide to Hell approach, although IMC, the Hag Countess is really Lilith (as per Dicefreaks), and Mephistopheles is likewise not a pyromaniac.


----------



## Zarnam (Jun 19, 2006)

James, I have a question - how much connection is there between the Obyriths and the Slaadi (if one exists at all   ) ??

And a second one...albeit this one will propably remain unanswered due to NDA's or some similiar things    - is there ANY BOOK AT ALL coming in our direction about the Limbo and Slaadi ??

Thanks


----------



## Shemeska (Jun 19, 2006)

Shade said:
			
		

> Also, the whole "Is Asmodeus actually a miles-long worm-thing?" idea has caused many much chagrin.




*rabblerabblerabble* 

I'd be one of those people unhappy with how 'Guide to Hell' treated Asmodeus, even if I actually use a very warped version of it in my own campaign.

Trying to force-fit the monolithic Good/Evil duality of Zoarastrianism into the Law/Chaos and Good/Evil planar structure of DnD never rubbed me well. It did, in some ways, take an axe to a few concepts established in the prior 2e material (though perhaps not quite as much as some of the 2e material did to the earliest 1e stuff).

The rest of the book wasn't bad however, and the treatment of the Reckoning was nice, as well as giving a few ideas about Bel's predecessor, Zariel. But the Asmo thing tarnishes my overall opinion.



			
				Sammael said:
			
		

> Personally, I hope they stick with a mixed Faces of Evil/Guide to Hell approach, although IMC, the Hag Countess is really Lilith




*shrugs* The name by itself doesn't really do much for me either way. However IMC, and in at least one story of mine ('The Proselytizer' aka 'The Deconstruction of Anthraxus') plus in the storyhour, I play with the idea that Baator's Hag Countess was the lone survivor of the Night Hag cabal who created, and eventually lost control over the Altraloth Xenghara. I also toy with the idea that she actually put him up to the act of slaughtering her sisters, and in doing so she earned the enmity of the hag goddess Cegilune, and thus her exile into Baator.


----------



## James Jacobs (Jun 19, 2006)

Zarnam said:
			
		

> James, I have a question - how much connection is there between the Obyriths and the Slaadi (if one exists at all   ) ??
> 
> And a second one...albeit this one will propably remain unanswered due to NDA's or some similiar things    - is there ANY BOOK AT ALL coming in our direction about the Limbo and Slaadi ??
> 
> Thanks




In my mind, the only connection between the slaadi and the obyriths are that they share a chaotic alignment and are both outsiders.

As for a slaadi/limbo book, who knows? Technically, slaadi aren't "fiends" (they're not evil), but I do think it'd be cool some day in the future for all the outer planes of the Great Wheel to get their own hardcover book. It'll never happen, but still... it'd be neat.


----------



## Ipissimus (Jun 20, 2006)

sckeener said:
			
		

> To each his own....I'm having trouble with the concept or at least wrapping my head around it.  I prefer to have my Far Realm be beyond morals and the Abyss by its nature has morals...Choatic evil morals.




Well, here's my take on it for what it's worth. The Far Realm is the place of ultimate chaos, a seething mass of protoplasmic stuff that would make Lovecraft proud. Mortals are unable to comprehend the Far Realm because our minds are based on order, 2+2=4 and all that, and attempting to causes what seems like madness, but is really another state of mind based on pure chaos (like a mental mutation).

Does this make the Far Realm intrinsically evil? It's certainly detrimental, it is certainly lacks anything to do with morals, but I am of the personal opinion that this does not necessarily equate to 'evil' except from our perspective of it. Lovecraft's personifications of chaos, upon which the Far Realm is based (Yog-Sothoth, Shub Niggurath, Azathoth) care nothing for morals of any stripe, they just are and they just do what they do. You can't blame a hungry Lion for eating you, you just keep out of its way.

But then, in the Lovecraft cosmology, you have Cthulhu and Nyarlathotep who are undoubtedly evil. Aza's an idiot, Shub and Yog don't care about anything, but Cthulhu and Nyarlathotep knowingly worship, exploit and abuse everything around them. Nyarlathotep actively spreads corruption because he enjoys it. He has no mandate from the Gods he supposedly represents because they couldn't care less about us insignificant little specks in the grand scheme. Cthulhu willingly advances the cause of a God who hungers to destroy reality and who also lacks the capability to care if he suceeds or not. This would be nonsensical unless power were Cthulhu's only agenda.

Back to DnD cosmology, technically the Far Realm and its inhabitants exist only to satisfy its instinctive desires without care for morality or sanity, and therefore could indeed be classed as Chaotic Evil (as opposed to Chaotic Neutral, CN people at least care about something). However, they won't go out of their way to bother us because they simply don't care.

Cthulhu and Nyarlathotep are, to me, more like the demons of the Abyss: Chaos and Evil personified. They don't have to do what they do, but they enjoy it. They LIKE eating your child's brain in front of you just to see how you'd react. They want you to turn to evil so that they can increase their own power by taking your soul. They actively recruit, corrupt and debase mortals to further their own selfish ends and they have no respect for any law other than might makes right, which is more a guideline anyway. In short, they care about mortals in their own twisted way.

This is why I welcome the inclusion of the Obyriths. The Far Realm is a place of such utter madness that it has no time or reason (considering that pure madness excludes reason) to bother us unless we bring it upon ourselves. The denziens of the Abyss want our souls and they are coming for them. An reasoning being such as FC1's Dagon doesn't belong in the Far Realm, even if he was spawned of it, because he desires power for his own ends. Sure, he's a psychotic lunatic, but he's not the babbling idiot in the corner, he's Hannibal Lector.

At least, as said, that's my take on it. Insert usual 'feel free to regard or disregard' disclaimer.


----------



## Baramay (Jun 20, 2006)

Although not a big issue but one that could help people who are advancing Demon Lords, should spell resistance be increased an equal amount as HD, rather than have a flat CR +13?

For example all of the demon lords have a SR=CR+11 except Orcus and Pazuzu, who are SR=CR+13.  Unless this is a misprint should they not retain their slightly better resistance to magic?

Great job James and Erik.  I was looking forward to this book all year and I was not disappointed.

Could someone point out the Dungeon and Dragon magazine issues where the demon lords have been given stat blocks. Thanks in advance.


----------



## BOZ (Jun 20, 2006)

Shade said:
			
		

> Also, the whole "Is Asmodeus actually a miles-long worm-thing?" idea has caused many much chagrin.




oy, and i don't much care for what they did with Jazirian either.


----------



## Wycen (Jun 20, 2006)

Question for Erik or James.

I know from reading the intro text to the demon lord chapter, (finally got around to that part today), that in Hordes of the Abyss you've ignored the difference between a demon lord and demon prince, but I'm curious if at anytime you considered determining the difference between a lord and prince.  In 1E, one was supposed to be more powerful, and if I recall they flipped that in Planescape.

Before I read the introduction I had been trying to determine if you considered that based on which lords had "prince of deception/wrath/etc" titles.


----------



## Mouseferatu (Jun 20, 2006)

Wycen said:
			
		

> Question for Erik or James.
> 
> I know from reading the intro text to the demon lord chapter, (finally got around to that part today), that in Hordes of the Abyss you've ignored the difference between a demon lord and demon prince, but I'm curious if at anytime you considered determining the difference between a lord and prince.  In 1E, one was supposed to be more powerful, and if I recall they flipped that in Planescape.
> 
> Before I read the introduction I had been trying to determine if you considered that based on which lords had "prince of deception/wrath/etc" titles.




I'm neither Erik nor James, but I know that, to me, having a defined and specific line of demarcation between two similar titles like that would feel far too contrary to the chaotic and undisciplined nature of demons. Devils, sure, they'll be that specific, but as I see it, a demon has whatever title it wants and can force others to accept, no more, no less.


----------



## Razz (Jun 20, 2006)

Completely off topic but:

*James/Erik*, can either of you talk to the WotC staff about fixing the *Klurichir* as a possible addition to the FC1 Web Enhancements? It truly is a huge mess in almost every aspect of it. It's such an awesome demon above the balor, I'd hate to see it go to waste or looking for the umpteenth "Klurichir Revision" written on the world wide web.


----------



## Shade (Jun 20, 2006)

Fiendish Codex I: The Lost Annals is up, including laghathti obyriths, Woeful Escarand, and other planar layers!

This is the web enhancement I've been waiting for, and it delivers.


----------



## Shade (Jun 20, 2006)

Shemeska (regarding laghathti) said:
			
		

> Will be interesting to see, as tempted as I am to refer to it as sushi for Marraenoloths




It looks like it would be an interesting battle, seeing as the laghathti and marraenoloths are the same CR.


----------



## Shade (Jun 20, 2006)

James,

The yochlol's spell-like abilities list dominate person (DC 16) at will.  Should this be charm person, or is the save DC misconfigured for dominate person?   I'm assuming charm since that is what it had in the Monsters of Faerun version.


----------



## James Jacobs (Jun 20, 2006)

Shade said:
			
		

> James,
> 
> The yochlol's spell-like abilities list dominate person (DC 16) at will.  Should this be charm person, or is the save DC misconfigured for dominate person?   I'm assuming charm since that is what it had in the Monsters of Faerun version.




Yes; that should be charm person instead of dominate person.


----------



## James Jacobs (Jun 20, 2006)

Baramay said:
			
		

> Although not a big issue but one that could help people who are advancing Demon Lords, should spell resistance be increased an equal amount as HD, rather than have a flat CR +13?
> 
> For example all of the demon lords have a SR=CR+11 except Orcus and Pazuzu, who are SR=CR+13.  Unless this is a misprint should they not retain their slightly better resistance to magic?
> 
> ...




Actually, since demon lords advance by +1 CR for every Hit Die you add, their spell resistance does actually increase by 1 for every HD gained. In my turnover, all the demon lords had a base SR of CR +13; I really don't know why this was changed during the book's editing/development cycle. Anyway, as a result, when you advance several demon lords, they'll get a 2 point boost in their SR. <shrug>

As for the Dragon issues:

Dragon 329: Pazuzu (plus anzu demon)
Dragon 333: Fraz-Urb'luu (plus skurchur demon)
Dragon 337: Zuggtmoy (plus basidirond, phycomid, and vathugu demon)
Dragon 341: Baphoment (plus ankishar demon)
Dragon 345: Kostchtchie (plus mavawhan demon)


----------



## James Jacobs (Jun 20, 2006)

Wycen said:
			
		

> I know from reading the intro text to the demon lord chapter, (finally got around to that part today), that in Hordes of the Abyss you've ignored the difference between a demon lord and demon prince, but I'm curious if at anytime you considered determining the difference between a lord and prince.  In 1E, one was supposed to be more powerful, and if I recall they flipped that in Planescape.
> 
> Before I read the introduction I had been trying to determine if you considered that based on which lords had "prince of deception/wrath/etc" titles.




The classic difference between a demon lord and a demon prince was that demon lords didn't control a layer of the Abyss, while demon princes did. Unfortunately, as the game went through editions, this distinction became blurred in several cases when they flipped meanings (sometimes randomly). Further complicating things, female arch-demons were generally called "queens" rather than "ladies or princesses." We decided to call them all demon lords; their appelations (Prince of Demons, Queen of the Succubi, Mother of Demons, Lady of Fungi, etc.) being self-appointed. There's no real hierarchy on the Abyss like there is in Hell, so these titles really don't mean much in the grand scheme of things. They're mostly just cool titles to refer to the demon lords as in cases where you don't want to use their actual names.


----------



## JustaPlayer (Jun 20, 2006)

James Jacobs said:
			
		

> Actually, since demon lords advance by +1 CR for every Hit Die you add, their spell resistance does actually increase by 1 for every HD gained. In my turnover, all the demon lords had a base SR of CR +13; I really don't know why this was changed during the book's editing/development cycle. Anyway, as a result, when you advance several demon lords, they'll get a 2 point boost in their SR. <shrug>
> 
> As for the Dragon issues:
> 
> ...



There was also one mentioned in the appendix of Hordes which was printed in Dungeon but I'm not sure which mag number.  It was Kezzit or Kerzit or some such. Lord of the Tome was his title I think.  Anyway, I'll get the number when I get home.


----------



## James Jacobs (Jun 20, 2006)

JustaPlayer said:
			
		

> There was also one mentioned in the appendix of Hordes which was printed in Dungeon but I'm not sure which mag number.  It was Kezzit or Kerzit or some such. Lord of the Tome was his title I think.  Anyway, I'll get the number when I get home.




Kerzit was detailed in issue #112 of _Dungeon_, along with the nabassu and the colchiln demon and the undead shoosuva (minions of Yeenoghu). The nabassu, of course, made it into the Fiendish Codex. Those seeking stats for the other monsters'll need to track down a copy of this issue, alas.


----------



## Ripzerai (Jun 20, 2006)

I would humbly suggest a new name for arrow demons: _sagittezu._

So does the book offer any hint at to what degree demon lords can control their realms? I notice the web enhancement says Kanchelsis can manipulate the shape of his palace at will, despite being only a demigod (that would ordinarily be a DvR 11 effect). Can Graz'zt and other demons explicitly do the same? It looks promising.


----------



## JustaPlayer (Jun 20, 2006)

Shade said:
			
		

> Fiendish Codex I: The Lost Annals is up, including laghathti obyriths, Woeful Escarand, and other planar layers!
> 
> This is the web enhancement I've been waiting for, and it delivers.



This seems to be no longer working.  Were you able to download stuff?


----------



## Shade (Jun 20, 2006)

JustaPlayer said:
			
		

> This seems to be no longer working.  Were you able to download stuff?




Odd...it's working fine for me.  It isn't a pdf download this time...just a series of web pages similar to the monthly previews.


----------



## JustaPlayer (Jun 20, 2006)

Shade said:
			
		

> Odd...it's working fine for me.  It isn't a pdf download this time...just a series of web pages similar to the monthly previews.



Crap, It's working now.  I just tried close to 20 times.  Cleared cache and all.  Now it works.


----------



## Shade (Jun 20, 2006)

JustaPlayer said:
			
		

> Crap, It's working now.  I just tried close to 20 times.  Cleared cache and all.  Now it works.




Ahh, the joys of the internet.


----------



## JustaPlayer (Jun 21, 2006)

Shade said:
			
		

> Ahh, the joys of the internet.



All information has now been assimilated into my database.


----------



## Shemeska (Jun 21, 2006)

The latest WE is very nice. I especially liked the description of the Dreaming Gulf the little bits of stuff about old ruins in Vallashan (the timeline is a tad off, otherwise it'd be very tempting to link that to the Harmonium's utterly failed attempt to invade and destroy the Abyss, shortly after they expanded out onto the planes from Ortho).

One typo in the description of Durao however I found amusing. Five layers in Gehenna, the Fourfold Furnace of Perdition? *grin*

This is one of those situations where some snickering 'loths on their lunch break from the Tower Arcane just went around putting signs in front of bottomless chasms that read, 'Portal to 5th Furnace', isn't it?


----------



## Ripzerai (Jun 21, 2006)

Shemeska said:
			
		

> (the timeline is a tad off, otherwise it'd be very tempting to link that to the Harmonium's utterly failed attempt to invade and destroy the Abyss, shortly after they expanded out onto the planes from Ortho).




I thought the same thing! It's as if we share a common frame of reference and agree on many points! Bizarre.

As it is, though, Vallashan seems to be an entirely new material planar world, unless it's an obscure reference that I'm not getting. Which is fine - maybe someone can develop it.

The Forgotten Land works very well with Colin McComb's email to BOZ, but also with Zzyczesiya's original reference - apparently Xanxost forgot to mention Zzyczesiya again because Zzyczesiya, Lord of Ignorance, made it so. Which was probably Colin McComb's intention, though I thought he was just joking about how it was a lord we had no information on. I also like the description of the layer a lot - it's quite an expansion on something that we previously had basically only one line of information on!

I'm going to choose to ignore the '600 years ago' reference, though, as it puts the beginning of Fraternity of Order Abyssal exploration a few centuries too late for my liking. If you turn the 6 upside down, it's about right considering the age of the faction.

Woeful Escarand was quite a major expansion as well, considering the only thing we knew about the layer itself was found in the 2e monster descriptions of manes and nalfeshnee.  Erik Mona seems to have been influenced by his layer of Black Regulus from _Armies of the Abyss_, which was another nalfeshnee tribunal. I had previously thought of Black Regulus as a layer seperate from Woeful Escarond, but now I'm inclined to say they're the same thing.
It was cleverly done, in any case - I particularly like the idea of rituals you can perform to force demons into trial. What a delicious way of defeating an enemy - or possibly not defeating them, depending on the judges' whims. Nice descriptions of the judges, too.


----------



## Erik Mona (Jun 21, 2006)

Thanks, guys! The short layers were the cut that cut deepest, so I'm thrilled that they're available for everyone to read. I could have written another 200 pages on the Abyss, easy (although I would have needed a _lot_ more time, as my editors can attest). 

What a fun project! I can't believe they followed it up with an even better one! 

--Erik


----------



## demiurge1138 (Jun 21, 2006)

Erik Mona said:
			
		

> What a fun project! I can't believe they followed it up with an even better one!
> 
> --Erik



Tease.

Demiurge out.


----------



## Razz (Jun 21, 2006)

There, how's this for a fixed *Klurichir*?

Klurichir Demon 

Upped it 5 HD, fixed it's missing damage and attack routines, based its new ability scores by comparing the new balor to the old and since the klurichir I assume was based off the 3.0 balor stats, I fixed the stats accordingly, fixed DCs, skill modifiers, gave it true seeing instead of see invisibility, etc.

Still missing a range on the spine attack...not sure what to give it? 30 ft., 50 ft., 60 ft. increment? 

So, yeah, did most of the work for you guys at WotC! How's about grabbing it, fixing it your special way and plopping it on the website as a fix?   

High hopes, I know. Klurichir's become my best friend since FF...


----------



## Upper_Krust (Jun 21, 2006)

Hey there Razz! 



			
				Razz said:
			
		

> There, how's this for a fixed *Klurichir*?
> 
> Klurichir Demon




Interesting. Though I would suggest it use the battleaxe two-handed, sacrificing one of its claws.

Also wouldn't a Huge Battleaxe deal either 4d6, 3d8 or 2d12 damage (rather than 3d6).

A +3 Battleaxe seems a tad weak in comparison to its Molydeus and Balor buddies. Maybe a +5 keen battleaxe of bitterness...?



			
				Razz said:
			
		

> Upped it 5 HD, fixed it's missing damage and attack routines, based its new ability scores by comparing the new balor to the old and since the klurichir I assume was based off the 3.0 balor stats, I fixed the stats accordingly, fixed DCs, skill modifiers, gave it true seeing instead of see invisibility, etc.
> 
> Still missing a range on the spine attack...not sure what to give it? 30 ft., 50 ft., 60 ft. increment?




60 ft. for Huge.



			
				Razz said:
			
		

> So, yeah, did most of the work for you guys at WotC! How's about grabbing it, fixing it your special way and plopping it on the website as a fix?
> 
> High hopes, I know. Klurichir's become my best friend since FF...




Maybe there'll be a Demonomicon article about the Klurichir? Perhaps the Klurichir represent the group of six powerful Balors (Klurichir are a bit like mutated advanced Balors) named at the back of AD&D Monster Manual 2, like Errtu and Balor.


----------



## Razz (Jun 21, 2006)

Upper_Krust said:
			
		

> Hey there Razz!
> Interesting. Though I would suggest it use the battleaxe two-handed, sacrificing one of its claws.




True, in such a case, probably a Huge greataxe would be more suitable. 



			
				Upper_Krust said:
			
		

> Also wouldn't a Huge Battleaxe deal either 4d6, 3d8 or 2d12 damage (rather than 3d6).




Battleaxe is 1d8, upgraded twice I'm pretty sure it goes to 2d6, then 3d6.



			
				Upper_Krust said:
			
		

> A +3 Battleaxe seems a tad weak in comparison to its Molydeus and Balor buddies. Maybe a +5 keen battleaxe of bitterness...?




True, I was merely trying to stay to the core klurichir as presented in FF without delving too far off base. But compared to a Molydeus and Balor's weapons, a +3 unholy wounding battleaxe (or greataxe) sounds about right for it, especially as a CR 25 (I don't agree with the CR 17 it was given, taking all its abilities into account even in its 3.0 version).



			
				Upper_Krust said:
			
		

> 60 ft. for Huge.




Really? I probably missed that in the MM or something. Where'd you find that one?



			
				Upper_Krust said:
			
		

> Maybe there'll be a Demonomicon article about the Klurichir? Perhaps the Klurichir represent the group of six powerful Balors (Klurichir are a bit like mutated advanced Balors) named at the back of AD&D Monster Manual 2, like Errtu and Balor.




I hope so, the klurichir would suck if they downgraded it though. It'll lose its flavor as the "demon that even gives balors nightmares."


----------



## Psion (Jun 21, 2006)

Here's a question for Erik if he's still lurking about.

I know there are mechanical differences, but were obyriths meant to be an "official take" on Qlippoths? In your campaign do you/would you essentially make them the same "race"?


----------



## Ripzerai (Jun 21, 2006)

Psion said:
			
		

> I know there are mechanical differences, but were obyriths meant to be an "official take" on Qlippoths? In your campaign do you/would you essentially make them the same "race"?




That was already answered.



			
				Erik Mona said:
			
		

> coyote6 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


----------



## hamishspence (Jun 21, 2006)

Reference to yochol: why should it have dominate person? the article seems pretty clear in the tactics for it, and the Knowledge-planes table for it also says it has dominate person. Suggestions?


----------



## hamishspence (Jun 21, 2006)

*Sorry, miswording.*

I meant to say: why are we being told that it having dominate person is a mistake in the codex? Since it is referred to several times, it cannot be a misprint.


----------



## James Jacobs (Jun 21, 2006)

hamishspence said:
			
		

> I meant to say: why are we being told that it having dominate person is a mistake in the codex? Since it is referred to several times, it cannot be a misprint.




Either way... there's an error in the stat block. If you go with _dominate person_ (my preference), then you need to raise the save DC for the ability. If you  don't want to change the save DC, change it to _charm person_. I'm not sure how WotC will want to handle the errata for this... my recomendation upon further thinking about it is to make it _dominate person_ and raise the save DC to 20.


----------



## Alzrius (Jun 21, 2006)

Razz said:
			
		

> I hope so, the klurichir would suck if they downgraded it though. It'll lose its flavor as the "demon that even gives balors nightmares."




Sadly, that's pretty much already the case. The _Fiendish Codex_ officially retconned the klurichir's CR to being 17, which seems to be the last nail in the coffin for them being weaker than balors in 3.5.


----------



## Zarnam (Jun 22, 2006)

After reading FC I at least two times now, I can really say that this book is imho quite solid addition to my D&D bookshelf   

James, I have some questions to you about the Demonlords and Demonomicon:

1) I know it much too early to ask...but do you have any concepts about who the next Demonomicon "star" will be ??
2) I was wondering if Haagenti will ever appear in Demonomicon ?? Do you think he would be able to cast spells as a wizard - like Orcus or Mephistofeles ??

Thanks !!


----------



## KL (Jun 22, 2006)

*Monster Manual 2 Demon Princes*

It was nice to see the demon princes mentioned in MM2 of first edition get some developement. What a coincidence that my version of Aseroth and Mastiphal came close to what was in the book. I had Aseroth as a prince of cold as well (he looked like a human with a bear's head and claws, huge hooves and white fur) and Mastiphal in my case was also red-skinned, four armed, and horned (but with wings and tail).

I had Obox-ob as a lord of worms and slugs (I guess that is Ugudenk's province now) and I had Ahrimanes's layer named Ahriman-abud also.


----------



## Erik Mona (Jun 22, 2006)

I think Ahriman-abad is from real world mythology.

--Erik


----------



## Wereserpent (Jun 22, 2006)

Shemeska said:
			
		

> And also, noticed the DL deities included in the list of layer lords this afternoon. Sweet.





Which is something that the people who work on DL over at Sovereign Press arent too happy about.  To quote Cam Banks from the Dragonlance.com forums upon hearing about this.



> AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRGH
> 
> Cheers,
> Cam




I agree with him, DL should NOT be in the Great Wheel, as it never was originally.  To quote Mr. Banks again



> Two problems with this:
> 
> 1. Dragonlance's cosmology was separate before it became incorporated into the Great Wheel (around the time of Manual of the Planes). The Dragonlance Abyss and the Greyhawk Abyss weren't originally identical. MotP and 2nd edition AD&D even had to move Takhisis to the Nine Hells since she's lawful evil. So it's not so much a retcon as a retcon of a retcon, and we worked hard to clarify all of this in the recent DL gaming sourcebooks.
> 
> ...




So, as far as I am concered, there are NO DL gods in the Great Wheel.


----------



## Shemeska (Jun 22, 2006)

Galeros said:
			
		

> 1. Dragonlance's cosmology was separate before it became incorporated into the Great Wheel (around the time of Manual of the Planes). The Dragonlance Abyss and the Greyhawk Abyss weren't originally identical. MotP and 2nd edition AD&D even had to move Takhisis to the Nine Hells since she's lawful evil. So it's not so much a retcon as a retcon of a retcon, and we worked hard to clarify all of this in the recent DL gaming sourcebooks.




It wasn't so much seperate as it didn't have a cosmology before it was part of the Wheel. There was never any real suggestion of a seperate DL cosmology outside of some very vague notions in DL Adventures, which listed a few names of places but did not establish anything concrete. Later in 1e they were incorporated into the Great Wheel and those names were used in subsequent sources as names of divine domains as I recall, not much of a retcon if any retcon at all, the 3e DL retcon being more invasive on some levels, but the novels have always been vague enough to not really make one difference or another. It's debateable.

I could also just default to the notion of... Psst, the scholars on Krynn just didn't know what they were talking about, calling -every- evil outer plane 'the Abyss'.   j/k




> 2. Chemosh isn't chaotic evil, he's neutral evil. So either he's slumming in an Abyssal layer or he's not the Dragonlance Chemosh (who is incidentally a major player in recent Dragonlance novels.)




Chemosh is listed in the relevant 2e material (OHG, p180) as having his divine domain in the Abyss. The plane doesn't match his alignment, sure, but while most deities choose to carve out their home in a plane that does match them, it's not a strict requirement. Chemosh for whatever reason chose this route (perhaps to seperate himself from Takhisis in Baator?).


----------



## Shade (Jun 22, 2006)

I'm failing to see why the DL deities being in FC is such an issue.   FC isn't a Dragonlance product, so it has no impact on the campaign setting.   Borrowing items from other campaign settings is a long-running tradition of D&D (that's how Tiamat ended up in DL, right?), so how does having a couple similarly-named gods on a list in an appendix to a non-core book going to cause any problems?


----------



## JustaPlayer (Jun 22, 2006)

Shade said:
			
		

> I'm failing to see why the DL deities being in FC is such an issue.   FC isn't a Dragonlance product, so it has no impact on the campaign setting.   Borrowing items from other campaign settings is a long-running tradition of D&D (that's how Tiamat ended up in DL, right?), so how does having a couple similarly-named gods on a list in an appendix to a non-core book going to cause any problems?



Tiamat has never been in DL.  The reason why it matters is that you think Tiamat was part of DL.  The creators of said world do not wish to have their vision muddied.


----------



## Shade (Jun 22, 2006)

JustaPlayer said:
			
		

> Tiamat has never been in DL.  The reason why it matters is that you think Tiamat was part of DL.  The creators of said world do not wish to have their vision muddied.




How could Takhisis be anything _but _ inspired by Tiamat?


----------



## Pants (Jun 22, 2006)

JustaPlayer said:
			
		

> Tiamat has never been in DL.



Tiamat WAS Takhisis. 2e subsequently muddled it up for no good reason, but back in 1e, they were one and the same.

That said, I'm all for keeping DL and the Great Wheel split, they never really fit together, even after all the retconns.


----------



## Nightfall (Jun 22, 2006)

All I have to say is Orcus rules but the picture they used in the book shouldn't have been the one from BoVD. It should have been the one on the art gallery.


----------



## Shade (Jun 22, 2006)

Nightfall said:
			
		

> All I have to say is Orcus rules but the picture they used in the book shouldn't have been the one from BoVD. It should have been the one on the art gallery.




Orcus rules (Thanatos), Juiblex drools, and Malcanthet is a wicked hottie (her picture should have been the one from Maxim).    

After Year of Dragons ends, I think next year should be Year of Fiends.


----------



## Nightfall (Jun 22, 2006)

I'm all for it. (And yes he rules Thanatos now but soon it won't just be there!)


----------



## JustaPlayer (Jun 22, 2006)

Pants said:
			
		

> Tiamat WAS Takhisis. 2e subsequently muddled it up for no good reason, but back in 1e, they were one and the same.
> 
> That said, I'm all for keeping DL and the Great Wheel split, they never really fit together, even after all the retconns.



Not according to Wies/Hickman.  They created the world.  I'll stick with their vision of it.


----------



## JustaPlayer (Jun 22, 2006)

Erik, if you are still around, what are the chances of seeing some of the lords not covered (except in the appendix) in future Demonomicon articles?  The ones coming out not are great, I just can't help but feeling the stuff has mostly been covered before(because it has).


----------



## Upper_Krust (Jun 22, 2006)

Hey Razz! 

apologies for taking so long to reply, I am a bit busy at the moment. 



			
				Razz said:
			
		

> True, in such a case, probably a Huge greataxe would be more suitable.




Absolutely. Or, I wonder would it actually be better wielding four single weapons?



			
				Razz said:
			
		

> Battleaxe is 1d8, upgraded twice I'm pretty sure it goes to 2d6, then 3d6.




Indeed, I was confusing myself with greataxe.   



			
				Razz said:
			
		

> True, I was merely trying to stay to the core klurichir as presented in FF without delving too far off base. But compared to a Molydeus and Balor's weapons, a +3 unholy wounding battleaxe (or greataxe) sounds about right for it, especially as a CR 25 (I don't agree with the CR 17 it was given, taking all its abilities into account even in its 3.0 version).




Certainly there doesn't seem to be much rhyme or reason behind the weapons...but then again it is the Abyss.   



			
				Razz said:
			
		

> Really? I probably missed that in the MM or something. Where'd you find that one?




I thought you were asking for opinions.   



			
				Razz said:
			
		

> I hope so, the klurichir would suck if they downgraded it though. It'll lose its flavor as the "demon that even gives balors nightmares."




Yes but if they had retained the CR 25 it would have been the "demon that even gives Demogorgon nightmares!"


----------



## ruleslawyer (Jun 22, 2006)

JustaPlayer said:
			
		

> Not according to Wies/Hickman.  They created the world.  I'll stick with their vision of it.



Just because the authors say so doesn't mean that their five-headed chromatic dragon doesn't bear suspicious resemblance to a pre-existing iconic figure in D&D.


----------



## Erik Mona (Jun 22, 2006)

JustaPlayer said:
			
		

> Erik, if you are still around, what are the chances of seeing some of the lords not covered (except in the appendix) in future Demonomicon articles?  The ones coming out not are great, I just can't help but feeling the stuff has mostly been covered before(because it has).




Probably pretty decent, given infinite time.

I doubt we'll see anything more on Chemosh, though. 

--Erik


----------



## JustaPlayer (Jun 22, 2006)

Upper_Krust said:
			
		

> Yes but if they had retained the CR 25 it would have been the "demon that even gives Demogorgon nightmares!"



Maawhaaaahaaaaahaaaaa!


----------



## James Jacobs (Jun 22, 2006)

Zarnam said:
			
		

> James, I have some questions to you about the Demonlords and Demonomicon:
> 
> 1) I know it much too early to ask...but do you have any concepts about who the next Demonomicon "star" will be ??
> 2) I was wondering if Haagenti will ever appear in Demonomicon ?? Do you think he would be able to cast spells as a wizard - like Orcus or Mephistofeles ??




1) It is, alas, too early to ask about who the next Demonomicon "star" will be. What I CAN say is that I've got the next 3 picked out and approved by the _Dragon_ editors.

2) Haagenti will probably not appear in a Demonomicon. At least, not any time soon. Those looking for more information on him might want to go check out Green Ronin's "Book of Fiends," though...


----------



## Wereserpent (Jun 22, 2006)

Shemeska said:
			
		

> It wasn't so much seperate as it didn't have a cosmology before it was part of the Wheel. There was never any real suggestion of a seperate DL cosmology outside of some very vague notions in DL Adventures, which listed a few names of places but did not establish anything concrete. Later in 1e they were incorporated into the Great Wheel and those names were used in subsequent sources as names of divine domains as I recall, not much of a retcon if any retcon at all, the 3e DL retcon being more invasive on some levels, but the novels have always been vague enough to not really make one difference or another. It's debateable.
> 
> I could also just default to the notion of... Psst, the scholars on Krynn just didn't know what they were talking about, calling -every- evil outer plane 'the Abyss'.   j/k
> 
> ...




Sure you can say that, but officially Krynn is not a part of the Great Wheel, and was never meant to be either.  The quotes I provided were from one of the game designers who works on the DL books.


----------



## sckeener (Jun 22, 2006)

James Jacobs said:
			
		

> 1) It is, alas, too early to ask about who the next Demonomicon "star" will be. What I CAN say is that I've got the next 3 picked out and approved by the _Dragon_ editors.




Thank you.....I was wondering how I was going to keep up all my interest in fiendish delights when that cursed glowing orb reached its zenith....a pox on Summer...

(that is right...I'm stuck working...fiendish thoughts are all that get me through the day)

seriously, I am so glad to hear that three more "star"s  have been approved.  I was surprised so much FC1 web material was coming out on WotC's website.  I figured they would want do some initial hype type stuff but then would settle down into spiking the sales...a perfect time would be right around Halloween.  I hope we have some wonderful fiendish and undead lore coming to us in Dragon or Dungeon during that month.


----------



## Ripzerai (Jun 22, 2006)

Galeros said:
			
		

> Sure you can say that, but officially Krynn is not a part of the Great Wheel, and was never meant to be either.  The quotes I provided were from one of the game designers who works on the DL books.




But not one of the game designers who works on the Great Wheel. That's the conundrum, isn't it? The DL designers are responsible for Dragonlance, and can only determine what goes on in the Dragonlance campaign. They can't determine what is or isn't part of the Great Wheel. 

That is, they can keep the Wheel out of Dragonlance, but they can't keep Dragonlance out of the Wheel. The core cosmology might well have a version of Krynn in it without the Krynn described in the d20 materials being part of the core cosmology.

Krynn was part of the core cosmology for two editions of the game, and works perfectly well in it. The thoughtless attempt to excise it for the sake of purity does great damage to a campaign setting that has evolved to be partly dependent on it - for example, it means removing or revising entire layers of the Abyss. Why should that happen? Why eviscerate a campaign setting - the Great Wheel's Abyss - just to keep out a campaign setting that was, for over a decade, intimately intertwined with it?

Dragonlance is almost entirely about the world of Krynn, and the cosmology it's set in doesn't change it to any significant degree. Taking all references to Krynn out of the core cosmology _does_ change that setting significantly, however.

Tracy Hickman didn't intend for Krynn to exist in a common "multiverse" with the other D&D worlds? Fine. But prominent designers of the D&D multiverse _did_ intend to include Krynn - and their vision for the campaigns they developed is just as worthy as Hickmans' vision for the campaign _he_ developed.


----------



## EricNoah (Jun 22, 2006)

Just wanted to chime in and say I'm enjoying the book.  It's got some good "old stuff" (for an old Planescape fan) and some good new stuff.  The least useful bits, to me personally, are the stats for the demon lords -- like stats for gods, not particularly useful for me.  

I still feel like there has been no product that really focused on "cults" ala a demon cult -- something that is not like a cleric, something that's maybe more limited in scope (maybe an NPC class) that has a limited repertoire of themed schticks as well as some social/criminal benefits.  I'm thinking of a social outcast who finds a demon to teach him a trick or two, uses it and his new confidence to wrangle a few followers, and they make mischief in a town.  That sort of thing.  Maybe there was something in BoVD that I missed as I haven't read that one thoroughly or recently.


----------



## John Q. Mayhem (Jun 22, 2006)

Dragonlance authors and Planescape authors disagree on whether it's in the great wheel? Interesting. I'll go with the guys writing about the specific setting, myself.

Also, saying that keeping DL separate from the Great Wheel does great damage to either setting is pretty ridiculous, IMO.

EDIT: Niceness.


----------



## Ripzerai (Jun 22, 2006)

EricNoah said:
			
		

> I still feel like there has been no product that really focused on "cults" ala a demon cult -- something that is not like a cleric, something that's maybe more limited in scope (maybe an NPC class) that has a limited repertoire of themed schticks as well as some social/criminal benefits.  I'm thinking of a social outcast who finds a demon to teach him a trick or two, uses it and his new confidence to wrangle a few followers, and they make mischief in a town.  That sort of thing.  Maybe there was something in BoVD that I missed as I haven't read that one thoroughly or recently.




There's the Demonologist from the _Book of Vile Darkness_, and the Thaumaturgist from Green Ronin's _Book of Fiends_.


----------



## Ripzerai (Jun 23, 2006)

John Q. Mayhem said:
			
		

> Also, saying that keeping DL separate from the Great Wheel does great damage to either setting is pretty ridiculous, IMO.




It depends on what you think "great damage" is. It means one of the quarters of the Marketplace Eternal in the Outlands is gone, several Abyssal layers and realms throughout the Outer Planes are gone, Krynnish expatriates like Torvald the dwarf and Factol Ambar of the Athar have their origins retconned, and it means one of the three parts of the Radiant Triangle in the Spelljammer setting are gone. It means the events of the Forgotten Realms novel _Tymora's Luck_ didn't happen, since kender, Sirrion, and Paladine/Fizban were fundamental to it.

By contrast, keeping Krynn _in_ the Great Wheel doesn't hurt Krynn at all. It's fine that the cosmology looks different from inside looking out than it does from outside looking in - it doesn't mean the Krynnish are stupid or ignorant, only that their perspective is different.

It's also fine to say that in a Dragonlance campaign Krynn is seperate, while in a Planescape, Ravenloft, Spelljammer, or Forgotten Realms campaign it's integrated; different campaigns have different needs, and there's no reason to cut off the ease of other adventures just because one personally likes one type more.

Which might be basically what you were saying - go with the guys writing the specific setting. In a Spelljammer campaign, you might go with the guys who wrote that setting said, while in a Dragonlance campaign, go with what _those_ guys said. In _Hordes of the Abyss_, go with what the guy writing _that_ said.


----------



## John Q. Mayhem (Jun 23, 2006)

Yeah, that's what I mean. In a PS game, do the PS thing; in a DL game, do the DL thing.


----------



## Wereserpent (Jun 23, 2006)

I think what Mr. Banks was saying was that DL was NEVER meant to be a part of the Great Wheel, it just go shoved in there when it was never supposed to be there. 

EDIT: I admit, this is also somewhat of a personal issue for me, as I DESPISE Planescape, so I loathe the idea of it being connected to Krynn in any way.


----------



## Ripzerai (Jun 23, 2006)

Galeros said:
			
		

> I think what Mr. Banks was saying was that DL was NEVER meant to be a part of the Great Wheel




It was meant to be part of the Great Wheel in just about every setting _other_ than DL, is what _I'm_ saying.


----------



## M.L. Martin (Jun 23, 2006)

DL was never clear on its planar position until 3rd Edition, really; DL Adventures included a description of the 'godly' realms that was ambiguous, while the Manual of the Planes, published later that same year, explicitly integrated DL into the cosmology.  Demogorgon showed up in the second DL story published, "A Stone's Throw Away", albeit not by name, and Takhisis was intended to be Tiamat at some point during the design, although that faded out as the project progressed.

       I say, declare them to be a Chemosh and Hiddukel that fled Krynn in the timeline when Raistlin killed the other gods, say Soth went to Ravenloft from that same timeline, and all's good.    

       BTW, James, Erik, I've got a tidbit that *must* go into the 'Demogorgon in the Real World' sidebar when the _Demonomicon _ gets around to him:

      "There are two variants in the manuscripts [of Lactantius' commentaries on Statius' _Thebaid_, I believe]; one is _demogorgona_, the other _demogorgon_.  From the latter of these corruptions, later ages evolved a completely new deity, Demogorgon, who was to enjoy a distinguished literary career in Boccaccio's _Genealogy of the Gods_, in Spenser, in Milton, and in Shelley.  This is perhaps the only time a scribal blunder underwent an apotheosis."--C. S. Lewis, _ The Discarded Image_, pp. 39-40, Cambridge University Press, Canto edition

 

       Matthew L. Martin


----------



## frankthedm (Jun 23, 2006)

Ripzerai said:
			
		

> Kobold Avenger said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Dagon is Cthulhu for the D&D game. An ancient evil, older than the Tanar’ri, worshiped by ancient communities of fish men  [Kuo-toa that never fled to the Underdark], has the ability to drive mortals to suicide and can inflict permanent crippling phobias. Nope,  nothing lovecraftian there…._Ia! Ia! Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn!_






He looks somewhat close to the Upcoming _Sota Toys_:*Nightmares of Lovecraft * Dagon too.


----------



## Mr.Black (Jun 23, 2006)

frankthedm said:
			
		

> Dagon is Cthulhu for the D&D game.




Nah.  Cthulhu is the next demon prince to be covered in Dragon.


----------



## Erik Mona (Jun 23, 2006)

Galeros said:
			
		

> EDIT: I admit, this is also somewhat of a personal issue for me, as I DESPISE Planescape, so I loathe the idea of it being connected to Krynn in any way.




That's unfortunate. Once you get past the inane verbal posturing that infected the first year or so of releases, it really marks a high-point of TSR's creative development.

--Erik


----------



## Nightfall (Jun 23, 2006)

Yeah especially Dead Gods.


----------



## frankthedm (Jun 23, 2006)

Erik Mona said:
			
		

> That's unfortunate. Once you get past the inane verbal posturing that infected the first year or so of releases, it really marks a high-point of TSR's creative development.
> 
> --Erik



I felt TSR's High point was the Dark*Sun box set. They blanked it all up pretty quick though.

Planescape was the Manual of the planes fluffernutted into a campaign setting. The Planescape 'campaign' was used to inflate the cost of Planar material and spread the information across multiple books and box sets. It was like marketing said, _"We know a single planar book would sell, lets spread it over dozens of books!" Oh, players love white wolf games, lets factionize the PCs like one of thier games. Don't forget to make them feel kewl about playing the setting, lets call all non planehopping characters "Clueless!"_


----------



## Nightfall (Jun 23, 2006)

To each their own frank. I felt the adventures were very good. Course I liked Dead Gods and of course the return of Orcus.


----------



## Erik Mona (Jun 23, 2006)

frankthedm said:
			
		

> Planescape was the Manual of the planes fluffernutted into a campaign setting.




You say that like it's a bad thing. 



			
				frankthedm said:
			
		

> The Planescape 'campaign' was used to inflate the cost of Planar material and spread the information across multiple books and box sets. It was like marketing said, _"We know a single planar book would sell, lets spread it over dozens of books!" Oh, players love white wolf games, lets factionize the PCs like one of thier games. Don't forget to make them feel kewl about playing the setting, lets call all non planehopping characters "Clueless!"_





Back then the creatives decided which products to make, not marketing. I think you're right about the factions, though. In hindsight I think tying the setting so closely to the factions and to Sigil was a mistake (how many Sigil books do we really need, anyway?), but there is a lot of _great_ material in the later Planescape books, and the Monstrous Compendium Appendices were of great use to DMs using any setting.

--Erik


----------



## Wereserpent (Jun 23, 2006)

frankthedm said:
			
		

> Planescape was the Manual of the planes fluffernutted into a campaign setting. The Planescape 'campaign' was used to inflate the cost of Planar material and spread the information across multiple books and box sets. It was like marketing said, _"We know a single planar book would sell, lets spread it over dozens of books!" Oh, players love white wolf games, lets factionize the PCs like one of thier games. Don't forget to make them feel kewl about playing the setting, lets call all non planehopping characters "Clueless!"_




That is what I hate about PS, the attitude.  I hate the arrogance displayed by the whole setting, and to some degree some fans I met(no one here).  The main reason I dont like PS being connected to DL is that it just doesnt mesh well with DL's Romantic Fantasy theme.


----------



## Ripzerai (Jun 23, 2006)

Here's a question asked on IRC:

"Quick question for you all. Hordes of the Abyss mentions Archosian Brightflame of Celene. Is that Melf by any other name? Or another Brightflame?"


----------



## EricNoah (Jun 23, 2006)

I loves me some planescape; my very best campaigns came straight outta that.  Pushed my game in a whole new wonderful direction.  And I love seeing the PS legacy finding its way into so many core and non-core 3E products.


----------



## Pants (Jun 23, 2006)

JustaPlayer said:
			
		

> Not according to Wies/Hickman.  They created the world.  I'll stick with their vision of it.



That's fine, but the 1e MotP pretty clearly established that they were one and the same, which only makes sense, assuming Krynn is located in the Great Wheel, which it was at the time, then having two multi-headed chromatic dragon gods with very similar portfolios was needlessly cluttering things. Only if Krynn is relocated outside of the GW does having Takhisis being different from Tiamat make sense, which is also logical, considering Krynn's cosmological viewpoint. 

PS is a good campaign setting. Too bad 90% of the information is haphazardly scattered across multiple box sets and books, making finding information on some subjects somewhat annoying. I'm also not fond of box-sets in general, but that's an entirely different issue.


----------



## Nightfall (Jun 23, 2006)

Pants,

I like the box set that Rappan Athuk Reloaded is coming in. Some people also liked the Midnight box set, along with the Judge's Guild box set. 

But there you are.


----------



## Razz (Jun 23, 2006)

PLANESCAPE was awesome in that it:

1) Was definitely a fantasy game taken to the "edge" (edge of time, reality, whatever, heh...)

2) Connected ALL the campaign settings, universes, worlds, etc. WITHOUT invading too much of the campaign's theme (though in some cases it invaded more than others, Forgotten Realms for example, but it worked out still)

3) The crossovers were just awesome: Tiamat/Takhisis, Vecna and Ravenloft, Orcus and Primus with the Modron March thing, Elminster/Mordenkainen/Dalamar get-togethers...I dunno about you guys, but cameos and crossovers in Planescape was what made my players in PS swoon.

4) Kept everything tidy and simple and in one place

5) Subtely stated that whatever the Primes ~thought~ they knew about the planes wasn't exactly what they hypothesized at all (this basically quieted down the crowd of people that would say "Uhh, how come this here is that when in my DL/FR/DS book says it's really this?")

6) It's simply fun and a good place to take epic level characters too, as well


----------



## Wereserpent (Jun 23, 2006)

Razz said:
			
		

> 5) Subtely stated that whatever the Primes ~thought~ they knew about the planes wasn't exactly what they hypothesized at all (this basically quieted down the crowd of people that would say "Uhh, how come this here is that when in my DL/FR/DS book says it's really this?")





That is one of the major reasons I dislike it.  It just rubs me the wrong way and is part of the attitude problem I talked about in my last post.

The crossovers IMHO were just cheesy.


----------



## Pants (Jun 23, 2006)

Nightfall said:
			
		

> Pants,
> 
> I like the box set that Rappan Athuk Reloaded is coming in. Some people also liked the Midnight box set, along with the Judge's Guild box set.
> 
> But there you are.



I really didn't like the PS boxsets at all. Seems like there was no rhyme or reason for why some information was in one booklet while other info was in the other booklet. Just needlessly cluttered things.



			
				Razz said:
			
		

> PLANESCAPE was awesome in that it:
> 
> 1) Was definitely a fantasy game taken to the "edge" (edge of time, reality, whatever, heh...)



Meh.



> 2) Connected ALL the campaign settings, universes, worlds, etc. WITHOUT invading too much of the campaign's theme (though in some cases it invaded more than others, Forgotten Realms for example, but it worked out still)
> 
> 3) The crossovers were just awesome: Tiamat/Takhisis, Vecna and Ravenloft, Orcus and Primus with the Modron March thing, Elminster/Mordenkainen/Dalamar get-togethers...I dunno about you guys, but cameos and crossovers in Planescape was what made my players in PS swoon.



I didn't much care for this aspect. Seemed like every setting put out by tSR 'back in the day' got shoehorned into the Great Wheel for no really good reasons. Just because.



> 6) It's simply fun and a good place to take epic level characters too, as well



Part of the appeal of PS was that it allowed lowbies to "safely" adventure in the planes while still having challenges for 'epic' adventurers (even though 'epic' sorta meant Level 13+ back in the day). That was cool.


----------



## Nightfall (Jun 23, 2006)

Oh so you're against the PS box sets, not box sets in general pants? 

*just seeking clarification...* 

Orcus rules!


----------



## frankthedm (Jun 23, 2006)

Erik Mona said:
			
		

> You say that like it's a bad thing.



So would having to buy the dark sun box set to get the Psoinics rules been be a good thing?







> but there is a lot of _great_ material in the later Planescape books, and the Monstrous Compendium Appendices were of great use to DMs using any setting.



Yeah, and it was real annoying when they spread the material over numerous book. And while the Monstrous Compendium Appendices were good, I did not need blank space, random quotes and oversized overstylized [though high quality] Tony Diterlizzi art swelling nearly _all entries _to two pages each.


----------



## Nightfall (Jun 23, 2006)

Well it has the point of using Psionics rules from 2nd edition making more sense. I mean they were all over the map...


----------



## KL (Jun 23, 2006)

*Why I Hate Planescape*

Personally I think Planescape had a lot of potential....

However, the adventures published for them sucked to high Abyss...
They are prime examples of how NOT to write an adventure. Players get "railroaded" so much that it is not even funny. They are no longer participants, but mere observers. Even if they do participate, it is toward an outcome that has already been determine.

Just read "The Deva Spark". What a piece of garbage that was. The second adventure in "Dead Gods" also, totally pointless. Don't even talk to me about "The Modron March!", or "Squaring the Circle" (no matter what the players do, the fiends loses their power to teleport).


----------



## Shade (Jun 23, 2006)

Fiendish Aspects III is up, as well as a compiled zip of all the fiendish aspects.


----------



## Pants (Jun 23, 2006)

Nightfall said:
			
		

> Oh so you're against the PS box sets, not box sets in general pants?
> 
> *just seeking clarification...*
> 
> Orcus rules!



Well, seeing as I've only been exposed to PS Boxsets...


----------



## Erik Mona (Jun 23, 2006)

Ripzerai said:
			
		

> Here's a question asked on IRC:
> 
> "Quick question for you all. Hordes of the Abyss mentions Archosian Brightflame of Celene. Is that Melf by any other name? Or another Brightflame?"




It's not Melf. I assumed a familial relation, but that's all.

--Erik


----------



## Nightfall (Jun 23, 2006)

Pants, 

You should really try other box sets than PS. The FR, the Birthright, and the Ravenloft ones were quite good. The Midnight one also rocks and plenty people keep saying how great the new Judge's Guild box set is. I'll let know what I think of the RAR box set.


----------



## Razz (Jun 23, 2006)

Galeros said:
			
		

> The crossovers IMHO were just cheesy.




For some, probably, for others it was great. Least for my players it was. That's what it's mainly about, if the players have fun with it, not if the DM doesn't like it.   I don't care too much for Eberron but I do look into it and learn about because I feel my players would really enjoy playing the new world


----------



## Razz (Jun 23, 2006)

Shade said:
			
		

> Fiendish Aspects III is up, as well as a compiled zip of all the fiendish aspects.




I was hoping for an aspect of Graz'zt, but alas, I figured he'd get screwed.

I assume that's the last of the aspect WE? Why aren't we getting a IV? It's just a couple more aspects...


----------



## Flexor the Mighty! (Jun 23, 2006)

My hat of PS know no limit. 

Really it just wasn't my cup of tea.  Campaign setting crossovers are cheesy IMO.  I always considered my campaign worlds to be seperate entities with no connection to each other.


----------



## Nightfall (Jun 23, 2006)

Until you see that horde of Titanspawn come crashing through the dimensional barriers...


----------



## BOZ (Jun 24, 2006)

Shade said:
			
		

> Fiendish Codex I: The Lost Annals is up, including laghathti obyriths, Woeful Escarand, and other planar layers!
> 
> This is the web enhancement I've been waiting for, and it delivers.




yay!    i just finally finished reading up on all the descriptive text in the book, for the descriptions of the layers and the text on the demon lords (took me long enough given how little free time i tend to have), including the web enhancement.  

that's the part i was waiting for, and indeed it delivers!


it did get me to thinking though... 

Erik has suggested before, that he would like to see article queries for Dragon on interesting planar locations (can you see where i'm going with this?) and i was thinking that a few articles on Abyssal layers to expand FC1 would be a lot of fun.  for a hint, the ones that were included in the web enhancement add up to a wordcount of 3327 (Woeful Escarand = 1047, additional layers = 2280), so you could pack quite a bit into an article with a wordcount, of say 5000.


----------



## BOZ (Jun 24, 2006)

noticed the references to Saint Kargoth the Betrayer, and Raxivort the other day.    good stuff!



			
				Ripzerai said:
			
		

> I would humbly suggest a new name for arrow demons: _sagittezu._




given that i was born on the 12th day of the 12th month, your reference is not lost on me.  

and i support this!



			
				Ripzerai said:
			
		

> The Forgotten Land works very well with Colin McComb's email to BOZ, but also with Zzyczesiya's original reference - apparently Xanxost forgot to mention Zzyczesiya again because Zzyczesiya, Lord of Ignorance, made it so. Which was probably Colin McComb's intention, though I thought he was just joking about how it was a lord we had no information on. I also like the description of the layer a lot - it's quite an expansion on something that we previously had basically only one line of information on!




indeed - as i have commented before, it looks like Erik really dug Colin's suggestions.    i forget if it was you or someone else, but i remember seeing someone defining Zzy as the "Patron of Innocence".  planar scholars might attribute "Innocence" as a mistranslation for "Ignorance" - pretty amusing.  

and actually, Colin told me that Z was actually Ray Vallese's "creation", which Ray later confirmed.



			
				Galeros said:
			
		

> I agree with him, DL should NOT be in the Great Wheel, as it never was originally.
> 
> So, as far as I am concered, there are NO DL gods in the Great Wheel.




hmm, i'm starting to think that the authors wanted to create controversy on purpose, since controversy sells.  



			
				James Jacobs said:
			
		

> Haagenti will probably not appear in a Demonomicon. At least, not any time soon.




although, you know, if someone gets to use the article idea i suggested above, we could have at least some description of the lesser demon lords pop up so that they don't have to compete with Orcus, Demogorgon, and Graz'zt for screen time.  



			
				frankthedm said:
			
		

> Dagon is Cthulhu for the D&D game.




actually, Dagon is _Dagon_ for the D&D game.  Cthulhu isn't the only Old One in Lovecraft's books, you know.  



			
				Ripzerai said:
			
		

> Here's a question asked on IRC:
> 
> "Quick question for you all. Hordes of the Abyss mentions Archosian Brightflame of Celene. Is that Melf by any other name? Or another Brightflame?"




i was wondering that myself, especially since Melf didn't have an actual first name that i'm aware of (unless Melf really was his first name)...


----------



## Mouseferatu (Jun 24, 2006)

BOZ said:
			
		

> Erik has suggested before, that he would like to see article queries for Dragon on interesting planar locations (can you see where i'm going with this?) and i was thinking that a few articles on Abyssal layers to expand FC1 would be a lot of fun.




I hope Erik and Jason agree, since I've just proposed that exact thing. 

(And I'm quite certain you and I aren't the only ones to think of it.)


----------



## Nightfall (Jun 24, 2006)

Would be nice to see stuff like Alzrius's layer maybe or the other layer Pazuzu runs.


----------



## frankthedm (Jun 24, 2006)

BOZ said:
			
		

> actually, Dagon is _Dagon_ for the D&D game.  Cthulhu isn't the only Old One in Lovecraft's books, you know.



The Critter from Dagon, which honestly never did get its own depiction, presumably was one of the things depicted in the stone carvings found by the unfortunate hero, unless one assumes H.P.L. intentionally misnamed the story. A better representative for Dagon would be a Kuo-Toa Leviathan of maximum advancement, from the FR:Underdark book. But as you say, there is more than one Great Old One and as long as the D&D game has The Great Obyrith Ones, it is all good.

… damnably human in general outline despite webbed hands and feet, shockingly wide and flabby lips, glassy, bulging eyes, and other features less pleasant to recall. Curiously enough, they seemed to have been chiselled badly out of proportion with their scenic background; for one of the creatures was shown in the act of killing a whale represented as *but little larger than himself*.


----------



## Razz (Jun 24, 2006)

You I've wondered something for awhile lately and--WHAT'S THE DEAL WITH DEMONS!?   

j/k

But seriously, I noticed the hype about demons demons demons and though I am on the same boat as everyone, I just wonder what is it about demons that likes to steal the spotlight and shine from the devils (which are just as awesome in their own light) and yugoloths (my absolute favorite of the 3 fiendish evils).

Not that I would want to see a loss of Demonomicon articles, but I wouldn't want to see a complete lack of, say, articles on the Lords of the Nine, new devils, and even articles on never-before-seen archdevils (beyond Geryon, there're other unique archdevils besides the ones that rule the layers). At least I believe it's been stated many times there are, the Nine Hells is one big vile, political landscape with its "nobles" and "ranks" to create just about any new archdevil.

As for the 'loths, one can go miles with them, and unlike demons, I don't mean just coming up with infinite new demon lords and new demon creatures either. Sure be nice to, maybe, see an article on the updated yugoloths not converted from 2E yet and yugoloth lords. Of course, yugoloths demand their own Fiendish Codex, number III on the list I, along with many others, are hoping for?


----------



## EricNoah (Jun 24, 2006)

I dunno, I think devils should be more like "beautiful evil", demons like "ugly evil," and yugoloths like "sneaky evil."  I haven't yet really seen what I envision devils to be like.  Maybe FC2 will have a new "race" of devils (not the baatezu) that are "beautiful evil."


----------



## Ripzerai (Jun 24, 2006)

BOZ said:
			
		

> i forget if it was you or someone else, but i remember seeing someone defining Zzy as the "Patron of Innocence".




Yeah, that was me. 

Here's a revised version:



> Zzyczesiya (pronounced zzie-CHESS-see-yah) was, at one time, the so-called Paragon of Innocence, taking the form of a beautiful angelic creature, like a solar and a deva. It was claimed that those who gazed at her visage could not cause her harm, and no form of divination in the multiverse could reveal her chaotic and evil alignment.
> 
> She was ultimately cast into the Wells of Darkness by Kostchtchie, remaining there for many long centuries. When she finally escaped from that prison (one of only a handful of beings ever to do so) she was changed, transformed into an alien being made of dark, shifting shadows, with three wrathful green eyes. Her ability to shroud her alignment had grown, allowing her to erase all memory of her past from the minds of everyone in the multiverse. Zzyczesiya moved to the Forgotten Land, the third layer of the Abyss.
> 
> Zzyczesiya's powers are amorphous, and the demon lady has likely forgotten their full extent, or has otherwise not bothered to learn how far its powers now extend since her escape. She takes part in the political games of the tanar'ri lords only sparingly, so as not to reveal anything more about herself than she needs to. Still, each of them seeks to draw Zzyczesiya in to temporary alliances, for she wields incredible power. Those who manage to ally themselves with Zzyczesiya are occasionally fortunate enough to achieve their ends - many of them are not, for she directs ill will and ill fortune indiscriminately.






			
				BOZ said:
			
		

> i was wondering that myself, especially since Melf didn't have an actual first name that i'm aware of (unless Melf really was his first name)...




It would be strange if his spells was titled after his nickname rather than his real one.


----------



## Erik Mona (Jun 24, 2006)

Melf is his real first name.

--Erik


----------



## BOZ (Jun 24, 2006)

wacky!  LOL


----------



## JustaPlayer (Jun 25, 2006)

Razz said:
			
		

> You I've wondered something for awhile lately and--WHAT'S THE DEAL WITH DEMONS!?
> 
> j/k
> 
> ...



I don't know about most people, but I like the devils better than the demons.  Out numbered and out gunned but they still hold the blood wars to a stand still.  Plus I think two of the coolest beings are devils. Asmodeus and Mephistopheles.  These guys play chess on a cosmic scale.


----------



## Ipissimus (Jun 25, 2006)

James Jacobs said:
			
		

> 1) It is, alas, too early to ask about who the next Demonomicon "star" will be. What I CAN say is that I've got the next 3 picked out and approved by the _Dragon_ editors.
> 
> 2) Haagenti will probably not appear in a Demonomicon. At least, not any time soon. Those looking for more information on him might want to go check out Green Ronin's "Book of Fiends," though...



 -prays- Please be Malcanthet, please, please, please...


----------



## Nightfall (Jun 25, 2006)

Orcus man, I want Orcus. Especially if they use the pick that wasn't actually used in the FC I book but was in the art gallery.

That was a VERY nice Orcus pic.


----------



## Nightfall (Jun 25, 2006)

...


----------



## Razz (Jun 25, 2006)

JustaPlayer said:
			
		

> I don't know about most people, but I like the devils better than the demons.  Out numbered and out gunned but they still hold the blood wars to a stand still.  Plus I think two of the coolest beings are devils. Asmodeus and Mephistopheles.  These guys play chess on a cosmic scale.




I like them all equally because they're all evil and unique in their own way.

But if I ~HAD~ to choose...yugoloths.


----------



## Nightfall (Jun 25, 2006)

Yeah well most of us like Yugoloths. I like Demons true but Yugoloths are fun because they are inscrunable evil. Probably why I liked Book of Fiends, even if they didn't quite go the traditional D&D route. There were/are some fun ones.


----------



## Shade (Jun 26, 2006)

I've always liked the devils less than the demons and yugoloths...probably for the same reason that I rarely identify with lawful characters.


----------



## BOZ (Jun 26, 2006)

because you can't be told what to do, maaaaan?


----------



## Ipissimus (Jun 26, 2006)

Nightfall said:
			
		

> Orcus man, I want Orcus. Especially if they use the pick that wasn't actually used in the FC I book but was in the art gallery.
> 
> That was a VERY nice Orcus pic.



 Well, if the the articles follow the pattern so far, they'll do the Lords that have yet to be covered in the BoVD. Still, my prefences would be 1. Malcanthet 2. Gr'zzt 3. Orcus. Any of those would be most cool.


----------



## BOZ (Jun 27, 2006)

you could be right, but it's hard to say exactly how they will come about.  could be that the next 9 articles will be the other lords from FC1, or there could be some other ones interspersed throughout.


----------



## Shade (Jun 27, 2006)

Dagon's next.


----------



## KL (Jun 27, 2006)

*Demonomicon of Iggwilv*

Personally I hope the article will now focus on more obscure demon lords. I mean, we know too much about Demogorgon, Graz'zt, Lolth and Orcus. 

How about Ilsidahur? Hordes of the Abyss is the first time he was mentioned since Dungeon Magazine.

Given the recent Age of Worms adventure path, I wouldn't be surprised if Miska, the Queen of Chaos and the Spyder-Fiends be next up (probably a two-part article for that one).

Of the demon lords featured on Fiendish Codex, the only one I can think who will be featured any time soon is Dagon.


----------



## Ipissimus (Jun 27, 2006)

True... I honestly wouldn't mind articles on Aldinach or Pazuzu's 'ex-wife' (can't remember her name) either.


----------



## Pants (Jun 27, 2006)

I'm awaiting the Obox-Ob article with glee! Not so much Malcanthet...


----------



## sckeener (Jun 28, 2006)

What I'd love to see is a Demonomicon article in Dragon and then have a different demon or devil in Dungeon that as some sort of connection to the Demonomicon article........I'd just like to see some Dungeon/Dragon/fiendish codex tie ins.


----------



## Shemeska (Jun 28, 2006)

In order, those that I'd like to see articles on are:

Dagon
Alzrius
Pale Night
Lynkhab
Obox-Ob
Vucarik

I'll admit, the work that has been done over on Planewalker with regards to the ill-fated Harmonium attempt to invade the Abyss, and breaches of the Abyss back onto their world of Ortho, have really elevated Alzrius on my list. Plus, the fact that he sends little shreds of himself, tiny living flames, along with his favored servants into battle, immolating them eventually in the midst of battle when they light themselves on fire and run screaming into their foes... that's just cool.


----------



## BOZ (Jun 28, 2006)

Shade said:
			
		

> Dagon's next.




at first i thought you were just being overconfident in guessing, but then i realized you know what you're talking about.   http://www.enworld.org/showthread.php?t=166875


----------



## KL (Jun 28, 2006)

Personally, the Abyss is so vast and there are so many possibilities you can do with it that you need more than one book to do it, I would have one book on the creatures of the Abyss, one book on the demon princes, and a third book on layers,magic, and other riff raffs.


----------



## BOZ (Jun 29, 2006)

that wouldn't have been so bad.


----------



## heirodule (Jun 29, 2006)

*Demonweb map?*

Is my memory failing, or is the map of the demonweb in FC1 nothing like the demonweb map in Q1, where the demonweb was an interlocked set of tunnels that looked like a cool geometric design.

Was that changed for a reason?


----------



## Ripzerai (Jun 29, 2006)

heirodule said:
			
		

> Is my memory failing, or is the map of the demonweb in FC1 nothing like the demonweb map in Q1, where the demonweb was an interlocked set of tunnels that looked like a cool geometric design.
> 
> Was that changed for a reason?




It's a different part of the Demonweb, I think. This one has more in common with the Demonweb section detailed in Dungeon #84, though it's not the same as that map, either (though the ship, the yochlol tower, and Laveth are all from that adventure).

It seems likely that the Demonweb shifts and changes over time as well, as befits terrain in a plane of Chaos, subject to the whims of a chaotic goddess.


----------



## Nightfall (Jun 30, 2006)

Yeah I mean why should a plane in the Abyss ALWAYS remain stable.  Anyway I'm happy for changes. Just wish one of them was the death of the drow panethon.


----------



## Shade (Jun 30, 2006)

(Half)-Fiendish Variety web enhancement is up.  No cambions or alu-fiends yet, but it only says "part one".


----------



## BOZ (Jun 30, 2006)

cool...


----------



## Nightfall (Jun 30, 2006)

Agreed, that is cool. I can't wait to see how part 2 works out and possibly more info on individualizing half fiends and maybe even tielflings!


----------



## howandwhy99 (Jul 1, 2006)

Erik Mona said:
			
		

> Melf is his real first name.
> 
> --Erik



I never would want to contradict the sage Iquander.  So I'll just post a quote from the Gord the Rogue series.  I don't know where those books fall in the canon.



			
				Artifact of Evil p. 132 said:
			
		

> "The stars guide you and the heavens watch over you," Venerable Halomew said in benediction.  Then, smiling and clasping the gray elf's hand, he said, "Melf . . . good luck!  Before you go, there is a question I must ask."
> 
> Melf was puzzled, but he liked the old cleric, and nodded to him.  "You may ask."
> 
> ...



So I'm guessing Melf is his chosen name and Prince Brightflame (something) is his given true name kept in secret.  Of course, it's possible he is lying here too.
(You've got me reading quite a bit on Greyhawk now I'm running the AoW)


----------



## Nightfall (Jul 1, 2006)

*chuckles* AoW will do that. I wonder if Savage Tide will be like that too?


----------



## Land Outcast (Jul 1, 2006)

Shemeska said:
			
		

> [Alzrius]Plus, the fact that he sends little shreds of himself, tiny living flames, along with his favored servants into battle, immolating them eventually in the midst of battle when they light themselves on fire and run screaming into their foes... that's just cool.




Those are the things that hold me from throwing a tantrum because of not having access to delicious articles I read about here...

Shemeska, just a question: where -precisely- do you get that kind of stuff? (beware, my questions might sound dumb, it's too advanced in the night here...)


----------



## Nightfall (Jul 1, 2006)

Don't worry Land, The King of the Crossroads rarely holds ignorance against someone. After all, information is made to be exchanged.


----------



## Erik Mona (Jul 1, 2006)

howandwhy99 said:
			
		

> I never would want to contradict the sage Iquander.  So I'll just post a quote from the Gord the Rogue series.  I don't know where those books fall in the canon.
> 
> 
> So I'm guessing Melf is his chosen name and Prince Brightflame (something) is his given true name kept in secret.  Of course, it's possible he is lying here too.
> (You've got me reading quite a bit on Greyhawk now I'm running the AoW)




Right you are. I simply meant that Melf is the name he goes by, and "Archosian" was meant to be a different person.

Good catch.

--Erik


----------



## Gez (Jul 1, 2006)

Razz said:
			
		

> I hope so, the klurichir would suck if they downgraded it though. It'll lose its flavor as the "demon that even gives balors nightmares."




Just give them this ability:

*Abyssal Judge (Su):* Klurichir are protected by an effect similar to _sanctuary_ that only works against Tanar'ri. In addition, the Klurichir has a gaze attack that stuns and paralyzes Tanar'ri. Both effects can be resisted with a will save, the DC is Charisma based. Other Klurichirs are immune to this ability.​
With that, and a good boost to Charisma, the Klurichir can give even Balors a nightmare. They can't attack it, and are rendered vulnerable to devastating coups de grâce from the Klurichir.




			
				James Jacobs said:
			
		

> ... manitou loumara...




Beware! They truly are dangerous.


Oops, it seems I misread.


----------



## Ripzerai (Jul 2, 2006)

Shade said:
			
		

> (Half)-Fiendish Variety web enhancement is up.  No cambions or alu-fiends yet, but it only says "part one".




Quoted from the article:

"You should not choose a demon lord or devil prince, but an aspect of one is fair game. Rulers of the Lower Planes have better things to do than go around mating with lesser creatures."

That's odd. Someone should remind Graz'zt of that.


----------



## James Jacobs (Jul 2, 2006)

Ripzerai said:
			
		

> Quoted from the article:
> 
> "You should not choose a demon lord or devil prince, but an aspect of one is fair game. Rulers of the Lower Planes have better things to do than go around mating with lesser creatures."
> 
> That's odd. Someone should remind Graz'zt of that.




Or Malcanthet, for that matter, or Kostchtchie, or Demogorgon, or Baphomet, or most of the others. Except maybe Juiblex. He's too ugly to get a date.


----------



## Land Outcast (Jul 2, 2006)

WotC said:
			
		

> Rulers of the Lower Planes have better things to do than go around mating with lesser creatures.




  ROFML!!!   

*sigh*... can't... breath... laughing... so... hard... *Deep Breath*



			
				Ripzerai said:
			
		

> Someone should remind Graz'zt of that.




*nod**nod**nod*


----------



## Shemeska (Jul 2, 2006)

James Jacobs said:
			
		

> Except maybe Juiblex. He's too ugly to get a date.




Except seemingly in the Japanese animated Abyss.


----------



## Land Outcast (Jul 2, 2006)

*Just because Shemeska surely didn't see the other...*



			
				Shemeska said:
			
		

> [Alzrius]Plus, the fact that he sends little shreds of himself, tiny living flames, along with his favored servants into battle, immolating them eventually in the midst of battle when they light themselves on fire and run screaming into their foes... that's just cool.





Just a question: where -precisely- do you get that kind of stuff? (beware, my questions might sound dumb, it's too advanced in the night here...)


----------



## Shemeska (Jul 2, 2006)

Land Outcast said:
			
		

> Just a question: where -precisely- do you get that kind of stuff? (beware, my questions might sound dumb, it's too advanced in the night here...)




A bit of that is from Alzrius' description in _Hellbound: The Blood War_ (page 25 of 'The Dark of the War'), and in the Planewalker.com project that's been detailing Ortho, the Harmonium's homeworld on the Prime Material (which early in its history suffered a spillover from the Abyss). The Ortho Project can be found here.

Enjoy!


----------



## Land Outcast (Jul 2, 2006)

I can't say I'm feeling safe when so much valuable information is passed on to me by someone who goes by the name of Shemeska...   

But... thanks...   : paranoid :


----------



## sckeener (Jul 2, 2006)

James Jacobs said:
			
		

> Except maybe Juiblex. He's too ugly to get a date.






			
				Shemeska said:
			
		

> Except seemingly in the Japanese animated Abyss.




 There is a big difference between getting a date and taking a date....Juiblex is probably too ugly to get a date....and the whole wanting to eat the date is not a turn on in Juiblex's case.


----------



## Shade (Jul 3, 2006)

James Jacobs said:
			
		

> Or Malcanthet, for that matter, or Kostchtchie, or Demogorgon, or Baphomet, or most of the others. Except maybe Juiblex. He's too ugly to get a date.




 

Now that June's over, I wonder if we'll still be seeing part two of the series...


----------



## Nichols (Jul 4, 2006)

OK, new questions for monsieurs Jacob and Mona...

1. In the section on Pazunia, it states that one can walk to the bordering planes of *Hades* and Pandemonium. However, the planes of *Carceri* and Pandemonium are normally considered to border the Abyss.  Is this intentional, or is this a mistake?

2. How large are finite layers? No indications are given the book. Tens of miles? Hundreds? Thousands? How large are the finite layers that appear in _Hordes of the Abyss_?

3. What are the edges of finite layers like?  What happens when a character reaches the edge of a finite layer?

The book is great. Thank you very much for your hard work - now I have to go and revise all the Abyssal information I've worked up!  

Chris Nichols


----------



## Shemeska (Jul 4, 2006)

I'll add another question for Erik and James too:

How much, if at all, did you guys talk with the authors of the Fiendish Codex II. Or, barring that, do you know if they had access to your material when they were working on their book?

I ask because the legends and facts regarding planar prehistory that FC:I either confirms, reintroduces, or makes twists upon would have some impact on the pre-existant legends regarding the history and origins of Baator, the Baatezu, and the Ancient Baatezu as well. Suffice to say, it'd be incredibly cool if you and they both had some sort of crosstalk going on between the books, rather than eventually having potentially mutually exclusive legends tossed out in both books.


----------



## Ripzerai (Jul 4, 2006)

Since both Fiendish Codices are designed by freelancers, I would be surprised if there's much crosstalk between their designers. Besides the tip of the hat to the baernaloth origin theory, FC1 introduced a number of other older concepts - generation from larvae, for example, and most significantly the idea that slain demons respawn as lesser fiends if slain outside their home plane. There's also the issue of the power levels of diabolic rulers.

FC2 has a lot of hurdles to overcome - it's got to reconcile 1e, 2e, and 3e lore on the subject (the Reckoning, Mephistophes' self-coup, changing views of Asmodeus, changing power levels of pit fiends), it's got to bring together all the new types of devils introduced in 3.x (ghargantulas, advespas, xerfilstyxes, paeliryons, etc.) into some sort of coherent civilization/hierarchy, and it has to ideally do all this in a way that feels fresh and new. In a tiny page count, too.


----------



## James Jacobs (Jul 4, 2006)

Erik can answer these better, I bet (he wrote Chapter 5, after all), but here's my take on the answers.



			
				Nichols said:
			
		

> 1. In the section on Pazunia, it states that one can walk to the bordering planes of *Hades* and Pandemonium. However, the planes of *Carceri* and Pandemonium are normally considered to border the Abyss.  Is this intentional, or is this a mistake?



I'd say you can walk to the other neighboring layers, but you'd have to take specific paths. If you just walk in a random direction, you end up walking in a circle and end up back where you started. But take a specific route (such as the River Styx or some other, unnamed land route) and presto! You're in Hades or Pandemonium.



			
				Nichols said:
			
		

> 2. How large are finite layers? No indications are given the book. Tens of miles? Hundreds? Thousands? How large are the finite layers that appear in _Hordes of the Abyss_?



Unless the layer itself says, the actual size of finite layers is left to the DM; that way, even though they're finite, the scope of the layer isn't constrained for future development (either in official products or in home campaigns). In some cases, of course, you can measure a finite layer's size by checking that layer's map (such as Hollow's Heart) but in others (such as Thanatos) there's no clear boundary shown. 



			
				Nichols said:
			
		

> 3. What are the edges of finite layers like?  What happens when a character reaches the edge of a finite layer?[/i]



Depends on the layer, really, but for the most part, I envision a finite layer's edge as merely a "border" with another Abyssal layer. This border may manifest as a dense forest, a cliff wall, a curtain of blood, a swath of searing insects with human faces, or whatever. In some rare cases (such as Occipitus) the edge of a finite layer is a physical edge, in this case, a ring of mountains and a sky of fire. Even then, with the right magic, you should be able to dig or fly or swim through that limit and eventually find yourself on another layer (or in something far worse, like the primal Abyssal void).


----------



## James Jacobs (Jul 4, 2006)

Shemeska said:
			
		

> I'll add another question for Erik and James too:
> 
> How much, if at all, did you guys talk with the authors of the Fiendish Codex II. Or, barring that, do you know if they had access to your material when they were working on their book?
> 
> I ask because the legends and facts regarding planar prehistory that FC:I either confirms, reintroduces, or makes twists upon would have some impact on the pre-existant legends regarding the history and origins of Baator, the Baatezu, and the Ancient Baatezu as well. Suffice to say, it'd be incredibly cool if you and they both had some sort of crosstalk going on between the books, rather than eventually having potentially mutually exclusive legends tossed out in both books.




I haven't spoken to them at all, and we were done with the design of FC 1 before I heard they were moving on FC 2. The writers of FC 2 did have access to FC 1 during their design work though, I believe. I hope that they build on the contents of FC 1 and don't contradict them, but since I've no real involvement in FC 2 I'll have to wait till later in the year to find out (we'll be printing a couple of devil-themed adventures in _Dungeon_ that'll speak directly to FC 2, so hopefully I'll get to check out the book before we go to press on those adventures!).


----------



## BOZ (Jul 5, 2006)

James Jacobs said:
			
		

> Except maybe Juiblex. He's too ugly to get a date.




he used to be able to get some play until you went and changed how Zuggtmoy looks.    now she thinks she's too good looking for him!


----------



## Nightfall (Jul 8, 2006)

Well wouldn't you? I mean the Eyeful wonder has a face only the Great Mother could love...if she didn't blast him into eternal goo...


----------



## BOZ (Jul 8, 2006)

isn't juiby already eternal goo?


----------



## Shemeska (Jul 8, 2006)

Another question, and an easy one at that: 

Who wrote each chapter in the book, or if not in full, contributed partially to a given chapter?


----------



## Nichols (Jul 12, 2006)

Bump...?


----------



## James Jacobs (Jul 12, 2006)

Shemeska said:
			
		

> Another question, and an easy one at that:
> 
> Who wrote each chapter in the book, or if not in full, contributed partially to a given chapter?




Ed Stark wrote all of chapter 1 and the Black Cult of Ahm section of Chapter 4.

Erik Mona wrote all of chapter 5.

James Jacobs (hey! That's Me!) wrote all of Chapter 2, Chapter 3, and the majority of Chapter 4.


----------



## BOZ (Jul 12, 2006)

cool


----------

