I'm excited about Pathfinder and the possibility of contributing beasties. Since outsiders and elementals are my bread n' butter, I thought I'd see what could be used, and what would need to be replaced.
Angels - In SRD.
Archons - In SRD.
Eladrins, Guardinals - Oddly, although they have representatives in the SRD (avoral, bralani, leonal), the names of the groups are never mentioned, so I suppose a new name must be chosen for the exemplars of NG and CG.
Celestial Paragons - All are off-limits.
Demons, Devils - In SRD, but the baatezu and tanar'ri subtypes are off-limits. Obyriths and loumaras are off-limits.
Archdevils and demon lords - Many can be used based on inclusion in ToH and other OGL sources. Since many of the names come from mythology, others can be reimagined.
Yugoloths - Thanks to ToH, can be used, but must be called "daemons" again.
Altraloths and other yugoloth lords - Anthraxus and Charon are in the ToH.
Demodands - Can be used thanks to ToH.
Formians - In SRD.
Inevitables - In SRD.
Modrons - Can't be used.
Slaad - Thanks to ToH, can be used. Only Ygorl and Ssendam are present, though, so all new types of non-lord slaadi would have to be created.
Rilmani - Unfortunately off-limits. A new exemplar race of true neutrality would be needed.
As for the elementals, we lose the monolith category. All the existing archomentals and the term "archomental" are unavailable. We also lose access to para-elementals.
However, quasi-elementals are in the ToH, so quasi-elementals could be expanded to take the place of the para-elementals. New archomentals could be created to fill the gaps of the loss of the others. I know a few guys with some experience working on archomentals who'd be happy to help out. ;)
What am I missing?
new celestial paragons could always be created, to fit whatever archfiends do appear in the setting, if they are even desired with gods already in place. that's no real problem.
while the slaad lords are in the ToH, i don't know that Paizo can just go ahead and create their own slaads. "Lord of Entropy" and "Lord of the Insane" would probably have to become lords of something else... which would be perfectly fine, i'm sure. ;)
the archomentals we know and love are a no-go of course... even after all the hard work we put into them. :P
as for the rest, everything is covered, and i guess it just depends on where the cosmology gets developed from the groundwork laid thus far!
I believe I read that they were sticking with the Great Wheel, so hopefully things can remain relatively close to the current structure.
Creative Director
|
Mostly correct. Although, and correct me if I'm wrong, the online 3.5 reprint of the Tome of Horrors does not have slaads in it anymore? Not sure...
But certainly, if WotC set aside slaadi for their own use, I intend to honor their wishes and not try to sneak in slaadi through any nefarious back doors.
Demodands and daemons though... that's another story.
RPG Superstar 2013 Top 4, RPG Superstar 2011 Top 16
|
The great Wheel is only a metaphor anyways... it's a diagram to visualize the Outer Planes. You won't actually find Bytopia "clockwise" from Mt. Celestia if you're walking the planes... It's not like you're looking down on a solar system from above the Plane of the Ecliptic.
75% of the travel done by creatures in the Planes happens by way of Portals, Gates, Planar Paths (Yggdrasil, Oceanus, the Styx, Mt. Olympus, the Infinite Staircase), Astral Conduits, and Elemental Voritces. The remainder is Plane Shift typo spells or abilities.
Mostly correct. Although, and correct me if I'm wrong, the online 3.5 reprint of the Tome of Horrors does not have slaads in it anymore? Not sure...
But certainly, if WotC set aside slaadi for their own use, I intend to honor their wishes and not try to sneak in slaadi through any nefarious back doors.
looking... nope, they are still in the revised book. :) (and herein, the lord of entropy is now a black slaad rather than a black salad...) i understand if you'd want to avoid them, since including a "Slaad Lord of Entropy" without being able to use slaadi seems kind of silly. ;) still, as Lovecraftian as they are, i bet you could find another way to use them if you really wanted to. ;) maybe make a new race of chaotic beings for them to be exemplars over... (since the names Ygorl and Ssendam are not used) ?
|
Creative Director
|
looking... nope, they are still in the revised book. :) (and herein, the lord of entropy is now a black slaad rather than a black salad...) i understand if you'd want to avoid them, since including a "Slaad Lord of Entropy" without being able to use slaadi seems kind of silly. ;) still, as Lovecraftian as they are, i bet you could find another way to use them if you really wanted to. ;) maybe make a new race of chaotic beings for them to be exemplars over... (since the names Ygorl and Ssendam are not used) ?
Interesting...
Still, I'd be inclined not to use them, since it'd be better to come up with something new (or to build off something else) rather than deliberately taunt the spirit of the OGL license.
Can we get a new lawful race, too? I never liked Formians, and while Inevitables have their purpose, they aren't outsiders and don't have anything like a society. Neither do Slaadi, but that's because they're chaotic.
In a way, I'm glad the Great Wheel outsiders can't be used "out of the box" because, though useable and interesting, I think we could really use a good creative reimagining of the outer planes and the beings that hail from there. The outsiders grew pretty organically by creation of different good, evil, chaotic and lawful outsiders which others later tried to force into some kind of coherent multiverse. I'd love to see good outsiders reimagined by, for instance being organized by the seven virtues, or some other order. I'd love to see fiends reimagined. And I'd love to see a new chaotic race that is more evocative of pure chaos than the slaad ever were.
|
|
I kind of liked the Formians, although I admit to hardly ever using them or seeing them used. Hmmm, a new lawful planar race... probably keep the mental enslavement thing. Maybe the more powerful ones could do a forced attitude adjustment (alignment change) to slaves. And since lawful creatures like conformity, they might be able to 'conform' bodies, too.
A hierarchy of creatures works well for advancing opponents, but what if they were more like the Borg? All of them pretty much alike in form, expansionist, and producing new ones without the weaknesses of the old. Sort of the reverse trend of dragons: in this case, the oldest would be the weakest. Just my random thoughts.
I'm starting a write-up for new Chaotic and Lawful outsiders...Hopefully I'll have it finished by Sunday. Do we know what the submission address for Pathfinder is yet?
P.S. If you do use Yugoloths, can we come up with a better racial name than Daemons? It works well enough on paper, but it sounds too much like demons. I suppose I could always read 'Yugoloths' out loud when the page says Daemons, but there has to be a cleaner solution. I suggest 'Nephilim'. Still a nice, mythologic word for fiend.
Hmmm, a new lawful planar race... probably keep the mental enslavement thing. Maybe the more powerful ones could do a forced attitude adjustment (alignment change) to slaves. And since lawful creatures like conformity, they might be able to 'conform' bodies, too.
Mike Mearls did this as a template in Portals & Planes. He did a nice job of it, too.
I'm starting a write-up for new Chaotic and Lawful outsiders...Hopefully I'll have it finished by Sunday. Do we know what the submission address for Pathfinder is yet?
P.S. If you do use Yugoloths, can we come up with a better racial name than Daemons? It works well enough on paper, but it sounds too much like demons. I suppose I could always read 'Yugoloths' out loud when the page says Daemons, but there has to be a cleaner solution. I suggest 'Nephilim'. Still a nice, mythologic word for fiend.
i don't believe anything has been established yet about submissions. you may not have anywhere to send it to, yet. :)
as far as calling them daemons, if the ToH versions are used, Paizo probably has to stick with that name. the name "yugoloth" is closed IP, but if they decide to invent their own NE outsiders they can call them whatever they want. not 100% sure on this, but it sounds right to my uninformed opinion. ;)
as far as calling them daemons, if the ToH versions are used, Paizo probably has to stick with that name. the name "yugoloth" is closed IP, but if they decide to invent their own NE outsiders they can call them whatever they want. not 100% sure on this, but it sounds right to my uninformed opinion. ;)
ToH is OGC, right? If it's just being used as a source of stat-blocks, it should be possible to change names without infringing on anyone's rights (Just like how demons can be called whatever you want, just not Tanar'ri.)
However, if that is not the case, I may have to add 'evil' to my list of things to write. Make Nephilim for myself.
While I'm on a roll, I might as well revisit Guardinals too, since there's only two in the SRD, and we can't call them Guardinals. Make new NG outsiders to match the NE ones. Archons are good...So are demons and devils...Need new Eladrins (or at least CG outsiders). Hrmm. That goes at the bottom of the list. Others are more important.
OOOOH! The Plane of Sloth. Now that's a cool idea. Planar traits--all non-natives act as if under the effect of a permanent slow spell, etc. etc.
The Plane of Chastity. All of the angels from there have perfect celestial bodies, but keep them completely covered.
Etc.
And then we get to the Plane of Lust. Ruh-roh Reorge!
I'm starting a write-up for new Chaotic and Lawful outsiders...Hopefully I'll have it finished by Sunday. Do we know what the submission address for Pathfinder is yet?
You'll have competition (assuming they're open to any new exemplar ousiders). ;)
What would happen if I just posted it on the boards, then? Would you guys still be able to use it, or whould I have screwed the pooch as far as copyrights go?
Also, to Shade: Nothing's wrong with a little competition.
Also, to Shade: Nothing's wrong with a little competition.
Not at all. Look at how great Dragon and Dungeon turned out. :)
|
Creative Director
|
Need new Eladrins (or at least CG outsiders). Hrmm. That goes at the bottom of the list. Others are more important.
No way! Eladrins are the BEST of the good-aligned outsiders! But they will need a new name, that's for sure.
As for yugoloths/daemons, I've always been more partial to the word daemon than anything else. It's 99% likely that's what they'll be called in Pathfinder, but they'll probably also have subraces. After all, Devil/Daemon/Demon are all on one level, while, in theory, baatezu/yugoloth/tanar'ri should be one level down. There should certainly be room for non-yugoloth daemons, in other words.
Nephilim are too well established in mythology to be anything else but nephilim, I think. We can't just slap that name on as a yugoloth replacement, since yugoloths aren't nephilim.
Contributor
|
No way! Eladrins are the BEST of the good-aligned outsiders!
I agree that ghaele eladrins rock the house (and the others are cool too). Most archons (especially the sadly non-SRD ones) are super awesome as well, what with their more traditional angel looks (well, except for the lanterns and the hounds). And both groups are better than the guardinals, who are just glorified furries.
While we are on the subject of outsiders, any chance we get Pathfinder and Paizo use, in general, of the Excellent Book of Fiends from GR? I'd love to see more of those monsters and that mythology in print.
I just (sadly) realized that the SRD only includes the following planes:
The Material Plane
The Ethereal Plane
Plane Of Shadow
The Astral Plane
Elemental Plane Of Air
Elemental Plane Of Earth
Elemental Plane Of Fire
Elemental Plane Of Water
Negative Energy Plane
Positive Energy Plane
So I suppose most of our outsiders need new homes. :(
Obviously, Heaven and Hell can be used by anyone, but what about using Pandemonium or Limbo, for example?
|
Contributor
|
I just (sadly) realized that the SRD only includes the following planes:
The Material Plane
The Ethereal Plane
Plane Of Shadow
The Astral Plane
Elemental Plane Of Air
Elemental Plane Of Earth
Elemental Plane Of Fire
Elemental Plane Of Water
Negative Energy Plane
Positive Energy PlaneSo I suppose most of our outsiders need new homes. :(
Obviously, Heaven and Hell can be used by anyone, but what about using Pandemonium or Limbo, for example?
We could use the names at the very least. Same with most of the planes from the Great Wheel.
pandemonium and Limbo are both from non-D&D sources (Pandemonium is the name of Satans capital city in Hell in Milton's Paradise Lost IIRC) and Limbo is the place where babies who die before thier babtizim go in Roman Catholic lore.
note that while all of the 1e names of the outer planes of the great wheel are open for use (they all come from mythology) the actual discriptions of the planes would need to be changed in ways to make them different then WotC's take on them.
No way! Eladrins are the BEST of the good-aligned outsiders! But they will need a new name, that's for sure.I've always been more partial to the word daemon than anything else.
Nephilim are too well established in mythology to be anything else but nephilim, I think. We can't just slap that name on as a yugoloth replacement, since yugoloths aren't nephilim.
Ok, I won't bother remaking Eladrins, but I'll still rework NG outsiders. Especially after Mike's comment that they're just furries. (I'll never be able to look at an Avoral again.)
Not that I'm trying to argue, but why are you partial to 'Daemons'? I find it confusing to try to put it next to Demons and expect people to realize there's as much difference between Demons and Daemons as Daemons and Devils.
I hadn't realized that Nephilim were that well established in most peoples ideas of mythology. I'll try to come up with another name while I make my new NE race.
|
Creative Director
|
While we are on the subject of outsiders, any chance we get Pathfinder and Paizo use, in general, of the Excellent Book of Fiends from GR? I'd love to see more of those monsters and that mythology in print.
That book may be my favorite d20 book. So yeah... I think there's a pretty good chance of seeing monsters from there pop up in Pathfinder now and then...
Why not simplify the whole business and have one catch-all term for good outsiders and one for evil outsiders. Angels and Daemons, or something along those lines. Then you can subdivide them into groupings based on their homes or their genesis or the "faction" they belong to, kind of like we do with Tanar'ri and Obyriths (but using different names and giving those names different significance).
|
Creative Director
|
Not that I'm trying to argue, but why are you partial to 'Daemons'? I find it confusing to try to put it next to Demons and expect people to realize there's as much difference between Demons and Daemons as Daemons and Devils.
I'm partial to the name "daemon" because that's what they were called during 1st edition, which is where I learned the game. The name "yugoloth" didn't come around until 2nd edition, and I kind of still associate it with the introduction of tanar'ri and baatezu as "Kid-Friendly" cop-out names for devils and demons. Now, over time, I've come to like the names tanar'ri, baatezu, and yugoloth, but I remain pretty fond of the original names. Especially since, in the case of devil and demon, you can just say the word and someone who's never played D&D immediately knows what you're talking about. Daemon too, to some extent, since that's basically just the Greek version of a devil/demon/fiend from the afterlife/evil spirit.
And honestly, if demon/daemon/devil confuses people, I think that might kinda be the way that the demon/daemon/devils would want it! :-)
|
Creative Director
|
Why not simplify the whole business and have one catch-all term for good outsiders and one for evil outsiders. Angels and Daemons, or something along those lines. Then you can subdivide them into groupings based on their homes or their genesis or the "faction" they belong to, kind of like we do with Tanar'ri and Obyriths (but using different names and giving those names different significance).
Because the SRD groups all devils and all demons into categories that share traits. Calling all devils and demons by one name kind of goes against that design model (as does Eberron's rescattering of who lives where on the outer planes, for that matter). But more to the point, the game's always had devils and demons as distinct and very different groups. Same for the good guys.
Angels and Daemons, or something along those lines.
We already have broad categories like that. 'Celestial' and 'Fiend'. Subdiving them into demons/devils/daemons is kind of sorting them based on location and affiliation.
I'm partial to the name "daemon" because that's what they were called during 1st edition, which is where I learned the game. The name "yugoloth" didn't come around until 2nd edition, and I kind of still associate it with the introduction of tanar'ri and baatezu as "Kid-Friendly" cop-out names for devils and demons.
I thought nostalgia might have something to do with it. I didn't actually know that Daemon went back to 1E, though.
And honestly, if demon/daemon/devil confuses people, I think that might kinda be the way that the demon/daemon/devils would want it! :-)
Good point!
It won't be the Great Wheel, but it'll be similar in most manners.
New name: The Impressive Circle