Post/Author/DateTime	Post
zesteal 07-01-07, 04:46 PM	Anywhere i can find a Rakshasa Rajah? I've found pleanty of Rakshasas, but no Rajahs.
Rerecros 07-01-07, 04:56 PM	I don't think they are stated anywhere, they are just very powerful. I don't think any character in eberron could even fight them, so there's no point in stating them. If you engage them in direct combat, a mortal will loose. Compare in power to cthulhu, the horsemen of the apocalypse, or the dark gods of silent hill.
Darakhoranon 07-01-07, 05:34 PM	There aren´t stats for the rajahs - they are NOT meant to be opponents you can fight (and - possibly - defeat). They are, as Rerecros said, like Cthulhu, you can fight and kill off their followers by the dozen, but you can´t fight THEM. If you´re looking for names, interests or plans of specific rajahs, you MIGHT get lucky and find something. Maybe the *fanfares* Infernal Bovine *fanfares* himself will grant you an audience and answer (a few of) your questions, but as far as I can say, the rajahs are mysterious and unknown (and quite possibly unknowable).
Teron Gorefiend 07-01-07, 05:52 PM	Dragon #337 contains an excellent article about the Lords of Dust written by Keith Baker. It includes game information on the Rajahs, and one of them is fully statted. Basically, each one is an immortal, teleporting Game Over that can see and hear everything within miles of anyone who speaks its name, manipulate everyone around it without trying, and probably free its brethren fairly easily. A campaign involving a free Rajah wouldn't focus on fighting so much as running, hiding, and finding the Ultimate Eldritch Plot Device that can bind it again before it finishes reverting Eberron to the Age of Demons. Speaking of Dragon: I'm upset too, Rerecros, but you should really cut down on your signature. A lot of people block signatures that long, and you don't want to annoy the rest when you're looking for sympathy.
Hellcow 07-01-07, 06:38 PM	Though note that Dragon #337 is intended to serve as a baseline. It's a general sense of the power level under discussion, but you can always scale it to suit the needs of the story if you want a stronger or weaker one. And as long as I'm posting, I'll note again: While they are often called "rakshasa rajahs", they AREN'T just advanced rakshasa; the title simple reflects the fact that their primary servants were rakshasa. Personally, I prefer the title "Overlords of the First Age."
mhacdebhandia 07-01-07, 07:34 PM	Yeah, Keith, but you have to admit: "rajah" is cooler than "overlord". Is this something about which you have changed your mind since the Eberron Campaign Setting was published, or was the initial decision to call them rakshasa rajahs not yours in the first place? I'm also curious about something I'll spoiler-tag from the Savage Tide conversion notes: Was it always your intention that Khyber be less of an "Underdark" and more of a "Lower Plane within the world"? Most published Khyber locations and plot hooks tend to assume that it's literal caverns and tunnels within the planet. I'm also curious: had you envisioned the existence of unique fiends above the Lords of Dust but below the overlords in power prior to the need to find a place for Demogorgon?
Hellcow 07-01-07, 08:09 PM	Yeah, Keith, but you have to admit: "rajah" is cooler than "overlord". Sure. The problem is that when people call them rakshasa rajahs, they often assume that they're just big rakshasa. Is this something about which you have changed your mind since the Eberron Campaign Setting was published, or was the initial decision to call them rakshasa rajahs not yours in the first place? More just something we didn't really think about. "Rakshasa rajah" is obviously a logical name for leaders of the rakshasa, and we didn't really consider the fact that people would assume their were all rakshasa. Was it always your intention that Khyber be less of an "Underdark" and more of a "Lower Plane within the world"? Most published Khyber locations and plot hooks tend to assume that it's literal caverns and tunnels within the planet. I'm also curious: had you envisioned the existence of unique fiends above the Lords of Dust but below the overlords in power prior to the need to find a place for Demogorgon? I've always seen Khyber as both things. Eberron is inspired by pulp. Consider that John Carter originally gets to Barsoom by going into a cave. Look to Pellucidar, Agharta, or the realm of the Vril-Ya. You can have caves and tunnels, but you can also have worlds within worlds... magical lands awaiting discovery. As for the "intermediaries", I hadn't specifically spelled it out, no. I never intended to use Demogorgon in Eberron. Thus, when posed with the question of how to use the Fiendish Codex in Eberron (that Eberron Expanded never came out, right? I have a bad feeling it was lost in a data spike) the concept of the intermediaries came up. I've never seen the rakshasa as the only fiends of the First Age, just the most numerous; there's no reason not to have a diverse range. So I hadn't planned it all along - but I'd never stated the opposite, either.
Euangelion 07-01-07, 08:33 PM	...that Eberron Expanded never came out, right? I have a bad feeling it was lost in a data spike... Surely this doesn't have to be the end of that Eberron Expanded article? Surely something could be done, couldn't it? For that, and any other Eberron Expanded and Dragonshards articles that might have been lost? Please? :bow:
yrogerg 07-01-07, 08:57 PM	Sure. The problem is that when people call them rakshasa rajahs, they often assume that they're just big rakshasa. True, but personally, I've always been somewhat inclined to name the Rajas after the Rakshasa from the Mahabharata and Ramayana IMC, all the same. Even though they aren't Rakshasas, per se, the names are cool.
zesteal 07-01-07, 09:43 PM	If a Rakshasa Rajah isn't a Rakshasa, then what exactly is it?
DragoonDarkfire 07-01-07, 09:51 PM	If a Rakshasa Rajah isn't a Rakshasa, then what exactly is it? A godly powerful outsider?
Vharuck 07-01-07, 11:10 PM	If a Rakshasa Rajah isn't a Rakshasa, then what exactly is it? Whatever it wants to be.
Darakhoranon 07-02-07, 04:28 AM	Originally Posted by zesteal: If a Rakshasa Rajah isn't a Rakshasa, then what exactly is it? They´re the ultimate BBEGs - with a CAPITAL B... They´re like a whole bunch of (un)natural desasters all rolled into one and turned lose - with the slight difference that you might be able to survive the desasters... They´re what every self-respecting evil overlord wants to be - but in contrast to the usual bunch the rajahs ARE (nearly) invincible... They´re what makes the Four Riders of the Apocalypse look like tame puppies - tame, friendly puppies who love the world... I´m sure you get my point... At least, that is my view on the rakshasa rajahs...
Euangelion 07-02-07, 12:08 PM	If a Rakshasa Rajah isn't a Rakshasa, then what exactly is it? The better question would be: what are the rajahs and the rakshasas? The precise answer is shrouded in the fog of time, but there seems to be a consensus among scholars that the rajahs and their lesser kin are the spawn on Khyber itself, the rajahs simply being the most powerful of those spawned. Of course, scholars differ on the nature of Khyber, in terms of how literally they take the myth of the creation of Eberron and the Progenitor Dragons, but all agree that the rajahs have a powerful bond and connection with the deep underground realms of Eberron known as the Dragon Below. There seems to be a heirarchy amonst the native fiends of Eberron, rajahs at the top, followed by intermediate fiends (such as one known as Demogorgon, but whose very existence is disputed by many scholars), then by lesser fiends knowns as the rakshasas. There are four known types and/or castes (of course, by their nature they are master deceivers, and thus there may indeed be more or even fewer kinds of rakshasas) in order of heirarchy: the ak-chazar (masters of necromancy), the "standard" sorcerer-like rakshasa, the zakya (a consumate warrior), and the naztharune (stealthy assassins). Of course, an individual rakshasa of a lesser caste may be far more powerful than an individual of a higher caste. The lowest form of the spawn of Khyber are such native fiends as half-fiends, unholy scions, tieflings, and various fiendish creatures (though by definition these -Edit: only the creatures with the fiendish template- are not properly called "outsiders"). There has been some confusion among scholars as to what to call these fiends native to Eberron. A region of Khorvaire rumored to be rampant with them is called the Demon Wastes, which has led some to assume that this region has some connection to the chaotic fiends of Shavarath, but this is a false assumption. At this point it is necessary to differentiate between the native fiends of Eberron and the organization known as the Lords of Dust. The LoD as a group is chiefly made up of the servants of the rajahs, but over the years this group has come to include other fiends not native to Eberron, such as the aforementioned demonic fiends of Shavarath, as well as their infernal opponents the devils, and fiends from many other of the outer planes (pit fiends and balors from Fernia, succubi and others from Mabar, ice devils from Risia, etc.). Thus the rakshasa rajahs are called "rakshasa rajahs", because they are the rulers (rajahs) of the rakshasas, rather than being of the tiger-like fiends themselves, but they also rule other kinds of fiends besides the various rakshasas; thus they might more properly be called the Fiendish Rajahs. But just as the term "Demon Wastes" is here to stay despite being less than accurate, so too is the term "rakshasa rajah." There are other forms of fiends spawned by Khyber that are not under the dominion of the rajahs. Chief among these are the night hags and their ilk, but some believe that the horrible aberrations of the deep known as the aboleths are themselves Khyber-spawned. Clear as mud?
Hellcow 07-02-07, 01:48 PM	Euangelion and Darakhoranon are both on the right track here. Euangelion has hit the nail on the head with the question What are any of these things? All outsiders are essentially incarnate ideas, concepts given solid form. The rajahs are the mightiest and most powerful of these things. Rak Tulkhesh is the Rage of War, the pure fury of battle, and he has the power to stir men to strife. Kateshka the Gatekeeper embodies the fear of death and the horror of the undead, and he can slay the living and animate the dead. They aren't rakshasa, because each one is unique: they are the mightiest spirits spawned by Khyber, each embodying a specific and fearsome idea. But in general, Euangelion has summed it up quite well. They are the unquestioned rulers of the horrors of the First Age. As the rakshasa are the most numerous and best known of those horrors, they have come to be known as rakshasa rajahs. And just on the mythological aspect, I myself love Hindu mythology, which is one reason I wanted to do more with the rakshasas. But the point is that traditionally, the rakshasas AREN'T fixed in tiger form, and they can't be killed with blessed crossbow bolts (something inherited from, of all things, Kolchak the Night Stalker). They are powers of illusion, some of which have no fixed form. The rajahs are themselves more like the Asura, dark spirits with power to rival the gods. I don't personally use the names of traditional Asura or Rakshasas for the same reason I prefer to avoid the traditional archdevils or gods like Thor; this isn't Earth, and it's not our cosmology. I may look to the myths for inspiration, but Rak Tulkhesh is unique to Eberron; he's not Mahishasura. Not, mind you, that I see anything wrong with using the names - I just prefer to keep cosmologies distant.
mhacdebhandia 07-02-07, 06:13 PM	Thanks for your thoughts, Keith! This is another one of my favourite areas of Eberron, as you might guess. One small question more for now: have you thought of a name for the standard, sorcerer-like rakshasa caste, to match "zakya", "nazrathune", and "ak'chazar"?
Zardnaar 07-03-07, 04:06 PM	The ones in Lords of Dust article in Dragon seem to be on par with a low ranked demigod in terms of game mechanics and power.
OgreBane99 07-03-07, 04:48 PM	There was also a "Create your own rakshasa rajah" thread on these boards some time ago. I've been trying to search for it, but haven't been able to find it. Might be part of the Monster Archive post....
OgreBane99 07-03-07, 04:53 PM	Found it: Rakshasa Rajahan Project. (http://boards1.wizards.com/wotc_archive/index.php/t-356791) It's an archive but should still be useful.
Vharuck 07-03-07, 05:36 PM	Keith, you've stated before that you always viewed the imprisoned Rajahs in a very similar light as H. P. Lovecraft's "The Old Ones." However, aside from being dormant supernatural entities (such a common motif in Eberron that I don't think it would make you consider them above other things more analogous), I don't see it. Care to explain?
Cifer 07-03-07, 06:00 PM	However, aside from being dormant supernatural entities (such a common motif in Eberron that I don't think it would make you consider them above other things more analogous) There's "only" two kinds of imprisoned dormant supernatural entities in Eberron: The Daelkyr and the Rajahs (ok, and some of their creatures). Of those, Daelkyr have the Madness part right down, but the Rajahs have the better cults, IMO.
Vharuck 07-03-07, 06:05 PM	There's "only" two kinds of imprisoned dormant supernatural entities in Eberron: The Daelkyr and the Rajahs (ok, and some of their creatures). Of those, Daelkyr have the Madness part right down, but the Rajahs have the better cults, IMO. Dal Quor is disconnected from the planar system, effectively "imprisoning" the Quori from anywhere other than their home plane. However, they do influence (sometimes to the point of possessing) extraplanar things (in this case, humans are extraplanar). The Old Ones influence and communicate with those they cannot otherwise interact with, especially via dreams. More to the point, I see the daelkyr as being largely inspired by The Old Ones, wondered why Keith considered the Rajahs more like The Old Ones, but didn't want to influence his answer.
Hellcow 07-03-07, 09:57 PM	Keith, you've stated before that you always viewed the imprisoned Rajahs in a very similar light as H. P. Lovecraft's "The Old Ones." However, aside from being dormant supernatural entities (such a common motif in Eberron that I don't think it would make you consider them above other things more analogous), I don't see it. Care to explain? Certainly. I'm a fan of H.P. Lovecraft and Robert Chambers. among others. Xoriat, Dal Quor, Khyber, and all of the forces tied to these things all draw inspiration from these sources... but in different ways. Hence, the Cults of the Dragon Below can be tied to either Khyber or Xoriat, depending. You've already mentioned an obvious connection to Dal Quor. With Xoriat and the daelkyr, you have the concept of madness and the corruption of flesh - not unlike "The Color Out of Space". The common use of aberrations also adds touch of the flavor to the daelkyr. However, to my mind, the daelkyr themselves are not directly analagous to the Old Ones. Among other things, they are too compact, and have too much in common with one another. They are roughly human in size and shape. They lead armies into battle. Even now, they are down below the surface of the world, actively working on strange experiments. Their actions may be impossible for us to comprehend, and their mere presence may drive many mad. But you can face one in battle. The default daelkyr presented in the ECS isn't even an epic level challenge. If you defeat a daelkyr, you can even take his weapon and use it yourself. They are powerful, alien beings; but they are still humanoid, man-sized, beings who rely on armies to accomplish their wider goals. They destroy worlds, but they do it by twisting the creatures of the world and turning them against their fellows. A daelkyr may drive people mad with his presence... but you have to be fairly close for this to take effect. The Overlords of the First Age, on the other hand, are ancient and primal powers. They are forces beyond mortal comprehension. They ARE hatred, rage, and madness. Should anyone ever free Tul Oreshka (also known as the Truth in the Darkness), she could drive an entire country to madness. The release of Rak Tulkhesh would spread riots and wars across surrounding countryside. The rajahs themselves can be of any size and shape, all the way to colossal. They won't fight you with weapons, because they have no need of weapons - or if they do use weapons, these will simply be extensions of their identities. As for touching the world through their dreams, that is what the rajahs do. They only rarely reach MORTAL minds, but they do receive impressions from their servants, and the prakhutu of a rajah can commune with the Overlord. Another side point is that the Overlords were bound by an ancient force, not by human (or in this case, orc) hands. They are on a level above the daelkyr, who for all their power (and daelkyr like Belashyrra are more powerful than the one in the ECS) aren't even the mightiest forces of Xoriat; the worst horrors of the realm have no interest in other worlds. So: the Quori, the daelkyr, and the Overlords have all been influenced in some way by Lovecraft and Chambers. I see the rajahs as being the closest to the Old Ones themselves because of their age, their transcendant power, and the impact their release would have on the world. While they may not be as "aberrant", if you will, as the daelkyr, they are nonetheless ancient and terrible forces beyond our comprehension - forces that could shatter our world should they rise again.
DragoonDarkfire 07-03-07, 11:21 PM	Question. It's said in sections on Dal Quor that the Il Lavishtar or Dreaming Dark is powered by a moral mind as powerful as any deity. And with Keith's quote here- the worst horrors of the realm have no interest in other worlds. So what we can garner from this is that there ARE Gods in Eberron, or forces strong enough to match the power of the Raja's (Overlords, whatever) and in so doing possibly defeat/bind them again and for good. The thing is, these forces have no interest in Eberron or the Overlords and are content with the fact that the Overlords could awaken and take over as it doesn't really concern them. So we could assume that forces such as the Il Lavishtar, the true horrors of Xoriat, the leading forces of the armies of Shavarath, the great reaper of Dolurrh. All these forces could in theory match the power of an Overlord but are simply apathetic to the plight of Eberron? Or am I mistaken?
mhacdebhandia 07-03-07, 11:38 PM	They are on a level above the daelkyr, who for all their power (and daelkyr like Belashyrra are more powerful than the one in the ECS) aren't even the mightiest forces of Xoriat; the worst horrors of the realm have no interest in other worlds. Would it, then, be appropriate to compare the "worst horrors of Xoriat" to the Overlords of the First Age, and the daelkyr themselves to the Lords of Dust and/or powerful unique fiends with their own agenda? Like Demogorgon?
Hellcow 07-04-07, 12:20 AM	Would it, then, be appropriate to compare the "worst horrors of Xoriat" to the Overlords of the First Age, and the daelkyr themselves to the Lords of Dust and/or powerful unique fiends with their own agenda? Like Demogorgon? The WORST horrors of Xoriat would have more in common with il-Lashtavar or Azazthoth - powers that in part have no interest in Eberron because they ARE Xoriat; the idea of going elsewhere is simply impossible. I think it's reasonable to compare the chief daelkyr (Dyrrn, Belashyrra, et al) to archfiends. The lesser daelkyr (using the stat block in the ECS) are then on par with Lords of Dust, sure - a little less powerful that the members of the Council of Ashtakala, a little more powerful than the typical ak'chazar. You could also look at them as being on par with the typical kalaraq quori. They are more alien to us than the rakshasa, because they are spirits of Xoriat, while the rakshasa are spirits of Eberron. Note that even the "typical" daelkyr is hardly typical; there's only supposed to be around a dozen of them. However, the point is that there are daelkyr - Orlassk, Belashyrra - with powers beyond those stated in the ECS.
Hellcow 07-04-07, 12:33 AM	So we could assume that forces such as the Il Lavishtar, the true horrors of Xoriat, the leading forces of the armies of Shavarath, the great reaper of Dolurrh. All these forces could in theory match the power of an Overlord but are simply apathetic to the plight of Eberron? Or am I mistaken? You're mistaken. The point is that there's a tremendous difference between "the leading forces of the armies of Shavarath" and il-Lashtavar, or what I see as the greatest powers of Xoriat. The thing about il-Lashtavar is that you can't encounter it directly. It couldn't leave Dal Quor even if it wanted to... because it is Dal Quor. While you're IN the heart of Dal Quor, it does have the power of a god - but it can't exercise that power elsewhere, which is why we're dealing with the Inspired instead of il-Lashtavar. The only Quori who can commune directly with il-Lashtavar is the Devourer of Dreams. It's a force that can make its presence known, but you can't just meet for tea; when you walk the heart of Dal Quor, il-Lashtavar is all around you. So each plane has its mighty, mobile spirits - the Devourer of Dreams and his peers, the archfiends and celestial generals of Shavarath, the Lord of Eyes, the great powers of the fey court, etc. It also has greater powers that are tied to the plane itself. For all their power, I doubt the rajahs could leave Eberron - because just as il-Lashtavar is Dal Quor, Rak Tulkhesh is a piece of Eberron (well, Khyber). Meanwhile, even among the mobile forces - generals of Shavarath - most are too concerned with the affairs of their own planes to travel to others. An archfiend of Shavarath might be able to come to Eberron, but there is the question of what its absence will do to the balance of power in Shavarath. Even the lords fo Dal Quor only took an interest in Eberron when they thought their existence depended on it. The daelkyr are unusual in being planar predators, though as a DM you could always create others. Anyhow, I am about to travel for a week, so this will be the last post from me for a while.
ArcTan 07-05-07, 09:28 PM	True, but personally, I've always been somewhat inclined to name the Rajas after the Rakshasa from the Mahabharata and Ramayana IMC, all the same. Even though they aren't Rakshasas, per se, the names are cool. ...Especially because the name "rakshasa" as originally used by those texts was a generic term the way we might use the term "demon" or "devil" or "monster", and not particularly intended to name a specific race of evil spirits. (D&D's convention of the tiger-headed rakshasa is basically taking a particular archetype of rakshasa and making stand for the whole group -- no more accurate to the original tradition than making all "demons" be muscular men with goat horns is accurate to Catholic demonology.) I've always thought the Fiends of the Age of Fiends included all manner of D&D fiends, with the ones *we* know as "rakshasa" being the most "man-like" or anthropomorphic of them -- sort of like the distinction Hindu mythology sometimes makes between "rakshasa" and "asura" (the asura being the demon *gods*while the rakshasa are the rank-and-file).
ArcTan 07-05-07, 09:45 PM	And just on the mythological aspect, I myself love Hindu mythology, which is one reason I wanted to do more with the rakshasas. But the point is that traditionally, the rakshasas AREN'T fixed in tiger form, and they can't be killed with blessed crossbow bolts (something inherited from, of all things, Kolchak the Night Stalker). To be fair, that was inherited from the Ramayana and Rama's slaying of Ravana, in a twisted way. It's about as incongruous as making a rule that all giants have a special weakness to being hit by sling stones, but that's the kind of stuff old-school D&D was built on. They are powers of illusion, some of which have no fixed form. The rajahs are themselves more like the Asura, dark spirits with power to rival the gods. I don't personally use the names of traditional Asura or Rakshasas for the same reason I prefer to avoid the traditional archdevils or gods like Thor; this isn't Earth, and it's not our cosmology. I may look to the myths for inspiration, but Rak Tulkhesh is unique to Eberron; he's not Mahishasura. Not, mind you, that I see anything wrong with using the names - I just prefer to keep cosmologies distant. To me that was already inevitable by using the name "rakshasa" in the first place, though -- just like if you're going to call fey "fey" and have pixies and sprites and dryads then the Celtic myth and Greek myth will come creeping in. The thing is that I think Hindu myth strikes the right balance between familiar and alien for most Western fantasy fans in a way that the hoary old Greco-Roman or Tolkienesque Northern European myth doesn't. I'm sure people who grew up with Hindu mythology would feel differently, though.
Hellcow 07-05-07, 09:50 PM	I've always thought the Fiends of the Age of Fiends included all manner of D&D fiends, with the ones *we* know as "rakshasa" being the most "man-like" or anthropomorphic of them -- sort of like the distinction Hindu mythology sometimes makes between "rakshasa" and "asura" (the asura being the demon *gods*while the rakshasa are the rank-and-file). Certainly (hence my thought of the "rakshasa rajahs" as being more like the asura than rakshasa). As for other fiends, yes, that's basically what I said in the notes on the Savage Tide adventure path and in my as-yet-unpublished (and to be honest, I can't at this stage remember if it was fully completed - my fear is that it was on a drive that's been lost in the interim) Fiendish Codex Eberron Expanded. The rakshasa are the most common fiends of the First Age, but there were other types of fiends - including variations of the fiends found on other planes. While physically similar, of course, from a standpoint of personality and motivation these fiends are quite different from their counterparts on other planes - a fiend on Shavarath is fundamentally a spirit of conflict, while one from Eberron can follow a wider range of paths. (And yes, I am traveling - but hey, I had a free moment, an internet connection, and what better to do than post on the message boards?)
Euangelion 07-06-07, 12:19 AM	I think it is interesting to note that while the rakshasas may not have much interest in planar travel, their celestial counterparts the couatls can plane shift at will! In my mind this explains how the dragons discovered/rediscovered the Draconic Prophesy. While the native fiends of Khyber dominated the surface of Eberron and the dragons and lesser races wallowed in the dust and mud, the couatls were safely elsewhere, Syrania in particular, where they had the opportunity to study/develop/interpret the Draconic Prophesy, until a few were selected to reintroduce it to the dragons of Eberron. Then the rest of the coualts arrived home en masse , and at last the Age of Demons came crashing to an end in a blaze of argent flame.