Here's a question that's been making me ponder a bit. I know fey aren't cute little pretty-pretty princesses in Pathfinder. They eat people. They aren't happy. But what's the take then on the kinds of fey critters we already have (dryads, nymphs, satyrs, pixies, grigs and nixies)? Are they all similarly reframed into evil people eaters--or do they keep their original always chaotic good and en mass represent some kind of weird schism in fey society?
Honestly I thought it would be kind of fun to keep them good and perhaps have them be the representatives of a breed or court of fae (though pleaseohplease not Seelie--there's too much Seelie/Unseelie stuff out there. It just ain't as fresh as it was ten years ago) that are currently out of favor in fae lands. That way it doesn't require total helm of opposite alignment reimaginings of fairly classic creatures and leaves the door wide open for some more original malevolent types (like redcaps and roseblood fae).
In the meantime I've noodling around to come up with some more common types of evil fae. I mean they can't all be rosebushes....
|
As intelligent humanoids I'm not sure why Fey of any stripe require racial alignment. I would prefer them to be capricious, chaotic little nature spirits with a core alignment (if they must have one) of CN.
One of the odd things about rpg Fey is that it seems useful to chuck about 90% of the mythology out of the window. Otherwise you have to ask why goblins aren't Fey, why Sprites aren't little green-skins, why, why, why... pre-Tolkein Elves are fey and often crop up stealing babies and leaving changelings in their place (although they also resuce lost travellers or show people a high old time), but I don't want to lose PC elves.
I'm quite comfortable with the Nature-Spirit Fey (pixies, grigs etc - basically Flower-Faeries - plus dryads, nymphs et al) and spirit of chaos Fey (leprechauns, red-caps) and can see the cross-over between the two.
I know it can be tempting to go for evil, baby-stealing Fey, but dnd has plenty of baby-stealing nasties anyway; and i'd prefer it if some of the baby-stealers are just capricious little wierdos who have some warped but essentially benign motive for their actions.
|
In the meantime I've noodling around to come up with some more common types of evil fae. I mean they can't all be rosebushes....
I vote for Redcaps. Nothing lovable about Scottish fey that hang out at crossroads at night killing travelers for their blood. Well, nothing loveable other than that.
But them, I'm biased toward Redcaps.
|
I have a schizophrenic view of fey. I'm a big fan of the portrayal of Fey in Mike Mignola's work, and I like the idea of them perhaps starting to dwindle as civilization begins to spread and people stop beleiving in them. On the other hand, I'm a bio major, and Fey as nature spirits strain my suspention of disbeleif. What the hells does a rediculously small greenish aquatic humanoid have to do with the oxygen and algae ballance of a river ecosystem? Why would "a manifestation of nature's beauty" look like a human or elf with huge knockers?.
Maybe I'm spoiled by Magic the Gathering, where the nature spirits are Elementals composed of living matter, or the Woodsy looking Kami from Kamigawa. I'm used to Kickass guys like Molimo or Multani, who are manifestations of a massive, ancient forrest's consciousness. Emergent entities who's function is to be individuals but serve the will of the forrest, as a herald, diplomat, and hero. Creatures that are merely a mobile consciousness that slaps together a body out of the local plant matter whenever they need to interact. these guys are far from fey of any mythology, and I would call them a totally separate thing.
Also, I'm a pratchett fan, so you can see that I would also want fey to be extradimensional raiders with feeble bodies and massive arrogance but no real imagination, empathy, or intelligence (high Cha, Low Int, Wis nothing to write home about). They have copper-based blood, and can sense magnetic feilds to the point of Blindsight.
So, as you can see, with my love of these various genres, that I honestly have no idea how I want my fey to be. the best I can come up with is to make them at core extradimensional, but they have a strange ability to insinuate themselves into the material plane ecology, acting like a parasite or symbiote depending on the individual. Also, making them less human might be nice. Pixies, for example, only look humanoid in general shape. Closer inspection reveals that their big, innocent eyes are compound structures, their skin is chitinous, and their limbs segmented. They look more like cute, humanish wasps that little humans with wings. Lorwyn faries (MtG), but moreso.
The whole fey type itself is a horrible mishmash of real-world mythological creatures. The type is meant to represent creatures from irish folklore, but you also see things from greek mythology. and we all know what self-posessed, unobservant, comfort-loving, petty folk they were. the only function of nymphs was to fall in love with mortals, "falling in love" being the discreet term they use. Mythological creatures like this just seem so...implausible. at least Other creatures from other mythologies and in D&D itself can be made to make sense. Dragons, many magical beasts, abberations, and so forth dont strain my suspention of disbeleif, but a goat-legged human with horns and a set of pipes who's ecological niche is to dance about playing music and seduce/rape women and other "nature spirits" just seems...dumb. Displacer beasts may not make any evolutionary sense, and would, to me, be more suited as abberations, but at least they make a credible apex predator.
sorry, but I remember reading the "everworld" series back in middle school, and it forever colored my view of mythological creatures and Outsiders in D&D. To me, outsiders are "simplified" and "fake" biologicaly. Dissection of an outsider would reveal heart,lungs, crude digestive system that doesnt do very much, and pretty much nothing else. Maybe a liver, but no subtle glands, lumph nodes, spleens or other such things. For one thing, it makes my Conjuror character much more comfortable with summoning them to do his bidding. "they're not really real, so I can treat them however I want."
|
|
a goat-legged human with horns and a set of pipes who's ecological niche is to dance about playing music and seduce/rape women and other "nature spirits" just seems...dumb.
Irish and Greek "Fey" work together because they are both coming from the same direction. Intelligent, humanoid mainfestations of human ideas and/or the consciousness of unthinking nature.
Satyr's are an allegorical warning about what happens to men who become overtaken by their desires - they become raving animalistic things.
Nymphs are the semi-divine spirit of a location. In the mythology their form is generally amorphous but when they assume human form it is beautiful (in fact, even if they're a swan, or a fish, they tend to be a beautiful example of the species.
dnd divine portfolios are a hangover from the god of X aspects of most pantheons, which has the same rationale.
How do you fit allegorical beasties into an ecosystem? magic.
I like Jodah's concept of a nature of the wild manifesting as a more elemental entity. I like the idea of a Wendigo, or other raw being of nature and an amoral sense of logic.
I agree that taking a bone-breaking traditional approach to all fey would render many contemporary WotC-based forms into a wierd hodge podge. Like you mentioned, elves, goblins, bugbears, brownies, hobgoblins, etc. all become reduced, they all share a lot in common, many of their names are just synonemous with each other, and where any encounter with any individual fey should be a momentous event wrought with high risk and peril.
My impression so far is that I like what I see. Personally, it was the least burning desire for me to see elaborated until HMM with the party possibly going through Sanos Forest and meeting a Pixie and an undead Nymph. Now, I'd like more info since my party is right there. I've put in a little teaser but I don't dare exploit it in case Paizo would nullify my idea.