| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
silverwolfer
Senior Scribe
789 Posts |
 Posted - 22 Feb 2013 : 00:49:35
|
|
So the spellplague dumped a new kind of gensai on us, that are from the returned aibeir section of the FR cannon, my question is, what happen to the old native ones, that did not have all the weird markings ?
|
|
|
Tyrant
Senior Scribe
USA
586 Posts |
Posted - 22 Feb 2013 : 02:55:22
|
| I assume they are still around and may or may not be mingling with the new ones. Similar to Tieflings. |
Peace is a lie, there is only passion. Through passion, I gain strength. Through strength, I gain power. Through power, I gain victory. Through victory, my chains are broken. The Force shall free me.
-The Sith Code
Teenage Sith zombies, Tulkh thought-how in the moons of Bogden had it all started? Every so often, the universe must just get bored and decide to really cut loose. -Star Wars: Red Harvest |
 |
|
|
Jeremy Grenemyer
Great Reader
USA
2717 Posts |
Posted - 22 Feb 2013 : 05:24:49
|
| Yup, they're still around. I would imagine many were drawn to Akanu#770;l. |
Look for me and my content at EN World (user name: sanishiver). |
|
|
|
Diffan
Great Reader
USA
4430 Posts |
Posted - 22 Feb 2013 : 14:28:03
|
Like others have said, they're still around and probably doing what they were prior to Abeir returning. I could see many of them being curious about others of their kind and venturing to Akanūl though.
|
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 22 Feb 2013 : 14:34:51
|
The way I look at it, we just have more choices now. Use what you want, ignore the rest. Everything is still around (and if they weren't canonically, why would it even matter for our home games?)
In Faerūn, we mostly lean towards crossbreeds being first generation (with a few exceptions, like the Yuirwood Halfelves). On Abeir, the rule-of-thumb seems to have been crossbreeds finding each other and becoming their own subspecies. One group would not preclude the other. |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
|
|
|
Razz
Senior Scribe
USA
749 Posts |
Posted - 23 Feb 2013 : 14:23:02
|
| What happened to the Aasimar is the bigger question. |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 23 Feb 2013 : 17:22:50
|
They all flew over to Pathfinder.  |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
|
|
|
Derulbaskul
Senior Scribe
Singapore
408 Posts |
Posted - 25 Feb 2013 : 06:42:04
|
You could always simply use the old art with the new rules.
As for aasimar, they became devas. (Personally I don't like the deva name or its backstory. It's too Indian - that would be perfect for an Indian-flavoured setting! - so, IMC, "devas" have a variety of names but they're the reincarnations of the celestial servants of dead deities. Lots of them are spellscarred and silver and/or blue in colour as befits former servants of Mystra and Azuth. These are the spellborn.) |
Cheers
D
NB: Please remember: A cannon is a big gun. Canon is what we discuss here. |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 25 Feb 2013 : 15:10:46
|
My own catch all word for Devas/celestials is 'Tezu'. My catch-all word for elemental (lords) is 'Tanar'.
If you apply the prefix 'Ba' to anything, it implies 'tainted' (taint = Evil). If you apply the suffix 'ri' to something, it implies corruption (corruption = Chaos).
Ergo, the original group of Celestials were all of one accord, working for 'the powers that be' (the original beings above 'the gods', and probably even above the primordials). Some 'fell', as detailed in the FC2: Tyrants of the Nine Hells, and became the first 'Ba-Tezu' (evil celestials). At around the same time, forces from 'outside' (Far Realmsian influences) managed to seep into parts of the Maelstrom/elemental planes, corrupting the Elemental Lords (geniekind), creating the Tanar'ri.
So I completely avoid all the cross-edition (and cross-mythos) confusion in D&D by creating my own terminology, based on existing D&D terminology.
The terms Batezu and Tanar'ri are not so much as racial identifiers (since I consider ALL outsiders below primordial level of the same 'race') as they are signifiers as to what their 'job' used to be, and what they've become. On the other hand, devil and demon are more about where they live, and what 'side' they take.
Look at it this way - I am a human (I think), which is like an outsider being a Celestial (the original, untainted, uncorrupted variety). I am of Irish decent (amongst other things), so you can say I am an 'Irishman' (kinda sorta) - that is my specific identifier within the human group (much the way I use Tanar and Tezu). I also live in New york, so you can say I am a 'New Yorker', and that is like how we use devil and demon (some sort of strange comparison going on there... but I'll continue). Being of one group doesn't preclude me from being from the other group - they are just labels applied to the different attributes of my heritage, preferences, and living arrangements.
And just as we are all human - and all look different (some folks dramatically so), so do Outsiders. The way I look at it, these are creatures of energy, and they really only take physical form when on the material plane (borrowing matter from the prime to do so). What we 'see' when we are outside of the Physical plane is our interpretation of what they look like, and we see exactly what we expect to see. When they take physical form, they are subject to the 'rules' of the Crystal Sphere, and look like what folks from that world would expect for a creature of its kind (so rather then just an image created by our preconceptions, when they arrive of the Prime Material they truly are just that way).
That also helps explain why thing sometimes look different in art - the same exact being could look different to different people in the outer planes, and could also take a completely different physical form from world to world, and even from region to region, and quite possibly from time period to time period (if people's perceptions have changed). The thing to remember is, anything outside of the Prime Material plane lacks physicality until it enters the Prime Material Plane. This is what makes the material world so unique, and why so many outsiders want to be here as much as they can (for a good reference of how an angel would behave, see the movie Michael, or even City of Angels - not having physical senses most of the time, they can be overwhelmed by mortality). They really do sometimes just want to 'roll in the grass'.
Fiends, of course, have much baser (carnal) desires.
Thats my take on the whole shebang - YMMV. |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
Edited by - Markustay on 25 Feb 2013 15:13:55 |
|
|
|
Razz
Senior Scribe
USA
749 Posts |
Posted - 02 Mar 2013 : 05:08:47
|
quote:
Originally posted by Derulbaskul
You could always simply use the old art with the new rules.
As for aasimar, they became devas. (Personally I don't like the deva name or its backstory. It's too Indian - that would be perfect for an Indian-flavoured setting! - so, IMC, "devas" have a variety of names but they're the reincarnations of the celestial servants of dead deities. Lots of them are spellscarred and silver and/or blue in colour as befits former servants of Mystra and Azuth. These are the spellborn.)
No. I doubt it. I am pretty sure the developers said the Devas were replacing the Aasimar, not that they were Aasimar to begin with. The origins of both are very completely different.
Yeah, I am aware this is the same brain-dead team that decided all demons are now elementals, yugoloths are just demons with "devil-like" mindsets, succubi were (somehow) secretly erinyes devils all along and are now full-fledged devils, eladrin are now feyborn elves and the chaotic good celestial race they really are have vanished, that iron and adamantine dragons are somehow less confusing than bronze and brass dragons to people (they note this in the developer book "Wizards Presents" series, by asking you if you could remember all 5 metallic dragons and all their double breath weapons...and then degrade you sarcastically by saying, in the same paragraph, that if you did, well good for you) and are now good dragons despite one being of the ferrous lawful dragons and the other is a planar dragon. (I am still bitter about their disregard for continuity still, yes)
But I am sure I read during the talk on the Realms that the PHB2 Devas were being used instead of bringing back the Aasimar...who I didn't know left to begin with (like Markustay said, ran off or got zipped to Golarion during the SPellplague).
I like the race, I just prefer a name change since Deva is already taken (and, of course, I wish a PF or 3rd Edition version was somewhere floating about). The Indian-flavor works just fine in places like the Golden Waters region and beyond. I am tired of the Eurocentric myth stuff to begin with in D&D. |
|
|
|
Euranna
Learned Scribe
USA
219 Posts |
Posted - 02 Mar 2013 : 20:18:05
|
quote:
But I am sure I read during the talk on the Realms that the PHB2 Devas were being used instead of bringing back the Aasimar...who I didn't know left to begin with (like Markustay said, ran off or got zipped to Golarion during the SPellplague).
 Maybe they made the right choice? |
|
|
|
Markustay
Realms Explorer extraordinaire
USA
15724 Posts |
Posted - 03 Mar 2013 : 14:09:44
|
I never liked the term Aasimar, but it was better then continuing the 'killed them and took their stuff' path that 4e went down.
I think something very similar to Aasimar would work best, like 'Asrael' (Yeah, I know that already has a religious significance, but its minor and sounds kinda cool). Asmarael? Asmarae? (plural of the first one). Whatever, anything is better then them further convoluting past-lore be re-defining existing D&D terminology.
I like that Exarch replaced demigod - I hated that 'chosen' had started to go that route.
What should the child of a god be considered? An exarch, or an Aasimar? (or fiend/Cambion/Tiefling if it is an evil deity?) |
"I have never in my life learned anything from any man who agreed with me" --- Dudley Field Malone
|
Edited by - Markustay on 03 Mar 2013 14:15:52 |
|
|
|
Diffan
Great Reader
USA
4430 Posts |
Posted - 03 Mar 2013 : 15:07:05
|
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
I never liked the term Aasimar, but it was better then continuing the 'killed them and took their stuff' path that 4e went down.
I was never really a fan of the name either, though I can't say that Deva was an improvement. It always comes of as "Diva!" (as in some rambunctious, self-centered singer).
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
I think something very similar to Aasimar would work best, like 'Asrael' (Yeah, I know that already has a religious significance, but its minor and sounds kinda cool). Asmarael? Asmarae? (plural of the first one). Whatever, anything is better then them further convoluting past-lore be re-defining existing D&D terminology.
I like Asmarael, sounds pretty cool!
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
I like that Exarch replaced demigod - I hated that 'chosen' had started to go that route.
What should the child of a god be considered? An exarch, or an Aasimar? (or fiend/Cambion/Tiefling if it is an evil deity?)
I don't think the children of Gods and Mortals should really follow any set, specific rule for what they're called or do. Exarch is a nice title and has similiar significance when compared to Mortals who are touched by the divine and risen in power (The Red Knight or Fzoul for example). |
|
|
|
Bladewind
Master of Realmslore
Netherlands
1280 Posts |
|
|
Razz
Senior Scribe
USA
749 Posts |
Posted - 04 Mar 2013 : 23:46:43
|
Well Aasimar have always been humans with a trace of celestial in their bloodline. This did carry over into 3E. Brilliantly, Pathfinder went and made aasimar of different celestial lineage (so that an aasimar with eladrin ancestor will look and have different traits than one that descended from an archon or angel).
For some strange reason, the FR designers decided to have it where some Aasimar and Tieflings had god-blood in them. Such that an Aasimar could possibly be about a hundred ancestors off from a union between, say, Selune and a mortal. Likewise with Tieflings. And that some half-fiends and half-celestials were the offspring of a deity and a mortal. I find both silly, I believe the mechanics to a "god-blooded" being should be something not only different, but also unique to specific kinds of deities. Such mechanics would require several pages of in-depth info, unfortunately.
This phenomenon was common in Mulhorand, where the god incarnates would produce such offspring. I can agree to that in a sense. They're incarnates, not avatars, so I can believe the god-blood in an incarnate was much weaker in power than an avatar. After all, the Mulhorandi and Untheric Pantheons both sent aspects of their power to the people, not their full deific selves until after the Time of Troubles. |
|
|
|
Chosen of Asmodeus
Master of Realmslore
1221 Posts |
Posted - 05 Mar 2013 : 22:41:56
|
I remember Eric saying a while back that the idea that devas were supposed to be aasimars was actually a misconception, they're supposed to be something else entirely, and they just didn't include aasimars in 4e.
Personally I preferred devas to aasimars. I liked their astetics better, I liked their reincarnation shtick. Only thing I didn't like about them was the whole, become evil, get reincarnated as a rakshasa, which made no sense to me(they're supposed to be angels incarnate in mortal bodies, and angels themselves don't have to be good or evil in 4e, merely the servants of the gods). |
"Then I saw there was a way to Hell even from the gates of Heaven"
- John Bunyan, Pilgrim's Progress
Fatum Iustum Stultorum. Righteous is the destiny of fools.
The Roleplayer's Gazebo;
http://theroleplayersgazebo.yuku.com/directory#.Ub4hvvlJOAY |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
|
|
So if the new gensai are from return aibeir....
