| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Fellfire |
Posted - 29 Nov 2010 : 10:38:24
Kyton, Chain Devil. Anybody got any in-depth information on this enigmatic monster? They're not devils but dwell in Hell, I'm still checking on some old PS and newer PF tomes, and I'm aware of the Hellchain Weaver from Dragon #343, but that's about it, a few brief references here and there. Surely there is some erudite sage of planar lore who has done some research, such as..where are they from? Are they precursors to baatezu the way obyrith are to tanari? Who are their mysterious leaders and what are their goals? Why do they have no representation among the greater powers of Hell? (The Princes, Black Nine, Dark Eight...) What is/was their role in the Blood War? I'm curious about any/all of it. |
| 30 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Arian Dynas |
Posted - 11 Feb 2015 : 21:46:46
quote:
Originally posted by Ayrik
I don't quite understand your distinction.
Devils were introduced in the 1E Fiend Folio monster book; the name was amended to Baatezu in 2E, and Baatezu were firmly established as a type of fiend in subsequent 2E Planescape lore.
I've recently read Faces of Evil: The Fiends and Hellbound: The Blood War, in particular all the sections relating to Baatezu (they relate to my own project). No distinction is made in those books - Baatezu are always referred as such. In fact, the planar cant calls out the fact that "Devil" nomenclature is used only by the most stubbornly parochial fools, vastly greater in ignorance than even the normal varieties of clueless primes. The Baatezu themselves tend to hate being called Devils and usually get very angry about it (and so of course the Tanar'ri perpetuate the terminology).
My books do state that the plane of Baator was already inhabited "by a race of powerful, unknown creatures" before the first Baatezu arrived. The larvae of these natives were somehow formed from the very essence of Baator (instead of the "normal" method of larvae being formed from the souls of lawful evil mortals). Whoever/whatever they were, the Baatezu exterminated or absorbed them entirely. Sometimes larvae will naturally spawn nupperibos (apparently the "young" of this lost Baatorian race); the Baatezu see to it that larvae aren't left unsupervised and tend to herd nupperibos for demotion back down to lemures (so that they will die or "properly" evolve into Baatezu spinagons instead of repopulating the lost Baatorian race). Some of the most ancient and powerful Baatezu may have originally been members of this lost race reforged into the Baatezu form. The distinction is meaningless; nupperibo and lemures are treated as least Baatezu and that's the end of it. In any event, it is noted that this race are also definitely not "Devils".
Baatezu are described quite fully in these tomes and many of your questions are answered. Without these books you can draw from the monster entries well enough. The normal course of things is that lawful evil souls and spirits are formed into larvae which can die on Baator (and be forever lost), die elsewhere (and be reformed again as larvae on Baator), or be promoted to greater rank. Each promotion basically involves a long time (sometimes years or centuries) of torment in some kind of pit of pure evil nastiness, and those who survive emerge with their bodies, minds, and essences fully reshaped into their new Baatezu form. Baatezu society is rigidly structured, there are no ways to "cheat" the system and no ways for incompetent Baatezu to be promoted. Ever.
Erinyes are just one of the 13 Baatezu stations and (like all the others) they serve very specific purposes within the Baatezu hierarchy. Erinyes are formed from promoted Abishai, Kocrachons, or sometimes any of the lesser stations; they can employ disguises of beauty but are certainly not descended from outside the Baatezu ranks.
Kytons are described in Planes of Law as a two page monster entry. They are carefully not called Chain Devils in the writing.
To expand on this, you might want to look at Zargon; word holds that he was the king of these proto-Baatorians. |
| Shemmy |
Posted - 09 Feb 2015 : 16:24:36
quote:
Originally posted by Fellfire
Shemmy, or anybody else who may know, I remember PF had big plans for the kyton. Did they follow through? If so, can you point me in the right direction?
They've done some amazing stuff on kytons in PF. They're presented as exiles or escaped prisoners from the Hells, obsessed with pain and mortification (think the Cenobites from Hellraiser). They're now most strongly associated with the Plane of Shadows and as servitors on the god Zon-Kuthon (who might have turned evil as a result of their tender touch, so to speak).
The pathfinder wiki (not the defunct wikia site) should have books to reference. |
| Fellfire |
Posted - 06 Feb 2015 : 02:23:54
Shemmy, or anybody else who may know, I remember PF had big plans for the kyton. Did they follow through? If so, can you point me in the right direction? |
| Joran Nobleheart |
Posted - 28 Oct 2011 : 04:09:16
quote:
Originally posted by Fellfire
Cambion? I thought cambion were half-demon, like Kaanyr Vhok and the tunnaruk, or Dlardrageth's and the fey-ri, are all technically cambion. Tiefling seems to be the new catch all term for those of demonic (not devilish/diabolic) decent. I'm reading that the term cambion is now used to describe the half-diabolic (devil) instead, but where are you getting that??
Remember that the fey'ri are elven tieflings, and tanarukk are orc tieflings. Also, if the original poster is still looking for information of Kytons, might I suggest this...?
http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/monsters/kyton.html#_kyton |
| Shemmy |
Posted - 28 Oct 2011 : 03:50:55
quote:
Originally posted by Marc
''ENTIRE material planes worth of their followers are murdered'' - never heard of that
Planets, not planes. Calling planets "material planes" or "alternate material planes" has been used at scattered points through the years in a source or two, though IMO it's needlessly confusing.
I think he's referring to a good bit of 2e Planescape lore involving the fiends making a point to the gods to stay out of the Blood War/fiendish politics by obliterating their followers' faith on one world and starving a deity to death in the process. There was also some insinuation of wholesale fiendish slaughter of worlds worth of mortals to do the same. Plus there's references to entire worlds being subsumed into the Abyss and/or Baator (in 2e and 3e as well). |
| Marc |
Posted - 27 Oct 2011 : 08:18:32
''ENTIRE material planes worth of their followers are murdered'' - never heard of that
|
| .seth |
Posted - 26 Oct 2011 : 09:59:56
it is true that cambions and alu-fiends are offspring of succubi. tieflings are like third/fourth generation fiends with blood too weak to matter anymore. they might as well be fancy elves. the rest though......
complete blasphemy. erinyes are not succubi. grazzt is not a devil. asmodeus might be awesome, but that pact story is full of new edition bs. you guys seriously don't know the origin of the fiends? well you are in for a special treat because i made a forum account just to school you kids on how it REALLY happened, which can't be undone by some illiterate moron suddenly deciding to change everything for no reason *cough* 4e *cough*
in the beginning there was EVIL. it was NOT law first. the baernaloths were the first to see that a new tactic was needed to ensure the victory of the primal force they represented and spawned the yugoloth race in response. apomps tried to get in on the action by creating geherelths but got tragically shut down because his creations were tainted with law and chaos. apparently he was not banished soon enough, and all the yugoloths were contaminated.
luckily the general of gehenna, first ultroloth out of the gates, created a powerful artifact called the heart of darkness and purged his people. all the law slime they could scrape up they dropped off in baator, and all the chaos cream they tossed into the abyss. larva or what have you, the native residents of those planes, absorbed the delicious yugoloth juice and eventually evolved into the demons and devils we all know and love.
angels attempt to interfere in the blood war. all but a handful are slaughtered as the three factions of fiend immediately turn on them. further expeditions are planned, but are never realized. the angels realize now that they must focus fire, but their law/chaos axis prevents them from reaching consensus on which fiend needs to go down first.
deities intervene, but ENTIRE material planes worth of their followers are murdered or converted to fiend worship and their empty hush is left drifting in the astral as a reminder to stay the hell out of it.
in order to one day regain the reigns and take back command over their "offspring" the baernaloths had devised an ingenious long term plot from the beginning. an angel, i think a solar or planetar but even i am sketchy here, was corrupted with terrible dire secrets and put to a special purpose.
becoming a twisted being known as the maledur et kavek, he is the nexus that makes all fiendish teleports and summons function. he is told the true name of each and every demon, and present day pc's are "offered" a xanatos gambit to dump him in the river styx to purge him of them along with the immense guilt of his sins. should they succeed, the yugoloths unite the warring factions by restoring instant planar travel only to fiends swearing fealty to their cause and put the rest of the multiverse in a Koybioushi Maru. |
| Ayrik |
Posted - 06 Dec 2010 : 14:41:24
Oh, I'm not entirely sure ... if only a few of those chains didn't obcure important details. |
| Kajehase |
Posted - 06 Dec 2010 : 05:30:59
The one in the Pathfinder RPG Bestiary definately is. |
| Markustay |
Posted - 06 Dec 2010 : 04:40:07
Maybe they are not any of those things - perhaps, like the Kytons, the Succubi are really Baatorans (Hellions, whatever).
So 'Succubi' and 'Erinyes' are just what the Devils and Demons call them - maybe they have their own, secret name, and their own agenda.
Are their any female Kytons? If not, maybe we just found them.  |
| Ayrik |
Posted - 06 Dec 2010 : 00:24:36
Well, nudging back to OP ... devil, demon, and daemon are used in 1E; baatezu, tanar'ri, and yugoloth in 2E. Is there any distinction between devil and baatezu in 3E or beyond? Does the TSR/Wizbro canon use the terms interchangeably or do the terms (even just once) refer to different species? 3rd party sources can define the terms any way they like, or even use them in a clumsy manner, so I don't really consider them canonical except for some instances (like Pathfinder) where they are popularly seen as equivalent or superior to the "official" D&D product line.
A baatezu is a devil and a devil is a baatezu, yes? "Chain devil" definitely sounds better than "Chain baatezu". Kytons may be a quasi-baatezu flavour of LE "devils" (just as nupperibos are quasi-baatezus and gehreleths are quasi-yugoloths). Any other differences? |
| Razz |
Posted - 05 Dec 2010 : 23:55:41
It's been established there're two sets, one lawful and one chaotic. There's even erinyes and succubi NPCs. There was absolutely no story reason why they suddenly merged.
Were the erinyes that deceitful that they managed, for untold eons, to disguise themselves as succubi in the Abyss in order to subvert the demons and gather information from the demon lords they served? Or were the succubi erinyes that turned chaotic? What caused the succubi to go back to being lawful devils? Were they outed by a yugoloth snitch?
It's as bad as the whole "demons are also elementals" lore they unnecessarily shoved into D&D. The two were never the same. My problem has always been the way they handled the cosmology, as in "Oh this is the way things have ALWAYS been, you just didn't know, despite the fact some of you were DMs and should've known all along."
But this is going too far off topic. To get back on point, my original post was only trying to point out that the lore from the first 3.5 editions have been very consistent with very little, and rather easily fixable, inconsistencies. Whenever we bring 4e lore into the picture, it really does just confuse and muddy things up way too much. For this particular discussion, it's doing just that because of the subject matter. |
| Ayrik |
Posted - 05 Dec 2010 : 22:36:15
The Erinyes Baatezu-serving Succubi change does remove a bit of "needless" redundancy. Seducer fiends designed with a Tanar'ri template being paired against (roughly identical) seducer fiends designed with a Baatezu template seems a little conveniently contrived. I've said it before: there's no requirement for arbitrarily pleasing balance and symmetry to exist on the planes. Having their origins described as fallen celestials is sensible enough. Removing one or the other is not particularly objectionable to me.
I don't much like the idea of them being treated as a "single" fiend subspecies which serves whichever side appeals most to their individual alignment inclinations. It would be much simpler (and I think more consistent) to just merge them in with the Yugoloths instead. Baatezu and Tanar'ri are idealogically opposed at every level (aside from sharing great evil), so it seems to me that each side maintaining their own harems of "shared" fiendish agents is a bit ridiculous and improbable. If nothing else, I imagine the Baatezu would force their succubi to comply with their species norm, reshaping or adapting them as they see necessary, probably so that they would be "stronger" than their Tanar'ri counterparts. As a unique form of fallen celestials, succubi are not required to "fit in" with the other characteristic fiendish varieties; being creatures of "pure evil" allows them to function as agents for both sides of the Blood War. It does not constrain them into the mindset of either side; they might be drawn towards pursuing any sort of evil ends, regardless of whether it's implemented as independently spontaneous "demonic" opportunism or as carefully executed sinister "devilish" plans.
The only good thing I can see from this new succubi distinction is the possibility of them being used by their Baatezu or Tanar'ri masters against their Blood War enemies. Again, this seems to better fit the mercenary 'loth disposition. A flaw in this idea is that these seducer fiends are "designed" with the very specific purpose of corrupting mortals, so they are just not the best agency to employ against enemy fiends. |
| Razz |
Posted - 05 Dec 2010 : 22:06:28
I would like to ignore the 4E Cosmology completely concerning this. As we all know, the first 3 editions all were close in D&D Mythology and Lore and varied very, little. When we bring 4E lore into this, you're just muddying things up to all Hells.
Devils were just that, inhabitants of the Nine Hells originally.
When the "D&D is Satan's game" era came along, they changed the named to Baatezu.
When that started to die down, there were baatezu and "other", as in inhabitants of Baator/Nine Hells that weren't baatezu. This happened in 2E. Near the end of 2E, the ancient race of baatorians were mentioned in the Infinite Staircase adventure. And then 3E came along, and distinctly called ALL inhabitants of the Nine Hells devils, but there was a specific race of them called baatezu.
Erinyes, originally, were part of the "upgrade" chain for baatezu. 3E didn't exactly retcon this, they added the fact that the FIRST erinyes were fallen angels. I am sure the process of creating more was mastered by the baatezu. (and, sorry Markustay, but taking out erinyes and replacing it with succubus was one of the huge highlights that irked me about 4E and its complete disregard for keeping established D&D lore; succubus have always been demons, always known to inhabit the Abyss, and suddenly the erinyes disappears as if they never existed and in comes succubi raising their hand, giggling, and saying,"Hi! I've always been a devil! Fooled you all, didn't I?" It was a pointless over-simplification that destroyed more than it did fix anything)
Kytons are devils, but not baatezu. They weren't created by Asmodeus and his minions, in other words. |
| Ayrik |
Posted - 05 Dec 2010 : 20:57:54
lol, thanks Quale.
I generally avoid the wayback machine unless I'm desperate after exploring all other options. It's a slow and cantankerous nuisance to navigate. |
| Quale |
Posted - 05 Dec 2010 : 20:49:30
what, you never used the wayback machine, ok, I'll just post it here |
| Markustay |
Posted - 05 Dec 2010 : 20:30:09
Hmmm... I tried several things - I think it has more to do with AOL then CK (apparently they don't want you to direct link without signing-up for their 'uber goodness') 
Just grab the 'e' in 'Edit' and copy the whole thing from there, and then delete that final 'e' after you paste it into your browser. |
| Ayrik |
Posted - 05 Dec 2010 : 18:18:51
I was wondering about that, too. Edit the quote to link to source, please, Quale? |
| Markustay |
Posted - 05 Dec 2010 : 18:16:19
Thank You, but this is the wrong thread. 
Gremlins, or do you have multiple tabs open? 
Blade Golems are also part of the Mageknight game - no fluff there, but at least you can get a mini for it (for your D&D game), and/or have a visual to show your players.
There is also a 'Golem Blade', and from what I can tell that is something from two other game systems (apparently a type of 'flying sword' with a primitive awareness).
But haven't yet come-across anything canon in D&D sources.... yet. There are a number of MM's I haven't looked through yet (like Ravenloft and PS), so I'll go through those later.
The Sword Golems in CC (that Quale mentioned) should work just fine for crunch, but it would be nice to get some FR fluff on the Blade Golems (and Illefarn as well).
Any designers about? (Looking at you, Krash  ) Whats the deal with Illefarn?
I am finding a bunch of conflicting info about the place (including where... and WHAT... it was). |
| Quale |
Posted - 05 Dec 2010 : 10:57:45
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
MT's off topic post
that's a great theory, explains a lot, don't know what to add |
| Quale |
Posted - 05 Dec 2010 : 10:31:10
ok, found it, supposedly the blade golems were in the Dragon Dice board game and converted here by Heregul
quote:
Golem, Blade
CLIMATE/TERRAIN: Any
FREQUENCY: Very rare
ORGANIZATION: Solitary
ACTIVITY CYCLE: Any
DIET: Nil
INTELLIGENCE: Non- (0)
TREASURE: Nil
ALIGNMENT: Neutral
NO. APPEARING: 1
ARMOR CLASS: 2
MOVEMENT: 12
HIT DICE: 15 (65 hp)
THAC0: 6
NO. OF ATTACKS: 2
DAMAGE/ATTACK: 1d12/1d12
SPECIAL ATTACKS: See below
SPECIAL DEFENSES: See below
MAGIC RESISTANCE: Nil
SIZE: M (7' tall)
MORALE: Fearless (19-20)
XP VALUE: 10,000
The blade golem is a 7 foot tall 600 pound creation designed to look like a human wearing full plate armor. It is animated by an elemental spirit, and remains under the control of the creator, or whomever the creator specifies can control it. Inside the thick armor of the golem is an empty interior. The body is held together soley by the elemental spirit which gives it life.
The body of the golem has dozens of spikes and sharp points protruding from it, and in place of hands, it has two swords extending from it's wrists.
Combat: While mindless in combat, blade golems are given an instinctive knowledge of swordplay and melee fighting. They are completely emotionless and cannot be swayed in any way from their instructions. Blade golems have a strength of 18, for purposes of Strength checks.
A weapon of +1 enchantment or better is required to damage a blade golem. They are also immune to most spells, although cold based spells will act as a slow spell on the golem for 1d4 rounds. Due to the many spikes protruding from it's body, an creature who attacks a blade golem with natural weapons (claw, bite, tail, etc.) or a weapon of size S has a 30% chance of contacting one of the razor sharp spikes, which inflict 1d4 points of damage on the attacker. This chance occurs regardless of whether the attacker hits or misses with the attack.
While most golems are slow and clumsy, the blade golem reacts and moves quite quickly. It can attack once per round with each of it's sword arms, inflicting 1d12 points of damage with each. In addition, if the golem beats the initiative roll of it's enemies by 3 or more points, it gains an additional attack that round with one of it's sword arms.
Habitat/Society: Golems are automatons, artificially created and under the direct control of their creator. They have no society and are not associated with any particular habitat. Blade golems were constructed as weapons in the great wars of Esfah.
Ecology: Created by humanoids as non-intelligent servants, blade golems have no role in ecology. They simply exist to follow the bidding of their master, and will continue to do so until they are destroyed.
alternatively, Creature Collection II has sword golems |
| Quale |
Posted - 05 Dec 2010 : 00:54:23
I don't think there are any official stats, I remember they were on an old Planescape site, long dead, not Mimir, but the one with the netbooks |
| Fellfire |
Posted - 04 Dec 2010 : 22:24:08
Twas mentioned at the end of the Bladeling entry in Planes of Law |
| Ayrik |
Posted - 04 Dec 2010 : 22:21:27
I believe all (or at least most) Iron Golems are always fashioned with a sword in hand; there's no reason it shouldn't be a shortsword. |
| Markustay |
Posted - 04 Dec 2010 : 21:58:25
As far as I can tell, it was created for the Neverwinter Nights game, and were used as guardians by ancient Illefarn (Under Illefarn only mentions a single Stone Golem, NO Blade Golems).
It appears to be a hybrid of a Helmed Horror and a clockwork swordsman.
Sorry - that all I got. If it appears in any sources other then the VG, I have no clue. Where did you see them mentioned in conjunction with the Bladelings?
EDIT: The entry for Iron Golems say they "sometimes carry a short sword in one hand" - it could actually be as simple as that. |
| Ayrik |
Posted - 04 Dec 2010 : 21:14:56
I can find no references to Blade Golems in my lore. Planes of Law is currently unavailable (on loan to one of my players, er well, the actual owner of all "my" planescape lore). |
| Fellfire |
Posted - 04 Dec 2010 : 20:35:18
Blade Golems? Planescapers, Anybody?
|
| Kno |
Posted - 30 Nov 2010 : 22:22:05
Kytons are perfect in Dambrath, my players called their city Jangling Hitler |
| Markustay |
Posted - 30 Nov 2010 : 20:43:27
The ebil Gremlin Most-High, Baadcôd, has launched what he calls his Operation Ignorance. It appears to be some sort of plan to rid the world of all knowledge, thus reducing civilized peoples to the same level of society as goblinoids.
The last few days on Lolth's Web... errr... the Internet... has shown me several sites that are behaving 'wonky'. It appears the gremlins are making some headway. 
Our only hope is to launch a counter-strike with our Doomsday weapon: Unleash The Hamster!!! |
| Fellfire |
Posted - 30 Nov 2010 : 19:57:06
Yes, I have the Chain Golem in my file. I read in the Planes of Law; Bladeling entry about Blade Golems, anybody know where those are to be found?
What is going on w these posts? Kilvan's was not there when I wrote this. Anyway, Thanks Kilvan I got that same info from PFSRD. |
|
|
