Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Rakshasa 67 11-23-05, 07:58 AM	I don't like using them so they don't exisit in my realms.
Chosen of Bane 11-23-05, 08:00 AM	What do you got against Babar?
Cainan 11-23-05, 08:28 AM	Walking, talking elephants bother you? Giant floating eyeballs with multiple eystocks with other eyes that shoot laser beams doesn't? Seems strange to me heh.
Yokinobu 11-23-05, 10:28 AM	Because walking, talking elephant people just sounds silly. Might as well have rhinocerous people and girraffe people.
Slime Lord 11-23-05, 10:32 AM	Because walking, talking elephant people just sounds silly. Might as well have rhinocerous people and girraffe people. And, once more, Giant Floating eye balls with tentacles, eye balls and laser beams aren't? :cool: Use them. You can find something fun and exciting in your games when they are needed.
Tobus Neth 11-23-05, 10:33 AM	I too find that odd. This cool place where drow enslaved a nation of southern barbarians,a country of wizards and then Elephant people come on... I don't allow animal-subhumans in my world either.
Slime Lord 11-23-05, 10:43 AM	I too find that odd. This cool place where drow enslaved a nation of southern barbarians,a country of wizards and then Elephant people come on... I don't allow animal-subhumans in my world either. But there are dozens of animal-sub humans in the Realms. One could easily argue that Orcs are a subhuman, same with Hobgoblins and other creatures like that. Then, your also getting rid of Dragons since they're an animal/beast who can talk, has intelligence extra. Course, Angels and other Angelic/Celstial beings are gone because you know, Angels has feathers and all.. Get where I'm going?
Chosen of Bane 11-23-05, 10:55 AM	Wemics, Centaurs, Satyrs, Rakshasas (sp?), Were-creatures, Catfolk, Yuan-ti, Minataurs, Bullywugs........... Yeah, whoever heard of anthropomorphic animals in D&D?
Gallameed 11-23-05, 11:39 AM	I think the idea (Loxo) is a little bit silly but a lot of fantasy can seem silly at times if you really think about it. These elephant people really need a very cool peice of art to represent them so it lends some cred to the "silly" concept and gives it some balls as a race. Imagine the Loxo as drawn by Lockwood, Reynolds, Brom or even H.R. Giger or something. Many a good class, presti-class, or race has been let down by flat, cruddy art, I think there needs to be a bit more consistency in the D&D art, thats not to say all the art should be samey, just a smidgin more talent looked for in the artists. (get me a saucer of milk) :P
Gray Richardson 11-23-05, 11:49 AM	Honestly, I think the Loxo are quite cool. They remind me of the aliens in Larry Niven's novel Footfall. I can see where you are coming from on the silly thing, but honestly the Loxo are pretty well developed and 3-dimensional and have a good story. They don't strike me as silly at all. Anyway, they have been around in the realms for a long time, going back to Forgotten Realms Monstrous Compendium Appendix II, all the way back to 1991. So they are well established in Forgotten Realms lore.
GothicDan 11-23-05, 11:49 AM	Also, note that the idea of anthropomorphic elephants would really only be silly in Western culture. Faerun is not Western culture. It's not silly there. In African and Asian cultures, anthropomorphic pachoderm deities/beings (Ganesh, anyone?) were certainly in existence, and no more "silly" than Anubis. Or should we get rid of every anthropomorphic/intelligent-animal-based deity and creature? Goodbye Shedu, Rakshasa, Centaur, Sphinx, Satyr, Faun, Manscorpion, Thri-Keen, Behir, Wemic, Avariel, Aaracokra, Merpeople, Tritons, Tacos, Lizardfolk, Yuan-Ti, Nagas, Bullywugs, Kenku, Medusas, Unicorns, Pegasi ALL Lycanthropes, etc. Not to mention Anubis, Horus-Re, Hathor, Thoth, Set, Sobek, Bast, Nobanion, Lurue...
Gallameed 11-23-05, 12:04 PM	Also, note that the idea of anthropomorphic elephants would really only be silly in Western culture. Faerun is not Western culture. It's not silly there. In African and Asian cultures, anthropomorphic pachoderm deities/beings (Ganesh, anyone?) were certainly in existence, and no more "silly" than Anubis. Or should we get rid of every anthropomorphic/intelligent-animal-based deity and creature? Goodbye Shedu, Rakshasa, Centaur, Sphinx, Satyr, Faun, Manscorpion, Thri-Keen, Behir, Wemic, Avariel, Aaracokra, Merpeople, Tritons, Tacos, Lizardfolk, Yuan-Ti, Nagas, Bullywugs, Kenku, Medusas, Unicorns, Pegasi ALL Lycanthropes, etc. Not to mention Anubis, Horus-Re, Hathor, Thoth, Set, Sobek, Bast, Nobanion, Lurue... It's just the Loxo art. It is terrible. All the creatures you mentioned have some good art backing them up (and/or are cool anyway). :D
BrianCritchley 11-23-05, 12:08 PM	also, they exist because this is fantssdy, they are no siller then well.. Elves.
GothicDan 11-23-05, 12:27 PM	I think art is pretty shallow in trying to convey the quality of a fantastic idea. I shudder to think that the majority of modern gamers are so affected by it. Art (in the form of painting/drawing or what not), in itself, is wonderful. But using it to try to gauge a literary topic is like trying to judge a book's contents by the value of its cover. ;)
Gallameed 11-23-05, 12:53 PM	I think art is pretty shallow in trying to convey the quality of a fantastic idea. I shudder to think that the majority of modern gamers are so affected by it. Art (in the form of painting/drawing or what not), in itself, is wonderful. But using it to try to gauge a literary topic is like trying to judge a book's contents by the value of its cover. ;) Thats the unfortunate way things are these days, I know people who read a movie title and decide they are never gonna watch it because it sounds crap. Cool, huh...
Alac Luin 11-23-05, 01:07 PM	Anyone remember "Tortles" from the savage coast champain setting? The only reason for these things I can think of was the popularity of the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles at the time. Loxo do seem to have a more of bassis in real life mythology, best I can track done at the moment is conection to Africa
Gray Richardson 11-23-05, 01:24 PM	Well there was Ganesh in India...
ericlboyd 11-23-05, 01:30 PM	The title of the thread asks: Why are there walking, talking elephant people in the shining south? The only appropriate answer I can think of is: Because they came from outer space. :D
Alac Luin 11-23-05, 01:34 PM	Spelljamming Elephants? :confused: ;)
Crust 11-23-05, 01:37 PM	There are plenty of monsters in all of the books that really grind my gears. They exist at the gaming table as a source of laughter and puzzlement. They never show up in the game, as their appearance would completely dispel the mood and atmosphere of a good campaign world.
Mula 11-23-05, 04:14 PM	Even their name is kinda funny. Loxo... They look alright, though. At least this pic's fine: http://www.wizards.com/dnd/images/ssouth_gallery/84372.jpg Besides, loxo aren't the only 'anthropomorphic pachyderm' creatures out there. There's the hollyphant: http://www.wizards.com/dnd/images/boed_gallery/75113.jpg And the maelephant: http://www.wizards.com/dnd/images/ff_gallery/50080.jpg And there could be others...
Davidw 11-23-05, 05:05 PM	I don't like using them so they don't exisit in my realms. Strange that someone whose username is Rakshasa and has a picture of a walking, talking cat for his avatar thinks that walking, talking elephants are a bad idea. :D
WizO_Lyoness 11-23-05, 05:10 PM	Be nice...
Slime Lord 11-23-05, 05:34 PM	Be nice... Aye, we are. We know (well, msot of us :cool: ) know how to things on here. But, I agree with Davidw. It is funny that they says that these Elephants are silly while he has a walking, talking, weapon wielding cat as his avatar ;)
Cainan 11-23-05, 06:01 PM	Strange that someone whose username is Rakshasa and has a picture of a walking, talking cat for his avatar thinks that walking, talking elephants are a bad idea. :D You beat me to it haha. Best post yet. It's not meant to be mean and nobody here is bashing on the OP, just that, well, it seems strange that he doesn't like anthro elephants, but he likes anthro cats.
Kid SixXx 11-23-05, 06:05 PM	From a mythological standpoint, "Loxo" is the Hyperborean nymph attendant of Artemis (Roman -> Diana). As far as the monster in question, elephants are of the genus loxodonta. The word "loxodonta" refers to the losenge-shaped teeth that elephants use to chew coarse grasses with.
Gray Richardson 11-23-05, 06:40 PM	Well I'll be! Eric, as always, is right! The Loxo came to Faerûn by spelljammer ship over 200 years ago. They landed and settled in the Shaar. Apparently they were refugees from a homeworld where worship of an Abyssal Lord had taken hold. Since the loxo were introduced around 1991 and Larry Niven's Footfall was published in 1985 which featured an alien race of 2-trunked elephants called the Fithp... I'm gonna go out on a limb and suggest that the Fithp were definitely the inspiration for the Loxo. Which makes Larry Niven actually the inspiration for at least 2 of D&D's races. Charles Stross, who created the Githyanki, claims to have been inspired by Niven's alien race the Tnuctipun, who were slaves that rebelled against a galactic empire of psionic, mind-controlling slavers. The Tnuctipun and the Thrint slavers were introduced in larry Niven's novel World of Ptaavs.
Cli' San Aquanova 11-23-05, 07:00 PM	As far as the monster in question, elephants are of the genus loxodonta. The word "loxodonta" refers to the losenge-shaped teeth that elephants use to chew coarse grasses with. Damn, you beat me to it. Anyway, I much prefer Magic: the Gathering's Loxodon to D&D's Loxo (so much in fact, that I even made racial statistics for them; see my sig). The Loxodon are an orderly, theocratic people, yet militant and unafraid of battle. And, righteously, they have but one trunk. -C'SA :u:Bring Back Merfolk!!!:u:
Czechmate 11-23-05, 07:07 PM	Wemics, Centaurs, Satyrs, Rakshasas (sp?), Were-creatures, Catfolk, Yuan-ti, Minataurs, Bullywugs........... Yeah, whoever heard of anthropomorphic animals in D&D? lol, i am going to have my players run into a centaur really soon. Centaurs are so cool !!
Kid SixXx 11-23-05, 07:35 PM	Which makes Larry Niven actually the inspiration for at least 2 of D&D's races. More than three I would say as IMO Larry Niven's cat-folk, the Kzinti, are arguably the inspiration for nearly every race of fantasy cat-folk ever drafted (aside from ones with obvious mythological orgins such as the aforementioned Rakshasa, whom are fiends). The Kzinti actually got a 2ed write-up in Dragon Magazine #50 waaaaaaay back in June of 1981. I think that issue is tucked away somewhere in my attic.
GothicDan 11-23-05, 11:34 PM	Rakshasa aren't fiends. ;) And in Vedic lore, they weren't specifically cat-headed, either.
Rakshasa 67 11-23-05, 11:38 PM	I like Babar. But I feel that the creation of these races is just like "What shall we put for races in the Shining South, oh how about a elephant man." I don't like it however Ironic as I may be." Not every monster in the monster Manual(s) are suppose to exist; Which is what refines a World and makes it alive through your imagination. Like Ewoks at the end of Jedi.(How a simple creature can kill a story) The clone troppers were bada**, and teddy bears kill them in the future.
Mr. Wilson 11-24-05, 01:14 AM	In fairness, the answer was given as to why the creatures are present. The Realms was default in TSR, so they had to come up with all kinds of strange reasons why creatures in the MM's were present in the realms. The creature existed in the realms in 2E. Spacejamming really is a decent reason, given that spacejamming was far more prevalent in AD&D.
Yokinobu 11-24-05, 01:47 AM	A rakshasa is sometimes defined as an evil spirit in Hinduism. Uh, where's a loxo's background? You see, most of the anthropomorphic creatures in the Realms has some sort of fantasy or often mythological background before there time in the Realms, and even fairly original creatures in the Realms have mostly been there since the campaign setting was fairly young. I wasn't around in 2E, bur why had I never heard of a loxo making its way into a more civilized northern nation, as a a member of even the most reclusive species has sometimes done? Please forgive me, but a walking elephant who happens to somehow be just as smart as a human(and with two trunks, which sets it apart from Ganesh)wearing shorts(as per the pic in SS) does come off as ridiculously silly. And don't gimme that beholder bull. Beholders are pure evil, easily manifestations of nightmares, with an anatomy so alien and frightening that terror is inspired in onlookers of such an abomination. Do you know what a loxo inspires in me? Laughter.
BrianCritchley 11-24-05, 02:02 AM	the north hardly has the msot obscure races in it, I mean a Drow is not terriably obscure for the North.
Borris 11-24-05, 02:02 AM	Another Loxo picture. Note that it's not wearing shorts: http://www.wizards.com/dnd/images/mm2_gallery/88268_620_81.jpg And another one. I'll admit; it could be better: http://www.wizards.com/dnd/images/ssouth_gallery/84343.jpg And speaking of anthropomorphic pachyderms, let's not forget the Thaskor: http://www.wizards.com/dnd/images/mhbk_gallery/76961_CN.jpg
Cainan 11-24-05, 02:35 AM	I'm still not quite grasping why people feel they do not fit. How does a Beholder fit? Because it has always been apart of DnD? Well, it seems these elephant guys have been around for a good number of years too. Not everyone has to agree with the elephant guys, but that doesn't mean they don't fit. Saying they don't fit cause they're silly looking is pretty hypocritical. Bullywugs are far more silly looking to me. An anthro elephant is nothing new, it's a pretty prevelent symbol in India and in Hindu culture. Oh yes, let's not forget the entire group of Anthro Horse celestials. How is an anthro horse that much different than an anthro elephant?
Gray Richardson 11-24-05, 05:11 AM	See page 35 of the old product Gold & Glory for a cool picture of Floshwa, loxo wizardess a member of the Mindulgulph Mercenary Company, scouting in the Shaar with a human female and a wemic scout. It's not like they haven't been mentioned before. They do have a history in the Realms. Gold & Glory is an old FR supplement which you can download for free from the Wizards downloads page at this link here: http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/dnd/downloads
Kid SixXx 11-24-05, 05:53 AM	Rakshasa aren't fiends. ;) And in Vedic lore, they weren't specifically cat-headed, either. Rakshasa were placed in the Nine Hells in most older lore: I know they're hell based in the 2ed MM aka The MM with the nudie succubus. I guess that newer lore has retconned them to native outsiders, but Eberron's mechanics builds most of it's fiendish templates from the Rakshasa, probably because the Lords of Dust have close ties to the Eberron version of the Hells. In Vedic lore, they weren't necessarily cat-headed but they were considered to be evil spirits. Rakatabija had a human form, and Ravana had ten heads of varying bestial & human features.
babysamurai 11-24-05, 09:12 AM	Spelljamming Elephants? :confused: ;) We have the Giff - Spelljamming Hippopatami. So why not! Long live freaky Anthropomorphism.
GothicDan 11-24-05, 10:38 AM	Rakshasa were placed in the Nine Hells in most older lore: I know they're hell based in the 2ed MM aka The MM with the nudie succubus. I guess that newer lore has retconned them to native outsiders, but Eberron's mechanics builds most of it's fiendish templates from the Rakshasa, probably because the Lords of Dust have close ties to the Eberron version of the Hells. In Vedic lore, they weren't necessarily cat-headed but they were considered to be evil spirits. Rakatabija had a human form, and Ravana had ten heads of varying bestial & human features. The 2E MM doesn't detail the Succubus. The first 2E product that the Succubus was detailed in, I believe, was the first Planescape Monstrous Compendium. That being said, Rakshasa were placed in Acheron or Gehenna, I believe. Certainly not the Nine Hells. And, even then, living in the Lower Planes does not a fiend make. Fiends would be one of the following: yugoloth, gerehleth, tanar'ri, or a baatezu. :)
GothicDan 11-24-05, 10:42 AM	Rakshasa were placed in the Nine Hells in most older lore: I know they're hell based in the 2ed MM aka The MM with the nudie succubus. I guess that newer lore has retconned them to native outsiders, but Eberron's mechanics builds most of it's fiendish templates from the Rakshasa, probably because the Lords of Dust have close ties to the Eberron version of the Hells. In Vedic lore, they weren't necessarily cat-headed but they were considered to be evil spirits. Rakatabija had a human form, and Ravana had ten heads of varying bestial & human features. The 2E MM doesn't detail the Succubus. The first 2E product that the Succubus was detailed in, I believe, was the first Planescape Monstrous Compendium. That being said, Rakshasa were placed in Acheron or Gehenna, I believe. Certainly not the Nine Hells. And, even then, living in the Lower Planes does not a fiend make. Fiends would be one of the following: yugoloth, gerehleth, tanar'ri, or a baatezu. :) Also, I don't understand why the Loxo are bad. The original poster keeps stating what happens, for him, to the Realms/the South with their presence, but is still not pointing out what makes them inappropriate in the first place. Mythologically, a great number of creatures make people go "What the..?!" It's only with time and lore and legends that they start to actually make sense to people - if one defines 'making sense' as them just assuming that it's alright because they have religious/mythological context. The Loxo have a history in the Realms. And, personally, I often think that the Beholders are more "What the...?!" worthy than the Loxo, myself. Or the Illithids, or other things from the Far Realms. That doesn't mean I think they're silly or inappropriate, though. It's a psychological schema in one's mind that one would consider the Loxo any less appropriate to the Realms than, say, Centaurs or Wemics.
Gallameed 11-24-05, 11:19 AM	I'm fairly new to D&D, when I first got into it I had a real eyerolling-cringe-moment over some aspects of the game, mainly the sometimes crap art that the odd creature had, or a childish sounding name like "Bugbear" and many of a certain authors* character names used to make me gag (and still do). *Imagine if in LOTR's at the battle of Helms Deep, if Gimli had a different name and in the middle of the bloody combat against the orcs, Aragorn looks frantically around for him and spots him, shouting: "MUFFINHEAD, OVER HERE!!!" *cringe* Really spoils things dunnit? As I've got more into D&D and mainly the realms I've almost become blind to the goofyness now and can see past the bad art, yet sometimes when I'm talking to my players about a monster I still squirm as I try to validate something which has bad art. For example, Yuan-Ti are cool and are very good villians, they have a large range of roles that can play out in many a campaign, right? Now look at the art for the Yuan-Ti on p.152 of Races of Faerun, imagine a player has just come up to you with an idea for a new poison-using, assassin-type character and he wants a cool, cold, inhuman and rather deadly race, something like the Yuan-Ti is exactly what he would want... You mention the Yaun-Ti, he loves the sound of them. You show him the page... He laughs, screws up his nose and says "That is crap. They look like that?". You then spend the next few minutes showing him "cool" pictures of Yaun-Ti from Dragon, Novel covers and other books, eventually he sees the light and gets over the bad art. "phew". How things are depicted in the art really does count, it can make or break a creature or character concept, the art is the first thing you see and good art can grab you and suck you into the text. Maybe its just me and my players being a group of superficial comic-book *****s but I dont want any "Howard the Duck moments" screwing up my version of the realms. I'm in no way against animal-people (or Howard), I love em but just look at the Loxo pictures above and imagine showing them to the players in a session just after they had survived a hard-won encounter, lost a friend and made it through the wilderness, escaping the temple of Zahah (or whatever) they now stumble into these ancient, towering, wise, old elephant people and dont know if they are friend or foe....(now if you show them that art)...... The players start laughing, asking "They look like that!?" the cruddy art, works its talentless evil, thus sucking them back into reality after all the good roleplaying and story building you built up. The more fantastic a creature is, calls for great art, I like the art for the Loxo on the first page of this thread (the one carrying the wood) but the other stuff is awful dreck. Must check out some of these "Larry Niven" books now, love me sci-fantasy.
Mula 11-24-05, 11:22 AM	See page 35 of the old product Gold & Glory for a cool picture of Floshwa, loxo wizardess a member of the Mindulgulph Mercenary Company, scouting in the Shaar with a human female and a wemic scout. :mymy: No, that definitely is not a 'cool' picture. Gallameed, you can also just show the pic of yuan-ti in the Monster Manual.
Gallameed 11-24-05, 11:39 AM	:mymy: No, that definitely is not a 'cool' picture. Gallameed, you can also just show the pic of yuan-ti in the Monster Manual. Yeah, I like that art. :) But usually the FR's books are my first point of reference, as we always play in the realms. Dragon mag #304 has a very nice Yaun-Ti on the cover also. It's just a shame they dont put the good art where it counts most.
Monsoon28 11-24-05, 12:12 PM	Well considering that my two favourite creatures are Anthropomorphic: Gnolls (Hyena) and Minotaur (Bull), I say leave the Loxo alone. I guess another option would be to remove both of these creatures alone with the Loxo (Besides Thaskor are so much cooler!) ;) Why are they on Faerun? Why is any creature on Faerun? Because they thought it was a nice temperate, fertile world to inhabit. :D
Kid SixXx 11-24-05, 08:08 PM	The 2E MM doesn't detail the Succubus. The first 2E product that the Succubus was detailed in, I believe, was the first Planescape Monstrous Compendium. My aplogies. I should have said 1ed Monster Manual in reference to the Succubus and the Rakshasa. IIRC, the Rakshasa were placed in the Nine Hells in the 1ed MM. Planescape has them native Archeron & Gehenna now, I suppose that trumps the really old books. We'll have to agree to disagree on the fiendish nature of the Rakshasa.
Rakshasa 67 11-25-05, 01:35 AM	It's just so Babar to me I guess.
Fabius Maximus 11-25-05, 05:24 AM	I found the idea of Loxos rather silly when I first heard of them rather than seeing the pictures. As some people pointed out, they have no mythical background other than having an indian god. There is no way to make the Loxo look 'cool' or dangerous or whatever. They will always look ridiculous. They are elephants for heavens sake. I also don't understand the following: Everyone is whining about how Wizards is ptuting out new elven subraces everytime they turn around. But the idea of new (or old) anthropomorphic races does not irritate you?
Cainan 11-25-05, 06:46 AM	Again, I don't see how people see Loxor as something strange, compared to just about everything else in the MMs. What is the real mythical backing for Beholders? Or Bullywugs? Most mosters are crazy and strange. But there are lots of cultures who have anthropomorphic gods and spirits. I can imagine at some point there were asian and middle eastern cultures that believed in some sorts of anthropomorphic elephant spirit. They aren't that absurd.
Gallameed 11-25-05, 10:04 AM	I found the idea of Loxos rather silly when I first heard of them rather than seeing the pictures. As some people pointed out, they have no mythical background other than having an indian god. There is no way to make the Loxo look 'cool' or dangerous or whatever. They will always look ridiculous. They are elephants for heavens sake. I also don't understand the following: Everyone is whining about how Wizards is ptuting out new elven subraces everytime they turn around. But the idea of new (or old) anthropomorphic races does not irritate you? Come on, how can you say this isnt cool. LOOK at how awsome they are! They make the drow look like Micheal Jackson. http://www.wizards.com/dnd/images/ssouth_gallery/84343.jpg LOxo ROxo! They are cooler than if you got Samuel L. Jackson + Fonzie + the matrix + a Quentin Tarantino movie + Wolverine + Jack Nicholson + John Woo + Bill HIcks doing a bag of drugs on an Iceberg. Thats why every group has one and players beg their DMs to be one! :P
Tobus Neth 11-25-05, 08:50 PM	Big game hunters would Love them!
Yokinobu 11-25-05, 10:34 PM	Come on, how can you say this isnt cool. LOOK at how awsome they are! They make the drow look like Micheal Jackson. You can make anything look cool like that. You want the difference between other anthropomorphic creatures? They are there. We don't need anymore anthropomorphic animal people. Were-elephants are okay, because you can have a were-anything. But not "loxo". The name itself just seems stupid. And what do they represent? To what traditional familiarity do we owe them? The are different anatomically by looking at them than the Hindu god, and even if they were modeled after the god, why would a race be modeled after a deity? The myth of the minotaur goes back forever, so you can't really argue against that creature to justify the loxo. And the gnoll is a D&D staple, as old as 1E, with mythological similarities to the çíyyîm in the Bible, the myth of cynocephali, and were-hyenas of old African folklore(courtesy of Wikipedia). I have already broken down beholders as something alien and frightening enough to have a D&D justification, along with most abberrations. And beholders, with all their powers and their hideousness, is cool, besides being a monster of decent power to have to overcome. But a talking human-like elephant is like a creature out of a kids story. We can always use powerful ugly freak monsters, but did we really need this weird Babar race? It's like it was thrown in there out of obligation to included more anthropomorphic creatures just because they already had some and it wasn't fair to leave elephants out. I simply don't see the reasoning behind it.
Tobus Neth 11-25-05, 10:38 PM	I was filled with rage when i saw them in the book!
Tobus Neth 11-25-05, 10:42 PM	My new character is a monk/that will train as a Assassin when he gets older. the dm "Wow that sounds cool, what's his name and race?" Player:Babar,and he's a Loxo!!!!!! :thumbsdow
Alac Luin 11-26-05, 11:54 AM	Just for some history of the word "Loxo" Loxo is of Greek origin, roughly translating to "slant of a line" "Loxo" is also one of the Nymphai Hyperboreiai, the three demi-goddesses that attend Artemis, the archer the Nymphai Hyperboreiai were responsible for the three aspects of archery; aim (opsis), trajectory (loxos) and distancing (hekaergos). What this has to do with elephants, I don't know. I did mention connection to Africa, the word "Loxo" is used to describe some African art. I'm still not to sure what it means in that context.
Slime Lord 11-26-05, 02:33 PM	I don't care. I like these guys, yes there is these humanlike animal things here, but who cares? Fantasy world. And, one could argue that "there are to many humans with diffent colors, I don't like them" or "to many races of elves, who needs moon elves?" Get what I'm saying? Who cares. It creates more, it generates more. And hell, there isn't even that many of them. What, under a thousand? So c'mon, cut them some slack. They're cute elephants ;)
Gallameed 11-26-05, 03:29 PM	So c'mon, cut them some slack. They're cute elephants ;) And their totally hot too! *wolf whistles* "Hey Loxo dude, check out the size of my peanut!*" "Dont make me get a mouse!" *Try saying that 10X after a bottle of plonk.
Kid SixXx 11-26-05, 06:34 PM	Just for some history of the word "Loxo" Loxo is of Greek origin, roughly translating to "slant of a line" What this has to do with elephants, I don't know. We covered this on the first page of the thread. Elephants belong to the genus "loxodonta." Derived from the Greed "loxo" as you've stated & "donta" meaning "teeth." "Loxodonta" refers to the shape of an elephant's foreteeth: the ones it uses to shred grass & prepare it for chewing by it's numerous molars.
Alac Luin 11-27-05, 01:20 PM	We covered this on the first page of the thread. Wow, I guess I shouls read the whole thread :embarrass Then I don't know what the problom is with them. Do I like them enough to use in my games? No. That don't make them bad. The only reason I liked the Giff race is they like things that go *BOOM*. (sort of like bunny and tegra, but thats a different thing)
Tobus Neth 11-27-05, 09:03 PM	Were they in Ed Greenwoods true realms canon.
Slime Lord 11-27-05, 09:12 PM	Were they in Ed Greenwoods true realms canon. I'm not saying this for sure - But, I do believe Ed does still use 2E stats and stuffage for his campaigns, and if the loxo's where there in 2E, I'd say there is a fine chance he would/does/has used them, if not him, one of his players.
Kuje31 11-27-05, 09:14 PM	I'm not saying this for sure - But, I do believe Ed does still use 2E stats and stuffage for his campaigns, and if the loxo's where there in 2E, I'd say there is a fine chance he would/does/has used them, if not him, one of his players. Aye, his players and him voted that they would continue to run thier campaigns using 2e rules. As for if the loxo were in Ed's version..... who knows. :)
Doormouse321 11-28-05, 10:50 PM	hmmmm...a Loxo rogue......(LOL)
Fabius Maximus 11-30-05, 05:50 AM	Come on, how can you say this isnt cool. LOOK at how awsome they are! They make the drow look like Micheal Jackson. LOxo ROxo! They are cooler than if you got Samuel L. Jackson + Fonzie + the matrix + a Quentin Tarantino movie + Wolverine + Jack Nicholson + John Woo + Bill HIcks doing a bag of drugs on an Iceberg. Thats why every group has one and players beg their DMs to be one! :P :D These guys are simply elephants walking on two legs with two trunks. Nothing else. To look something other than ridiculous, they should have smaller ears, one short trunk and shorter tusks. More like a human-elephant crossbreed. I can't stand rakshasa, either. (Why rakshasa, Keith, of all things?) They look like upright walking tigers. They look stupid, not dangerous.
Kid SixXx 11-30-05, 08:49 PM	:D I can't stand rakshasa, either. (Why rakshasa, Keith, of all things?) They look like upright walking tigers. They look stupid, not dangerous. You should see the illios from Dragon 337 featuring the Lords of Dust. The pics of some of the Rakshasa aren't bad at all.
The Darkone 12-02-05, 04:50 AM	I have no problem with the Loxo, they are a small population in a rarely travelled part of Toril. We should also all remember that they were introduce to Toril via Spelljamming, the same 2ed product line that brough us giant space hamsters. Someone along the line posted that they were fleeing an abyssal lord, I like to believe they were fleeing the Krynn gnome's exspansion into space.
Fabius Maximus 12-02-05, 02:43 PM	Someone along the line posted that they were fleeing an abyssal lord, I like to believe they were fleeing the Krynn gnome's exspansion into space. The loxo or the hamsters? Anyway, if I'd have the chance I'd flee the tinker gnomes anytime. :twitch:
Slime Lord 12-02-05, 02:57 PM	The loxo or the hamsters? Anyway, if I'd have the chance I'd flee the tinker gnomes anytime. :twitch: The Loxo's, which is one of the cool reasons of thinking about these guys. Obviously they're powerful enough to "sail" from Realm A to Realm B that being like what was it said? Three Hundred of them? None the less, I like them and the idea of them. Giant Hamsters I hate. :pbbbtt: