| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Kyrene |
Posted - 20 Feb 2009 : 07:31:45
According to Races of Faerūn, in the Realms at least, aasimars can be distant descendants of not only celestials, but also the gods. However, and here is my confusion, is this true for the evil gods too? Aasimars are decidedly good-aligned, they tend to want to be paladins; they tend to fight evil. Is a Bane descendant or a Shar-touched child still an aasimar? |
| 24 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| ranger_of_the_unicorn_run |
Posted - 22 Feb 2009 : 00:39:39
Oh, and the lawful and chaotic planetouched are zenythri and chaonds, respectively. |
| ranger_of_the_unicorn_run |
Posted - 22 Feb 2009 : 00:34:23
I really can't remember where I read it, but I think there was some 3.x source that had a creature resulting from the crossbreeding of celestials and fiends. That's going to bother me. Now I have to go look through my books...
EDIT: Found it! In MM IV there is a creature called a concordant killer that has mixed celestial and demonic heritage. They have red skin and feathery, white wings. They are sort of like the ultimate mercenary, in that they often hunt down powerful beings in exchange for favors. |
| Markustay |
Posted - 21 Feb 2009 : 22:35:34
quote:
Originally posted by KnightErrantJR
The really confusing part is, what do true neutral deities produce in later generations?
That was covered above - Asslings. 
I give them small vestigal wings to start-off, and maybe a lump (large ridge) on their forehead, and depending which way they went alignment-wise, they'd either develop into batwings and horns, or fethered wings and a halo.
Then again, those are stereotypes... why can't a fiend have feathers and a halo?
On the other hand, you just gave me an idea for an extra-dimensional race - a group of beings that have all the usual demonic features, but were actually more along the lines 'Saytrs' (I know Mystarra/ODD had something along those lines called a Diabolus, but I was thinking something less... planer).
It really all depends on your concept of 'ugly', or rather, 'scarey'. Maybe Celestial/Fiendish beings don't really look like anything at all (like Gods) - they appear as someone expects them to appear. That meas a 'goodly' Minotaur deity would have horns, and it would have no refelction on their alignment (or antlers, or a snout, or anything else for that matter).
Or maybe the child of a true-neutral deity is a lot like that uber-bland guy from the Visine commercials (I think his name is Ben Steine). He/she would wear a lot of greys and talk in a monotone voice, and have the ability to put anyone (or anything - even Undead!) to sleep.  |
| KnightErrantJR |
Posted - 21 Feb 2009 : 19:02:17
Good aligned gods would be good outsiders, and good aligned outsiders beget, at least a few generations out, Aasimar. Evil aligned gods are evil outsiders, and would beget tieflings, in later generations. There were lawful and chaotic planetouched, though I can't remember the names off hand, but I'd venture to say that if a god was more about their ethical alignment than their moral alignment (i.e. LN or CN gods), they would probably produce one of these planetouched children long term.
The really confusing part is, what do true neutral deities produce in later generations?
Oh, and with all due respect, I can't apply 4E logic to previous genealogy, since creatures that had FR origins were still "rewritten" to fit the core storyline. I can't remember what was said about tieflings, but both Shadar-kai and Dragonborn clearly had been introduced into Realmslore, and yet previous lore was ignored completely when referring to them in the 4E products. |
| Markustay |
Posted - 21 Feb 2009 : 18:21:16
Thank you  ... but thats not why I'm posting again.
Not to rub salt in fresh wounds, but in 4e, a fiend CAN BE a Paladin!
Who's to say it was a 'standard' (old school) Paladin? Even in 3e, we had things like "Paladin of Tyranny". Alignment, weather we like it or not, is no longer an issue.
This is one lore conundrum actually solved by 4e, rather then exacerbated by it.
Edit: Not trying to steal Wooly's thunder here - I actually prefer a 'defiled paladin' explanation... I'm just pointing out that an explanation is no longer necessary.  |
| Brynweir |
Posted - 21 Feb 2009 : 16:14:42
I agree with Markustay. "A god is a celestial being, despite it's alignment, and therefore any offspring it produces would be celestial in nature."
I also think that over time the alignment and actions would take a toll on appearance, but there's no real reason (technically) an aasimar can't be evil - they just tend to take the good alignment as that's the influence from the parent.
|
| sfdragon |
Posted - 21 Feb 2009 : 03:15:18
I heard that Xvim was a cambion as well a Half-fiend.
which next in line would be Tiefling and the fiendish template...... or so I Believe |
| Rabiesbunny |
Posted - 20 Feb 2009 : 23:48:35
quote:
Originally posted by The Sage
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
I'm seen references to Xvim being the offspring of Bane and a demon, or Bane and a paladin... I remember that in a previous discussion, I figured out a way to reconcile both of those ideas. 
Yeah, I liked your idea about "the woman not being a demoness until after her liaison with Bane... Something about carrying his child pushed her over the edge, so to speak."
As I recall, I noted that the presence of the demon seed in the mother's womb was actually the aspect responsible for her ultimate transformation. Not a fiend in the truest sense of the word, but rather a fiend by association. This would make Bane the one and only influence in the generation of Xvim.
It would also work to resolve some of the theories surrounding Xvim's mother and why her presence or nature wasn't anything of any real consequence in the Realmslore.
...I am suddenly VERY SAD I was not here for that conversation.  |
| The Sage |
Posted - 20 Feb 2009 : 23:31:13
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
I'm seen references to Xvim being the offspring of Bane and a demon, or Bane and a paladin... I remember that in a previous discussion, I figured out a way to reconcile both of those ideas.
Yeah, I liked your idea about "the woman not being a demoness until after her liaison with Bane... Something about carrying his child pushed her over the edge, so to speak."
As I recall, I noted that the presence of the demon seed in the mother's womb was actually the aspect responsible for her ultimate transformation. Not a fiend in the truest sense of the word, but rather a fiend by association. This would make Bane the one and only influence in the generation of Xvim.
It would also work to resolve some of the theories surrounding Xvim's mother and why her presence or nature wasn't anything of any real consequence in the Realmslore.
|
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 20 Feb 2009 : 23:12:29
I'm seen references to Xvim being the offspring of Bane and a demon, or Bane and a paladin... I remember that in a previous discussion, I figured out a way to reconcile both of those ideas. |
| The Sage |
Posted - 20 Feb 2009 : 23:03:01
quote:
Originally posted by Kuje
Xvim was originally a tiefling. :)
quote:
Originally posted by Rabiesbunny
Perhaps if it was created with a celestial - Xvim was created out of a union between Bane and a Demon, which is decidedly Chaotic. So maybe it's referring to, say, if Cyric wormed his way into a celestial's skirt?
Indeed. And Eric, in his "Westgate Dynasties" reference [a web enhancement for Cloak & Dagger:- see here], tells us that during the time Xvim ruled Westgate he was "A cambion from another plane, who claims to be the son of Bane, god of tyranny." |
| Kuje |
Posted - 20 Feb 2009 : 17:57:42
Indeed it does and Cyric, plus a few other deities, are also listed.
quote:
Originally posted by Ardashir
Didn't 3.5's Races of Faerun state that there is a line of tieflings descended from Beshaba who commonly share her snow-white hair and antlers?
|
| Ardashir |
Posted - 20 Feb 2009 : 17:40:47
Didn't 3.5's Races of Faerun state that there is a line of tieflings descended from Beshaba who commonly share her snow-white hair and antlers?
|
| Kuje |
Posted - 20 Feb 2009 : 17:36:09
quote:
Originally posted by Alisttair
quote:
Originally posted by The Red Walker
quote:
Originally posted by Alisttair
Agreed with Kuje, with Neutral deities possibly having both Aasimar and Tiefling offspring.
Asslings or Tiefimars??
HAHAHHA! I like that Red. |
| Kuje |
Posted - 20 Feb 2009 : 17:35:24
Xvim was originally a tiefling. :)
quote:
Originally posted by Rabiesbunny
Perhaps if it was created with a celestial - Xvim was created out of a union between Bane and a Demon, which is decidedly Chaotic. So maybe it's referring to, say, if Cyric wormed his way into a celestial's skirt?
|
| Markustay |
Posted - 20 Feb 2009 : 17:31:54
Although lore-wise Kuje makes sense - and I'd probably rule it that way myself if it ever came up IG - mechanically I'd say they could very well be Aasimars.
A god is a celestial being, despite it's alignment, and therefore any offspring it produces would be celestial in nature.
So, mechanically I'd have to agreee with the rules, but like I said, I'd probably run it the other way m'self - sometimes common-sense takes precedent over rules.
Of course, I personally think the only difference between Fiends and Celestials are their alignments - their outward appearance is merely a physical representation of the ugliness inside.
Ergo, a fallen celestial would start appearing fiendish, and an 'enlightened' fiend would begin to look... pleasant. This not only fits with typical Judaeo-Christian mythology (the fall of Satan), but also shoe-horns well into D&D lore (the fall of Lolth to Demon-status, etc...). Although this normally only applies to creatures of 'Exarch' status or higher - like fiends, celestial, demigods, etc.. - we also see a bit of this creeping-in with mortals as well. The rules regarding corruption appear to be a mortal version of this, and we can see some of it in 2e's Complete Book of Necromancers, wherein powerful Neromages and death-priests begin looking a little... feral... from their usage of evil magics.
So with powerful beings, the outside is just a reflection of what's on the inside.
Just my take for what it's worth. |
| Alisttair |
Posted - 20 Feb 2009 : 16:01:01
quote:
Originally posted by The Red Walker
quote:
Originally posted by Alisttair
Agreed with Kuje, with Neutral deities possibly having both Aasimar and Tiefling offspring.
Asslings or Tiefimars??
|
| The Red Walker |
Posted - 20 Feb 2009 : 15:34:03
quote:
Originally posted by Alisttair
Agreed with Kuje, with Neutral deities possibly having both Aasimar and Tiefling offspring.
Asslings or Tiefimars?? |
| Alisttair |
Posted - 20 Feb 2009 : 15:31:30
Agreed with Kuje, with Neutral deities possibly having both Aasimar and Tiefling offspring. |
| Rabiesbunny |
Posted - 20 Feb 2009 : 13:55:11
Perhaps if it was created with a celestial - Xvim was created out of a union between Bane and a Demon, which is decidedly Chaotic. So maybe it's referring to, say, if Cyric wormed his way into a celestial's skirt? |
| The Sage |
Posted - 20 Feb 2009 : 13:27:16
Kuje has the right of it.
Though, I would allow something like this *if* the creation theory behind the evil descendent was creative enough for me to generate a fairly entertaining campaign around it.
Otherwise, I'd leave this kinda thing to the upper planar types only.
|
| sfdragon |
Posted - 20 Feb 2009 : 08:26:00
quote:
Originally posted by Nerfed2Hell
I concur with Kuje.
2nded |
| Nerfed2Hell |
Posted - 20 Feb 2009 : 08:02:18
I concur with Kuje. |
| Kuje |
Posted - 20 Feb 2009 : 07:34:27
If it was me, or my campaign, I'd say no. Offspring from evil beings, even deities, are tieflings.
But this is me. Aasimar, to me, are upper planars and offspring from good aligned beings, again, even deities. |
|
|
