Recently I realized that Asmodeus is not created by Wizard of the Coast. Instead, it came from the real world mythology so it is 100% safe for Paizo to use him! I wondered whether there are more similar cases other than him so I began searching. Turns out, many among the evil outsiders are from the real world mythology.
Among archdevils, there are Asmodeus, Baalzebul, Barbatos, Belial, Dispater, Geryon, Mammon, Mephistopheles, and Moloch.
Among infernal dukes, there are Alocer, Bifrons, Caacrinolaas, Crocell, Eligos, Furcas, Gaap, Haborym, Malthus, Nergal, Oriax, Ose, Sabnach, Titivilus, Vapula, Vassago, Zaebos, and Zepar. And it seems that all malebranches are from the real world mythology too.
I discovered there is a Finnish goddess called Kalma but I'm not sure whether the infernal duke Kalma was somehow inspired by her.
Among demon lords, Abraxus, Areshkagal, Baphomet, Behemoth, Dagon, Demogorgon, Flauros, Haagenti, Ipos, Lamashtu, Marbas, Nurgal, Orcus, Pazuzu, Shax, and Vepar are from the real world mythology.
Kostchtchie seems from D&D but I cannot find out whether he's created by Wizard of the Coast or not.
Even among daemons, I found out that Apollyon and Charon are from the real world mythology.
But strangely, there seems no similar cases among other evil outsiders like asura ranas, Forsaken, harbingers, oni daimyos, qlippoth lords, rakshasa immortals, sahkil tormentors, velstrac demagogues, though.
So I'm curious. Are the names of other demon lords not mentioned above, like, Aldinach, Andirifkhu, Angazhan, Cyth-V'sug, Deskari, Gogunta, Izyagna, Jezelda, Jubilex, Kabriri, Nocticula, Shamira, Sifkesh, Shivaska, Sithhud, Socothbenoth, Urxehl, Xoveron, Yhidothrus, Zevgavizeb, and Zura are 100% created by Paizo?
Creative Director
|
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
Three of the main reasons we draw so heavily from real-world mythology for deities and monsters are:
1) Familiarity. While not everyone knows all of these, most gamers know some of them, and seeing familiar creatures or deities helps to build in a sense of nostalgia and comfort to those who come to the setting.
2) Inspiring. Human history is replete with inspiring and amazing stories, and they've inspired us in many ways to build Golarion or become gamers in the first place, so including these elements honors that inspiration.
3) Tradition. Many of the names you post above have been a part of Pathfinder and its predecessor RPGs for decades, all the way back to the start of things when D&D was first created in the 70s.
As for your other questions...
The following are inspired by real-world mythology: Aldinach, Nocticula, Socothbenoth
The following were invented by Paizo (many of them by me): Andirifkhu, Angazhan, Cyth-V'sug, Deskari, Gogunta, Izyagna, Jezelda, Kabriri, Shamira, Sifkesh, Shivaska, Sithhud, Urxehl, Xoveron, Yhidothrus, Zevgavizeb, and Zura.
This one was invented by Gary Gygax and we could only use him due to him being in the Tome of Horrors: Jubilex. Note that a typo in Tome of Horrors means that the actual original spelling of this demon's name, Jubliex, is NOT open content. Regardless, we won't be able to do anything with Jubilex going forward with the remastered rules, which is fine.
Kostchtchie is a weird one. He's based on the real world story of Koschei from Russian mythology, but the version of him specifically as a giant cold demon is very much from Gary Gygax, so he's one we'll also be staying away from in the remastered rules. We'll be moving toward Sithhud as our big cold demon in the setting.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There is actually a canon Asura Rana from Hindu mythology - Vritra, who on Golarion takes the form of a three-headed serpent. On Earth, Vritra is the serpent slain by the god Indra using his thunderbolts. He apparently lingers in Golarion, albeit a bit obscure since all 1e ever set out was his name and status, not his domains.
Generally though, I think Paizo are better off taking inspiration from mythology for original characters than incorporating real-life elements, especially since some of these beings are from religions still practiced by people, or whose ancestors were the original practitioners, and there's the risk of offence.
Th
Kostchtchie is a weird one. He's based on the real world story of Koschei from Russian mythology, but the version of him specifically as a giant cold demon is very much from Gary Gygax, so he's one we'll also be staying away from in the remastered rules. We'll be moving toward Sithhud as our big cold demon in the setting.
Be an interesting lich phycltary
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I liked the Kobold Press version of Koschei, a king of ancient and forgotten land who transformed himself into sort of lich/fiend being and now serves Baba Yaga.
The following are inspired by real-world mythology: Aldinach, Nocticula, Socothbenoth
Really? Aldinach, Nocticula, and Socothbenoth are from the real world mythology? I searched their names on Google but I couldn't find any. So I thought those names are 100% created by Paizo.
This one was invented by Gary Gygax and we could only use him due to him being in the Tome of Horrors: Jubilex. Note that a typo in Tome of Horrors means that the actual original spelling of this demon's name, Jubliex, is NOT open content. Regardless, we won't be able to do anything with Jubilex going forward with the remastered rules, which is fine.
So what Gary Gygax created for D&D was Jubliex, but the writer of Tome of Horrors somehow made a typo by mistake thus included Jubilex in the book instead? I thought Paizo deliberately created the name Jubilex so that it would not violate the intellectual property of Wizard of the Coast.
Actually I feel very sad that Paizo can never use Jubilex in Pathfinder anymore. Paizo should have included the article for Jubilex in one of the adventure path book. :( Similarly, I feel very sad that Paizo didn't include an article for Nocticula in the Wrath of the Righteous adventure path. Since she is redeemed and thus not a demon lord any longer, that means we cannot see an article for demon lord Nocticula forever.
But just because someone is from the real world mythology does not make them entirely safe for Paizo to use I guess. I was very surprised to find out that Demogorgon and Tiamat are from the real world mythology because I have always thought that Paizo couldn't use them since they are owned by Wizard of the Coast. Considering that Asmodeus, Orcus, and Pazuzu exist in Lost Omens, I honestly have no idea why Paizo chose not to use Demogorgon and Tiamat at all.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Nocticula’s still a demon lord in Starfinder, to my understanding.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Really? Aldinach, Nocticula, and Socothbenoth are from the real world mythology? I searched their names on Google but I couldn't find any. So I thought those names are 100% created by Paizo.
I believe that Socothbenoth is inspired by Succoth-benoth, a babylonian god.
Aldinach is a demon from egyptian mythology and I think Nocticula is god found in Roman mythology, but I'm not sure.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
But just because someone is from the real world mythology does not make them entirely safe for Paizo to use I guess. I was very surprised to find out that Demogorgon and Tiamat are from the real world mythology because I have always thought that Paizo couldn't use them since they are owned by Wizard of the Coast. Considering that Asmodeus, Orcus, and Pazuzu exist in Lost Omens, I honestly have no idea why Paizo chose not to use Demogorgon and Tiamat at all.
A minor but important point of clarification: There is no "Tiamat, a five-headed dragon with each head a different colour" in mythology, nor "Demogorgon the two-headed tentacle baboon". The others either have sufficient precedent from mythology (Asmodeus the lord of fiends, Pazuzu the demon of ill winds, etc) or are at least different enough from their D&D incarnations. This significant thing here is not the name it's the presentation.
(And as for why not take the names Tiamat and Demogorgon and make totally infringement free versions, its something of a "We have Tiamat at home" meme. For better or worse, Paizo has decided that making a new character with the same name as a more popular character was only going to mislead and frustrate players into thinking they would be the same, which is not worth it.)
As for Orcus, I'm pretty sure he only technically exists in Lost Omens and has already consciously been avoided as a major undeath deity in the past, so I would probably put him more in the category of "deities left behind in OGL stuff"
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
It really feels like PF2 said all it's going to need to say about Orcus in the Book of the Dead.
|
Creative Director
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
I honestly have no idea why Paizo chose not to use Demogorgon and Tiamat at all.
Because the real-world inspirations for these two are VERY different than how they exist in D&D. If we used them we would have had to make up entirely different things, and that would have looked like us making a huge mistake to most gamers, who aren't as aware of this fact. And so we chose to do new things with the role of "leader of demons" (Lamashtu) and "evil dragon god" (Dahak, who comes from the same mythological cycle as Tiamat) and "ruler of the first layer of Hell" (Barbatos instead of Tiamat).
|
Creative Director
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Nocticula’s still a demon lord in Starfinder, to my understanding.
I'm not sure but I can confirm that Starfinder is NOT meant to be the "one true future" for Pathfinder. We created the Gap to give both settings room to tell their own stories; many of those will link across games but some will not, and what happens in Pathifnder doesn't automatically mean setting something up for Starfinder, and what happens in Starfinder doesn't automatically mean that we are bound to tell that story to resolve it in that way in Pathfinder.
|
Creative Director
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
It really feels like PF2 said all it's going to need to say about Orcus in the Book of the Dead.
More to the point, D&D has kinda said most of what we feel needs to be said about Orcus. He's been the "star" of more D&D adventures about demon lords than most.
The following are inspired by real-world mythology: Aldinach, Nocticula, Socothbenoth
I'm going to parrot Aenigma's surprise at this; I'd never encountered these entities in "the wild" prior to D&D, and it's only really in Fiend Codex I in 3.5 that they appeared in the old testament (with some rather familiar names on the cover of that tome, might I add). I *think* I recall Nocticula appearing in older content as just a name, though.
They were pretty clearly "claimed" by Paizo following the split, but I always wondered if they were considered safe to claim with the OGL kerfuffle. I would guess so, since Wizards never did anything with them, but I'm a little surprised at the assertion that they're based in real myth. TheMountain's explanation is as good as any, though.
Also, yes. After he was one of the stars of the show for Planescape, D&D kind of said all that need be said on the subject of Orcus.
Also, since we appear to have one JJacobs on the horn for a moment, I've been curious: Deskari is one of the more obvious Paizo Originals when it comes to supernatural beings (and makes a great showing in Wrath, both tabletop and CRPG), but what precisely informed his design and his story from a real-world perspective? He's obviously got a lot of inspiration from locust swarms and whatnot, but did any specific mythology inform him? What was it that nudged him over the edge to be *the* Demon Heavy of 1E? Did his locust-centaur design come from any specific place, or was it just a Reynolds design that crossed the desk and everyone was all "this is it, this is what we HAVE to roll with"?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Nocticula’s still a demon lord in Starfinder, to my understanding.I'm not sure but I can confirm that Starfinder is NOT meant to be the "one true future" for Pathfinder. We created the Gap to give both settings room to tell their own stories; many of those will link across games but some will not, and what happens in Pathifnder doesn't automatically mean setting something up for Starfinder, and what happens in Starfinder doesn't automatically mean that we are bound to tell that story to resolve it in that way in Pathfinder.
Wasn’t mean to imply that, to be clear - that was me replying to OP’s bemoaning the lack of demon lord Nocticula in Pathfinder. I was telling them there’s still more of her in that role somewhere else, should they want it!
I quite like that the two canons are separate.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Really? Aldinach, Nocticula, and Socothbenoth are from the real world mythology? I searched their names on Google but I couldn't find any. So I thought those names are 100% created by Paizo.I believe that Socothbenoth is inspired by Succoth-benoth, a babylonian god.
Aldinach is a demon from egyptian mythology and I think Nocticula is god found in Roman mythology, but I'm not sure.
Nocticula seems to be a medieval European witch goddess, akin to or another name for Hecate, Benzosia and Habondia. At least, this guy's blog post cites Paul Huson and Gerald Gardner as saying so:
https://theotherside.timsbrannan.com/2022/09/in-search-of-nocticula.html
|
Creative Director
|
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm going to parrot Aenigma's surprise at this; I'd never encountered these entities in "the wild" prior to D&D, and it's only really in Fiend Codex I in 3.5 that they appeared in the old testament (with some rather familiar names on the cover of that tome, might I add). I *think* I recall Nocticula appearing in older content as just a name, though.
Some of these names are pretty deep dives into obscure sources and lore in print books and the like. The internet is big, and there's a lot on Wikipedia, but it doesn't hold everything and not all of it is easy to quickly find. One of my favorite print resources is Theresa Bane's Encyclopedia of Demons A flip through that book reveals...
Aldinach: A lesser demon from Egyptian mythology.
Nocticula: A vampriric demonic goddes from France.
Socothbenoth: Isn't in the book, but is in fact a variatn of "succoth-benoth," which is itself perhaps a mistranslation of the name of a Babylonian deity.
In all three cases, we made significant changes to the Pathfinder versions, taking only the name and some basic mythological elements to build our own creations from.
|
Creative Director
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Also, since we appear to have one JJacobs on the horn for a moment, I've been curious: Deskari is one of the more obvious Paizo Originals when it comes to supernatural beings (and makes a great showing in Wrath, both tabletop and CRPG), but what precisely informed his design and his story from a real-world perspective? He's obviously got a lot of inspiration from locust swarms and whatnot, but did any specific mythology inform him? What was it that nudged him over the edge to be *the* Demon Heavy of 1E? Did his locust-centaur design come from any specific place, or was it just a Reynolds design that crossed the desk and everyone was all "this is it, this is what we HAVE to roll with"?
Deskari is one of the few Pathfinder demon lords I didn't invent; he was created by Erik Mona, who wanted a brand new demon to be something involved with the setting. As far as I know, his name and appearance and role and all that is 100% a creation of Erik's. I did the same thing with several other demon lords, including (for example) Cyth-V'sug, Jezelda, Kabriri, Sifkesh, and Zura, to name a few.
|
Creative Director
|
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'd honestly prefer to see more representation to mythology accurate Tiamat xP
Not something we're interested in doing in the context of Pathfinder. D&D's flavor of her is too overwhelming and distracting for a game like Pathifnder and a setting like Golarion. Plus, there's countless other great sources of inspiration to explore. And PLUS plus... what D&D's done with Tiamat is a really pretty cool creation that's quite successful and recognizable and popular. As with things like mind flayers and beholders and drow, it's increasingly my preference to let those things be D&D things and to focus my attention for Pathfinder/Golarion on other stuff that we can make cool without having to compete for attention and potentially disappoint folks with alternate takes to fan-favorites.
Re: Deskari
I don't know if Erik Mona used Egyptian mythology as one of his sources of inspiration, but Apshai was the god of insects and was considered one of the "dark" forces opposed to Ra.
Fun fact: The dungeon-crawl video game Temple of Apshai (1979) predated the first AD&D video game by about 3 years. Temple of Apshai and its sequels (IIRC, it was a trilogy) also allowed multiplayer and custom dungeon generation.
|
Creative Director
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Re: Deskari
I don't know if Erik Mona used Egyptian mythology as one of his sources of inspiration, but Apshai was the god of insects and was considered one of the "dark" forces opposed to Ra.
Fun fact: The dungeon-crawl video game Temple of Apshai (1979) predated the first AD&D video game by about 3 years. Temple of Apshai and its sequels (IIRC, it was a trilogy) also allowed multiplayer and custom dungeon generation.
Erik is VERY well-read on topics like that. I suspect that he named Deskari using his knowledge of language, naming conventions, and the like (I know I do that when making up new names for creatures that I want to have names evoke specific thematic or emotional reactions), but I'd be surprised if Apshai was one of those inspirations in this case.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Nitpick: the original name for J* in the 1e Monster Manual and 1e DMG was Juiblex, not Jubliex or Jubilex. Which is odd, because I distinctly remember people calling him Jubilex in the early 80s. Maybe it's phonetically more familiar.
Otherwise, Yahoo tells me that Jubilex is "an up and coming dubstep artist", whatever that means.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'd honestly prefer to see more representation to mythology accurate Tiamat xP
Given that the mythological Tiamat and her husband Abzu embody the primordial watery chaos the precedes the birth of the gods who imposed structure on the universe, it seems to me that The Speakers of the Depths already fill that role in the Pathfinder methos.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'd honestly prefer to see more representation to mythology accurate Tiamat xPGiven that the mythological Tiamat and her husband Abzu embody the primordial watery chaos the precedes the birth of the gods who imposed structure on the universe, it seems to me that The Speakers of the Depths already fill that role in the Pathfinder methos.
I've long wondered whether Paizo's image of the Maelstrom and the Proteans was partly inspired by Egyptian thought, which similarly involved serpent-gods writhing in the primordial chaos. But it works just as well transposed into a pseudo-Mesapotamian context or even a Hittite or Greek one - the churning of primordial chaos by serpents is a common chaoskampf. Though Tiamat and Abzu were late additions to the mythology, specifically Babylonian, and I'm not aware of the two having counterparts in earlier Akkadian or Sumerian mythology. And if Paizo did want to flesh out Ninshabur, I think I'd rather draw from those sources than something more familiar/obvious.
|
Creative Director
|
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
I've long wondered whether Paizo's image of the Maelstrom and the Proteans was partly inspired by Egyptian thought, which similarly involved serpent-gods writhing in the primordial chaos. But it works just as well transposed into a pseudo-Mesapotamian context or even a Hittite or Greek one - the churning of primordial chaos by serpents is a common chaoskampf. Though Tiamat and Abzu were late additions to the mythology, specifically Babylonian, and I'm not aware of the two having counterparts in earlier Akkadian or Sumerian mythology. And if Paizo did want to flesh out Ninshabur, I think I'd rather draw from those sources than something more familiar/obvious.
The proteans and Maelstrom were inspired by equal parts prehistoric sea creatures/primeval Earth and antibodies fighting an infection. Not much direct inspiration from mythology, as far as I know, other than the name being derived from Proteus.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I've long wondered whether Paizo's image of the Maelstrom and the Proteans was partly inspired by Egyptian thought, which similarly involved serpent-gods writhing in the primordial chaos. But it works just as well transposed into a pseudo-Mesapotamian context or even a Hittite or Greek one - the churning of primordial chaos by serpents is a common chaoskampf. Though Tiamat and Abzu were late additions to the mythology, specifically Babylonian, and I'm not aware of the two having counterparts in earlier Akkadian or Sumerian mythology. And if Paizo did want to flesh out Ninshabur, I think I'd rather draw from those sources than something more familiar/obvious.The proteans and Maelstrom were inspired by equal parts prehistoric sea creatures/primeval Earth and antibodies fighting an infection. Not much direct inspiration from mythology, as far as I know, other than the name being derived from Proteus.
"Antibodies fighting an infection" ?
That is a fascinating tidbit and something I had not heard before. It opens many vistas.
Thanks a lot for the info, as usual.
|
I'd honestly prefer to see more representation to mythology accurate Tiamat xPGiven that the mythological Tiamat and her husband Abzu embody the primordial watery chaos the precedes the birth of the gods who imposed structure on the universe, it seems to me that The Speakers of the Depths already fill that role in the Pathfinder methos.
Eh, I can still prefer mythological Tiamat to D&D one I don't know anything about xD
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
So to come back to this thread for a bit:
Kostchtchie is a weird one. He's based on the real world story of Koschei from Russian[/wider Slavic] mythology, but the version of him specifically as a giant cold demon is very much from Gary Gygax, so he's one we'll also be staying away from in the remastered rules. We'll be moving toward Sithhud as our big cold demon in the setting.
So I've been curious concerning this: the 1E Sarkoris & Pulura lore had it posited that Pulura and Kostchtchie were often seen in the Sarkorian pantheistic tradition as dualistic gods of cold, with Pulura being the "holy" one (and one of the more widely venerated entities throughout Sarkoris), and Kos as the "unholy" one (and who influenced the giants who eventually moved into Dyinglight after it was evacuated). With Big K quietly being shown the door as of the Remaster, is this dynamic going to be shifted over to being Pulura vs. Sithhud, or will this aspect just be very quietly dropped and not referenced again?
(Playing a would-be Puluran cleric makes me extremely hungry for as much Pulura lore as I can lay hands on, needless to say.)
|
Creative Director
|
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
So to come back to this thread for a bit:
Kostchtchie is a weird one. He's based on the real world story of Koschei from Russian[/wider Slavic] mythology, but the version of him specifically as a giant cold demon is very much from Gary Gygax, so he's one we'll also be staying away from in the remastered rules. We'll be moving toward Sithhud as our big cold demon in the setting.So I've been curious concerning this: the 1E Sarkoris & Pulura lore had it posited that Pulura and Kostchtchie were often seen in the Sarkorian pantheistic tradition as dualistic gods of cold, with Pulura being the "holy" one (and one of the more widely venerated entities throughout Sarkoris), and Kos as the "unholy" one (and who influenced the giants who eventually moved into Dyinglight after it was evacuated). With Big K quietly being shown the door as of the Remaster, is this dynamic going to be shifted over to being Pulura vs. Sithhud, or will this aspect just be very quietly dropped and not referenced again?
(Playing a would-be Puluran cleric makes me extremely hungry for as much Pulura lore as I can lay hands on, needless to say.)
It's probably more likely that we'll just not do more with that pantheon. In cases like these, where we have established story lore about how OGL-enabled creatures are part of the world, they're technically still there in an historical context. We aren't removing them from ever having appeared in our work... we're just not telling more stories about them.
Pulura is our own invention though, and one of my favorite Empyreal Lords. I certainly hope we'll do more with her and expand her mythology going forward!
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
So, that's the "very quietly dropped" column, then. :V
But yessss. I also dig how Pulura has shaken out over the years, and I would absolutely love love love to see more done with her and a bit of an examination on her seemingly-unique place in Sarkorian culture (and maybe a bit more on the post-4606 Sarkorian diaspora generally, both how it endured the Worldwound and what's going on post-Fifth Crusade!)
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I just want to say: Thank you James Jacobs for the absolute treasure trove of information in this thread about the thoughts/inspirations/general origins of so many figures and places that you've discussed in this thread. I am so here for it, and hope there will be more! Sadly I'm way too scatter-brained right now to think of my own questions, but my favorite is hearing about the more obscure sources that I had no idea about, like Nocticula.