Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Baron Phylos 09-06-03, 01:57 AM	Basically, my question is: How do I use the new Erinyes in campaigns? They seem to have undergone a fundamental change of roles. From tempters of mortals to literal avenging angels from Hell. -They have no form altering abilities(No MM3.5 baatezu seems to, making Devilish infiltration of mortal realms seemingly harder). -They have paltry diplomatic abilities. -They are almost completely dedicated to aerial assault. Short of having them rely on magical items or picking up the Fiend Folio Fiend of Corruption PrC, should I bother using an Erinyes as tempter? Or should I just go with what the SRD seems to portray them as and use them as pretty-looking "close-air support aircrafts"... from Hell? Thanks
ieattrollsforbreakfast 09-06-03, 07:05 AM	They've changed the Erinyes? Really? Now I come to think about it...the erinyes was never really a very good devil. Temptation and corruption aren't really lawful so I suppose they have a point to the change.
Count Arioch the 28th 09-06-03, 12:15 PM	However, they tend to make great rangers now.
edsonaoki 09-06-03, 06:39 PM	I guess they were changed because they were too much like succubus.
Dalaeck 09-06-03, 06:43 PM	Oh lord they changed the erinyes... lord forbid we have 2 monsters that are somewhat similar (orc, hobgoblins, ...). An old wizard wanders away to cry for the game that once was ....
d_nychus 09-06-03, 07:26 PM	Is there anything you don't whine about? And seriously if you really think you are a wizard and are crying over this, you really need to get some mental help.
Mordenkainen's Rubber Duck of DOOM 09-06-03, 07:32 PM	Originally posted by d_nychus Is there anything you don't whine about? And seriously if you really think you are a wizard and are crying over this, you really need to get some mental help. I could say the same to you. "Are there any 3.0 players you don't whine about? and seriously if you really think it's your duty to flame others because they play a different edition, you really need to get some mental help." See? It goes both ways. I won't use that, though, because imitation of others is a form of flattery. Here's my response: "Just because he plays 3.0 and you play 3.5, doesn't mean that you have to flame him." Have a nice day.
Sweet Steph 09-06-03, 07:47 PM	Originally posted by edsonaoki I guess they were changed because they were too much like succubus. The change probably wasn't to make them less like the succubus, but to make them more like the mythological Erinyes (Furies to the Romans). They served as spirits of divine retribution, dedicated to punishing criminals that evaded human justice. They were vengeance incarnate, but they were not without some good qualities. After justice was served, they could be quite forgiving to their victims, and they are often called the Eumenides (kind-hearted ones). The mythological Erinyes would probably be LN rather than LE. D&D Erinyes are still far different from their Greek counterparts, but they're a lot more closely related now than before.
d_nychus 09-06-03, 07:58 PM	Originally posted by Mordenkainen's Rubber Duck of DOOM I could say the same to you. "Are there any 3.0 players you don't whine about? and seriously if you really think it's your duty to flame others because they play a different edition, you really need to get some mental help." See? It goes both ways. I won't use that, though, because imitation of others is a form of flattery. Here's my response: "Just because he plays 3.0 and you play 3.5, doesn't mean that you have to flame him." Have a nice day. Umm, excuse me? Do I go in and flame any thread that has a slight bearing with 3.0 just because it is 3.0? Do I cry endlessly in threads about 3.0 about trivial details that I am often totally wrong about? Do I start every post as though I am some sort of fantasy character? It doesn't work both ways. Honestly, if it were anyone else, I would have just ignored it, but repetition of highly biased and incorrect "information" needs to be stopped.
Mordenkainen's Rubber Duck of DOOM 09-06-03, 08:08 PM	I know perfectly well about the subject and both of your histories, thank you very much. Anyhow, I concur that the Erinyes was changed because it was virtually identical to the Succubus, but it didn't make sense given that an Erinyes were "The Furies" in greece, and weren't tempters.
d_nychus 09-06-03, 08:15 PM	Originally posted by Sweet Steph The change probably wasn't to make them less like the succubus, but to make them more like the mythological Erinyes (Furies to the Romans). They served as spirits of divine retribution, dedicated to punishing criminals that evaded human justice. They were vengeance incarnate, but they were not without some good qualities. After justice was served, they could be quite forgiving to their victims, and they are often called the Eumenides (kind-hearted ones). The mythological Erinyes would probably be LN rather than LE. D&D Erinyes are still far different from their Greek counterparts, but they're a lot more closely related now than before. Very true. I also think they were altered to be "succubus-esque" because of the "hot winged chick" factor. To be totally honest, I always saw Erinyes as something like a Succubus-lite (TM) for the Baatezu/Devils. They were never realy worth using, in my opinion, because a Succubus was much better. Now it seems like there is a reason for me to use them in my games. They lost a good number of spell-like abilities (most of them quite broken anyways, i.e. Ploymorph Self). They also got rid of the charm person/charm monster redunancy. For that cost, they became much better combatants, like the classical Erinyes A fiendish harrier. I like that.
Count Arioch the 28th 09-06-03, 10:08 PM	Originally posted by d_nychus Is there anything you don't whine about? And seriously if you really think you are a wizard and are crying over this, you really need to get some mental help. Grow up. You do know that Daleack has as much right to an opinion as you do, right? Sure, he might have made a lot of dumb mistakes in the past, mistakes he wouldn't have made if he had bothered to educate himself before he judged. Lately, he's been pretty spot on with a lot of things, it seems he now knows what exactly he's protesting. I'd let him be. I don't particularly like him, he comes off a bit arrogant at times. But I'm not going to flame him constantly. He knows where he stands with me, no need to flame him more.
d_nychus 09-06-03, 10:20 PM	Opinions are fine. Contributions to discussion are fine. Coming into every 3.5 thread and "weeping for the game that once was" without contributing anything else to the discussion is just plain dumb. Like I said, if he did it only occasionally, I wouldn't care, but the SHEER NUMBER of threads that have his pointless and innane ranting and belating over the fact that things change is utterly ridiculous. If he had posted something like "I dislike the 3.5 Erinyes as compared to the 3.0 Erinyes because of..." I would have listened and debated. But coming in and decrying all of 3.5 because someone noted a singular change to a monster and wants to talk about it is utterly worthless to this discussion and really needs to stop.
Dalaeck 09-06-03, 10:38 PM	Originally posted by d_nychus Umm, excuse me? Do I go in and flame any thread that has a slight bearing with 3.0 just because it is 3.0? Do I cry endlessly in threads about 3.0 about trivial details that I am often totally wrong about? Do I start every post as though I am some sort of fantasy character? It doesn't work both ways. Honestly, if it were anyone else, I would have just ignored it, but repetition of highly biased and incorrect "information" needs to be stopped. From the too numerous posts of his that I have read, I seriously think he needs mental help. The old wizard laughs heartily... Well let me see... I didn't jump into that thread clearly labeled "3.0 increase in CR with HD" until Benny had politely told you to take your preaching elswhere 2-3 times? The hypocrisy of your statements have hit my revulsion threshold. If anyone needs professional care it's likely yourself. lord forbid someone actually "roleplays" their avatar on a site dedicated to a "roleplaying" game... :rolleyes: And the furies did tempt mortals. I'll get a quote later.
Mordenkainen's Rubber Duck of DOOM 09-06-03, 11:38 PM	Originally posted by Dalaeck The old wizard laughs heartily... Well let me see... I didn't jump into that thread clearly labeled "3.0 increase in CR with HD" until Benny had politely told you to take your preaching ass elswhere what? 2-3 times? The hypocrisy of your statements have hit my revulsion threshold. If anyone needs professional care it's likely yourself. lord forbid someone actually "roleplays" their avatar on a site dedicated to a "roleplaying" game... :rolleyes: And the furies did tempt mortals. I'll get a quote later. I thought they were justice seekers of the gods, not tempters? Did they get bored and tempt people into bad acts so that they could give retribution or something?
Sweet Steph 09-07-03, 02:08 AM	Originally posted by Dalaeck ...And the furies did tempt mortals. I'll get a quote later. Please do. I've not heard of them doing any such thing except possibly as a means of ensnaring those who drew their wrath. Any quote showing that they lure mortals into sin would show them to be Evil indeed, and would be much appreciated.
WizO_Pony 09-07-03, 02:21 AM	I like the change to the Eryines. There were, and still are plenty of creatures that fullfill the tempter/temptress role. In 3.0 though, there were almost no creatures above CR2 which were presented as decent archers. However, I do not like people flaming, insulting and harrassing each other. :mad:
Walter Russ 09-07-03, 04:08 AM	Can't we all just get along?
Nerfix 09-07-03, 06:24 AM	The fundamental question is: What's wrong with Erinyes? Is i t broken or what?
Count Arioch the 28th 09-07-03, 02:15 PM	I'll get back to you on that. Adventure after next, I'm putting her through a test drive. (Adding 7 ranger levels, as it seems to be the most appropriate chouce for her.) I'm going to have fun with entangling rope thing, also I've given her improved grapple, I intend to grab onto the PCs, and dropping them from a very high place. Fun, fun, fun! :devil:
d_nychus 09-07-03, 03:24 PM	Might want to switch out her Rapid Shot for something else then, if you plan on giving her the archery combat path. Redundant feats are rather...redundant.
Count Arioch the 28th 09-07-03, 07:12 PM	Originally posted by d_nychus Might want to switch out her Rapid Shot for something else then, if you plan on giving her the archery combat path. Redundant feats are rather...redundant. Yes, I was actually. I love playing with feats and such, monsters rarely have the same feats they have in the MM in my game. I prefer to think of them as "sample" monsters to base your own creations off of.
edsonaoki 09-07-03, 08:13 PM	Yes, I was actually. I love playing with feats and such, monsters rarely have the same feats they have in the MM in my game. I prefer to think of them as "sample" monsters to base your own creations off of. Woops.. and donīt forget the alternate magic items and above-average stats.
Saint Sinister 09-07-03, 08:28 PM	I just used one aganst a 2 9th level players. basically it killed one and would have killed the other but only because they couldn't handle her flying or DR.
Count Arioch the 28th 09-08-03, 09:04 AM	Originally posted by edsonaoki Woops.. and donīt forget the alternate magic items and above-average stats. But of course! Monster with Pc classes get the elite array. (A house rule in my game for a couple years made official by the 3.5 MM.) And I give her treasure like a level 15 NPC, chosen intellegently based on her tactics.
ruleslawyer 09-08-03, 10:17 AM	Also, for you non-graybeards out there, keep in mind that once upon a time (the old days of 1st edition), erinyes were in fact avenging scourges rather than temptresses. The temptress thing in fact is a 2e change from 1e, one that I never liked in particular since it made the erinyes too much like the succubus. Originally posted by Dalaeck: An old wizard wanders away to cry for the game that once was .... So, apparently not that old a wizard. And the furies did tempt mortals. I'll get a quote later. Unlikely, given the Furies' mythopoetic function as a surrogate for fate and the self-reflexive nature of human conscience. Tempting mortals into doing evil (or doing ANYTHING) would be really, really inconsistent with their character. Find me something out of Ovid, Apollodorus, Homer, one of the great playwrights, Bulfinch, Edith Hamilton, or even D'Aulaire's, and we'll talk.
canamrock 09-08-03, 11:34 AM	Something never felt quite right about an LE temptress. I think of it like this - LE bends the truth, but isn't as prone to flat-out lying. This is bad for seduction because it just isn't possible to flatter some 300 pound misshapen man with body odor without lying absolutely. The Erinyes does its new job fairly well, and its LA fits within the WotC-doesn't-want-it-played LA range. I'd suggest dropping it by 1 or 2, and rewording the Magic Rope ability so you can't Shapechange for infinite magic item goodness.
Lankin the Mad Mage 09-08-03, 11:55 AM	In 3.0 though, there were almost no creatures above CR2 which were presented as decent archers. Ummm...were't solars pretty good with their instantly slaying bows? Weren't they also CR 20 or something?? Confused.... Anyway, I agree that Erineyes are better and more mythologically correct in their new form. It allways bugged me that they took the feared and horrible avengers of the blood and made them into weak succubi-copies. The problem is alignment. I allways saw them as LN. They upheld justice at all costs, punishing the guilty in the cases of murder upon blood-kin. It sounds more like a fleshy Inevitable than a Devil to me. But, then again, they did enjoy causing pain...... Perhaps I should stop rambling.
Dackad 09-08-03, 01:13 PM	Originally posted by Lankin the Mad Mage Ummm...were't solars pretty good with their instantly slaying bows? Weren't they also CR 20 or something?? Confused.... Well, there was the Solar.... and not much else ;)
R.M.G.C.L.F. 09-08-03, 05:54 PM	Originally posted by ieattrollsforbreakfast They've changed the Erinyes? Really? Now I come to think about it...the erinyes was never really a very good devil. Temptation and corruption aren't really lawful so I suppose they have a point to the change. Corruption is not chaotic in any way. Corruption is evil. While temptation in and of itself does lean on the chaotic side, temptation to establish a state of facism and subjugate others to your world vision, along with temptation of power and dominion, is lawful and evil. I see erinyes as being more like a dark promiser, whispering dark tales of conquer and rulership into your ears.
R.M.G.C.L.F. 09-08-03, 05:57 PM	Originally posted by canamrock Something never felt quite right about an LE temptress. I think of it like this - LE bends the truth, but isn't as prone to flat-out lying. This is bad for seduction because it just isn't possible to flatter some 300 pound misshapen man with body odor without lying absolutely. The Erinyes does its new job fairly well, and its LA fits within the WotC-doesn't-want-it-played LA range. I'd suggest dropping it by 1 or 2, and rewording the Magic Rope ability so you can't Shapechange for infinite magic item goodness. You can find something good to say about almost anybody.
Incenjucar 09-08-03, 06:03 PM	Personally, now that the Erinyes is in her proper place, I'd love to see a LE seducing race (OR a NE one for that matter. Yugoloths are way to pigeon-holed)