| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Fellfire |
Posted - 03 Apr 2011 : 07:35:49
These creatures have been mentioned oft of late. What do we know of these monsters? Was their first appearance truly in City of the Spider Queen? I also read the Wiki link provided by Arik. Any appearances besides the 4e MM and the Unclean novel? To me they would make great servitors of the Beast aspect of Kanchelsis. Of course, I'm partial to that guy and continue to search for more lore.
edit: Sorry, Sage. I meant to put this in General.
Mod Edit: The "Sages of Realmslore" shelf is actually more appropriate for this kind of discussion.  |
| 9 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Markustay |
Posted - 09 Apr 2011 : 01:42:46
Strangely, if you read 2e Lords of Darkness, vampires turn mortals into other, lesser vampires, but Succubus turn mortals into greater vampires.
Seriously - read the section on vampires and the two brothers - and that's not just D&D canon, that's FR canon.
And I read that after my last post, and this discussion was underway. Apparently, I wasn't far off the mark - perhaps succubi are what vampires ascend to when they become fiends.
So fiends with vampiric qualities - and there are several - may be highly evolved forms of some other vampiric creatures. It would make sense if you were to become a fiend, why would you lose all the 'goodies' from what you were before?
And the very first step of a mortal becoming a fiend (would that be 'descending'?) would be to die, and then wind-up in hell (or the Abyss, etc), and I think 'undead' pretty-much got the first part covered already. |
| Barastir |
Posted - 06 Apr 2011 : 21:48:09
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
Technically, Myrkul can appear as a handsome young man, if he so willed it (and was still a god, of course). Ergo, being 'undead' (as in the case of so many gods and fiend-lords) is little more then mortal perception.
Well, vampires are undead and can appear as handsome men or beautiful women. But I think Myrkul is a deity, and that is beyond this discussion. Besides, being a powerful mage (even if he was a necromancer) Myrkul could use spells to appear as a handsome mortal.
But my first question about vampire fiends was that maybe it could be impossible to one creature have both powers and abilities at the same time. In this way, a fiend could easily have been a vampire before being destructed and rising as a mane or larva... But a succubus would not turn into a vampire if she was bitten by mortal nosferatu. |
| Markustay |
Posted - 06 Apr 2011 : 20:05:17
quote:
Originally posted by Barastir
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
In fact, now that I think about it.... a person who DIES and becomes a lemure or mane has a VERY distant chance of rising through the ranks and becoming a real fiend. Since they are DEAD, but can become a fiend, isn't that very close to fiends being 'undead'?
In many cultures, Demons (& devils) are considered 'evil spirits' - both require an 'Exorcism' (ghosts and fiends), both can be driven-off by priests, both react violently to 'good' relics and divine magics.
Following this line of reasoning, angels and other celestials could also could be considered undead? Another question is: if a fiend is a sort of undead, so they theoretically should not be vampirized, right? Otherwise, I could have a lich turned into a vampire lich, for example... However, we do have the "visage" demonic undead in 2e.
Thats precisely how I would run it - becoming a fiend is one of the highest forms of 'undeath'.
And yes, Celestials/Good outsiders would be positive-energy undead, which is why I have such a hard time with the term 'undead' - it is an oxymoron. They are not alive, therefore they are DEAD, by definition. I like Eberron's 'Unliving' - that suits me better (although mechanically I would use it differently).
Dependent upon when you got each 'undead' template (some would 'rank' higher then others), you could be one thing first (a vampire or a lich, for instance), and then become demonic later, which would over-ride your type for a new one. In this system, I've extended the type-pyramid to have layers within itself. In this way, we could explain why some beings are both Divine/Fiendish, and yet still 'undead' (they were undead first, before their type was over-written). The funny thing is, we know from RAW that divine beings and most fiends do not have to appear the way we expect them to, which leads me to believe there is a simple 'default manifestation' that mortals see (what the EXPECT to see), which is oly over-ridden when the god cares to devote a wee bit of energy into doing so (which they wouldn't bother with most of the time).
Technically, Myrkul can appear as a handsome young man, if he so willed it (and was still a god, of course). Ergo, being 'undead' (as in the case of so many gods and fiend-lords) is little more then mortal perception. A being of pure energy (spirit/god/etc) is no longer subject to physical 'types', and what we 'see' is just a hold-over from when they had a corporeal form.
@Arik - can I have the recipe for 'Troll Turnovers' (and would they be hard to digest, all things considered?)  |
| Ayrik |
Posted - 06 Apr 2011 : 19:04:54
Orcus, Vecna, Kanchelsis/Mastraacht, Mellifleur, Falazure, Myrkul, Thanatos, Kyuss, Evening Glory, and others are individual outsiders (archfiends, deities, powers) who are also undead. Vestiges and lost/dead/dormant gods (such as Karsus and Moander) might be "undead" in philosophical contexts but not insofar as D&D game mechanics and templates. (I'm not certain if undeath/vampirism is afflicted onto blood fiends or inherent from their inception, nor if there's any meaningful distinction.)
Higher orders of undeath can apparently apply to any mortal, fiend, deity, etc. In short, any (presumably sentient) creature which starts alive might become unalive. That said, it's quite possible that unusual or deliberate methods of propagation might be required. Vampires (along with liches, ghosts, etc) might be a "natural" expression of life beyond death which emerges in a spontaneous and convergent manner everywhere in the D&D universe (just as do humans, elves, drow, etc).
Planescape lore asserts that all fiends originated as lemures/manes who progress through through the ranks. The overwhelming majority of these unfortunate once-souls are instead consumed or destroyed irrevocably by the fiends, hags, and other evil entities; as often to gain sustenance as to simply inflict meaningless torment. The extraordinary few who do progress up the fiendish food chain (ie, those with a slim chance in Hell) probably do not retain any semblance of their original identity; they are transformed by the pits and the torments, their pitiful human lifetimes are overshadowed by countless millennia of fiendish malificence, they essence of the lower planes is refined and concentrated within them. |
| Barastir |
Posted - 06 Apr 2011 : 12:17:11
quote:
Originally posted by Markustay
In fact, now that I think about it.... a person who DIES and becomes a lemure or mane has a VERY distant chance of rising through the ranks and becoming a real fiend. Since they are DEAD, but can become a fiend, isn't that very close to fiends being 'undead'?
In many cultures, Demons (& devils) are considered 'evil spirits' - both require an 'Exorcism' (ghosts and fiends), both can be driven-off by priests, both react violently to 'good' relics and divine magics.
Following this line of reasoning, angels and other celestials could also could be considered undead? Another question is: if a fiend is a sort of undead, so they theoretically should not be vampirized, right? Otherwise, I could have a lich turned into a vampire lich, for example... However, we do have the "visage" demonic undead in 2e. |
| Markustay |
Posted - 05 Apr 2011 : 03:29:18
Now you see, I would argue that they are mutually inclusive.
Natural creatures native to the prime material plane have a life. Fiends were never 'alive' in the same sense as prime material folk are (no outsider is), therefor I suggest that both are unliving.
Or, in other words, they both need to get a life.
And since mortals can become fiends (through a very long, slow process), perhaps undead can as well? It could explain some things. In fact, now that I think about it.... a person who DIES and becomes a lemure or mane has a VERY distant chance of rising through the ranks and becoming a real fiend. Since they are DEAD, but can become a fiend, isn't that very close to fiends being 'undead'?
In many cultures, Demons (& devils) are considered 'evil spirits' - both require an 'Exorcism' (ghosts and fiends), both can be driven-off by priests, both react violently to 'good' relics and divine magics.
I'm not really seeing a whole lot of difference between the two groups - who's to say that ALL fiends weren't living mortals at one time? Fiends just may be the 'ultimate' incarnation of undead. |
| Shemmy |
Posted - 03 Apr 2011 : 21:08:18
They first showed up in one of the 3.x MMs as far as I recall.
One can argue in circles if they can actually be considered fiends, since fiend and undead are effectively mutually exclusive. |
| Ayrik |
Posted - 03 Apr 2011 : 09:41:33
I only know what I've learned from reading RLB's Haunted Lands trilogy and various wiki sites about blood fiends and Tsagoth.
Blood fiends are typically listed as "other", abberations outside of all other fiend groupings. I suspect they were created by dumping a basic (human) vampiric template on a fiend or half-fiend. They're probably listed as "undead" more for attempted conformity than anything else, it seems only partially appropriate. They are already fiends/outsiders so I doubt that their "undead" status ever really comes into play, unless one is perhaps trying to manipulate them as undead on their plane of origin. |
| Fellfire |
Posted - 03 Apr 2011 : 07:56:43
Also, the FR Wiki entry for Tsagoth lists him as undead. I'm assuming this is just because of the somewhat inconsistent nature of those sites. |
|
|
