| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Zireael |
Posted - 21 Oct 2010 : 18:40:11
I'm about to write a mini-article for a friend (Planescape setting).
Here's a bit gleaned (by me) from WotC forums of old.
Anything to add/remove? I want to have this article as clear as possible.
Zireael
Thanks in advance for any replies. |
| 30 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Zireael |
Posted - 22 May 2012 : 10:08:01
*swears loudly*
Studies, work, and I completely forgot about translating the article. Oh my! I hope I'll really get around to this! |
| Zireael |
Posted - 14 Sep 2011 : 14:15:42
Ouch. I'll admit I forgot about it completely. I'll try to translate it though. |
| Zireael |
Posted - 22 Jan 2011 : 16:44:37
The fanzin won't be published, since my article was the only one sent. I've published the article in Polish at the Polish forum. After my exams - that is, in February - I'll try to translate it (without the stylized language of Sigil, I'm afraid) and post it here. |
| Ayrik |
Posted - 10 Nov 2010 : 19:29:57
Well now, to be fair, Kanya did make an effort to be polite and I was guilty (not for the first time) of completely derailing and dominating the topic of an otherwise fine thread.
But yes, the topics are tangentially related. Fiends are native to the lower planes, which is another way of saying that they are born in a dimension where evil and corruption are essential building blocks of their existence as much as flesh and blood are the building blocks of ours. Half-fiends could (and most probably do) combine the worst aspects of both worlds. I don't see any problem with fiends procreating with corrupted humans on a purely spiritual level. They may have no particular interest in corrupting flesh and blood at all, at least until they discover the spiritual associations small-minded mortals make between these things. I'd think it's impossible for a half-fiend to be conceived without the presence of evil in both parents. |
| Alystra Illianniis |
Posted - 10 Nov 2010 : 17:26:33
Actually, the two subjects are related- when one is dealing with demons or devils, morality concepts for how this happens come into play. Thus the discussion of using game mechanics to explain the results of such deviations of morality. And I don't think he is saying that horror campaigns are bad, just that the air of doom tends to be stifling in D&D games. As he said, there are other settings/systems out there for that. Ravenloft aside, the idea of creating demonic half-bloods has been tied to pacts with evil outsiders in the past, which adds a lot more darkness to the game than most people prefer. I like a bit of horror now and then, myself. One of the best games I ran had a barghest as the main enemy, and lots of undead and really scary stuff! |
| Kanya Skulls |
Posted - 10 Nov 2010 : 01:42:57
@ Arik
Sorry if I will sound a little rude but... what does it have to do with the topic at hand? The title is "Demons/devils that are able to have half-fiends", not "Rants about novels and mechanics" or "Horror campaigns are bad". Please, don't go offtopic. |
| Ayrik |
Posted - 09 Nov 2010 : 15:24:33
D&D novels are already infamous for taking liberties with the game mechanics. Another boldly controversial topic here at Candlekeep. D&D purists see "bad" or "impossible" rules violations all over the place, pure fantasy fiction fans see the D&D rules universe as literally constraining and unimaginative. I'm one of the crowd who prefer to stand on a compromising middle ground: I see the purpose of the novels as being entertainment and I value interesting story and character interactions more than slavish adherence to the game rules; provided that the Realms setting remains fairly intact and "cheating" details aren't rampantly abused by the author without good reason. Heroes are defined by the quality of the villains and obstacles which oppose them, so if the bad guy needs to break some rules to build a better story then I'm all for it.
I'm not saying campaigns which explore deep and dark complex moral issues are all dismal, and a little bit of healthy horror is refreshing every now and then, but I (and my group) generally prefer to spend our creative energies exploring more pleasant aspects of role-playing gaming. There's plenty of terror, injustice, depression, apathy, ennui, and nihilism in the real world, D&D is one little way for groups of friends to "escape" from it for a little while and enjoy straightforward simple rewards and victories from pounding against the forces of evil.
I don't want to seem like some kind of pessimist, but really, a good part of the reason I play D&D is to have a good time with my friends, not to be violated by the sorts of fear and powerlessness I might feel when banging into RL criminals, haters, bureaucrats, lawyers, and politicians. |
| Arianthus Deszault |
Posted - 08 Nov 2010 : 23:15:01
Arik:
You make perfectly good points there, and I agree completely. I was looking at things with more of a novel standpoint, where your first point rings especially true, a fine line must be tread.
When you use a gameplay standpoint, it does make morality/corruption much more difficult to work with! It is something that may work in a one-on-one game (and that's a big may). I can't see a non-mechanics based morality working with a group of 3 or 4 without doing exactly what you said about the campaigns "mood" per se. |
| Ayrik |
Posted - 08 Nov 2010 : 12:12:34
@Arianthus:
A simple idea with infinitely complex answers. It treads the line of theology and blurs the definitions of morality. I agree with your viewpoint, since "corruption" fundamentally needs to be spiritual, not physical. All those fiends, demons, and devils need to establish a foothold into the world by tainting somebody's soul before they can actually manifest any sort of physical presence anyhow. (Likewise, all those glowing pure angelic sorts need to meddle and twist the hearts of mortals to establish their foothold in the world. So do the gods.)
But I think the basic facts of the matter are
1) D&D, as a product line, must carefully avoid stepping into the muddy mire of controversial demon/devil worshipping badness. Part of this compromise is a tacit and deliberate attempt to be inoffensive to real-world religious canons. Today's society is more sophisticated than it was 20-30 years ago, and D&D is seen as less of a dark influence for warping innocent young minds (compared to XBox, at least) ... but it's still good business practice to be a little diplomatic.
2) D&D is a predominantly rules-based game. Numerical, mechanistic rules; tables, charts, and choices. Contrary to what each new rule book says in the rules, you suddenly "need" all these new rules to play the same D&D you've always played before. The scribes of Candlekeep have filled thousands of scrolls with rules and rules arguments.
So "corruption" of the character should be something that can somehow be avoided, dodged, or resisted. Or allow a saving throw. Or be corrected through the use of an expensive spell. Hard numbers, cause and effect, dice and player choices. It's not supposed to be determined by ambiguous and blurry moral dilemnas. It's not as if any DM is truly capable of accurately measuring morality anyhow.
There have been plenty of D&D rules-based variants over the years, though ... evil "taint", magic systems causing corruption and insanity, the dreadful Ravenloft setting, to name a few offhand. My personal experience is that these systems are interesting novelties but eventually set a tone of darkness, despair, and doom which takes more away from the game than it adds. There's other games which deal with vampires, demons, and conspiracies which people find enjoyable - but none of them are D&D. Mass murdering monsters and minions is all big happy fun, but fighting against the torments of your own inner (or outer?) demons is a little bit too provocative and heavy to make for recreational gameplay. |
| Arianthus Deszault |
Posted - 03 Nov 2010 : 18:28:10
I would like to bring up the "joining into a pact causes physical transformation" discussion again. I think that a physical transformation is just as likely an effect of the pact as Warlocks gaining the ability to fling bolts of unholy power are. It isn't necessarily something that would happen to all Warlocks, but it is something that could. It could then be passed down through the generations.
I also like to think that a pact involves a magical ritual. In any world where magic of the D&D variety is possible, anything else is feasibly possible. A spell that links to the Abyss could, perhaps, corrupt the blood or mind of the channeler. The spell may even require a magical transfusion of blood from the outsider. Couple this with the idea that an evil outsiders corruption could warp a person physically and mentally and who knows what can happen!
My 2 cents. |
| Zireael |
Posted - 30 Oct 2010 : 18:09:38
Then it's weird.
Pt. II of half-fiends coming soon!
I'm thinking about making the same type of thing for half-celestials. |
| Galuf the Dwarf |
Posted - 29 Oct 2010 : 19:35:32
quote:
Originally posted by Zireael
[quote]Maybe those were half-fiend rakshasa or night hag.
No, those were not mentioned as being half-fiends at all, only full-blooded varieties of their species. |
| Zireael |
Posted - 29 Oct 2010 : 18:10:32
quote:
Originally posted by Galuf the Dwarf
What I find odd is that some evil-aligned outsiders (not technically demons or devils) were mentioned as potentially being the bloodlines of some Tieflings (and therefore being in the blood of a half-fiend before them) on pages 125 and 126 of Races of Faerun. They were Night Hags and Rasksasha.
However, seeing that at least male human coupling with a hag should technically produce a Hagspawn, I find the former case possibly being a misnomer. Raksasha, I'm not too sure about either. Yugoloths, I could see, but they'd probably be less frequently prevalent in half-fiend bloodline than demons or devils.
Maybe those were half-fiend rakshasa or night hag.
And half-yugoloths will probably feature in Pt. IV of my little work.
@ up: Thanks, will check it out. |
| Bladewind |
Posted - 29 Oct 2010 : 16:57:26
Zireael, you might be interested in the Green Ronin's 3.5 tome Aasimar & Tieflings: a guide book to the planetouched. It notes almost all possible stat adjustments for all the varying planar crossbreeds. From half-outsider (such as Nephilim and Cambions) to templated races (such as the Jinx gnome-fiends, Fetch halfling-dretches, Similem halfelven invisible stalkers, and more) you'll find just what you need in it.
It's got some great art too! |
| Galuf the Dwarf |
Posted - 29 Oct 2010 : 15:40:23
What I find odd is that some evil-aligned outsiders (not technically demons or devils) were mentioned as potentially being the bloodlines of some Tieflings (and therefore being in the blood of a half-fiend before them) on pages 125 and 126 of Races of Faerun. They were Night Hags and Rasksasha.
However, seeing that at least male human coupling with a hag should technically produce a Hagspawn, I find the former case possibly being a misnomer. Raksasha, I'm not too sure about either. Yugoloths, I could see, but they'd probably be less frequently prevalent in half-fiend bloodline than demons or devils. |
| Zireael |
Posted - 29 Oct 2010 : 10:28:43
Add-on to Half-Fiendish Variety
The following half-fiends are in Half-fiendish Variety: Half-marilith, half-goristro, half-ekolid, half-glabrezu, half-yochlol, half-molydeus, half-succubus (half-pleasure devil), half-nabassu.
Below you can find new half-fiend templates created by me in accordance with the rules presented in the article. If nothing is changed, please refer to the normal half-fiend template in SRD.
Half-babau
Size & Type: outsider. Size is not changed.
Speed: no wings
Natural armor: +2 bonus.
Attack: like normal half-fiend (bite & claws)
Damage: like normal half-fiend
Special attacks: like normal half-fiend (smite good)
Spell-like abilities: like normal half-fiend, with the following exceptions: 3-4 dispel magic; 5-6 see invisibility, 13-14 greater teleportation
Special qualities: like normal half-fiend, with the following exception: DR 5/good (HD <11) or 10/good (HD >11)
Attributes: Str +4 Dex +2 Con +4 Int +2 Cha +4.
Skills: Treat the following as class skills regarding the outsider skills: Move Silently, Listen, Open Lock, Disguise, Search, Survival, Hide, Disable Devices, Use Rope, Climb, Escape Artist, Pick Pocket
Challenge Rating: like normal half-fiend
Alignment: like normal half-fiend
Level Adjustment: like normal half-fiend
Half-balor
Size & Type: outsider. Size is not changed.
Speed: like normal half-fiend
Natural armor: +4 bonus
Attack: slam, no bite
Damage: 1d6 + Str bonus
Special attacks: like normal half-fiend (smite good)
Spell-like abilities: like normal half-fiend, with the following exceptions: 1-2 HD telekinesis, 15-16 HD power word stun; 17-18 HD implosion; 19+ HD fire storm
Special qualities: like normal half-fiend, with the following exception: DR 5/good (HD <11) or 10/good (HD >11)
Attributes: Str +6 Dex +2 Con +4 Int +2 Cha +2
Skills: Treat the following as class skills regarding the outsider skills: Bluff, Move Silently, Spellcraft, Diplomacy, Concentration, Listen, Disguise, Search, Spot, Use Magic Device, Survival, Hide, Knwoledge (any two), Sense Motive, Intimidate
Challenge Rating: HD < 4 CR +2; HD 5-10, CR +3; HD >11, CR +4
Alignment: like normal half-fiend
Level Adjustment: like normal half-fiend
Half-bebilith
Size & type: outsider. If the base creature is large or bigger, its size category increases by 1.
Speed: climb (half the base land speed of base creature)
Natural armor: +3 bonus
Attack: like normal half-fiend (bite & claws)
Damage: like normal half-fiend
Special attacks: like normal half-fiend (smite good)
Spell-like abilities: like normal half-fiend, with the following exceptions: 15-16 HD plane swap
Special qualities: like normal half-fiend, with the following exception: DR 5/good (HD <11) or 10/good (HD >11)
Attributes: Str +6 Dex +2 Con +6 Cha +2
Skills: Treat the following as class skills regarding the outsider skills: Move Silently, Diplomacy, Listen, Search, Jump, Spot, Survival, Hide, Climb, Sense Motive
Challenge Rating: HD < 4 CR +2; HD 5-10, CR +3; HD >11, CR +4. Further +1 increase if the size was increased.
Alignment: like normal half-fiend
Level Adjustment: like normal half-fiend
Half-dretch
Size & type: outsider. Size is not changed.
Speed: no wings
Natural armor: +1 bonus
Attack: like normal half-fiend (bite & claws)
Damage: like normal half-fiend
Special attacks: like normal half-fiend (smite good)
Spell-like abilities: like normal half-fiend, with the following exceptions: 3-4 HD scare; 5-6 HD stinking cloud
Special qualities: like normal half-fiend, with the following exception: DR 5/good (HD <11) or 10/good (HD >11)
Attributes: like normal half-fiend
Skills: Treat the following as class skills regarding the outsider skills: Move Silently, Listen, Search, Spot, Survival, Hide
Challenge Rating: like normal half-fiend
Alignment: like normal half-fiend
Level Adjustment: like normal half-fiend
Half-hezrou
Size & type: outsider. Size is not changed.
Speed: no wings
Natural armor: +3 bonus
Attack: like normal half-fiend (bite & claws)
Damage: like normal half-fiend
Special attacks: like normal half-fiend (smite good)
Spell-like abilities: like normal half-fiend, with the following exceptions: 13-14 HD chaos hammer; 15-16 HD gaseous form
Special qualities: like normal half-fiend, with the following exception: DR 5/good (HD <11) or 10/good (HD >11)
Attributes: Str +4 Con +6 Int +2 Cha +4
Skills: Treat the following as class skills regarding the outsider skills: Move Silently, Spellcraft, Concentration, Search, Listen, Spot,Survival, Hide, Use Rope, Climb, Escape Artist, Intimidate
Challenge Rating: like normal half-fiend
Alignment: like normal half-fiend
Level Adjustment: like normal half-fiend
Half-nalfeshnee
Half-hezrou
Size & type: outsider. Size is not changed.
Speed: like normal half-fiend
Natural armor: +3 bonus
Attack: like normal half-fiend (bite & claws)
Damage: like normal half-fiend
Special attacks: like normal half-fiend (smite good)
Spell-like abilities: like normal half-fiend, with the following exceptions: 3-4 HD slow, 7-8 HD feeblemind, 15-16 call lightning
Special qualities: like normal half-fiend, with the following exception: DR 5/good (HD <11) or 10/good (HD >11)
Attributes: Str +4 Con +4 Int +4 Cha +4
Skills: Treat the following as class skills regarding the outsider skills: Bluff, Move Silently, Spellcraft, Diplomacy, Concentration, Listen, Disguise, Search, Spot, Use Magic Device, Survival, Hide, Knowledge (arcana), Sense Motive, Intimidate
Challenge Rating: like normal half-fiend
Alignment: like normal half-fiend
Level Adjustment: like normal half-fiend
Half-vrock
Size & type: outsider. Size is not changed.
Speed: like normal half-fiend
Natural armor: +3 bonus
Attack: like normal half-fiend (bite & claws)
Damage: like normal half-fiend
Special attacks: like normal half-fiend (smite good)
Spell-like abilities: like normal half-fiend, with the following exceptions: 3-4 HD mirror image, 15-16 HD heroism
Special qualities: like normal half-fiend, with the following exception: DR 5/good (HD <11) or 10/good (HD >11)
Attributes: Str +4 Dex +2 Con +6 Int +2 Cha +2
Skills: Treat the following as class skills regarding the outsider skills: Move Silently, Spellcraft, Diplomacy, Concentration, Listen, Search, Spot, Survival, Hide, Knowledge (any one), Sense Motive, Intimidate
Challenge Rating: like normal half-fiend
Alignment: like normal half-fiend
Level Adjustment: like normal half-fiend
----------------------
Any comments?
Part II to come - half-devils. Pt. III - offspring of fiends from other sources (ex. Fiend Folio). |
| Zireael |
Posted - 27 Oct 2010 : 08:35:08
'Kay, I wrote that Planescape article emphasising the differences between various half-fiends and that they are not all hideous. Been sent, we'll see if there's anything to add/change in it.
Now I'm wondering about making a homebrew addition to "Half-Fiendish Variety" featuring some of those half-breeds not mentioned in the WotC article. |
| Quale |
Posted - 24 Oct 2010 : 17:42:05
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by Quale
religious connotations, bring them on, tough unless I'm using names like God, Devil, Satan or Lucifer my players have no idea
Wait -- your players are totally unaware of real-world religious connotations behind terms like devil and demon?
devils are renamed, but it wouldn't be a big deal unless I translate the word
demon is not so infamous word in our language, kinda like ''alien'' |
| Jorkens |
Posted - 24 Oct 2010 : 16:31:21
I never liked the 2nd edition names. For me it increased the feeling that the demons and devils were just another group of monster races. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 24 Oct 2010 : 14:47:34
quote:
Originally posted by Quale
religious connotations, bring them on, tough unless I'm using names like God, Devil, Satan or Lucifer my players have no idea
Wait -- your players are totally unaware of real-world religious connotations behind terms like devil and demon? |
| Quale |
Posted - 24 Oct 2010 : 11:49:10
religious connotations, bring them on, tough unless I'm using names like God, Devil, Satan or Lucifer my players have no idea
names like baatezu, yugololoth and tanar'ri are pretty good, I keep the 3e take on them where they are subraces of devils, demons and daemons, except devils are called inphe or infernals
|
| Alystra Illianniis |
Posted - 24 Oct 2010 : 04:00:24
Interesting. I never even knew they had been renamed, as I came in during the height of the 2nd ed hay-day. I do have a few of the older books from before that- like the original Fiend Folio, but I'm most familiar with the terms from the 2nd ed MM and the Planescape stuff. And I also agree with IK- I still have trouble remembering all the names, myself. Then again, I rarely ever use outer-planar creatures in my games. I've done barghests, a shadow demon, a few lower-level pit-fiends, and a cat lord, and not much else. |
| The Sage |
Posted - 24 Oct 2010 : 00:53:30
quote:
Originally posted by Ionik Knight
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
[quote]Originally posted by Markustay
I actually liked the renaming of fiends... It made them sound more exotic and also made it easier to remember which was which. Additionally, the renaming allows them to avoid any religous connations.
Easier to remember? Really? I have a hard time even remembering the words (much less spell them) they used to rename the fiends. I take the Myth series view of labeling planar critters...
I think it depends, also, on just how prevalent fiends are in your campaigns. For me, demons and devils feature regularly across many of the worlds I campaign in -- mostly due to my love of PLANESCAPE. So I'm inclined to agree with Wooly's point.
|
| Ayrik |
Posted - 23 Oct 2010 : 23:02:18
The DM can always use whatever terms he pleases, of course. I take advantage of this aversion and have all those musty old tomes in my games use whatever terminology might have been their fashion du jour in decades and centuries past. I've modelled many of my most expert sages on the personalities of RL sages, so they're a crotchety grizzled lot of grognards who'll argue relentlessly about miniscule errors in terminology ... just another annoying little complication to sometimes delay and frustrate players, make them second guess themselves when answering riddles and such, or suck extra gold through the hired-sage straw. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 23 Oct 2010 : 22:22:40
quote:
Originally posted by Ionik Knight
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
[quote]Originally posted by Markustay
I actually liked the renaming of fiends... It made them sound more exotic and also made it easier to remember which was which. Additionally, the renaming allows them to avoid any religous connations.
Easier to remember? Really? I have a hard time even remembering the words (much less spell them) they used to rename the fiends. I take the Myth series view of labeling planar critters...
It's easier to remember that the baatezu are the lawful evil ones (because they're from Baator), and that tanar'ri are the chaotic evil ones (the name suggests chaos, to me). It's not as easy to keep the alignments straight betwixt demons and devils.
I do, however, like the catch-all term fiend. It also lacks the religious connotations, and can be used for any nastybad from the Lower Planes.
I wasn't into D&D then, but I do recall the hysteria against D&D from the 80s. I even recall flipping thru channels once and seeing some kid on a religious show explaining how playing D&D gave him all sorts of dark urges, and how he'd hear a voice in his head demanding he leave when he was hanging with his friends and they decided to pray. 
I never took any of that seriously, and I'm pretty far from the picture of a devout churchgoer. That said, I'm far more comfortable with the terms baatezu and tanar'ri than I am with the original terms. |
| Ayrik |
Posted - 23 Oct 2010 : 20:03:25
I approve of the "fiend" nomenclature as well. Distancing the terminology from popular religious contexts was a damned intelligent move. I'm not sure I agree with all of the finer details, especially the retconned neutering of potentially controversial material, but it could've been done a lot worse (just think about the uproar caused by some other particular retcons).
"Fiend" is now also a great blanket term for pretty much anything extra-planar and evil that doesn't really fit neatly into existing categories. |
| Ionik Knight |
Posted - 23 Oct 2010 : 17:59:41
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
[quote]Originally posted by Markustay
I actually liked the renaming of fiends... It made them sound more exotic and also made it easier to remember which was which. Additionally, the renaming allows them to avoid any religous connations.
Easier to remember? Really? I have a hard time even remembering the words (much less spell them) they used to rename the fiends. I take the Myth series view of labeling planar critters... |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 23 Oct 2010 : 00:15:00
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
And I agree with you that 'gross' works better, especially where Fiends are concerned. The 'energy exchange' is just a bit too 1980ish TSR for me (you know, when they re-named Fiends, and had the vampires steal 'life energy', rather then drink blood?)
I actually liked the renaming of fiends... It made them sound more exotic and also made it easier to remember which was which. Additionally, the renaming allows them to avoid any religous connations. |
| Ayrik |
Posted - 22 Oct 2010 : 22:51:47
Yeah, evil transformation is bit of a stretch. I didn't really think that one through very well before posting. A guy like Manson or the Ripper would probably attract some sort of fiendish attention in the Realms, and probably be unable to resist whatever temptations/power the fiend would initially offer. As you say, there would be direct influence from an outside source. |
| Alystra Illianniis |
Posted - 22 Oct 2010 : 21:45:00
The evil deeds taint concept just seems so silly to me. Why would doing something like- say, sacrificing puppies to a dark power, or going Jack the ripper on innocent elf-maids- turn someone into a fiend in the literal sense? Even Dr. Jeckle (who was a good man, BTW) needed his formula to turn into Mr. Hyde. And that was a transitory thing, to start out. Dahmer and Manson were about as twisted as it gets, but they were still fully human. (Just using the psychology in this example, not comparing RL sickos to the FR. The point is that a similar creep in FR would still just be a very disturbed human.) DNA and pacts aside, I don't see an evil person manifesting demonic traits unless there was some direct influence from an outside source. A demonic graft, maybe, or drinking demonic blood (a la Dragon Age: Origins) or some other means of physically or ritualistically consorting with such creatures. |
|
|
