Pathfinder Campaign Setting: Book of the Damned—Volume 2: Lords of Chaos (PFRPG)

Yeah, leave the "us-against-them" to WotC, Paizo is much better than that.

I don't see WotC as enemies but rather corporate victims. Lisa has offered an alternative for not only us players but those friends they hold dear still working at WotC. After all this is done, everyone who loves the game will be working for an RPG company. There are a lot of extreme personalities in this business, I am finding out. Some are better at selling themselves and others are better at something else but they are all good at forwarding the cause of RPG. I can live without 2-3 staple D&D creatures because I still have my game that I enjoy.

I really hope this comes out soon. With as little as we have heard about this, I am suspecting we wont see it till January at the earliest though.

Btw did anyone else check out the "preview" they gave in the module? Was kinda disapointed. They did show off a few class features of demoniac, but then the feats and monsters he could summon just had an * saying to check the real book. Kinda annoying preview.

I really hope this comes out soon. With as little as we have heard about this, I am suspecting we wont see it till January at the earliest though.

Btw did anyone else check out the "preview" they gave in the module? Was kinda disapointed. They did show off a few class features of demoniac, but then the feats and monsters he could summon just had an * saying to check the real book. Kinda annoying preview.

That IS an annoying preview. We shouldn't have done that. Or at the very least, we shouldn't have touted it as a preview.

In any event, it's my understanding that this book should be going out VERY VERY soon.

Ghent wrote:

I really hope this comes out soon. With as little as we have heard about this, I am suspecting we wont see it till January at the earliest though.

Btw did anyone else check out the "preview" they gave in the module? Was kinda disapointed. They did show off a few class features of demoniac, but then the feats and monsters he could summon just had an * saying to check the real book. Kinda annoying preview.

That IS an annoying preview. We shouldn't have done that. Or at the very least, we shouldn't have touted it as a preview.

In any event, it's my understanding that this book should be going out VERY VERY soon.

Awesome thanks for the info. I love me some demons. :)

Im curious what a "brimoraks" is after reading the mod. Looks like its a nice addition to the below "summon monster 5" list. The npc in the mod can summon 1d4+1 of them with a 6th level slot. I am guessing they are 4th level summons but could be lower of course.

Ghent wrote:

Btw did anyone else check out the "preview" they gave in the module? Was kinda disapointed. They did show off a few class features of demoniac, but then the feats and monsters he could summon just had an * saying to check the real book. Kinda annoying preview.

That IS an annoying preview. We shouldn't have done that. Or at the very least, we shouldn't have touted it as a preview.

Are you guys talking about this blog entry from last March?

That's actually more of a preview than we *usually* offer nine months in advance...

I think they were talking about the PFS Preview blog the week of Thanksgiving. I haven't bought the items yet, so not sure, but if what they describe is the preview I think I'll wait =/

I think they were talking about the PFS Preview blog the week of Thanksgiving. I haven't bought the items yet, so not sure, but if what they describe is the preview I think I'll wait =/

I see... we're talking about the demoniac NPC from Pathfinder Society Scenario #2-08: The Sarkorian Prophecy.

The way we handled that scenario was not correct—you should not need to own Lords of Chaos to run that NPC. We'll be revising the scenario ASAP to ensure that everything you need to run it is included in the scenario itself. (The class abilities are already described in the stat block, so no changes are needed there; the brimoraks will be removed as a summoning option, and a sidebar will be added to explain the feat taken from Lords of Chaos.)

Okay!

Just worked out the text for the sidebar with Mark—we'll be updating this scenario with that short sidebar that explains what's going on with this NPC. The good news is that for all versions of the NPC in question, the stats are complete—the bonuses he gains from his prestige class and is Demonic Obedience feat are all pre-calculated into the stat blocks, so there's no game rule information missing from the stats at all (especially since he doesn't summon brimoraks in the adventure—we probably should have just kept quiet about the brimoraks entirely and left them out of the stat block since they're completely unnecessary anyway), so there's no actual changes to the rules of the scenario or its stat blocks needed.

So while, on closer inspection of the stats, there's no missing rule information and you CAN run that character fine without access to "Lords of Chaos," the sidebar we're adding simply makes that more clear and, hopefully, will make GMs who want to run the adventure feel that they aren't missing info. 'Cause they're not.

In any event, going forward, we'll try to make sure that we're more clear on this type of thing. Sorry about the confusion, all!

Cool thanks. I will redownload the module when it comes out. I am stoked to see the new book. I saw the blog listed it as a preview of the book so I bought the mod to see the early content. :)

Anyway Im eagerly awaiting that Half fiend Santa to deliver my book!

I've updated the product description and cover image to reflect the finished product.

[late to party] Did you have Dark Mistress model the cover art for you? [/late to party]

The use of the term "preview" was more in reference to the fact that players and GMs could see a diabolist in play in this adventure and everything needed to run him is included. I see where the references to elements that technically belonged in his statblock that weren't included could be confusing, but hopefully the new statblock will illuminate those elements. We didn't go back in and add the stats for the brimorak nor the actual text of the feat (though that can be found on the blog, here) but we do clarify where the mechanical bonuses of that feat show up on the NPC's statblock.

Sorry if you expected something else when I mentioned it in the blog, and I hope you'll find the new sidebar covers some of the questions about how diabolists work.

The use of the term "preview" was more in reference to the fact that players and GMs could see a diabolist in play in this adventure and everything needed to run him is included. I see where the references to elements that technically belonged in his statblock that weren't included could be confusing, but hopefully the new statblock will illuminate those elements. We didn't go back in and add the stats for the brimorak nor the actual text of the feat (though that can be found on the blog, here) but we do clarify where the mechanical bonuses of that feat show up on the NPC's statblock.

Sorry if you expected something else when I mentioned it in the blog, and I hope you'll find the new sidebar covers some of the questions about how diabolists work.

You can make it up to me by sending me an early copy of the pdf for the book. *grin*

No big deal though. I guess the feat is the "insects have to crawl on them to memorize spells" thing?

Vic Wertz wrote:

I've updated the product description and cover image to reflect the finished product.

[late to party] Did you have Dark Mistress model the cover art for you? [/late to party]

My legs look way better than that. ;p

Todd Stewart wrote:

I want to write a celestial book. ;)

*orbital mind-control lasers*

Sorry, dude, I call Paizo-dibs on that, seeing as I wrote a 3E book about that already. ;)

And it is one of the BEST treatment of angels for tabletop RPGs ever (fluff-wise)! The organisations were interesting, too (in context of the book itself).

-- C.

I wasn't too happy with the crunch aspect of the book in the context of its use with other sourcebooks. I don't think the "each angelic race is also a playable race!" aspect of it needs to be repeated - at least not for Pathfinder.
However, I'll admit that the crunch aspect of Anger of Angels work as a mostly self-contained product (obviously the 3.5 core books would be necessary to some extent, and contents from the 2 Fiendish Codex sourcebooks could be incorporated, too). Y

I wasn't too happy with the crunch aspect of the book in the context of its use with other sourcebooks. I don't think the "each angelic race is also a playable race!" aspect of it needs to be repeated - at least not for Pathfinder.

Perhaps that's a fine thing for generic Pathfinder games, but it's certainly a fun place to riff on In Nomine using Pathfinder...

Psiphyre wrote:

I wasn't too happy with the crunch aspect of the book in the context of its use with other sourcebooks. I don't think the "each angelic race is also a playable race!" aspect of it needs to be repeated - at least not for Pathfinder.

Perhaps that's a fine thing for generic Pathfinder games, but it's certainly a fun place to riff on In Nomine using Pathfinder...

I was always a big fan of In Nomine but not of the rules. The setting etc was great. Was never away of the source book talked about till now. Might have to go back and check it out now, if it is anything at all like In Nomine.

Got it now and I am already loving it. My players are heading towards the Caverns of Tsojcanth so I have quite a bit of crunch to throw at them now for demonic-filled valleys and dungeons.
Love the nascent demon lords, and hero-deities, and the new class, and the spells. Oh well, love just about everything in this supplement.
Just wondering how would you use as a replacement for Graz'zt in your campaign, a demon lord of lust, conquest and gore, a bit like Korne of WH?

Excellent... planning on asking Nocticula out in the new year and reading this will be the equivalent of stalking somebody on Facebook so that you can say "why yes I do indeed have exactly the same favourite films/bands/torture methods as you".

Got it now and I am already loving it. My players are heading towards the Caverns of Tsojcanth so I have quite a bit of crunch to throw at them now for demonic-filled valleys and dungeons.

Love the nascent demon lords, and hero-deities, and the new class, and the spells. Oh well, love just about everything in this supplement.
Just wondering how would you use as a replacement for Graz'zt in your campaign, a demon lord of lust, conquest and gore, a bit like Korne of WH?

As a long time Warhammer fan I feel compelled to correct the above: Graz'zt and Khorne are miles apart, conceptually. G is a scheming, brooding, slightly emo manipulative intellectual, while Khorne is a beast of war, more akin to a cross between Gorum and Rovagug. Blood for the god of blood, skulls for the throne of Khorne, KILL MAIM BURN *sounds of chainsword and hand flamer*

Just wondering how would you use as a replacement for Graz'zt in your campaign, a demon lord of lust, conquest and gore, a bit like Korne of WH?

James has indicated that the Graa'zt-a-like in PF is Socothbenoth, less violent more focused on sneaky&sexy. Also,as has been mentioned, in WH Khorne is pure kill-slash-burn-explode-fold-spindle-mutilate; conquest & gore sure, but not really lust (which is Slaanesh).

As a long time Warhammer fan I feel compelled to correct the above: Graz'zt and Khorne are miles apart, conceptually. G is a scheming, brooding, slightly emo manipulative intellectual, while Khorne is a beast of war, more akin to a cross between Gorum and Rovagug. Blood for the god of blood, skulls for the throne of Khorne, KILL MAIM BURN *sounds of chainsword and hand flamer*

I disagree to the disagreement, I always figured Graz'zt as a plane-conquering god of massacre and battle, whose emphasis for lust is only for the dozens of naked women groveling at his feet. He conquered three layers after all, and being a demon, the thing shouldn't have been without bloodshed. I agree Khorne is possibly more bestial and pure rage, but I envision Graz'zt as general, clad in steel and blood, that commands armies of million demons.

Graazt (GH) is certainly violent, and would have no compunctions about slaughtering thousands in order to get something he wants.

Khorne (WH) however is slaughter pure and simple. He dosn't use violence to get what he wants -- what he wants *is* violence.

Graazt is much more manipulative; there's very little manipulation or lust involved where Khorne is concerned.

Soccothbenoth (PF) is "pure" manipulation & lust, and while he'd as happily kill anyone who crosses his path as any other demon lord his focus is corruption & depravity; why meerely kill when you can destroy in so many more creative and delightful ways. In many regards the opposite of Khorne, much closer to Slaanesh (in terms of Warhammer).

I absolutely accept your point, even though I always considered manipulation more a concern of devils than demons. I am sticking to a more-Gygaxian view of demons as beings of pure chaos and violence.
In any case, I'd like to adapt my view of graz'zt to the new demon rules.

Having "flipped" through the pdf of this book last night, I'm impressed. Tons of material in this book. I just hope it doesn't get overlooked due to the Bestiary 2 coming out the same day. Very well done Mr. Jacobs.

Nocticula is growing on me. I use to really like... she who can not be named or WotC will sue us and was on the cover of Dungeon... a lot. I have skimmed the book and read parts of it and liked it so far. I do have one thing that I didn't like. The parchment sections, they was kinda hard to read in PDF form, for me anyways.

Got it now and I am already loving it. My players are heading towards the Caverns of Tsojcanth so I have quite a bit of crunch to throw at them now for demonic-filled valleys and dungeons.

Love the nascent demon lords, and hero-deities, and the new class, and the spells. Oh well, love just about everything in this supplement.
Just wondering how would you use as a replacement for Graz'zt in your campaign, a demon lord of lust, conquest and gore, a bit like Korne of WH?

Socothbenoth is the best choice for a "replacement" for Graz'zt. Shax is a good second choice.

I absolutely accept your point, even though I always considered manipulation more a concern of devils than demons. I am sticking to a more-Gygaxian view of demons as beings of pure chaos and violence.

In any case, I'd like to adapt my view of graz'zt to the new demon rules.

Manipulation is a tool that ALL the outsider races use to a certain extent; it's not something that only one outsider type has a lock on.

Devils prey upon the mind and faith and loyalty of mortals, and want to corrupt them into being evil and betraying their kin so that when they die, their souls go to Hell and fuel the machine.

Demons prey upon the flesh and the body and the cities of mortals, and want to destroy and ruin things—be that by showing up and smashing things or by showing up and being more subtle about ruining things like relationships or reputations or political stuff or other less tangible things—buildings are as much a mortal construct as are marriages, and both of those are examples of things that demons want to destroy. If you're destroying a building or a body, claws and weapons and fire and stuff work great. If you're destroying a marriage or a political alliance, manipulation and seduction and the like are better options. Demons aren't really concerned about populating the Abyss with evil souls—they're just not as greedy as devils in that way.

Daemons just want human souls; they're gluttons and do what they can to just kill mortals. The more refined/sneaky/forward thinking of daemons try to engineer ways to create vast devastation, like wars or famines or plagues or the like, while others have ways to "trick" souls into going to Abaddon, where they're hunted like game.

All three of them can use manipulation to achieve these ends.

Nocticula is growing on me. I use to really like... she who can not be named or WotC will sue us and was on the cover of Dungeon... a lot. I have skimmed the book and read parts of it and liked it so far. I do have one thing that I didn't like. The parchment sections, they was kinda hard to read in PDF form, for me anyways.

Nocticula is absolutely the best bet to "replace" Malcanthet. She's not exactly the same, obviously—Nocticula is a LOT more violent than Malcanthet.

AND: Thanks for the kind words, everyone! Glad folks are liking the book! Yay! :-)

Manipulation is a tool that ALL the outsider races use to a certain extent; it's not something that only one outsider type has a lock on.

Your response is excellent! I honestly never had anyone describe their relationship as well as you just did!

AND: Thanks for the kind words, everyone! Glad folks are liking the book! Yay! :-)

I can I not like a book about demons? :)

Both of these books are great, though of course the one for demons has way more challenges than the one for devils - 9 planes versus hundreds and hundreds means that the demons just get an overview. But I really like where this is going.

I do have one thing that I didn't like. The parchment sections, they was kinda hard to read in PDF form, for me anyways.

+1 on this one.

It's *really* keen when the text is legible.

With the demon name fonts and the "handwritten" stuff, sometimes I have to copy/paste it just to see what it says; hopefully the hardcopy won't be the same (hard to copy/paste and then do a font change for print :)

Edit:

Nocticula is absolutely the best bet to "replace" Malcanthet. She's not exactly the same, obviously—Nocticula is a LOT more violent than Malcanthet.

So she's an improvement, then. Got it. :)

I absolutely accept your point, even though I always considered manipulation more a concern of devils than demons. I am sticking to a more-Gygaxian view of demons as beings of pure chaos and violence.

In any case, I'd like to adapt my view of graz'zt to the new demon rules.

Actually, it's been stated that that is a unique aspect of Graz'zt, that he's always been the closest to being a "devil" in his methods than the other demon princes.

Nocticula is growing on me. I use to really like... she who can not be named or WotC will sue us and was on the cover of Dungeon... a lot. I have skimmed the book and read parts of it and liked it so far. I do have one thing that I didn't like. The parchment sections, they was kinda hard to read in PDF form, for me anyways.

+4

Beek Gwenders of Croodle wrote:

I absolutely accept your point, even though I always considered manipulation more a concern of devils than demons. I am sticking to a more-Gygaxian view of demons as beings of pure chaos and violence.

In any case, I'd like to adapt my view of graz'zt to the new demon rules.

Actually, it's been stated that that is a unique aspect of Graz'zt, that he's always been the closest to being a "devil" in his methods than the other demon princes.

Didn't one of the Fiend books that talked about Graz'zt allude to him being a former Archdevil involved in the Blood War who switched sides after carving up a good chunk of the Abyss for himself? I could've sworn I read that somewhere but I can't remember where.

Anyways, I'm really looking forward to this book, I have the pdf of the first Book of the Damned and am getting some good use out of it.

Didn't one of the Fiend books that talked about Graz'zt allude to him being a former Archdevil involved in the Blood War who switched sides after carving up a good chunk of the Abyss for himself? I could've sworn I read that somewhere but I can't remember where.

That's a 4e WotC thing.

idilippy wrote:

Didn't one of the Fiend books that talked about Graz'zt allude to him being a former Archdevil involved in the Blood War who switched sides after carving up a good chunk of the Abyss for himself? I could've sworn I read that somewhere but I can't remember where.

That's a 4e WotC thing.

Bleh, a total travesty! Hopefully this concept won't get carried forward in the future!

idilippy wrote:

Didn't one of the Fiend books that talked about Graz'zt allude to him being a former Archdevil involved in the Blood War who switched sides after carving up a good chunk of the Abyss for himself? I could've sworn I read that somewhere but I can't remember where.

That's a 4e WotC thing.

I didn't think so, since the only 4e products I've read are the first player's handbook and the Forgotten Realms Campaign Guide, but it looks like you're right and that info is cited on the FR wiki as coming from the 4e Manual of the Planes. Huh, well it's an interesting backstory no matter where it comes from, having a would be conqueror of the Abyss get pulled into it's embrace instead.

I can't say I've always been comfortable w/ Graz'zt being portrayed as a Demon Lord rather than an Archdevil. So I'll acknowledge WOTC did a good thing w/ changing his origin a bit. But since I don't play 4th edition, what I did in my homebrew was make Graz'zt a fallen Lord of the First World, exiled--perhaps self-imposed--to the Abyss.

This after reading the excellent and flavorful piece James Sutter wrote about the First World in PF #36.

Not trying to stir up debate on whether Graz'zt should or shouldn't be a Demon Lord folks. Just my own personal take on him.

Looking forward to my print copy of Lords of Chaos.

Sacrelige!!!

Yeah, I like it because it fit well with a campaign idea I put about a year and a half ago centered on the result of Graz'zt capturing Waukeen during the Time of Troubles in the Forgotten Realms, using a combination of the For Duty and Deity module and some homebrew stuff. I hadn't looked up anything on Graz'zt before then so I guess I must have read in the wiki how he 4e changed him to having been an Archdevil once without realizing it.

Anyways, long story longer that sentence sparked this massive campaign idea so I felt it was a great background, I can understand how someone who knew Graz'zt wasn't an Archdevil before 4e came around might not like it though. Back on this topic though, I'm really excited for this book too, though I'm waiting to get it until after I pay my bills and do my Christmas shopping for family before buying any more books for myself.

I can't say I've always been comfortable w/ Graz'zt being portrayed as a Demon Lord rather than an Archdevil.

Stuff like that's going to get his mother's attention now, and you really, -really- don't want Pale Night the Mother of Demons to show you her scary face. Trust me. It's like watching Cannibal Holocaust while on acid and sniffing a jumbo pack of magic markers. It isn't pleasant. ;)

while on acid and sniffing a jumbo pack of magic markers.

Note to self:

Remember to pick up jumbo pack of magic makers to go with the acid for New Years.

Noticed two (admittedly minor) retcons:

-There are now, officially, qlippoth lords comparable to demon lords. In AP #18, it was stated that qlippoths had no lords.

-Lamias are now apparently a creation of Lamashtu. Back in Rise of the Runelords, they were said to be prophets cursed by Pharasma.

Noticed two (admittedly minor) retcons:

-There are now, officially, qlippoth lords comparable to demon lords. In AP #18, it was stated that qlippoths had no lords.

-Lamias are now apparently a creation of Lamashtu. Back in Rise of the Runelords, they were said to be prophets cursed by Pharasma.

-I don't remember, was #18 written in character? If not, then like you said, minor.

-Why couldn't they be both, or neither? Deities parallel evolving monsters, or propoganda to get them to worship a deity?

waits with the patience of a Walker in downtown Atlanta for his Book of the Damned: Volume II to ship

-Lamias are now apparently a creation of Lamashtu. Back in Rise of the Runelords, they were said to be prophets cursed by Pharasma.

Lamashtu is just an aspect of Pharasma. It's like the Morrigan, or the Trinity.

Generic Villain wrote:

-Lamias are now apparently a creation of Lamashtu. Back in Rise of the Runelords, they were said to be prophets cursed by Pharasma.

Lamashtu is just an aspect of Pharasma. It's like the Morrigan, or the Trinity.

I'd not thought about having a triune goddess, not sure who I'd include -- Iomedae's probably the obvious maiden, and Pharasma works as the crone; Lamashtu's a corrupted mother, but I'm not sure who fits the normal mother role, none of the major goddesses quite fit the bill.

I just finished reading Lords of Chaos and had to chime in. Kudos on yet another fantastic Pathfinder supplement!

I definitely think this is one of Pathfinder's racier books. There is certainly some adult-themed material sprinkled throughout, but I think the author(s) did an excellent job toeing the line without actually crossing over into X-rated territory. (Well, perhaps with the exception of Socothbenoth's obedience! That's definitely an act that would get you kicked out of most Sunday school classes.)

Now, please excuse me, I need to take a cold shower. ;-)

I just finished reading Lords of Chaos and had to chime in. Kudos on yet another fantastic Pathfinder supplement!

I definitely think this is one of Pathfinder's racier books. There is certainly some adult-themed material sprinkled throughout, but I think the author(s) did an excellent job toeing the line without actually crossing over into X-rated territory. (Well, perhaps with the exception of Socothbenoth's obedience! That's definitely an act that would get you kicked out of most Sunday school classes.)

Now, please excuse me, I need to take a cold shower. ;-)

Finished already?

I'm still waiting for it to become available!

rocks gently, refreshes email