I've read the encyclopedia entry on aphanacts, but I was wondering if someone could tell me more about them?
Also, does the Dragon Magazine article in question give stats for them or just fluff?
Finally, what can you tell me about other races that are no longer extant (in large numbers), such as the progenitor races of good and chaos?
Thank you very much!
Whoa.... where can I read about these fan-made Priminals? That's an awesome idea. Makes me think of Mononoke-hime.
Oh, I see. What sort of fluff is mentioned in the magazine? Does it actually imply that they're "angelic" in some way? I'm not sure how exemplars of law would be "angelic."
Just in appearance.
Just in appearance.
Actually, it just says "the angelic creatures called Aphanacts", which can be interpreted in different ways. It could mean that they do, indeed, appear as conventional angels. It could just as well refer to some other aspect, such as their lofty goals or lawful tendencies or whatever. Then again, it could mean that they were winged people, but that just seems so boring and unsensical.
This seems like another example of a trend in the latest D&D writing, whereby many concepts, even those which are not originally based in Judeo-Christian mythology, become Christianized. Beings of pure law are "angelic?" Even if they were only angelic in appearance, that seems inconsistent with the idea of pure law. In either case, it seems to be an attempt to fit the idea of lawful progenitors with the Pact Primeval story in Fiendish Codex II, one of the clearest pre-4E indicators of this emerging trend. With 4E, of course, the trend becomes a fact of D&D life. It's not that I'm against Christianity or Abrahamic religions, but they are artistically boring and overused. I do apologize, however, if anyone still finds this little tirade offensive.
I agree. Little winged angels falling into sin are boring because they're overused. Just like anybody making a PC redeemed dark-elf duel-wielder or a halfling with an invisibility ring get groans, so do these trite Christian stories when somebody tries to rehash them into a campaign setting. This is especially so because the American culture, even including those people who are not Christian or even religious, is steeped in Christian symbolism. Most people know the basic biblical stories, even if they have not read the bible. That is one of the strong points of the Planescape setting. It's original enough, or at least manages to steal enough stuff in an original enough way, to be unique. That having been said, if Aphanacts are to law as Baernaloths are to evil, then I much prefer rip's description of geometrical shapes with eyes than any winged purty-boys.
Oh, is that like rip's story about how Asmodeus went from being a Lawful exemplar to being Lawful Evil in which there were the more abstract lawful exemplars like "Derivatives?" I really enjoyed that story, both for its treatment of lawful exemplars and for its take on the origin of Asmodeus.
Just fluff. There's not really anything else to tell.
Shemmy and I have been theorizing that the aphanacts are the "angels" mentioned in Fiendish Codex II: Tyrants of the Nine Hells, however - if so (and they seem to fit very well in that position), they're the ancestors of the baatezu.
The progenitors of Chaos might be the "true slaadi" described in Tales From the Infinite Staircase. Each of them is completely different, and they don't generally look anything like frogs (the terrible illustrations in that book aside).
The progenitors of Good are entirely undescribed, though Hellbound suggested they might exist as puppetmasters behind the guardinals. One fan, Dave King, coined the term "priminals" to describe them, and suggested that they were monkey-faced humanoids.