Abyss Layers [Archive] - Wizards Community

Abyss Layers [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Johnny_Angel
09-28-07, 11:19 AM I know that the Abyss is supposed to be infinite, but I'm curious about how many of the layers have been detailed from #1 to #666. I think #1 is the level of infinite portals which contains the old iron fortresses of the Obyrinths.

So, I'm curious, how many layers have been detailed? What are they? What source has information for them? If possible, I'd like to try to collect and catelog as many of the layers as I can in one thread.
zook1shoe666
09-28-07, 11:23 AM check these out...

http://www.geocities.com/ripvanwormer/abyss.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abyss_%28Dungeons_%26_Dragons%29
goldomark
10-02-07, 02:59 PM check these out...

http://www.geocities.com/ripvanwormer/abyss.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abyss_%28Dungeons_%26_Dragons%29

Is it all canon?
zook1shoe666
10-02-07, 03:18 PM the wikipedia one should show what sources were used
AtomicKitKat
10-02-07, 03:21 PM The most detailed they go is Obox-Ob being in charge of 663. I think the main problem is one of semantics. They are in fact the "infinite layers" of the Abyss. It's just that the "infinite" part refers to the size of each layer, rather than the number of layers.:P
zook1shoe666
10-02-07, 03:42 PM The most detailed they go is Obox-Ob being in charge of 663.

ummm check out the Demonomicons from the Dragon mags.... they have quite a bit of detail on the layers in them.

It's just that the "infinite" part refers to the size of each layer, rather than the number of layers.:P

depends on the reference... the lower levels are just harder to get to.
Shemeska the Marauder
10-02-07, 07:32 PM The most detailed they go is Obox-Ob being in charge of 663. I think the main problem is one of semantics. They are in fact the "infinite layers" of the Abyss. It's just that the "infinite" part refers to the size of each layer, rather than the number of layers.:P

No, there are an infinite number of layers, it's just somewhat taboo to formally create any distinct layers beyond 666, because some folks hold onto the gygaxian era limitation of the Abyss at that number. I don't hold the same attraction to that number mind you, and I've tried to break it by including a layer number well into the thousands in something in Dragon, but it didn't survive edits.

Two layers above 666 have been formally named (and an edition later renumbered below the limit), and in-game according to the Fraternity of Order (whose numbering scheme the layers are given their order by) they've mapped and defined 679 distinct layers.
AtomicKitKat
10-02-07, 09:59 PM ummm check out the Demonomicons from the Dragon mags.... they have quite a bit of detail on the layers in them.

Sorry, was late. Meant to say "The deepest layer they detail." I have the Demonomicon articles.:P

666 layers is still more than enough. I think the majority of the time, only 20-30 of them will see use, as the domains of the described Demon Lords, with another dozen or so houseruled/homebrewed based on brief descriptions.
zook1shoe666
10-03-07, 12:12 AM Sorry, was late. Meant to say "The deepest layer they detail." I have the Demonomicon articles.:P

just making sure ;)
Gray Richardson
10-04-07, 12:25 AM There are two schools of thought about the layers. Several people will swear there are an infinite number of layers. Others think there are only 666 layers.

When Gary Gygax invented the plane, he set the number at 666. Later designers have tried to retcon that number, but even in current lore the number persists.

I personally think there are merely an "indefinite" number of layers, that is, a large number of uncounted layers, but not an infinite number. It may not even be fixed. New layers may spawn and old layers may get reabsorbed. The count could vary.

Several of the layers may be infinite in volume. But the actual number of layers themselves are most likely finite.

There is nothing anywhere to suggest that there are an infinite number of layers. But I do understand why people object to the idea of precisely 666 layers. The argument goes that the number is arbitrary or too "biblical". And though I personally like the number 666, and don't think that the arbitrary or biblical arguments hold water, I am not necessarily wed to it.

Rip Van Wormer made a convincing argument once that the Abyss, being a chaotic plane, should perhaps have a variable number of layers. And I could maybe see that as a viable option. People have also made arguments that layers have been discovered above 666, but (if true) of course it does not follow at all that just because there may be more than 666 layers the number is automatically infinite. That's a pretty big jump in logic.

And we must also consider that, though people have claimed to have counted layers over 666, we cannot be sure they have actually discovered new layers, rather than new regions of previously discovered layers. We cannot rule out a miscounting by fallible mortals eager to claim a new discovery.

For instance, if an explorer found a rift into an ice layer and another rift into a layer of magma, and another rift into an acid sea, the explorer might be tempted to label them 3 different layers, when in actuality they could be 3 different regions of the same layer.

Earth itself has icy areas, volcanic areas, and there is a sulfuric sea (or lake at least) in a cavern somewhere I saw in a nature documentary.

Seriously, if there were truly an infinite number of layers, explorers would have found thousands more by now, and the count would be up in the, well thousands at least.

The fact that the official count has hovered around 666 for such a good long time seems to be a compelling indication that the number of new layers to be discovered has petered out.

I cannot say for sure that some day they won't find new layers above 666, but even still I doubt it will be that many more. And certainly not infinite.

I am not even sure Pazunia is infinite. We haven't even discovered if it is a flat plane, extending to infinity, or if it is perhaps a sphere (like a planet) or a hypersphere (like we suspect Earth's universe to be).

However, it occurs to me that Pazunia itself could be just one planet in an Abyssal universe of similar planets. And I suppose it is possible that those other planets might have their own rifts leading to other layers. But that is probably one of those questions we may never have an answer to. :devil:
mearrin69
10-04-07, 01:54 AM I'm thinking that all of the 'canon' layers were detailed in Fiendish Codex. Didn't notice any missing anyway - though I could have easily since I don't know them by heart. Plenty of room for expansion.
M
Bob the Efreet
10-05-07, 12:52 AM I'm thinking that all of the 'canon' layers were detailed in Fiendish Codex. Didn't notice any missing anyway - though I could have easily since I don't know them by heart. Plenty of room for expansion.

I believe they were (Erik and James really did their homework), but at least two (as mentioned by Shemmy) were renumbered under 666, so as not to offend those who prefer that number.
AtomicKitKat
10-05-07, 10:40 AM Immovable rod geographers! ;)

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Johnny_Angel 09-28-07, 11:19 AM	I know that the Abyss is supposed to be infinite, but I'm curious about how many of the layers have been detailed from #1 to #666. I think #1 is the level of infinite portals which contains the old iron fortresses of the Obyrinths. So, I'm curious, how many layers have been detailed? What are they? What source has information for them? If possible, I'd like to try to collect and catelog as many of the layers as I can in one thread.
zook1shoe666 09-28-07, 11:23 AM	check these out... http://www.geocities.com/ripvanwormer/abyss.html http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abyss_%28Dungeons_%26_Dragons%29
goldomark 10-02-07, 02:59 PM	check these out... http://www.geocities.com/ripvanwormer/abyss.html http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abyss_%28Dungeons_%26_Dragons%29 Is it all canon?
zook1shoe666 10-02-07, 03:18 PM	the wikipedia one should show what sources were used
AtomicKitKat 10-02-07, 03:21 PM	The most detailed they go is Obox-Ob being in charge of 663. I think the main problem is one of semantics. They are in fact the "infinite layers" of the Abyss. It's just that the "infinite" part refers to the size of each layer, rather than the number of layers.:P
zook1shoe666 10-02-07, 03:42 PM	The most detailed they go is Obox-Ob being in charge of 663. ummm check out the Demonomicons from the Dragon mags.... they have quite a bit of detail on the layers in them. It's just that the "infinite" part refers to the size of each layer, rather than the number of layers.:P depends on the reference... the lower levels are just harder to get to.
Shemeska the Marauder 10-02-07, 07:32 PM	The most detailed they go is Obox-Ob being in charge of 663. I think the main problem is one of semantics. They are in fact the "infinite layers" of the Abyss. It's just that the "infinite" part refers to the size of each layer, rather than the number of layers.:P No, there are an infinite number of layers, it's just somewhat taboo to formally create any distinct layers beyond 666, because some folks hold onto the gygaxian era limitation of the Abyss at that number. I don't hold the same attraction to that number mind you, and I've tried to break it by including a layer number well into the thousands in something in Dragon, but it didn't survive edits. Two layers above 666 have been formally named (and an edition later renumbered below the limit), and in-game according to the Fraternity of Order (whose numbering scheme the layers are given their order by) they've mapped and defined 679 distinct layers.
AtomicKitKat 10-02-07, 09:59 PM	ummm check out the Demonomicons from the Dragon mags.... they have quite a bit of detail on the layers in them. Sorry, was late. Meant to say "The deepest layer they detail." I have the Demonomicon articles.:P 666 layers is still more than enough. I think the majority of the time, only 20-30 of them will see use, as the domains of the described Demon Lords, with another dozen or so houseruled/homebrewed based on brief descriptions.
zook1shoe666 10-03-07, 12:12 AM	Sorry, was late. Meant to say "The deepest layer they detail." I have the Demonomicon articles.:P just making sure ;)
Gray Richardson 10-04-07, 12:25 AM	There are two schools of thought about the layers. Several people will swear there are an infinite number of layers. Others think there are only 666 layers. When Gary Gygax invented the plane, he set the number at 666. Later designers have tried to retcon that number, but even in current lore the number persists. I personally think there are merely an "indefinite" number of layers, that is, a large number of uncounted layers, but not an infinite number. It may not even be fixed. New layers may spawn and old layers may get reabsorbed. The count could vary. Several of the layers may be infinite in volume. But the actual number of layers themselves are most likely finite. There is nothing anywhere to suggest that there are an infinite number of layers. But I do understand why people object to the idea of precisely 666 layers. The argument goes that the number is arbitrary or too "biblical". And though I personally like the number 666, and don't think that the arbitrary or biblical arguments hold water, I am not necessarily wed to it. Rip Van Wormer made a convincing argument once that the Abyss, being a chaotic plane, should perhaps have a variable number of layers. And I could maybe see that as a viable option. People have also made arguments that layers have been discovered above 666, but (if true) of course it does not follow at all that just because there may be more than 666 layers the number is automatically infinite. That's a pretty big jump in logic. And we must also consider that, though people have claimed to have counted layers over 666, we cannot be sure they have actually discovered new layers, rather than new regions of previously discovered layers. We cannot rule out a miscounting by fallible mortals eager to claim a new discovery. For instance, if an explorer found a rift into an ice layer and another rift into a layer of magma, and another rift into an acid sea, the explorer might be tempted to label them 3 different layers, when in actuality they could be 3 different regions of the same layer. Earth itself has icy areas, volcanic areas, and there is a sulfuric sea (or lake at least) in a cavern somewhere I saw in a nature documentary. Seriously, if there were truly an infinite number of layers, explorers would have found thousands more by now, and the count would be up in the, well thousands at least. The fact that the official count has hovered around 666 for such a good long time seems to be a compelling indication that the number of new layers to be discovered has petered out. I cannot say for sure that some day they won't find new layers above 666, but even still I doubt it will be that many more. And certainly not infinite. I am not even sure Pazunia is infinite. We haven't even discovered if it is a flat plane, extending to infinity, or if it is perhaps a sphere (like a planet) or a hypersphere (like we suspect Earth's universe to be). However, it occurs to me that Pazunia itself could be just one planet in an Abyssal universe of similar planets. And I suppose it is possible that those other planets might have their own rifts leading to other layers. But that is probably one of those questions we may never have an answer to. :devil:
mearrin69 10-04-07, 01:54 AM	I'm thinking that all of the 'canon' layers were detailed in Fiendish Codex. Didn't notice any missing anyway - though I could have easily since I don't know them by heart. Plenty of room for expansion. M
Bob the Efreet 10-05-07, 12:52 AM	I'm thinking that all of the 'canon' layers were detailed in Fiendish Codex. Didn't notice any missing anyway - though I could have easily since I don't know them by heart. Plenty of room for expansion. I believe they were (Erik and James really did their homework), but at least two (as mentioned by Shemmy) were renumbered under 666, so as not to offend those who prefer that number.
AtomicKitKat 10-05-07, 10:40 AM	Immovable rod geographers! ;)