Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Tevish Szat 12-14-06, 04:35 PM	The following is for discussion of a possible third fiendish codex on the Yugoloths. Would you like to see one, and if one does come out, what would you like to see in it?
Raymond_Luxury_Yacht 12-14-06, 04:48 PM	Please no.
Shemeska the Marauder 12-14-06, 05:09 PM	A jumbled wishlist of things I'd like to see (and in lieu of a book, which I'll happily develop on my own mind you): 1) I'd want multiple, conflicting origin legends about the 'loths to be presented. They've got a story they tell themselves that's true, there's a story they tell themselves in self-delusional self-importance, there's the story their makers never deigned to whisper to them, and there's the story that they tell the rest of the multiverse. Which one is objectively true? Well that my friends would be telling. 2) Baernaloths - their role above the orthodox yugoloth heirarchy as spiritual puppetmasters/advisors, and a discussion of their position as the firstborn fiends of primordial Evil 3) An explanation of the 'loths as the "Godless fiends", and an exploration for their absolute racial enmity for divinity in virtually any form 4) An exploration of the dichotomy of their own self-importance, greed, and selfishness that somehow coexists with their own racial pseudo-religion that puts them as cogs and willing puppets of a universal Evil that spawned them 5) An actual development of Mydianchlarus, and yes, a picture of the Oinoloth. Give him history, give him goals, give him whispered rumors as to what he said that terrified Anthraxus to the point that he stepped down willingly from the throne. Until he's made more obviously awesome (and he is awesome), there will be a vocal subset of players that opine Anthraxus no longer being Oinoloth like they remember back in 1e. 6) Further development of various unique 'loths, both the altraloths, and a number of orthodox 'loths such as powerful ultroloths, arcanaloths (such as Helekanalaith), etc. 7) We need to bring Apomps the Triple Aspected into 3.5... 8) Dispense of the bizarre idea of the 'loths being almost all in Gehenna, and not the major powers of the Gray Waste. They never abandoned the Waste like some 3e sources seem to insinuate, they spread out like an infection from the Waste, inserting themselves like metaphysical viruses into the flesh of Gehenna (to the point of now spawning directly from that plane as well), and they seek to do the same to Carceri. They view the three NE planes as something of a racial birthright, or perhaps a way of proving their worth to their own cold, distant, uncaring Baernaloth progenitors. 3.xe has done very little for the NE fiends, though the Crawling City was a nice touch. They need to be fleshed out further.
Count Arioch the 28th 12-14-06, 05:14 PM	What I'd like to see: The book split evenly between Yugoloths, Gehreleths, and Night Hags. It is my honest opinion that as far as NE fiends go, there's way too much yugoloth to go around. (Although in general there's not enough NE fiends to go around.)
Bob the Efreet 12-14-06, 06:32 PM	The ultroloth deserves to be CR 20. The rest of the yugoloths should spread down from there.
Manyfist 12-14-06, 06:39 PM	If there is a FCIII I hope theres more than just one warlock PrC. I mean the entire class is devoted to Devils and Demons even Yugoloths.
PunkRockBard 12-14-06, 07:32 PM	Here we go! 1.) Having the Yugoloths across the three neutral evil planes works much better than mostly on Gehenna with a few leftovers in the Waste. This will make Yugoloth settings as diverse as those of demons and devils. 2.) I would love to see the Diseased Lords fluffed, crunched, and illustrated. Those brief mentions in MM II deserve forms. I love the idea of a group of unique, spiritually vacant beings fighting for the "King of the Middle Planes" title. It enhances the whole spiritual disease theme of Oinos itself. 3.) The role of the Oinoloth brought back to what it once was. Isn't "Oino" supposed to imply "the one/the ultimate singular head honcho"? Right now, the Oinoloth is a ruler of some leftovers in Hades. That's not very grand. My own vision is the Oinoloth being the political authority..the "king/queen"...while the General is considered the Pope..the cult of personality figure..as spiritual as the Yugoloths can get....both equally powerful in their own unique ways. 4.) Specific details of Khin-Oin, Tower Arcane, Crawling City, Tower of Incarnate Pain, as well as more sites throughout the three planes. 5.) i am sorry, Shemeska...but i really want Anthraxus back. We have all of these Yugoloth lords with interesting, unique forms. Why a random ultroloth as the ultimate leader? Now, i love ultroloths as much as the next 'loth fan...but think of it this way. Reading on all of the rulers of the Nine Hells...and we finally reach number nine...instead of Asmodeus..it is a Pit Fiend. Kinda a let down, in my opinion. i spose if the fluff was very well written it could sway me...yet i don't see how it could. You, Rip and others have written fabulous 'loth material...and bless You all for trying to give Mydianchlarus a personality that DND never bothered with....that being said... i find Anthraxus tons more interesting.
ripvanwormer 12-14-06, 07:42 PM	Isn't "Oino" supposed to imply "the one/the ultimate singular head honcho"? No, it means "the one in charge of Oinos," which is just one of 13 lower planar layers the yugoloths dwell on (not counting the layers of Pandemonium and Acheron, where they are also found on occasion). "Oinos" is Greek for wine, as in an alcoholic beverage derived from grapes. It doesn't mean "ultimate" or anything like that. There is no inherent reason the Oinoloth is such a big deal, aside from its central location and control over the spot the yugoloth race supposedly originated. But I have no problem with there being more important beings behind it. The Oinoloth is the most important of the local administrators. That's it. Why a random ultroloth as the ultimate leader? Because it isn't random. Because it was the best, the most competent, the most secretive, the most brilliant. Because it was pure, and Anthraxus was tainted. Anthraxus should still be part of the book, and get his aspect statted and everything else. But he doesn't need to be Oinoloth. Maybe what he's doing now is more important than being Oinoloth. Maybe he's "graduated" from puppet to puppetmaster. He's finally evolved enough to be one of those pulling the strings.
ripvanwormer 12-14-06, 07:53 PM	But yes, I agree that it would be best to divide the book between yugoloths, night hags, and demodands. You can't talk about one race without talking about the other two. It would be no different than FC1 dividing itself between tanar'ri, obyriths, and lamoura. All three races are demons, and the hags, 'loths, and 'leths are all daemons in some sense. The baernaloth myth has to be a fundamental part of the story because it's a central part of what makes yugoloths a force to be reckoned with equal to the tanar'ri and baatezu, though the baernaloths themselves don't need a lot of attention unless Shemmy's writing it, in which case there can be a whole chapter on the 13 Demented. The baernaloths are what ensure that they're not a third-tier species of Anthraxus-come-latelies, but instead a core part of the grand design of the Lower Planes. Without the baernaloths, there is no reason to respect them. The baernaloth myth doesn't mean they're somehow better than demons or devils; it just means the 'loths have their own claim to fame. Barghests, gautieres, hordlings and so on should get attention too, but less so.
Gray Richardson 12-14-06, 10:01 PM	There is no inherent reason the Oinoloth is such a big deal, aside from its central location and control over the spot the yugoloth race supposedly originated. But I have no problem with there being more important beings behind it. The Oinoloth is the most important of the local administrators. That's it.True, but consider that the position of Pope began as merely the Bishop of Rome. ;)
Gray Richardson 12-14-06, 10:08 PM	I would love to read an FCIII that Shemmy had a hand in writing. It would be that much better a book with his participation. Now that he has his byline on a Dragon article, he should have some writer cred. WotC should seriously consider bringing him in on the project, if they have it in the works.
Shemeska the Marauder 12-14-06, 11:06 PM	I would love to read an FCIII that Shemmy had a hand in writing. It would be that much better a book with his participation. Now that he has his byline on a Dragon article, he should have some writer cred. WotC should seriously consider bringing him in on the project, if they have it in the works. I doubt I'm on WotCs radar. :embarrass I suspect the only chance I have of influencing whatever might appear in any possible future FC:III would be if I'm one of the folks tagged to write a 'loth article for Dragon. My pitch is sitting in editorial limbo along with several other pitches by other people, and I worry that my particular pitch might be too broad to be selected, but I mentioned to that crew during GenCon that I'm perfectly willing to collaborate on any article (if they end up doing one) so as to wiggle my way into some level of involvement on whatever they end up doing. Because ultimately, a Dragon article on the 'loths would form a basis on the topics and tone that got placed into a FC:III to some extent. I don't have a clue yet though if my article pitch will be selected, or if I'll get to help out on another if they go for a different angle on one piece or another. Either way I'd be honored of course, but I don't want to get ahead of myself here and assume I have a shot if I don't. I did manage to sneak a named Ultroloth into my one article in dragon, and if it survives edits, there may be a namedrop in my ecology article two months from now.
Archmage_of_Blood 12-15-06, 08:04 PM	To be honest, I'd like to see ANYTHING 3.5 on 'loths. Is there some? Yeah. I can tell you more about even fallen (or raised?) archdevils like Geryon then 'loths put together.
sciborg2 12-15-06, 08:15 PM	I would love to see a picture of an ultroloth that might actually scare me, or even my player. Then again, neither the pitfiend nor balor frighten me, but there are pictures of them that make me awed by the raw might on Evil's side. The ultroloth just seems lame as the culimination of all that is yugoloth -- I think they'd look cooler if their heads were more insect like, with the suggestion of facial features between compound eyes. More akin to dragonflies... I'd also like to the see the 'loths make their case about why their theory has more validity than the other fiend creation myths. Largely because I've seen Shemmy present the body of evidence -- which I disagree with, but I feel bad because I can't ever seem to really remember it.:embarrass If FCIII put in the 'leths, I'd love to see something interesting done with them -- and don't add another 'leth race unless there is a real point. Apomps and his little black triangles of racial memory have so much potential.
General_Ridley 12-15-06, 08:20 PM	To be honest, I'd like to see ANYTHING 3.5 on 'loths. Is there some? Yeah. I can tell you more about even fallen (or raised?) archdevils like Geryon then 'loths put together. aside from monsters in a few books (Monster Manual 3, Stormwrack, and Monster Manual 5 are what I can think of, and none to an acceptable job) there's no mention of Yugoloths at all. I would love a Yugoloth book along the lines Shemeska described, although I also support the inclusion of a good amount of crunch on overlords and such.
Archmage_of_Blood 12-15-06, 08:22 PM	I'm with Ridley on this one.
Phantom Llama 12-15-06, 08:49 PM	The most important common misconception about Yugoloths that a FCIII would have to address is their names. There are a lot of people who think there exist Yugoloth lords called 'Anthraxus', 'Cholerix', 'Bubonix' and so forth. Obviously this is not the case, as Yugoloths are cool and hence would not have chosen their names out of a book of rejected comic book supervillains. Mydianchlarus, by contrast, has an awesome name*. Since I don't actually know anything about the various yugoloth lords he is my favourite based on this criterion. *He also has bonus points for not pinching it from mythology like most fiends do.
Adrez Nesnsid 12-15-06, 09:48 PM	It is my honest opinion that as far as NE fiends go, there's way too much yugoloth to go around. Could you please explainthe reasoning behind this statement; it baffles me :thinks: (I mean, man there's like, practically nothing out there on the Yugoloths in 3e or later... (Could you tell me where this glut of yugoloth info can be found, because I can't seem to find much :detect: ) )
Archmage_of_Blood 12-15-06, 09:50 PM	Yeah, I've no idea what the Count means.
Raymond_Luxury_Yacht 12-15-06, 11:15 PM	Mydianchlarus, by contrast, has an awesome name*. Since I don't actually know anything about the various yugoloth lords he is my favourite based on this criterion. Like almost all high-up yugoloths, his name is a reworking of a disease, chlamydia in this case.
Archmage_of_Blood 12-15-06, 11:18 PM	Yeah, Anthraxus = Anthrax and Bubonix = Bubonic Plague, etc.
Phantom Llama 12-15-06, 11:40 PM	Like almost all high-up yugoloths, his name is a reworking of a disease, chlamydia in this case. Ahh. That makes sense. That one is obscure enough to pass muster, as well as being (unlike the others) a good name in its own right. In general, 'x'es are ill-advised. Yeah, Anthraxus = Anthrax and Bubonix = Bubonic Plague, etc. I'm well aware of that. That's part of why they are so awful - they're about one step away from 'Doctor Evil' in the nomenclature stakes.
sciborg2 12-16-06, 12:22 AM	Mydianchlarus, by contrast, has an awesome name Actually, he's based on a disease too. But don't worry, my doctor says it's not contagious.
ripvanwormer 12-16-06, 12:46 AM	Actually, he's based on a disease too. But he's not so obvious about it. I actually like the disease names, though. They spread evil like a virus. Their transformations are the result of other beings infecting them with their taint. It's an apt metaphor.
Shemeska the Marauder 12-16-06, 12:57 AM	I actually like the disease names, though. They spread evil like a virus. Their transformations are the result of other beings infecting them with their taint. It's an apt metaphor. It also gives a nice template for creating new names from obscure diseases. For instance, Yrsinius the Elder, Phleboerus zef Thiragoth, and Trypanos vath Chagarn. Fun stuff.
Angelflesh 12-16-06, 01:29 AM	If they include Demodands, please, please, please let someone other than Baxa illustrate them.
Adrez Nesnsid 12-16-06, 08:12 AM	Like almost all high-up yugoloths, his name is a reworking of a disease, This reminds me of the first episode of the Dilbert TV show, where they were going to have to start naming all of their products after diseases, because everything else was copywrited; "How about 'Seborrhea'? that's a disease." "No, that's a condition"
omegalith 12-16-06, 12:56 PM	I'm hoping they stat Gonorrheus, personaly.
PunkRockBard 12-19-06, 10:56 AM	Ack....sorry for the delayed response....i've been a procrastinator... Well..regardless of the technical meaning...in 1E i think the term was meant to mean what i previously typed. Yes..i know that meaning has changed from 2E on. A lot of it is preference. i like to view the Oinoloth as a lone figure of ultimate rulership on the top of a tower in the direct middle of the lower planes.....i am glad that 2E and 3E did keep the idea of other 'loth lords constantly challenging the current Oinoloth for the position. 2E did many great things for the 'loths....i still prefer 1E treatment in terms of rulership. As for the Mydianchlarus/Anthraxus debate....if Mydianchlarus were given a dazzling writeup...i could be persuaded. i agree that the method of obtaining the throne was brilliant...i should be more enthralled....Mydianchlarus just doesn't interest me at this point. i see how Chlamydia was taken for his name..hhmm...was this intentional on DNDs part? It is pretty subtle. Yes..we should keep diseased lords. The theme fits well with the Yugoloths. If Mydianchlarus was intentionally made from Chalmydia....pretty darn inventive. Most of these lords have been left to the imagination for decades....they deserve treatment on par with demon lords/princes and lords of the nine.
Raymond_Luxury_Yacht 12-19-06, 06:47 PM	i see how Chlamydia was taken for his name..hhmm...was this intentional on DNDs part? It is pretty subtle. Completely intentional.
DragonLich 12-19-06, 08:40 PM	Oh my god! A book on the ultraloths? Wow...any thing that would have those would rock, any of his cousins too! I don't see why they shouldn't have one though. There would at least be one person buying it. ;)
Karasuko 12-19-06, 09:09 PM	I was just thinking about this the other day! :ayyyy!: I really hope they make a Fiendish Codex III for Yugoloths. There are so many Yugoloths out there, but the only time you hear about them is when they are mercenaries in the Blood War. :( I'd love to learn more about their own goals, society, psychology, physiology, history and so on. After all, neutral evil is often called "true evil", so it should be very interesting to explore a "true evil" fiendish race. :devil: Also, I've always wanted to know where WotC got the word "Yugoloth". The words "Demon" and "Devil" are obvious, but does "Yugoloth" come from a more obscure earthly source, or is it just made-up? I'd love to know. :D
Shemeska the Marauder 12-19-06, 09:54 PM	I'd love to learn more about their own goals, society, psychology, physiology, history and so on. After all, neutral evil is often called "true evil", so it should be very interesting to explore a "true evil" fiendish race. :devil: You might like some of the 2e sourcebooks on them :) Also, I've always wanted to know where WotC got the word "Yugoloth". The words "Demon" and "Devil" are obvious, but does "Yugoloth" come from a more obscure earthly source, or is it just made-up? I'd love to know. :D It was created back in 2e. They were originally called "daemons" very early in D&D's history, but they've been 'loths since the early 90's. No inspiration from outside sources, it just sounded cool.
PunkRockBard 12-19-06, 10:32 PM	Yeah! What Shemeska said..... Some Yugoloths...like Charon his crew....are based off the Greek Myths (which makes sense....since the Greek Underworld is in the 3rd layer or Hades)...but many many 'loths are DND original creations. Kinda nifty! As for the front cover of a FC III.....Ultroloths and Arcanaloths would work..tho i haven't warmed the 3rd ed. Ultroloth illustrations. If not Charon...a Maraenoloth could work....a long robed figure in a boat with a skeletal hand reached out for payment..cool stuff!
Karasuko 12-19-06, 10:39 PM	You might like some of the 2e sourcebooks on them :) Thanks! :D I'm afraid I'm only familliar with versions 3 and 3.5, but I'd love to learn more. :) It was created back in 2e. They were originally called "daemons" very early in D&D's history, but they've been 'loths since the 80's. No inspiration from outside sources, it just sounded cool. That would explain why in the Scarred Lands supplements I have, all neutral evil fiends are called Daemons. :thinks: Daemon sounds cool, but I'm glad they changed it to Yugoloth because people would get them confused with Demons. :crazy: Thanks for the info! :bow:
Karasuko 12-19-06, 10:44 PM	As for the front cover of a FC III..... If not Charon...a Maraenoloth could work....a long robed figure in a boat with a skeletal hand reached out for payment..cool stuff! Ooo! That would be awesome! :bow: I love Greek mythology! :love:
Shemeska the Marauder 12-19-06, 11:33 PM	Thanks! :D I'm afraid I'm only familliar with versions 3 and 3.5, but I'd love to learn more. :) 'Faces of Evil: The Fiends' 'Hellbound: The Blood War' 'Planes of Conflict' Are the 2e books that'll hold the most information for you. You can snag the pdfs pretty easily if you don't want to grab the paper copies :)
Karasuko 12-20-06, 10:30 AM	'Faces of Evil: The Fiends' 'Hellbound: The Blood War' 'Planes of Conflict' Are the 2e books that'll hold the most information for you. You can snag the pdfs pretty easily if you don't want to grab the paper copies :) Cool, thanks! :w00t: It'll be awesome to get some background on the Yugoloths. :detect: Thanks again! :bow:
Tevish Szat 12-23-06, 05:44 PM	Of course, there are those, and i hope that a FCIII would draw on some of those for source material.
PunkRockBard 12-24-06, 12:52 PM	A mixture of 2E, even some things from 1E, and some newly created things for 3E (since there is little so far) would be great. If a FC III ever happens....it -must- fall into competent hands! The writers of MM IV...bless em....needed a 'loth education.
Mith_The_Godling 12-26-06, 02:44 AM	I think the third one is gonna be very good. The First Codex was very good, and what mistakes they did make in that one, was actually corrected in Codex II, (to some extent) which was a nice change. If this works out well, we might actually get that Celestial Codex we all have been wanting. If they are on par with what I have seen with the Codex series so far, its going to be freaking awsome. I am almost in love with Codex II just becasue they actually took care of the problems with the CR, which really rekindled my respect for WoTC, which has been somewhat reduced after the deity rules and the Codex I Demonlords. Good jobs Wizards, keep up the good work. And please, for the love of God make Codex III with the same quality as the last one, and then please start on a Celestial Codex series! Sure, they aren't bad guys, but the plot hooks are awsome, not to mention great for evil parties.
Tevish Szat 06-01-07, 01:32 AM	bump
ripvanwormer 06-01-07, 02:36 AM	they've been 'loths since the 80's. Well, since 1991 or so, when the Monstrous Compendium Outer Planes Appendix came out. They were actually daemons in a few very early 2e products (City of Greyhawk boxed set, Monstrous Compendium Volume II).
Shemeska the Marauder 06-01-07, 03:21 AM	Well, since 1991 or so Typo on my part :)
Snarkbone 06-01-07, 03:54 PM	Like almost all high-up yugoloths, his name is a reworking of a disease, chlamydia in this case. Really? I thought it was a derivative of medichlorians, the things that power/connect to force the jedi. Would be nice to get some psionics in for good measure (devils/demons didn't get any in the big boys department) someone gotta lure psions in with knowledge.
ArcTan 06-01-07, 04:07 PM	To be honest, I'd like to see ANYTHING 3.5 on 'loths. Is there some? Yeah. I can tell you more about even fallen (or raised?) archdevils like Geryon then 'loths put together. Geryon neither fell nor rose. He vanished.
XHereticX 06-01-07, 08:43 PM	I would like to see Yugoloth stats redone. The Ultroloth needs to be powered up to Cr 20 more more, consitering they have more influence in loth society than Balors and Pits Fiends do in their society. Mezzoloths are too powerful, Arcanaloths are too weak for CR 17s, Yanganaloths too weak, etc. I would also like to see stuff on the Ultroloth lords and their special qualities and stuff on the Baern would be nice too. Plus we can't do without a creation story. I also would like to see stuff on The Blood Rift and FR specific loth stuff.
Deacon Liadon 06-01-07, 08:57 PM	I would also like to see stuff on the Ultroloth lords and their special qualities and stuff on the Baern would be nice too. Plus we can't do without a creation story. And not just the Ultraloths, after all, the way the loths work mean that there are a fair amount of powerful Arcanoloths out there as well. Hekenelaith for example, Shemeska and A'kin as another.
Shemeska the Marauder 06-01-07, 09:50 PM	I would like to see Yugoloth stats redone. ... Mezzoloths are too powerful, Arcanaloths are too weak for CR 17s, Yanganaloths too weak, etc. Honestly I think the 3.x mezzoloths are pretty spot on in terms of power level. Yes they're the lowest rank of yugoloth, and yes they can ravage the low tiers of both tanar'ri and baatezu, but that's how it should be since mezzoloths are intended to operate as Blood War chattle, being sent to the slaughter just as quickly as they're birthed by their native planes and recycled just as soon as they die. The arcanaloth has been updated to 3.5 in Dungeon magazine #144 (in the adventure 'Diplomacy'). There's a CR 20+ arcanaloth sorcerer/archmage as one of the villains therein.
XHereticX 06-01-07, 11:06 PM	And not just the Ultraloths, after all, the way the loths work mean that there are a fair amount of powerful Arcanoloths out there as well. Hekenelaith for example, Shemeska and A'kin as another. shemmy and akin aren't archfiend level yet. Hekenelaith is there but barely. Yugoloth lords are primarily dominated by Ultroloths, Altraloths, uniques like Malkizid, and The Baern.
PunkRockBard 06-02-07, 01:17 AM	Wow...this thread arose from the ashes. i have kinda given up on the prospect of a Fiendish Codex III. How are all of You feeling on it so far?
Deacon Liadon 06-02-07, 06:45 AM	shemmy and akin aren't archfiend level yet. Hekenelaith is there but barely. Yugoloth lords are primarily dominated by Ultroloths, Altraloths, uniques like Malkizid, and The Baern. Yugoloth society isn't really as dominated by hierarchy as the Abyss or Baator, at least, thta's the impression I got from Faces of Evil. Sure, they'll pay attention when their "leaders" are speaking, but they won't necessarily do it how they're wanted. It might then be better to have Yugoloths of note then, rather than the archfiends.
Phantom Llama 06-02-07, 08:17 AM	In theory, yugoloths would be less hierarchy-dominated than devils but moreso than demons.
ArcTan 06-02-07, 09:52 AM	In theory, yugoloths would be less hierarchy-dominated than devils but moreso than demons. Demons aren't that hierarchy-dominated. They are in practical terms -- when a Balor or Marilith tells a Quasit what to do, the Quasit does it -- but they don't have any overarching hierarchy, just a big pile of different squabbling factions with merry bands of demons under a single Marilith or Balor that are prone to switch sides. It's not like the hierarchy of the Nine Hells at all. By this standard, Yugoloths are indeed more organized. All Yugoloths are supposed to at least pay attention to what the Oinoloth says, even if they don't give him the reverence Devils give Asmodeus.
Archmage_of_Blood 06-02-07, 10:59 AM	Geryon neither fell nor rose. He vanished. Yes, thank you for the nit-picking. :rolleyes: I meant those no longer Archdevils.
XHereticX 06-02-07, 01:22 PM	Demons aren't that hierarchy-dominated. They are in practical terms -- when a Balor or Marilith tells a Quasit what to do, the Quasit does it -- but they don't have any overarching hierarchy, just a big pile of different squabbling factions with merry bands of demons under a single Marilith or Balor that are prone to switch sides. It's not like the hierarchy of the Nine Hells at all. By this standard, Yugoloths are indeed more organized. All Yugoloths are supposed to at least pay attention to what the Oinoloth says, even if they don't give him the reverence Devils give Asmodeus. Then again, the Oinoloth is just a puppet...
Shemeska the Marauder 06-02-07, 01:36 PM	Then again, the Oinoloth is just a puppet... I wouldn't go that far. The Oinoloth has a ferocious amount of power across the Waste (more so on Oinos) and they aren't utterly beholden to the General of Gehenna or the Demented. Mydianchlarus and Anthraxus before him may have to take the General's dictates into consideration, but I doubt that they take him as a superior nor does he order them around as if he was. They probably view him as an older sibling with wisdom they can use to their advantage, and a surrounding myth they can subvert to their own ends when possible. As for the Demented, it's more an issue of control, but even then the Oinoloth's relationship to them is similar to that of an emperor or other secular power and a pope or similar religious authorities. They aren't controlled by them, but the Oinoloth's policies and long-term plans are molded and shaped by the baern (though the Oinoloth may feel that's not the case).
Bob the Efreet 06-02-07, 03:11 PM	Really? I thought it was a derivative of midichlorians, the things that power/connect to force the jedi. Planescape was either ended or almost so before The Phantom Menace came out.
Tevish Szat 06-04-07, 11:04 PM	Hopefully, one little thread on the official message boards (or two, i just noticed the one in general) will be noticed, at least to some extent. Not much is ever mentioned about the 'loths nowadays, and I for one would like to see that change. Parity for NE fiends!
Shemeska the Marauder 06-04-07, 11:06 PM	Hopefully, one little thread on the official message boards (or two, i just noticed the one in general) will be noticed, at least to some extent. Not much is ever mentioned about the 'loths nowadays, and I for one would like to see that change. Parity for NE fiends! We'll be seeing Charon and some other potentially familiar 'loths in Dungeon #149. ;)
Micheal_Roele 06-05-07, 10:01 AM	If they did do one on the Yugoloths, I would be curious to see what new wrinkles they will add and how it will relate with I and II. It seems Codex I and II have sort of retconed the concept of the Lolths directly making the Tanar'ri and Baatezu, like was elaborated in Planescape. So I hope they give the Yugotloths some super cool role, and not just make them fiends sitting in the middle. They should make the Yugoloths the primal corruptors and spreaders of evil, that are carrying on for the Baernorloths. Maybe the Yugoloths or Baernorloths have more to do with the Tanar'ri rising. over the obyriths than we are told. Perhaps they are behind the overthrow of the obyriths, wanting a race i nthe Abyss more focused on Evil than Chaos. The Yugoloths or Baernorloths could have convinced the Angels like Asmodeus, Mephistopheles, and Dispater who were fighting the Demons to adopt evil as a better tactic, and are responsible for their corruption. That would be really cool, to elaborate why they became evil and if the Lolths were involved in it. Maybe the Lolths goal is to spread ultimate evil itself, Law and Chaos are irrelevant tools to lead all beings to the ultimate end. One day, Evil itself will triumph over all other forces. Fiendish Codex II did one thing I liked, and elaborated on Asmodeus' hatred of the Gods of the Lawful Upper Planes for doing all their dirty work. The Blood War is cool, but Law vs. Chaos isn't the only conflict, there is Good vs. Evil as well. I like the fact they added that facet. It evven says in II, Asmodeus wants to one day put aside the war with the Demons to attack the Upper Planes... Perhaps that is all part of the Lolths plan in spreading Evil....knowing the Law vs. Chaos war will fade and Evil vs. Good will take the forefront... It would be nice to see the Yugoloths have some backstory, future rivalry, or hook with the Guardinals of Elysium, who are their Great Wheel opposites. General of Gehenna and Talsid (I think that is his name) were the first battle of Good and Evil. Wahtever they come up with, lets hope it is cool and as good as what they did for Devils and Demons.
Kain Darkwind 06-05-07, 10:16 AM	I also support an updated statting of the Loths, placing the ultroloth at CR 20 and working down from there. I know myself and Dackad both have done such stats...WotC can easily manage something themselves as well. I'm not sure why demons and devils were allowed to be spread throughout the CRs in 3.5 but every single other planar race from slaad to angels received no such bump.
Micheal_Roele 06-05-07, 10:19 AM	I also support an updated statting of the Loths, placing the ultroloth at CR 20 and working down from there. I know myself and Dackad both have done such stats...WotC can easily manage something themselves as well. I'm not sure why demons and devils were allowed to be spread throughout the CRs in 3.5 but every single other planar race from slaad to angels received no such bump. Yeah, for Antrhaxus' sake, make the Ultroloth more powerful than a Pit Fiend, or Balor. They should at least be Duke of Hell status, and the unique lolths be Archdevil and Demon Lord status. We don't need a new generation of players to lose all fear of Ultroloths....
Kain Darkwind 06-05-07, 10:31 AM	Yeah, for Antrhaxus' sake, make the Ultroloth more powerful than a Pit Fiend, or Balor. They should at least be Duke of Hell status, and the unique lolths be Archdevil and Demon Lord status. We don't need a new generation of players to lose all fear of Ultroloths.... Er....no. I am suggesting they make the ultroloth as powerful as a pit fiend and balor. If you want to stat up something more powerful, an epic stat block for the baernoloth would be very nice to include in the book as well.
Witch 06-05-07, 10:31 AM	Yeah, for Antrhaxus' sake, make the Ultroloth more powerful than a Pit Fiend, or Balor. They should at least be Duke of Hell status, and the unique lolths be Archdevil and Demon Lord status. I completely disagree. Ultroloths should not have Duke of Hell status. Pit Fiend or Balor status should be enough. Their emphasis should be different, ofcourse, but their power stratum similar. We don't need a new generation of players to lose all fear of Ultroloths.... People haven't lost all fear of pit fiends either. And they're "only" CR 20 ;)
Kain Darkwind 06-05-07, 10:33 AM	People haven't lost all fear of pit fiends either. And they're "only" CR 20 ;) Well, to be honest, when you consider that the Lords of Hell used to be CR 20-32, Dukes of Hell must obviously fall somewhere in between a CR 20 and a CR 20.
Witch 06-05-07, 10:37 AM	Well, to be honest, when you consider that the Lords of Hell used to be CR 20-32, Dukes of Hell must obviously fall somewhere in between a CR 20 and a CR 20. Those're just aspects. *whistles innocently*
Kain Darkwind 06-05-07, 10:39 AM	Those're just aspects. *whistles innocently* If I'd meant aspects, I would have called them aspects, and said they ranged from CR 19-27.
Witch 06-05-07, 10:44 AM	If I'd meant aspects, I would have called them aspects, and said they ranged from CR 19-27. Hey - don't ignore my innocent whistling! I know what you mean. And I'm fairly sure that we both agree that an average pit fiend and a duke of hell being the same CR makes little sense. Especially given the point that in this context, the poster made a statement that an "ultroloth should be more powerful than a pit fiend, more at the level of a duke of hell".
sciborg2 06-05-07, 04:30 PM	It seems Codex I and II have sort of retconed the concept of the Lolths directly making the Tanar'ri and Baatezu, like was elaborated in Planescape. Its actually one of several theories brought up in FC I. FC II entirely ignores it and has Asmodeus fighting the gods then ending up in Baator.
Kain Darkwind 06-05-07, 05:47 PM	Its actually one of several theories brought up in FC I. FC II entirely ignores it and has Asmodeus fighting the gods then ending up in Baator. Indeed. Bechard, a dying obyrith, certainly buys into that theory. And has expressed as much to Yeenoghu.
Kain Darkwind 06-05-07, 07:15 PM	'Faces of Evil: The Fiends' 'Hellbound: The Blood War' 'Planes of Conflict' Are the 2e books that'll hold the most information for you. You can snag the pdfs pretty easily if you don't want to grab the paper copies :) Damn, I just checked for this stuff on Ebay and Amazon. $80 and up! Troll and Toad must be yugoloths themselves to charge such a price! Reminds me of trying to find a copy of Valkyrie Profile for the Playstation. Is there someway I can legally buy the PDFs for a reasonable price? Or must I resort to file sharing?
Witch 06-05-07, 07:25 PM	Paizo sells them all for the reasonable price of 4 dollars a piece. http://paizo.com/store/downloads/wizardsOfTheCoast/aDAndD2/planescape
Andyr 06-06-07, 05:08 PM	Its actually one of several theories brought up in FC I. FC II entirely ignores it and has Asmodeus fighting the gods then ending up in Baator. I think the style of that part of FCII is meant to be slanted with Baatezu propaganda and indirect truths. Perhaps the 'loths created the Baatezu beforehand, and Asmodeus arrived later, just enforcing an 'I have always ruled' official line.
sciborg2 06-06-07, 05:26 PM	And Hellbound isn't yugoloth propaganda? ;) I like 3.5e throwing historical canon of the planes to the wind, as I'd rather have writers focus on ideas they like that are fleshed out than boxed in to one of the varied controversial theories, none of which I really liked as a whole (baernoloths creating all fiends, Asmodeus the giant serpent)... since we all know Io, the Ninefold Dragon, first shed his blood in the True Void so that the Shadow Void could be made, where the fledging gods could play at being creators...
Micheal_Roele 06-07-07, 09:02 AM	And Hellbound isn't yugoloth propaganda? ;) I like 3.5e throwing historical canon of the planes to the wind, as I'd rather have writers focus on ideas they like that are fleshed out than boxed in to one of the varied controversial theories, none of which I really liked as a whole (baernoloths creating all fiends, Asmodeus the giant serpent)... I agree. There is quite a bit of Yugoloth myth in that set. I remember how PC's hated serving as a mercanary in the Field of Nettles for some Lolth. I do like the new myth for Asmodeus as a Fallen Angel and soldier against Demonkind much better than the dualistic-serpent myth. Perhaps he and the fallen angels pretty much created devil-kind from the Ancient Baatorians and they sort of merged into one race. Another person pointed out FC I left that open, and it might be the case. The obryiths in FC I are cool. I still have the old "Rod of Seven Parts" box set from 2e. The Fields of Pesh was a compelling backstory. It was nice to see them use that, and weave the realtionship in with the Tanar'ri more. If they do a book on the Yugoloths, I hope they give them something compelling as well. They might not be the "creators" of the Tanar'ri or Baatezu anymore, but they should have some role in tainting law and chaos with evil.
Witch 06-07-07, 09:10 AM	Yugoloths. Lolth is an angsty spider goddess, loths are exemplars of pure evil. We don't need multiples of that Drow goddess.
Kain Darkwind 06-07-07, 11:44 AM	A yugololth is what was born after Shemmy and Lolth had a bit too much to drink on a 'girls night out' and expirimented with polymorph effects.
Micheal_Roele 06-07-07, 01:15 PM	Yugoloths. loths are exemplars of pure evil. They need their own sourcebook if they want to be 'exemplars' of pure evil. Lets hope that happens.
Shemeska the Marauder 06-07-07, 06:01 PM	A yugololth is what was born after Shemmy and Lolth had a bit too much to drink on a 'girls night out' and expirimented with polymorph effects. Oh please. I'd have better taste than that. It'd be Kiaransalee all the way.
Kain Darkwind 06-07-07, 06:14 PM	Oh please. I'd have better taste than that. It'd be Kiaransalee all the way. Hey, he's the one who was using the term Yugololths. And Yugosalee doesn't sound as good. Plus....she's undead? How would you...you know? Sounds like a recipe for atropal, not yugololth.
XHereticX 06-07-07, 09:36 PM	Its actually one of several theories brought up in FC I. FC II entirely ignores it and has Asmodeus fighting the gods then ending up in Baator. Actually, now the current canon says the Heart of Darkness produced the obryiths and Baatorians instead of the Tana'ri and Baatezu. The tana'ri were created by Obryiths as servants and the Baatezu are fallen archons.
Shemeska the Marauder 06-07-07, 11:37 PM	and the Baatezu are fallen archons. Probably not archons, but more likely fallen versions of a LN race of outsiders since at the time it appears that there had yet to be a schism among the early being of pure Law to differentiate between the Good/Evil alignment (as the Ancient Baatorians were LE by way of NE). Only after/during Asmodeus's expulsion did some of those early LN beings understand LG and potentially shift to that alignment (perhaps in reaction to Asmodeus's actions). Any sense of Asmo's once-superiors being LG would be much later historical revisionism acting upon the myth regarding those events.
sciborg2 06-08-07, 12:44 AM	Actually, now the current canon says the Heart of Darkness produced the obryiths and Baatorians instead of the Tana'ri and Baatezu. The tana'ri were created by Obryiths as servants and the Baatezu are fallen archons. There are no ancient Baatorians in 3e...anyway, a quote ref would be nice.
Shemeska the Marauder 06-08-07, 01:16 AM	There are no ancient Baatorians in 3e...anyway, a quote ref would be nice. FC:I Page 107 mentions the ancient baatorians as one half of the putative spawn of a revised version of the 'loth creation myth. FC:II only talks about Baator from the perspective of the Baatezu, so it doesn't mention them unfortunately. However allusions to them are there in the 3e MotP and in FC:II if you read between the lines in connection with the older material.
Gray Richardson 06-08-07, 01:25 AM	Actually, now the current canon says the Heart of Darkness produced the obryiths and Baatorians instead of the Tana'ri and Baatezu. The tana'ri were created by Obryiths as servants and the Baatezu are fallen archons.Not canon, precisely, merely the delusional ravings of a washed-up (literally) obyrith named Bechard. It is certainly an interesting story, and a nod to 2e lore, but it is couched in the language of an unreliable narrator, so that doesn't make it canon so much as an intriguing possibility. Ultimately, though, we don't know if Bechard speaks the truth. Not that he's necessarily lying, mind you--for I would never accuse a demon prince of so heinous a thing as lying--Bechard may even believe what he says. However, we do not know for sure his memory is reliable. If not a deliberate falsehood it could be a false memory, or an altered memory, or a memory of something that was told to him, or a mad delusion. The yugoloths may have even bribed Bechard with his life to spread such propaganda. Perhaps they have secretly keep the beached Bechard alive for all these millenia by using longevity potions or some such, in exchange for him spreading their carefully crafted story. Or it may simply amuse Bechard to tell such tall tales to the gullible Yeenoghu, or anyone else who will listen. After all, he is completely powerless. The only power he has left is the power of deception and manipulation :schemes:
sciborg2 06-08-07, 03:05 AM	FC:I Page 107 mentions the ancient baatorians as one half of the putative spawn of a revised version of the 'loth creation myth. Actually, that's cool. I do like my Light Eaters worthy citizens of the forgotten 'leth empire. True, though it does also mention the theory only holds weight in Hades and Gehenna. Imagine that. ;) I was rereading the Bechard part, and I'm thinking he could just as easily be talking about something from the Far Realms given the obvious obyrith similarity to denizens of that place. If he wanted to say "from Hades" I think Bechard could just as easily have said so, but instead he says "from elsewhere"...
Shemeska the Marauder 06-08-07, 03:26 AM	I was rereading the Bechard part, and I'm thinking he could just as easily be talking about something from the Far Realms given the obvious obyrith similarity to denizens of that place. If he wanted to say "from Hades" I think Bechard could just as easily have said so, but instead he says "from elsewhere"... Well out of game, it's indeed a reference to the 'loth myth. But they didn't hammer things down completely (leaving wiggle room is good). Of course Bechard might not necessarily be aware of where he came from, just that it was from elsewhere. He might have been of such lesser status when he was driven from Hades to the Abyss that he only vaguely recalls being conscious at the time, or he might himself have been part of a later generation of Obyriths after the first migrated, and himself have no direct experience of where they'd come from. Lots of reasons that in-game he didn't just say 'the 'loth's makers made us', though OOC that was apparently the intent to allude to that.
sciborg2 06-08-07, 03:43 AM	Or it may simply amuse Bechard to tell such tall tales to the gullible Yeenoghu, or anyone else who will listen. After all, he is completely powerless. The only power he has left is the power of deception and manipulation This is a good point. He may just be tossing out lies in an effort to gain something for himself. Lots of reasons that in-game he didn't just say 'the 'loth's makers made us', though OOC that was apparently the intent to allude to that. Definitely one way of interpreting the statement in game. Out of game, I don't know what they wanted but yeah it was probably a baernoloth allusion.
Micheal_Roele 06-08-07, 09:42 AM	Probably not archons, but more likely fallen versions of a LN race of outsiders since at the time it appears that there had yet to be a schism among the early being of pure Law to differentiate between the Good/Evil alignment (as the Ancient Baatorians were LE by way of NE). I kind of got the impression from the myth and text on Fallen Angels and Eriynes that Asmodeus was as genuine Celestial of the Upper Planes, the greatest ever according to the myth. The myth is mirroring the Judeo-Christianity Devil a bit...so it kind of makes his fall to Baator more dramatic and compelling if he was once good and became this evil being. I think you are right Shemeska there has to be connection to the Ancient Baatorians, even if we don't know the story. I went back and reread the FC I and other passages. They haven't been completely retconned out of existance. It could be Asmodeus, Dispater, Mephistopheles, and Fallen Angel forerunners of the Eriynes likely conquered the Baatorians and the two groups merged into the modern Baatezu. Maybe the Loths gave Asmodeus advice on how to better fight Demons (i.e., "Be Evil") and were part of his downfall and corruption. Maybe they had something to do with the mysterious Tanar'ri revolt after Pesh, and saw them as better agents of evil than the obryiths. One of Asmodeus' schemes in FC II is to stop the blood war long enough, ally with enough Demons, and attack the Upper Planes. He has his Archdukes under control, collecting energy to heal his wounds, and his army building in on schedule. Maybe this is the Yugoloths goal all along....the triumph of Evil over Good. I always from Planescape felt the Yugoloths used the Blood Wa to distract the Upper Planes and cull out the weak. It was a way to make evil stronger for the big apocolyptic showdown with good. We really need a FC III to either clear things up or confuse us more with new speculation..
Shemeska the Marauder 06-08-07, 06:30 PM	Not canon, precisely, merely the delusional ravings of a washed-up (literally) obyrith named Bechard. It is certainly an interesting story, and a nod to 2e lore, but it is couched in the language of an unreliable narrator, so that doesn't make it canon so much as an intriguing possibility. It appears that we now have another one of the eldest Obyriths backing up Bechard on some level. What a dark little tale IC history is weaving. As Cabiri explored the depths of the Abyss, it is believed that he discovered some of the truth behind the creation of the Obyrith race, a discovery that compelled him to resurface and seek out the obscure fiends known as the baernaloths. It goes on to say more. But Eric Boyd just earned some major points in my book for that little bit of lore, to say nothing of the rest of the article which rocks on toast (covering Astaroth, Ansitif, and Cabiri, and has mentions of Gargauth, the Fraternity of Order, and gobs of other little treasures).
ripvanwormer 06-08-07, 06:49 PM	The primary creation myths discussed in Fiendish Codex I are from the Demonomicon of Iggwilv and the Black Scrolls of Ahm, and so naturally they don't mention the baernaloths. This is fully in keeping with Planescape, which had it that even the most potent tome of yugoloth lore and truenames - the Book of Keeping - never mentions baernaloths once in it. They've simply hidden themselves too well. The myth in Fiendish Codex II is obviously just a local legend, a metaphor for the original events at best - I'll start with observing that it claims St. Cuthbert is a greater deity - but even it is pretty explicit that at the time Asmodeus was created, the powers of Law didn't comprehend either good or evil. He couldn't possibly have been a celestial of any kind. The only known in-character text that mentions the baern is the Book of Inverted Darkness (a truly terrifying tome, if we're to believe Monte Cook's Ptolus). Apart from that book and its translations, player characters who want to learn about the Gloom Fathers will have to go to Cabiri and Bechard, or to those few yugoloths willing to discuss the subject.
Shemeska the Marauder 06-08-07, 06:54 PM	The only known in-character text that mentions the baern is the Book of Inverted Darkness (a truly terrifying tome, if we're to believe Monte Cook's Ptolus). Since I don't have access to Ptolus, what does Monte do to further develop the BoID in that setting?
ripvanwormer 06-08-07, 07:04 PM	Since I don't have access to Ptolus, what does Monte do to further develop the BoID in that setting? Well, all I know is what it says in the preview Monte Cook posted on his site, an excerpt from Chapter 25. Here's some of it: Eslathagos Malkith was that rarest of villains who reveled in evil and darkness for its own sake. Corrupted by the Book of Inverted Darkness, he was motivated entirely by hatred for what he had once been. For him, light was darkness and darkness light. He hated life, nature, and all things born of the Creator. Kindness, compassion, love—these qualities he considered contemptible. Misery, hate, and pain spoke to him, and depravity, destruction, and malice became the objects of his lust. Most would consider this outlook pathological, but such was the nature of the corruptive Book of Inverted Darkness. Nearly the entire fortress lies within the invisible, incorporeal grasp of this tumor of pure evil called the Malignancy, which proves that an evil as potent as Jabel Shammar cannot exist for so long in one place without leaving behind a permanent scar—in this case, an infected one that spreads its contamination throughout the fortress. Actually, the Malignancy is the result of two factors: the accumulation of so much evil in one place for so long, and the nearly self-aware manifestation of the Book of Inverted Darkness that lies at the top of the Tower of Malice. In a manner of speaking, the fortress’ residual evil feeds the Malignancy’s metaphysical substance and the Book of Inverted Darkness focuses the power of the Malignancy toward a goal. Since the concept of corruption is at the very core of the Book of Inverted Darkness, it is no surprise that the Malignancy spreads a corruptive influence throughout Jabel Shammar. Anyone visiting this dire place faces the same corruptive forces that eventually overcame even Danar, a veritable pillar of righteousness and benevolence no mortal has equaled in all the millennia since he was lost.
XHereticX 06-08-07, 08:56 PM	Not canon, precisely, merely the delusional ravings of a washed-up (literally) obyrith named Bechard. It is certainly an interesting story, and a nod to 2e lore, but it is couched in the language of an unreliable narrator, so that doesn't make it canon so much as an intriguing possibility. Ultimately, though, we don't know if Bechard speaks the truth. Not that he's necessarily lying, mind you--for I would never accuse a demon prince of so heinous a thing as lying--Bechard may even believe what he says. However, we do not know for sure his memory is reliable. If not a deliberate falsehood it could be a false memory, or an altered memory, or a memory of something that was told to him, or a mad delusion. The yugoloths may have even bribed Bechard with his life to spread such propaganda. Perhaps they have secretly keep the beached Bechard alive for all these millenia by using longevity potions or some such, in exchange for him spreading their carefully crafted story. Or it may simply amuse Bechard to tell such tall tales to the gullible Yeenoghu, or anyone else who will listen. After all, he is completely powerless. The only power he has left is the power of deception and manipulation :schemes: In Planescape, nothing is for certain. All those legends are most likely loth lies anyway. But who knows when the loths are lying or telling the truth? I like to believe that story is accurate.
Gray Richardson 06-09-07, 03:34 AM	The story is a good one. And it may actually be true. But I have always liked the idea of competing myths and origin theories having an equal level of plausibility and authority on the Great Wheel. All the exemplars should have myths and legends of how their race (or their progenitors) were actually the first. What's more, I have always been partial to the idea of demons being first. And this is only a gut reaction, merely an aesthetic sensibility on my part. But the demons were the very first exemplars introduced in D&D. The basic seven flavors of Tanar'ri, Orcus and Demogorgon were all introduced in the supplement Eldritch Wizardry, (well, except for Balors, aka Typse VI demons, aka balrogs which were actually in the game from the very first pamphlet 1.) The demons were first, then devils were introduced in the 1e monster manual. Then daemons and slaad (aka yugoloths) were introduced in the Fiend Folio I believe. Modrons turned up in the 1e MMII. Because of this I will always look upon yugoloths as latecomers to the party. Thus I am much more fond of the theory that the demons were the first exemplar race to evolve out of the swirling chaos that was the Abyss in the primordial Great Wheel.
sciborg2 06-09-07, 04:30 AM	Gotta agree with Grey on this. I think how people react to varied mythologies makes things interesting. For instance, a baatezu speaking to a baern will defiantly claim the baern is a liar, while in his heart knowing there is enough evidence that such a thing might be true. The idea that the demodands were masters of the lower planes or, for that matter, were celestials is ludicrous...but no one ancient enough to know wants to talk about those silly ideas for some reason... Most planars scoff at the idea that the Lord of Nessus is a giant primordial serpent, but there does seem to be a canyon rent on the ninth made by something. And Jarizan seems to be more than just a racial goddess... The idea of primordial serpents of course tying into Vecna calling magic The Serpent...which is probably Vecna's insane thought process but then this idea of ancient reptiles speaks to dragon's faith that Io the Ninefold Dragon first create potential for their to be a Multiverse at all.
XHereticX 06-09-07, 09:32 AM	But the reason I think the loths came first is that they are pure, untainted evil, and it is only logical the lower planes began with them. I like to think that LN, CN, NG, NE came before LG, CG, CE, LE. The demons were introduced first mostly because that is the name by which we know evil outsiders best and at that time they most likely just threw all fiends, not mattering alignment, into that camp. Plus the whole demons were the primordian entities they are most likely is a demonic spread lie, just like the Heart of Darkness is for loths. In the end, the truth will most likely be a combination of all the theories or something completly unexpected like kender created the outer planes or something:D
Andyr 06-09-07, 01:10 PM	And Hellbound isn't yugoloth propaganda? ;) I like 3.5e throwing historical canon of the planes to the wind, as I'd rather have writers focus on ideas they like that are fleshed out than boxed in to one of the varied controversial theories, none of which I really liked as a whole (baernoloths creating all fiends, Asmodeus the giant serpent)... since we all know Io, the Ninefold Dragon, first shed his blood in the True Void so that the Shadow Void could be made, where the fledging gods could play at being creators... Heh, touché.
sciborg2 06-09-07, 01:51 PM	But the reason I think the loths came first is that they are pure, untainted evil, and it is only logical the lower planes began with them. I like to think that LN, CN, NG, NE came before LG, CG, CE, LE. I can see LN, CN, and TN coming before the others but why would NE or NG come before the others. There isn't anything pure about either - the middleground and adherence to it can be just as detrimental as the regimented thinking of Law and the anarchy of Chaos. I know the Loths think they are pure for having cleansed themselves of L and C but I think this is fundamentally flawed and the kind of stupidity inherent to racial purity groups. The guardinals on the other seek the tolerance of opposing forces and try to muddle their way through, a clumsier but ultimately far more honest way of existence.
Yanagita Kunio 06-09-07, 03:18 PM	I like for pretty much every planar group to assert primacy, or at least to have their own theory on origins and cosmology. For example, there are beings native to Mechanus that are perfectly willing to concede that Chaos came first--largely because they place no qualitative or quantitative value on being first.... I would definately want an FCIII to present a 'loth perspective, just as FCI and II have done for their respective planar critters: unreliable narration and the rashomon effect add richness (and plot options) to the planes as an environment. I've always been fond of the baerns in particular as unreliable narrators par excellence, with each spinning their own version skewed by incomprehensible agendas. Some mechanical boosts in print for the higher-ranking 'loths would also be great (I have such a hard time getting players to accept homebrew, even if it's good material), particularly stronger versions of the arcanoloth and ultroloth. Maybe it's too much to wish for, but I'd love for the gehreleths to get a slender chapter of their own (or maybe a particularly fat web enhancement) in which to share their unique perspective.
sciborg2 06-09-07, 03:57 PM	Speaking of which, B. Agnus really needs to get back to that story. Lazy arse.
XHereticX 06-09-07, 05:25 PM	I can see LN, CN, and TN coming before the others but why would NE or NG come before the others. There isn't anything pure about either - the middleground and adherence to it can be just as detrimental as the regimented thinking of Law and the anarchy of Chaos. I know the Loths think they are pure for having cleansed themselves of L and C but I think this is fundamentally flawed and the kind of stupidity inherent to racial purity groups. The guardinals on the other seek the tolerance of opposing forces and try to muddle their way through, a clumsier but ultimately far more honest way of existence. CN-pure chaos, LN-pure law, TN-pure neutrality, NG-pure good, NE-pure evil. I know Planescape tended to focus more on the law/chaos sides of the axis but good and evil are still fundemental forces in it as they are in any campaign setting.
sciborg2 06-09-07, 07:36 PM	(I'm just debating this for fun) Again, "pure" good and "pure" evil are meaningless terms at least as the Multiverse stands now. Neutral != pure save in the minds of yugoloths and likely the Rilmani, though the latter are more correct though even they perhaps don't really understand what they seek...the Being that was, that came before all this alignment mess...sigh, I hear the Song of Finding in my dreams but I can't find my way back..
XHereticX 06-09-07, 08:42 PM	(I'm just debating this for fun) Again, "pure" good and "pure" evil are meaningless terms at least as the Multiverse stands now. Neutral != pure save in the minds of yugoloths and likely the Rilmani, though the latter are more correct though even they perhaps don't really understand what they seek...the Being that was, that came before all this alignment mess...sigh, I hear the Song of Finding in my dreams but I can't find my way back.. hmm, how is pure good and pure evil meaningless and true law and true chaos not. Note: this is just a fun debate and there are no hard feelings:)
sciborg2 06-09-07, 10:19 PM	Chaos and Order are objective forces not predicated on the existence of sentient beings...note Limbo's elemental nature. Good and Evil are abstractions that require the existence of sentient beings. To allow for the concept of Good or Evil as forces as elemental to the Multiverse as Xaos and Order (now a hit TV show!), one would have to accept that they exist outside of choices one makes. This would mean that yugoloths are (here it comes :rolleyes: ) nothing more than modrons with the Evil switch turned on. ps. Xaos and Order heheh...imagine a slaad working in the D.A.'s office...well he could eat those killers and abusers who escape the Law and what can anyone do, he's a slaad for Ygorl's sake? Ironically, a greater justice would be served. :cool:
Gray Richardson 06-09-07, 10:32 PM	But the reason I think the loths came first is that they are pure, untainted evil, and it is only logical the lower planes began with them. I like to think that LN, CN, NG, NE came before LG, CG, CE, LE.I see your line of reasoning, but there is reason to believe that the Law/Chaos axis existed before the Good/Evil distinction. Did you know that in the original D&D booklets, the only alignments were Law and Chaos? Gygax was heavily influenced by Michael Moorcock's writings. If I recall, the Good/Evil alignments were not introduced until later, possibly in the 1e Advanced Dungeons & Dragons books. One could argue strongly that primordial chaos existed first, and then some sort of organizing principle evolved to oppose it. Then as they battled against each other the concepts of Good and Evil distilled out of the conflict. I have always been very partial to the myth about the axis of law splitting into Asmodeus and Jazirian, like some broken amphisbaena.
sciborg2 06-09-07, 10:43 PM	I have always been very partial to the myth about the axis of law splitting into Asmodeus and Jazirian, like some broken amphisbaena. great line Gray, seems like you're on a roll this week!
Gray Richardson 06-10-07, 02:17 AM	Thank you, I really dig your prose too!
PunkRockBard 06-10-07, 11:15 AM	Whoever it is who believes that each exemplar should have their own "me first" myth is right on. The outer planes are about ideas and philosophies. Their very nature is subjective. It would only make sense that the creation of those very planes, and the inhabitants, is also subjective.
Bob the Efreet 06-11-07, 02:01 AM	The story is a good one. And it may actually be true. But I have always liked the idea of competing myths and origin theories having an equal level of plausibility and authority on the Great Wheel. I agree with this position. Personally, I champion the 'loth supremacy idea, but I'm just claiming that it's true.
Doom_Linnorm 06-11-07, 02:27 PM	Its obvious! Io is the grand creator of everything! Well actually he created Tiamat and Bahamut, Tiamat created her playground and called it existence and Bahamut decided to challenge her to the longest and most complex ever chess game we know as the conflict of Good vs Evil. :P But yeah, it should always be like this: (Level 1 wizard)Player: So which outsiders were first. DM: It was the demons! Player: Really? DM: Neh, just messin' with ya. Player: So which is it then? DM: ..............HOW SHOULD I KNOW? Player: You run the frikkin' campaign world! DM: Does that mean I have to know which outsiders were first?! Player: ...........yes. DM: A ancient wyrm red dragon falls out of the sky on top of your character, take a reflex save to see if I only roll one hand of d6s instead of two hands.
sciborg2 06-12-07, 04:28 AM	I do think certainty can work for a DM, look at Shemmy's legendary storyhour that s/he is writing up on Enworld. For myself, I like contradictions and possibilities. I do believe the yugoloths *believe* they are the chosen ones, and that other fiends are the dross. But of course the baern carved those ideas into their brains so they can't help but think that...though I do believe the most ancient ultroloths have slowly begun to realize that the baern can't be trusted...
XHereticX 06-12-07, 08:31 PM	I see your line of reasoning, but there is reason to believe that the Law/Chaos axis existed before the Good/Evil distinction. Did you know that in the original D&D booklets, the only alignments were Law and Chaos? Gygax was heavily influenced by Michael Moorcock's writings. If I recall, the Good/Evil alignments were not introduced until later, possibly in the 1e Advanced Dungeons & Dragons books. One could argue strongly that primordial chaos existed first, and then some sort of organizing principle evolved to oppose it. Then as they battled against each other the concepts of Good and Evil distilled out of the conflict. I have always been very partial to the myth about the axis of law splitting into Asmodeus and Jazirian, like some broken amphisbaena. I am not disagreeing with you, I agree law and chaos are more primal. Our early mythology reflects this. Still, I would like to think that the Baern are some form of ancient, primal power. Maybe something that stood for an early concept of nihilism or something like that.
ripvanwormer 06-12-07, 10:35 PM	I am not disagreeing with you, I agree law and chaos are more primal. Our early mythology reflects this. Still, I would like to think that the Baern are some form of ancient, primal power. Maybe something that stood for an early concept of nihilism or something like that. I don't think there's any conflict between these two positions. The Hellbound mythology says that originally the forces of Law, Chaos, Evil, and Good existed as raw forces that formed the first progenitor races, who included the baernaloths. This is supported by all the other D&D mythologies if you assume that the serpentine progenitors of Law mentioned in hellbound were the equivalent of the baernaloths, and that the "gods of Law" mentioned in the Fiendish Codices I and II are the same thing as well. The obyriths are what happened to those progenitors of Chaos who were corrupted/manipulated by the progenitors of evil - the baernaloths. The only justification for taking the baernaloths out of the origin of the obyriths is if you assume the obyriths weren't, at first, evil. Which is possible. But as long as they were evil, the progenitors of evil have to figure into them. Just as much as the progenitors of chaos do. It's perfectly possible to state that the Law and Chaos progenitors formed first without dumping any of the Hellbound mythology. So the true slaadi and the serpentine progenitors of Law were around a little longer before the baernaloths and "priminals" showed up. That's fine. The powers of Law exist for a time as pure beings of order, uncorrupted by the taint that would later swallow Asmodeus/Ahriman, because the baernaloths have not been created yet, have yet to arrive, or are still getting their bearings. Uncorrupted Law could spend some time doing some groundwork - forming the ring shape of the cosmos (or the square shape initially, if you like) from the stuff of raw chaos, even creating the Spire and the Rule of Threes, as Guide to Hell said, and creating the moderators of Mechanus - before the tragedy and pathos start. But it isn't until the Good and Evil come on to the scene that history really begins. The baernaloths are still ancient and primal, even if they aren't quite as ancient or primal as their equivalents on the other axis
XHereticX 06-12-07, 11:10 PM	There is one flaw in your theory though. Asmodeus is no longer the primal embodiment of law, just a fallen lawful paragon. The whole serpents idea is now in question for me.
Gray Richardson 06-12-07, 11:21 PM	The obyriths are what happened to those progenitors of Chaos who were corrupted/manipulated by the progenitors of evil - the baernaloths.Now that's an idea that I could get behind. I find myself warming to this idea of the obyriths as progenitors of choas. Perhaps Ygorl and Ssendam are merely untainted obyriths, brothers/cousins to Obox-ob and the Queen of Cahos. And I find myself more easily drawn to the idea of the Baernaloths tempting or corrupting them to evil, rather than "creating" them by casting their own chaotic taint out into larvae. If the temptation idea is true, it still actually gives the Baernaloths bragging rights to say that they "created" the demons, because they kinda did, in a fashion, by causing them to "fall". Well, really only to scooch over a little. "Hey, Obox, a little to your left, please..." I like this idea because it means the demons could have come first, forming out of the churning void of chaso. The Baernaloths could then have come around later, but still have "created" the demons by bringing them over to evil. When the Baernaloths tell how they created demons, the story is both a lie, but with a kernel of truth. That works all the way around for me. I like it! :devil:
sciborg2 06-13-07, 12:03 AM	Rip once again takes it to the next level.:)
Micheal_Roele 06-13-07, 03:40 PM	There is one flaw in your theory though. Asmodeus is no longer the primal embodiment of law, just a fallen lawful paragon. The whole serpents idea is now in question for me. FC II does sort of do that, but it doesn't mean the Baernaloths weren't involved anyways. Asmodeus was an Angel who was leading the war against the Demons according to the myth in FC II, and over time started to become "evil" like their adversaries. His "Fall to Hell" was very early in the universe. Grey has a good point with the obyriths. Maybe they were once pure chaos, but the Baernaloths corrupted them to evil. I seem to remember, I could be wrong, the Queen of Chaos in the old 2e Rod of Seven Parts boxed set started out as more of a CN entity in the Law vs. Chaos war, but became CE over time, mainly due to her affiliation with her general Miska the Wolf-Spider. Who is to say that Asmodeus was not corrupted to evil by the Baernaloth or Yugoloths, who he would no doubt could have encoutered in his war against the demons. Maybe they were the ones who suggested tactics that would darken his band of angels to better fight the demons. Maybe the Yugoloths castoffs became the ancient Baatorians, and when Asmodeus fell to Hell with his followers, they all became one race, The Baatezu or Devils. Perhaps the obyriths created the Tanar'ri, from the castoff larvae of the Yugoloths. Who is to say, but it wouldn't be very much like the Yugoloths to instigate a revolt against the obyriths at the exact instance they are fighting the Eldarin. If you look at it that way, it means the Yugoloths still have their vile grubby claws on everything....and it worked out, because the lower planes are filled with evil, vile fiends.
Lobsopdoy 06-13-07, 07:09 PM	I LIKE it
XHereticX 06-13-07, 07:45 PM	FC II does sort of do that, but it doesn't mean the Baernaloths weren't involved anyways. Asmodeus was an Angel who was leading the war against the Demons according to the myth in FC II, and over time started to become "evil" like their adversaries. His "Fall to Hell" was very early in the universe. Grey has a good point with the obyriths. Maybe they were once pure chaos, but the Baernaloths corrupted them to evil. I seem to remember, I could be wrong, the Queen of Chaos in the old 2e Rod of Seven Parts boxed set started out as more of a CN entity in the Law vs. Chaos war, but became CE over time, mainly due to her affiliation with her general Miska the Wolf-Spider. Who is to say that Asmodeus was not corrupted to evil by the Baernaloth or Yugoloths, who he would no doubt could have encoutered in his war against the demons. Maybe they were the ones who suggested tactics that would darken his band of angels to better fight the demons. Maybe the Yugoloths castoffs became the ancient Baatorians, and when Asmodeus fell to Hell with his followers, they all became one race, The Baatezu or Devils. Perhaps the obyriths created the Tanar'ri, from the castoff larvae of the Yugoloths. Who is to say, but it wouldn't be very much like the Yugoloths to instigate a revolt against the obyriths at the exact instance they are fighting the Eldarin. If you look at it that way, it means the Yugoloths still have their vile grubby claws on everything....and it worked out, because the lower planes are filled with evil, vile fiends. That is EXACTLY how they want you to think;) You have been corrupted already.