| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Xar Zarath |
Posted - 21 Dec 2013 : 12:52:21
As we all know fiends can reproduce. So my question are as follows:
1.Are baatezu able to reproduce with each other? (besides the archdevils of course)
2.When demons reproduce with each other, do they produce full blooded demons or half breeds?
3.When yugoloths breed, are they able only to breed their respective caste only, such as arcanaloths are able to breed only arcanaloths, nycaloths only nycaloths? |
| 30 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Ayrik |
Posted - 25 Feb 2014 : 23:48:24
Vyrdallen:
The definitions you understand for “tiefling“ and “cambion“ are accurate enough, given the (D&D4E) background provided in the novels you listed. And continuing to use the definitions you understand very likely won‘t cause any problems in subsequent lore.
The arguments about definition in this scroll come from the AD&D2E-era usage of these same terms (largely in Planescape lore) to refer to substantially different things. 4E fiends are a bit more simplified, generic, streamlined, and consistent than their 2E counterparts, and the same applies to all their hybrid-fiendspawned descendants.
I summarized the old definitions earlier in this scroll, although I won‘t claim that my definitions are uinversally accepted. |
| Hawkins |
Posted - 25 Feb 2014 : 20:19:49
If you want a fun way to mix and match tieflings in 3.5 and PFRPG, check out today's blog post on my blog: Easy Hybrid Races – Part 2: Native Outsiders (Planetouched). |
| Shemmy |
Posted - 23 Feb 2014 : 19:30:14
quote:
Originally posted by Vyrdallen
Previously to this I had thought that a tiefling was a devil and human,
That's never been the case actually. Prior to 4e, tieflings were mortals with some fraction of fiendish blood below the level of a half-fiend. It could be any type of fiend: demon, devil, yugoloth, etc. It could also be any type of mortal. There were also some specific subtypes like the fey'ri that were true-breeding.
Cambion was more specifically used to refer to half-fiends of exclusively demonic origin.
4e posited that core 4e tieflings were exclusively devil and human. This was then pushed as also being the case for tieflings in other settings regardless of prior history.
I don't care at all for the 4e redefinition of tieflings, so I can't say for specific how it handled the gulf of a disconnect with the mass of prior lore on the topic, since I haven't read all the 4e sources. |
| Vyrdallen |
Posted - 23 Feb 2014 : 18:55:10
Okay, so I apologize because this is an older thread, perhaps necromantically so. It seems the most suited to the question, however.
I feel like I should know this by now, but I'm still not clear on what the difference between a tiefling and a cambion actually is. I've read Brimstone Angels, Lesser Evils, and Adversary so I know about tieflings and their history. Previously to this I had thought that a tiefling was a devil and human, while a cambion was a tanar'ri/demon and human, yet that seems to no longer be the case. |
| Ayrik |
Posted - 24 Dec 2013 : 19:13:24
A fair argument might be that the (Cold) Blood War raged onwards as eternally as always ... it‘s just that the 4E campaign worlds were somehow spared any exposure to it. I know it‘s cheap fare, and I‘m assuming the Sundering is just WotC‘s fancy name for some sort of parallel multiverse setup which encompasses (and semi-isolates) all the incompatible (or at least unpalatable) worlds they‘ve ever published.
But back to the Blood War - halted or not - it has apparently almost been alarmingly close to complete win/loss several times before. Perhaps both sides are once again weakened by attrition and rebuilding their strength? And, being fiends, you can absolutely bet that sooner or later any formal peace/truce/ceasefire arrangement will come to an abrupt and violent end. |
| Chosen of Asmodeus |
Posted - 24 Dec 2013 : 06:58:38
What annoys me most about the end/pause/halting of the Blood War during 4e having not been expanded upon at all is that it was one of the changes to the realms that was unique to the realms in 4e. In Points of Light, the Blood War was still going, though it was in one of it's "cold war" phases. In the Realms, it was specifically over.
That should have been the [expletive deleted] metaplot for 4e realms, not a foot note that gets ignored when the next edition rolls around. If you're not going to do anything with it, then it shouldn't have been done because there was no reason for it to happen. |
| Xar Zarath |
Posted - 24 Dec 2013 : 06:26:41
Cold Blood War is still a war =P
Hmm brainwashing, that could be something noteworthy indeed, a devil being seduced by the ideals of Chaos or a demon finding "comfort" in the Philosophy of Law, a marvel idea indeed |
| Ayrik |
Posted - 23 Dec 2013 : 22:46:14
Ah, I‘ve said it before: not everyone agrees that the Blood War ever halted. There would, at the least, always be some kind of simmering Cold Blood War.
EDIT -
And a Cold Blood War, involving fiendish levels of espionage, sabotage, intimidation, deception, betrayal, treachery, treason, terror, and assassination invites the notion of fiends somehow disguising their fundamental natures well enough to infiltrate each others‘ camps. While genuine interbreeding and/or “brainwashing“ of fiends may (or may not) actually be possible, the possibilities still seem awesomely dangerous. Especially since the primary battlefield of such warfare would likely be away from the planes, on worlds like Toril.
|
| Xar Zarath |
Posted - 23 Dec 2013 : 06:25:11
quote:
Originally posted by Demzer
back to the topic at hand about demonic couplings giving raise to all manner of weird things i say it's almost completely random:
Red Shroud is still a full blooded succubus (with full blooded succubus daughters, like Fall-From-Grace) despite being the daughter of Malcanthet and Pazuzu while Arendagrost (son of Demogorgon and Malcanthet) is an hydra-like abomination with three heads and a floating body composed of writhing tentacles. So when demons of differing subtypes mate and procude offspring i guess anything goes and a table for random characteristics like the one Markustay proposed sounds perfect to generate any kind of maddening horror.
After all the tanar'ri were shaped by the obiriths, the original true Chtulu-like elder evil abominations of D&D.
Considering that the Abyss is a place of chaos first and foremost, you're pretty much right, anything goes when they crossbreed, though I like to think that when demons of a similar subtype get together they make a demon of the same type, but then again they could birth something new and mad altogether |
| Xar Zarath |
Posted - 23 Dec 2013 : 06:19:58
The Blood War being "paused" for 4e may be nothing more than a calm between storms. After all in any war, there are always the calm between storms. Fiends are immortal, 100 years really is nothing to them. |
| Demzer |
Posted - 22 Dec 2013 : 19:38:23
You are right, i'm sorry for restarting the escalator of the downward spiral.
Sometimes i can't keep the evil gremlin locked inside.
Sorry all, back to the topic at hand about demonic couplings giving raise to all manner of weird things i say it's almost completely random:
Red Shroud is still a full blooded succubus (with full blooded succubus daughters, like Fall-From-Grace) despite being the daughter of Malcanthet and Pazuzu while Arendagrost (son of Demogorgon and Malcanthet) is an hydra-like abomination with three heads and a floating body composed of writhing tentacles. So when demons of differing subtypes mate and procude offspring i guess anything goes and a table for random characteristics like the one Markustay proposed sounds perfect to generate any kind of maddening horror.
After all the tanar'ri were shaped by the obiriths, the original true Chtulu-like elder evil abominations of D&D. |
| Markustay |
Posted - 22 Dec 2013 : 18:23:10
Nope. Not confrontational at all. Honest, and I am certainly a guy who appreciates blunt honesty.
I'm not sure many of you realize, but I actually do not agree with half the things I say. I know that sounds absolutely bizarre on the surface, but here's the thing: I am trying to make this work. Would I like to go back in time and completely erase 4e in existance? Absolutely. But it happened, and according to 'the powers that be', its here to stay.
So {sigh}, I am trying the "a spoonful of sugar helps the medicine go down" approach. Yes, I would prefer not to take my medicine at all.
And my Realms is nothing like this at - if 4e did one great thing for me (and hopefully others), it completely severed me from canon. I can care less about it, and make complete changes on the fly; the story that was The Realms no longer affects MY Realms one bit. Thus, most of what I theorize/postulate doesn't have any bearing on what I do at home. I'm just trying to help keep this patchwork together a little longer.
Wow... had to stop myself. Had a LOT more here, but erased it all. We've been down that road plenty of times, and its not helping anything. It is what is, and we have to play the hand we're dealt.
|
| Demzer |
Posted - 22 Dec 2013 : 17:31:13
Markustay, the "fixes" using 4e "lore" you are proposing are completely unnecessary.
Succubus can breed. Succubus are demons/tanar'ri. End of story.
The devil consorts (Bensozia included) are not cambions, they're full blooded unique devils/baatezu. And they can breed but require Asmodeus consent to do so with Archdevils. End of story.
There is no "brood-mare" rivalry, no need to mess things with unmotivated and absurd side switching 4e s**t.
If you want to have this kind of things in your home campaign worlds then fine, but none of your suggestions so far comes even close to the definition of "fix". They mud things around more and further taint the past lore with stinkin' 4e crap, leading to more stinkin' crap.
Like a lot of other 4e changes, there is no space for compromises between 4e "lore" and past lore. Past lore is sound and good, 4e "lore" is better left to rot alone in some dark, forgotten place.
EDIT: Markustay i appreciate and respect your divining, assumption-making and theory-crafting powers and insights regarding Realmslore and surrounding but in this case there is no 4e "lore" to use that can fix the matter: either we go on with weird, unnecessary and absurd side switching and "he was really him, she was his sister's daughter's cousin in reality, while that other one is an orphaned abandoned child of this family honest!" soap opera-ish "fixes" or we just say "Succubus are devils? Yeah of course Asmodeus has good propaganda but don't worry, after 100 years of sitting on their butts the demons finally unleashed their near infinite numbers on the devils, everything is well again, Blood War and all, and the bitches of the planes are obviously still full tanar'ri, also i wouldn't speak about this attribution incident while one is performing a ... uhm "service" ... to you, things could get messy. What? Graz'zt a baatezu? Go tell that in his face while i inform your relatives to not go looking for your corpse". The former keeps the crap and the stink around, the latter resolves the issue while conserving as much lore (3 editions worth) as possible. That's a no-brainer for me, thus all this theory-crafting is useless and kinda distasteful to witness, since it lends shreds of credence to pieces of "lore" that are best discarded as soon as possible in the new shiny bright future edition.
Anyway, apologies if you find this post too abrasive and confrontational. |
| Shemmy |
Posted - 22 Dec 2013 : 15:47:30
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
They did back=pedal on that point a bit. They stated that just because the their was some sort of 'truce' going on amongst some of the bigwigs, doesn't mean all demons and devils abide by it, and out beyond the lower planes (like in the Prime Material), the battles rage on.
If they continue forward with that, its a truly simple fix - one side betrayed the other (probably both), and the Bloodwar is back on, full swing. They are fiends, after all. That temporary truce could explain why the Succubus were allowed to 'come home' to the Nine Hells (and why we now know that Graz'zt was originally a devil).
More backpedaling is needed if they want to retain a shred of in-game cohesiveness on the lore. Clearly mortal sages were mislead by local events and the lies of a few summoned fiends, the Blood War never ended or even slowed down - it's something that only paused a handful of times in recorded planar history and this wasn't one of them.
As far as Graz'zt goes: Graz'zt was already established in multiple sources as the spawn of Pale Night, an Obyrith. It only makes sense for him to originally have been a devil in the core 4e cosmos. I see no reason to kowtow to the core 4e material in FR or in any other material that was founded on 1e/2e/3e planar continuity. |
| Markustay |
Posted - 22 Dec 2013 : 15:31:01
They did back-pedal on that point a bit. They stated that just because there was some sort of 'truce' going on amongst some of the bigwigs, doesn't mean all demons and devils abide by it, and out beyond the lower planes (like in the Prime Material), the battles rage on.
If they continue forward with that, its a truly simple fix - one side betrayed the other (probably both), and the Bloodwar is back on, full swing. They are fiends, after all. That temporary truce could explain such things as why the Succubus were allowed to 'come home' to the Nine Hells (and why we now know that Graz'zt was originally a devil).
As for the erynies - I never pictured their being 'endless numbers' of them like with the succubi, which would make sense if they were fallen celestials. There may be only a couple of hundred all told. Now, if we look at them as individuals, instead of monsters, that means fiends should also be able to level, take feats, and acquire (fiendish) templates. What that means is that a powerful erynie can 'earn her wings', and that fixes the continuity problem. If eladrin and dragonborn can grow wings through feats, then why not fiends?
In fact, going with leveled fiends (with feats and/or templates) could be a great way of fixing many of the edition snafus - the creatures aren't as all alike as we once thought. Maybe the devils are a bit structured, but as for demons, anything should go - no two should be alike! The ones in the MM's should just be more common examples, is all.
You know what 5e/D&D needs? A random demon generator! It should be like those power generators in 'supers' games. The parents should have some effect on the dice rolls, but it should also be very random what the thing looks like, and what abilities it has.
"Oh look honey - its got my tentacles!"  |
| Shemmy |
Posted - 22 Dec 2013 : 12:03:00
quote:
Originally posted by Sill Alias
Well, Blood War ended in 4th edition, so there might be partial integration of demons into devil territories.
Yuck.
Was that ever discussed with relation to FR though? Because in light of prior lore on the topic, it just ending like that would be completely absurd outside of the core PoL 4e setting which had radically different history and conceits regarding the Blood War.
*sigh* |
| Sill Alias |
Posted - 22 Dec 2013 : 11:58:35
Well, Blood War ended in 4th edition, so there might be partial integration of demons into devil territories.
Yuck.
Weren't there special Contract Devils, even when there were Pleasure Devils introduced?
Oh, another note for question 2, going by 3.5 material. Special Devils create Special devil children in unions. So, these Duke offspring will not be belonging to standard category.
Erynies seem to birth erynies, but 3.5 did not mention if they could birth other types. |
| Xar Zarath |
Posted - 22 Dec 2013 : 06:59:26
quote:
Originally posted by Shemmy
quote:
Originally posted by Lord Bane
Last thing i heard they wanted Succubi to be non of team devil or team demon, you sure they want to put them back to their pre-4e faction, Shemmy?
It would be a truly bizarre mistake IMO if that's the route they actually took. It's just such a continued departure from the 1e/2e/3e succubus just to give a nod to the 4e version that was itself an irrational deviation from prior D&D material.
The way I see it, some succubi during the Spellplague decided to ditch the Abyss and join the Hells. Not a lot mind you but some did, enough for powerful devils to incorporate their form into their hierarchy.
Many succubi still dwell in the Abyss, some flip flop sides as demons do, but im sure occasionally a succubi working for the Hells slips back to the Abyss permanently while a succubi dissatisified with position/power in the Abyss makes its way to the Hells to join them... |
| Ayrik |
Posted - 21 Dec 2013 : 23:13:12
The classic Gygaxian Great Wheel cosmology tended towards symmetries. If this model is used as the basis of the 5E cosmos then I would expect a "fair" balance of sorts; specifically, I'd expect that any rules applying to celestials and fiends should be equivalent. Hopefully not with the same extreme "must have a balanced complete one-of-everything set" mentality which ran rampant in 3E.
The other cosmological paradigms each have merit as well, but in terms of lore quantity the Great Wheel carries more validity (in my opinion) than the others which attempt to usurp it.
I half expect some other attempts at a multi-cosmos metaphor in 5E, however, simply to present some semblance of inclusiveness and compatibility with all previous (and mutually incompatible) planeslore. If 5E continues the 4E trend of granting special privilege towards celestials, for example, then it really just becomes a case-by-case special ruling applied to each particular species ... and there's little point in presenting rationale to oppose completely arbitrary preference.
Regardless which approach is favoured, there are beings such as archfiends and archcelestials and whatnot who vastly exceed the normal order for their kind. These are essentially unique entities, as groups and as individuals, who can pretty much trump the normal rules and do whatever they like (as long as they aren't opposed by beings of an even higher order), they are each an exception who defines the rule. If these wish to produce offspring of any impossible kind then so mote it be. |
| Shemmy |
Posted - 21 Dec 2013 : 23:07:30
quote:
Originally posted by Lord Bane
Last thing i heard they wanted Succubi to be non of team devil or team demon, you sure they want to put them back to their pre-4e faction, Shemmy?
It would be a truly bizarre mistake IMO if that's the route they actually took. It's just such a continued departure from the 1e/2e/3e succubus just to give a nod to the 4e version that was itself an irrational deviation from prior D&D material. |
| Lord Bane |
Posted - 21 Dec 2013 : 22:57:14
Erinyes were "promoted" to be thugs for the baatezu to bring in deals and lost their wings. That´s 4e for you. Then WotC created the pleasure devils to fill the gap created by removing baatezu seducers from the list. I don´t know if they will retcon this and give the erinyes their wings back and leave the pleasure devils as sidekicks or stick with it. I would prefer if they just ditched the 4e fiend changes as a whole.
Last thing i heard they wanted Succubi to be non of team devil or team demon, you sure they want to put them back to their pre-4e faction, Shemmy?
|
| Markustay |
Posted - 21 Dec 2013 : 22:19:09
4e sent the succubi over into the Devil camp. I don't know what happened to the Erynies in 4e - they may have just been absorbed back into the Succubi corps.
Hmmmmm... maybe we can borrow some 4e lore to fix things?
What if the Erynies were not Baatezu (as I believe someone noted above), but Succubi were? Then, when the Erynies first joined the devils, their was conflict with the Succubi (because they were supplanting them - the archfiends preferred mates that could sire children on). The Succubi would have lost that conflict, and hence their leaving The Nine Hells and joining with the Demons.
Now that the Succubi are back in the Hells, I can picture a lot of bad feelings (I can picture a succubus referring to an Erynie as a 'brood mare').
It makes sense, if some Celestials (those that are actually exalted mortals) are able to reproduce, that the devils would try and 'taint' some of them for their own nefarious purposes. Former mortals would probably be the easiest to lead down such a dark path. |
| Shemmy |
Posted - 21 Dec 2013 : 22:11:12
quote:
Originally posted by Ayrik
although succubi and their alu-fiend offspring have since been recategorized as non-demons
It hasn't been published yet and I haven't been paying as much attention to playtesting since I'm busy with other games, so who knows for sure, but from what has been mentioned so far in previews and discussion, 5e appears to be putting succubi back as demons (thankfully so). |
| Ayrik |
Posted - 21 Dec 2013 : 21:50:12
I do recall 2E Planescape lore specifying that a cambion (half human, half baatezu/devil) cannot reproduce with an alu-demon (half human, half tanar'ri/demon) - although succubi and their alu-fiend offspring have since been recategorized as non-demons, and the terms "cambion" and "alu-fiend" have since been redefined towards broader generic-all-fiend meanings. 2E-style tieflings were just mongrel fiend/outsider/human hybrids, basically human (or demihuman/humanoid) stock tainted with much diluted (and often unidentifiable) fiendish or outsider heritage, quite different from 4E-styled restrictive Asmodean tieflings. The same Planescape lore mentioned that devilspawned tieflings and demonspawned tieflings were "not likely" to ever conceive any union. Demon and devil blood was simply treated as incompatible, but the lore never examined whether the cause of this fact (or assumption) was biological, psychological, supernatural, or symbolic ... such crossbreeds simply had never yet been observed anywhere within the bewildering weirdness of the nearly-infinite planes. Or perhaps any which might have ever been born were summarily destroyed as unfit abominations by the first demon, devil, fiend, celestial, human, non-human, or other planar it encountered.
I cannot recall any specific examples of such crossbreeds published within canon lore. Some d20/OGL sources explored the topic in great detail, but they aren't proper WotC canon.
Planescape lore specified various baatezu breeding experiments - always very strictly monitored and controlled, and often dangerous, disastrous, or abortive - intended to create superior baatezu "supersoldier" strains. Although some varieties of non-baatezu species were sometimes involved, they very deliberately never incorporated any yugoloth/daemon or tanar'ri/demon components.
The methods by which baatezu procreate and advance were described in some depth; it would be utterly impossible for any non-baatezu to survive such an experience, and even if it somehow happened the result would still be a soul irrevocably destroyed or reshaped into a "pure" baatezu. Tanar'ri reproduction tends to be more bestial, but no less unpleasant and hazardous than baatezu methods.
Oddly, vampiric Blood-fiends (first appearing in late-3E/"pre"-4E, I think) were able to sustain themselves with the blood of any type of fiend, and could therefore presumably produce vampiric offspring from any of the same. |
| Shemmy |
Posted - 21 Dec 2013 : 16:25:14
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
Asmodeus, of course, is a special case. On some level, I think he is more powerful then deities, because he pre-existed most of them (only deities 'born' on the pre-Sundered world would be nearly as ancient and powerful). Thus, Asmodeus may have been created by primordials in that early universe (which may have granted him the power to procreate).
Asmodeus was a servitor of the original LN exemplars, and fell from there to LE (with him and the first baatezu then falling both literally and metaphysically into the earliest form of the 9 Hells where they then conquered and displaced the ancient baatorians who had been seeded there by the baernaloths [it's arguable that in some way the NE proto-fiends' expanding influence could have triggered Asmodeus's fall, but that's my pet theory]).
Accordingly he wasn't an angel, nor were his original servitors angels, but early LN beings (which might predate the arrival of deities). The erinyes may have arrived in the 9 Hells at a slightly later date, and might be derived from actual fallen celestials, or their forms might just be chosen to suggest that. Some of the Lords of the 9 are however actual fallen celestials, but they arrived in Hell well after its creation.
I'm largely going with 2e/3e sources here. The 4e sources are either exclusively for the PoL cosmology which really has no application to FR, or they inexplicably reference the PoL mythology in violation of prior canon in some cases. It's a garbled mess at times and it was really horribly unfortunate that 4e FR was forced to include the core 4e concepts regarding the planes because they were such a radical departure from 1e/2e/3e in many cases. With 5e it may be a case of which prior material do you completely ignore if you want to retain a cohesive in-game mythology. |
| Markustay |
Posted - 21 Dec 2013 : 16:06:11
Which still works within my theories above - if angels are former mortals, as some religions ascribe. Not all of them - just some. Or, conversely, what if angelic beings (spirits) can only procreate with a little help from gods? What if the fallen angels that bread with mortals (in the book of Enoch) were actually assisted by some elder evil? That would explain why some sources say Erynies can't reproduce (because they can't, normally), and others intimate they can (because they've received some sort of 'divine assistance' to move some power's agenda forward). We don't need to change the rules - we just need to figure out why there are exceptions.
Asmodeus, of course, is a special case. On some level, I think he is more powerful then deities, because he pre-existed most of them (only deities 'born' on the pre-Sundered world would be nearly as ancient and powerful). Thus, Asmodeus may have been created by primordials in that early universe (which may have granted him the power to procreate). |
| Sill Alias |
Posted - 21 Dec 2013 : 15:46:42
Oh, right. Erynies CAN reproduce.
It is explained in 3.5 by them being fallen angels rather than 100% devils. And it might be the case with the Dukes, especially Asmodeus. |
| Markustay |
Posted - 21 Dec 2013 : 15:42:04
Okay, so lets say all of these beings (not of 'the material world') are really just 'spirits'. Spirits capable of manifesting a (temporary?) physical form on the material plane (when summoned, etc).
Can a spirit procreate? Obviously, if it has enough power, it can. We see that some greater gods are capable of reproduction without partners (so do primordials attend parents without partners?) 
Thus, we may be able to surmise that at a certain level of power, a spirit-being (outsider) can initiate whatever process is required within a physical (material) being to reproduce. This, of course, would require far less power then trying to create a new being on your own (which is why archfiends and deities can't do it - they need a partner already capable of procreation).
So how do archfiends then breed with each other? I assume there is some sort of 'sacrifice' of power (soulstuff?), but still, it doesn't make much sense. Maybe true (100%) fiends CAN'T - we are just lead to believe so? How much do we know about Bensozia (Glasya's mother)? Could it be she was actually a Cambion? That would make more sense. Asmodeus should NOT be capable - even now - of procreating with another full-blooded outsider. Saying they have to sacrifice a bit of their power to do so is one way of explaining it, but still, there has to be some sort of physical mechanism preventing them from just creating armies of devils that are their children. Also, we have much folklore about fiends needing to breed with mortals... why is that? It can't just be an 'icky' thing (although I am sure they get their jollies). There has to be a valid reason why all of these beings - from lesser imps to greater gods - all need mortals to further their goals. |
| Shemmy |
Posted - 21 Dec 2013 : 15:27:15
quote:
Originally posted by Xar Zarath
As we all know fiends can reproduce. So my question are as follows:
1.Are baatezu able to reproduce with each other? (besides the archdevils of course)
2.When demons reproduce with each other, do they produce full blooded demons or half breeds?
3.When yugoloths breed, are they able only to breed their respective caste only, such as arcanaloths are able to breed only arcanaloths, nycaloths only nycaloths?
Off the top of my head:
1) Non-noble female baatezu are sterile (excepting erinyes in some sources).
2) Not entirely sure what you mean here, but they can and do breed amongst their own kind. As to what you would get if a female balor tried to breed with a male nalfeshnee, your best guess is mine as to what would actually result from that nightmare pairing. Lots of Abyssal horrific randomness I'm sure.
3) IIRC lesser yugoloths only produce mezzoloths. Nycaloths only produce nycaloths. Arcanaloths only produce arcanaloths. Ultroloths can only be produced by the promotion of an arcanaloth. 2e's 'Faces of Evil' has the specifics here. |
| Sill Alias |
Posted - 21 Dec 2013 : 15:02:50
Correcting mistake: baatezu cannot reproduce normally, as per Fiendiesh Codex II.
Unique devils are the only ones who can reproduce between each other. Like the Great Asmodeus himself, who has a daughter. And other Dukes with siblings. |
|
|
