|
6 months ago ::
Dec 06, 2012 - 7:11AM
#71
|
|
|
Does anyone know where the word "eladrin" came from in the first place? As an amateur Tolkien scholar, I suspect it is an intentional corruption of the word "eldarin," referring specifically to the languages of the Eldar, but also a generic term to refer to things, "of the Eldar."
Kalex the Omen Dungeonmaster Extraordinaire Concerning Player Rules Bias
Show
Gaining victory through rules bias is a hollow victory and they know it.
The argument goes, that some idiot at the table might claim that because there is a "default" that is the only true way to play D&D. An idiotic misconception that should be quite easy to disprove just by reading the rules, coming to these forums, or sending a quick note off to Customer Support and sharing the inevitable response with the group. BTW, I'm not just talking about Next when I say this. Of course, D&D has always been this way since at least the late 70's when I began playing.
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Dec 06, 2012 - 8:16AM
#72
|
|
|
What I really want is the concept of 4th E eladrin even though it has a different name.
In all honesty, 4e eladrin and the upper planes versions are almost litterally the same thing. Fey-like creatures living in another plane that range in power from normal mortal power to near god-like power. Both are heavily influenced by the Sidhe from Celtic mythology. All that differs is the plane they live on and that the mortal-power level ones can be PCs in 4e 
Pretty much, although not visible in the 4e phb book, you could see this in the mm, for all intents and purposes the only real difference is two where they live and the alignment system in the description of these two. Of course this could be real easily fixed by WOTC avoiding any mention of the planar cosmology in the MM.
Calling them grey elves would do them a disservice, well the concept is similar they are not the grey elves.
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Dec 06, 2012 - 9:32AM
#73
|
Date Joined:
Oct 30, 2012
|
Same. Along with #1 is the fact that monster powers and PC powers are balanced using different scales. A good example of this is daily powers. A wizard with a daily spell is balanced by the fact that they have an entire day worth of encounters. Give the same spell to a monster and it gets more powerful simply because the monster has no reason to NOT use it against the PCs. In other words, while many people rail against the 5MWD, monsters use this tactic in every fight.
Two things pointed out on another forum(s) -
* With so many monsters having spell-like abilities, we're not fighting devils and teaming up with angels; we're fighting refluffed wizards. Wizards with a set spelllist.
* Since angels have the tongues power, does that mean a wizard can use silence or a dispell to shut them up?
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Dec 06, 2012 - 9:58AM
#74
|
- Forum Guide
- Hero Craftsman Gold Medalist
- Master Dungeon Master
Date Joined:
Jun 23, 2005
|
* Since angels have the tongues power, does that mean a wizard can use silence or a dispell to shut them up?
From the article: "Their speech can be understood by any creature that has a language (as though using the tongues spell)"
The "as though" clearly refer to the angelic language's understandability. Whether that is a magical effect that can be suppressed would be up to the DM. (I would think it is.) Since it's not actually the tongues spell, but rather an innate ability of the angel, the DC for dispelling it would be 10+the angel's HD.
Silence should work whether or not the angel's language is magical, though. Just as it would work on Orcus and Pelor.
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Dec 06, 2012 - 9:58AM
#75
|
Date Joined:
Mar 26, 2007
|
I really wouldn't be okay with putting the Primal Spirits in the Outlands. The Primal Spirits are bound to the mortal world and don't belong in the Wheel at all. They're not True Neutral, they're Unaligned, and I really hope Next gets that.
Exactly, why on earth (accidental pun) would primal spirits of the world be kicking it on an outer plane (and as exemplars)?
Rillmani are great, IME, they feature quite heavily in my campaign, some people just don't get it, I guess.
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Dec 06, 2012 - 9:58AM
#76
|
Date Joined:
Aug 31, 2008
|
Same. Along with #1 is the fact that monster powers and PC powers are balanced using different scales. A good example of this is daily powers. A wizard with a daily spell is balanced by the fact that they have an entire day worth of encounters. Give the same spell to a monster and it gets more powerful simply because the monster has no reason to NOT use it against the PCs. In other words, while many people rail against the 5MWD, monsters use this tactic in every fight.
Two things pointed out on another forum(s) -
* With so many monsters having spell-like abilities, we're not fighting devils and teaming up with angels; we're fighting refluffed wizards. Wizards with a set spelllist.
* Since angels have the tongues power, does that mean a wizard can use silence or a dispell to shut them up?
Regarding the first one, that is exactly how I feel. To me, a creature like an Angel loses some of its mysterious coolness factor if you simply say, "It casts the following spells as a wizard (or cleric) of level X". I much prefer something like 4E, in which monsters had completely unique powers.
In terms of the second part, it would be awesome if Supernal was so powerful that not even a silence spell would be enough. Maybe it could stop the words of a lesser Angel (a Deva, perhaps), but I picture the words of a Solar as being able to rip through such puny mortal magic with ease.
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Dec 06, 2012 - 7:18PM
#77
|
Date Joined:
Oct 17, 2007
|
Eladrin: They're basically the same thing in Planescape and 4ed. One is more CG than CN, and the other is closer to the Material World, but by themselves, they fulfil that otherworldly, more 'true', elf archetype.
Archon: The elemental archons fulfilled a niche that the elemental planes needed (sentinent elemental soldiers), while the celestial archons share their niche with several similar creature groups. I think that the Celestial Archons need to justify their existence in connection to other angelic LG outsiders.
Archons, like Devils and Demons, are all over the place in theme and look; which wouldn't be a problem if Angels didn't occupy a more readily-recognized position in people's minds. If there were some kind of LG version of the 9 Hells, where the 7 Arch-Archons enforce goodness regardless of the will of Deities, then you might have something.
As it stands, Elemental Archons have fired people's imaginations, and the Celestial Archons have failed to be excite any kind of fanbase in and of themselves. If the Celestial Archons want their name back, they need to earn it back.
Deva: As above. The 4ed Deva, with its connections to the Rakshasa, really held its own flavourwise. Planescape Devas are (wait for it!) Angels with a different name. If they want to have the 'Deva' name, they have to give me a reason why we need to have Angel-angels and Deva-angels in the cosmology.
Angels: I have no problem with Angels having flowery, non-utilitarian names. Just like how Devil and Demons have flowery and simple names (Gelugon/Ice Devil), I can see a Planetar Angel also going by the title "Angel of War."
I'm also okay with mixing human-like faces with wispy energy faces. Perhaps the more humane and accessible-to-mortals angels keep a human face, while the all-business angels let their true faces show.
Overall, I'm pleased that WotC is thinking of keeping good things from 4ed, even if they want the Great Wheel to be the default.
"People want balance but can't accept this homogenization that occurs as a result of that balance being implemented. then they complain that the fighter is weaker than the wizard ad nauseam.: - Teitan
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Dec 06, 2012 - 9:06PM
#78
|
|
|
I like Inevitables as the "face" of LN. I think the creature designs are absolutely incredible on them, and they have more natural excuses to go out into the world and run into adventurers than Modrons. I like Modrons as a thing that exists, but I'm all up for Inevitables being the primary avatars of law.
I'm much less hot on Slaadi. It's not really clear to me why the avatars of chaos itself are just weird frog dudes with marginally unusual life cycles. They (unlike the better-designed fiends) have no resonance, they aren't (subjectively) very cool, and they just on the whole really don't hold their own alongside fiends, angels and inevitables. I think that one of three things should be done there. Either Slaadi should be comprehensively redesigned so they're less silly and given a dramatically different story more befitting beings of pure chaos, a new race should be created that better embodies chaos and Slaadi should be demoted to "yeah, some things that live on the chaotic neutral plane", or another group of creatures should step in as the role of primary avatars of chaos - ideally something that has some resonance, like angels and non-terrible fiends.
Dwarves invented beer so they could toast to their axes. Dwarves invented axes to kill people and take their beer.
"Feel free to claim I said anything you like. How's someone going to call you out on it? Are they going to be all like, 'I know all of the things that Gary said, and that's not one of them?'"
- Gary Gygax
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Dec 06, 2012 - 11:45PM
#79
|
|
|
I like Inevitables as the "face" of LN. I think the creature designs are absolutely incredible on them, and they have more natural excuses to go out into the world and run into adventurers than Modrons. I like Modrons as a thing that exists, but I'm all up for Inevitables being the primary avatars of law.
I'm much less hot on Slaadi. It's not really clear to me why the avatars of chaos itself are just weird frog dudes with marginally unusual life cycles. They (unlike the better-designed fiends) have no resonance, they aren't (subjectively) very cool, and they just on the whole really don't hold their own alongside fiends, angels and inevitables. I think that one of three things should be done there. Either Slaadi should be comprehensively redesigned so they're less silly and given a dramatically different story more befitting beings of pure chaos, a new race should be created that better embodies chaos and Slaadi should be demoted to "yeah, some things that live on the chaotic neutral plane", or another group of creatures should step in as the role of primary avatars of chaos - ideally something that has some resonance, like angels and non-terrible fiends.
I'd love for them to go all Dischordian and create a chaos-avatar race called the Erisians. I actually have already used them to some extent. They're a race that seeks to return the universe to its basal state by imposing paradoxes and contradictions wherever they go (without ever going anywhere). It makes for all kinds of hilarity, and the best thing is, if you get stumped on what they're likely to do, you can just whip out the Principia Discordia, Illuminatus Trilogy, or any sort of Chaos Magick spellbook and go to town :-)
Kallisti y'all.
|
|
|
|
6 months ago ::
Dec 07, 2012 - 12:22AM
#80
|
Date Joined:
Apr 21, 2003
|
Does anyone know where the word "eladrin" came from in the first place?
You'd have to ask Rich Baker, as he wrote the Planescape Monstrous Compendium II, which is where they were first written up in 2e.
Shemeska the Marauder, Freelancer 5 / Yugoloth 10
|
|
|
