Exemplars

16 posts / 0 new
Last post
Vaevictis Asmadi's picture
Offline
Namer
Joined: 2006-05-31
Exemplars

Hi folks,

I think I asked, or tried to ask, this question a few years ago, but asked it in a way that made no sense. I hope nobody minds if I ask again, hopefully this time I won't make myself sound so dumb..

OK, Exemplars. I'm not entirely clear on the idea but what I've gathered is that each Outer Plane has one particular Outsider race that personifies its alignment, and which can arise spontaneously out of the plane itself.

Some of these races are well-known. The ones I think are Exemplars are:

Outlands - Rilmani
Limbo - Slaadi
Abyss - Tanar'ri
Carceri - Gehreleths
Grey Waste - Yugoloths
Baator - Baatezu (formerly the Baatorians?)
Mechanus - Modrons
Mount Celestia - Archons
Elysium - Guardinals
Arborea - Eladrins

But that leaves some gaps:

Ysgard - ?
Beastlands - ? some kind of animal spirits?
Bytopia - ?
Arcadia - ? formians?
Acheron - ?
Gehenna - ?
Pandemonium - ?

Am I wrong about all planes having Exemplars, do these planes not have Exemplars at all? Or are they comparatively minor races that aren't well known?

There seems to be a pattern -- the "full" alignment planes have Exemplars, but the "in-between" alignment planes don't, except the Gehreleths. Are they just a fluke, an aberration thought up by Apomps? Is Carceri the only "in-between" plane that has Exemplars? Or are the 'leths not actually Exemplars?

If they don't have Exemplars (other than Carceri) do you suppose, as more and more belief is poured into them over the eons, that these planes will eventually develop or evolve defined Exemplars of their own? Maybe, in the eons of the development of the Outer Planes, the nine "cardinal" planes were the first to appear, and the more "in-between" ones developed later, as refinements and shades of alignments, as more and more dead folks came in over the eons, and more and more belief happened.

ripvanwormer's picture
Offline
Factol
Joined: 2004-10-05
Exemplars

'Vaevictis Asmadi' wrote:
There seems to be a pattern -- the "full" alignment planes have Exemplars, but the "in-between" alignment planes don't

Yeah, pretty much. There are races that dwell in the in-between planes, but they're not usually considered "exemplars." Gehreleths exemplify Carceri in many ways, but they aren't really considered "exemplars" - although they are fiends.

Quote:
If they don't have Exemplars (other than Carceri) do you suppose, as more and more belief is poured into them over the eons, that these planes will eventually develop or evolve defined Exemplars of their own?

That's very possible. It's thought that originally there were only five planes (Law, Chaos, Neutrality, Evil, and Good), and five became nine as Chaos and Law blended with Good and Evil, and nine became seventeen as the planes blended further. Maybe one day there will be more than seventeen outer planes as the gradients become finer still.

Vaevictis Asmadi's picture
Offline
Namer
Joined: 2006-05-31
Exemplars

OK, thanks for clearing that up! I've been confused for a long time about this.

Bob the Efreet's picture
Offline
factotums
Joined: 2004-05-11
Exemplars

The idea is that each alignment has an exemplar race tied to it. There are more than nine Outer Planes, though, because of the gradient issue Rip mentioned. Thus, only (about) half of the planes have an "exemplar" race, although all the planes are full of stuff, a lot of that stuff being outsiders.

__________________

Pants of the North!

Vaevictis Asmadi's picture
Offline
Namer
Joined: 2006-05-31
Exemplars

Now here's an Exemplar question: counting the different types of each Exemplar race that exist (and not including things like Primus, Demon Lords, Chaos Lords, the Eladrin Queen, etc) it looks pretty unbalanced. I could imagine that the very large diversity of Tanar'ri and Baatezu "subraces" has something to do with the Blood War (some kind of arms race?) but these numbers seem fishy to me:

Archons (LG) 10 kinds
Eladrins (CG) 7 kinds, plus Rulers
Guardinals (NG) 7 kinds
Modrons (LN) 14 kinds, plus Primus
Rilmani (N) 6 kinds
Slaadi (CN) 10 kinds, plus Chaos Lords
Yugoloths (NE) 23 kinds, plus Daemon Lords

Now I know that I haven't got perfect numbers here, but why is there such a huge diversity of statted fiends, and only 7 Guardinals, 7 Eladrins, 10 Archons, and 6 Rilmani? Is it just because WotC thinks Celestials and Rilmani are boring and dumb and they don't want to write about them? Is this part of a Yugoloth conspiracy to make Celestials look stupid and weak?

PlasmaPhoenixV's picture
Offline
Namer
Joined: 2006-02-04
Exemplars

I think it's mainly the fact that WotC seems to favor the fiends over the celestials, and also seems to like creating new fiends as they go along. From what I can tell (by way of Faces of Evil), Planescape recognizes 9 types of yugoloths, plus baernaloths, canoloths, and guardian yugoloths... much more balanced than the 23 you mentioned (which I assume come from 3.5, yes?).

ripvanwormer's picture
Offline
Factol
Joined: 2004-10-05
Exemplars

'Vaevictis Asmadi' wrote:
Is it just because WotC thinks Celestials and Rilmani are boring and dumb and they don't want to write about them?

The reasoning, from what I've heard, is:

1. Books about celestials don't sell.
2. Why bother to stat celestials when PCs aren't going to fight them very often?

Vaevictis Asmadi's picture
Offline
Namer
Joined: 2006-05-31
Exemplars

Maybe books about Celestials don't sell because now everybody knows that Warriors of Heaven is bad and nobody wants it? Sticking out tongue

'ripvanwormer' wrote:
2. Why bother to stat celestials when PCs aren't going to fight them very often?

That isn't exactly an excuse for them to not exist at all, with or without stats. But, perhaps there is more to WotC's philosophy:

3. The only reason anything exists is for the PCs to kill it. Habitat/Society and Ecology are unnecessary. If it isn't something to fight, don't even bother to write about it at all.

Duckluck's picture
Offline
Factor
Joined: 2006-10-10
Exemplars

Actually, WotC's attitude is more like:
Monster manuals exist so that people can kill the beings found within. Any particularly popular race will have chapters or even whole books written about it so that WotC can get lots of money.

Naturally, this means that unless something reaches a particular percieved popularity level, it is ignored. The reason there are so many stupid, random Yugoloths is because WotC shoves a few into every monster book with no regard to Yugoloth society. This is likely because they know that new monsters sell, but there hasn't been a single 3E book about Yugoloths, so they haven't bothered to make them form anything approximating a "society." They are just a bunch of monsters.

Vaevictis Asmadi's picture
Offline
Namer
Joined: 2006-05-31
Exemplars

'Duckluck' wrote:
The reason there are so many stupid, random Yugoloths is because WotC shoves a few into every monster book with no regard to Yugoloth society. This is likely because they know that new monsters sell, but there hasn't been a single 3E book about Yugoloths, so they haven't bothered to make them form anything approximating a "society." They are just a bunch of monsters.

I think that's really too bad. Sad What attracts me to Planescape is that there is substance and feeling to the setting, not just a bunch of monsters to kill.

But did WotC really get rid of Habitat/Society and Ecology sections for creatures, or is that just a nasty rumor?

Bob the Efreet's picture
Offline
factotums
Joined: 2004-05-11
Exemplars

'Vaevictis Asmadi' wrote:
But did WotC really get rid of Habitat/Society and Ecology sections for creatures, or is that just a nasty rumor?

For a time, yes. But they've returned in the new stat block format that everybody and their grandmother seems to hate.

__________________

Pants of the North!

Iavas's picture
Offline
factotums
Joined: 2006-07-12
Exemplars

I like the new stat block.

Bob the Efreet's picture
Offline
factotums
Joined: 2004-05-11
Exemplars

'Iavas' wrote:
I like the new stat block.

So do I. It just seems that everywhere I go people are whining about how bad (which probably just means different) it is.

__________________

Pants of the North!

Vaevictis Asmadi's picture
Offline
Namer
Joined: 2006-05-31
Exemplars

I don't care how stats are arranged on a piece of paper, but I've seen some 3.5 monster entries and there is nothing there except the stats themselves. No description, not even the barest information about the creature's societal arrangement. I don't mean "Organization: clan" I mean the Habitat/Society entries in the 2E monster manuals. They made the monsters an actual part of the setting, instead of just meaningless canon fodder. It allowed options for interacting in ways other than killing things, or at least making encounters more interesting.

ripvanwormer's picture
Offline
Factol
Joined: 2004-10-05
Exemplars

'Vaevictis Asmadi' wrote:
I don't care how stats are arranged on a piece of paper, but I've seen some 3.5 monster entries and there is nothing there except the stats themselves.

Yes, that was true until the Monster Manual IV, which introduced greatly expanded ecology entries and the like.

Earlier 3.5 stats often have virtually nothing. This was especially egregious in Complete Psion.

Vaevictis Asmadi's picture
Offline
Namer
Joined: 2006-05-31
Exemplars

'ripvanwormer' wrote:
Yes, that was true until the Monster Manual IV, which introduced greatly expanded ecology entries and the like.

Well, cool. I'm glad to hear they changed it back. Smiling

Planescape, Dungeons & Dragons, their logos, Wizards of the Coast, and the Wizards of the Coast logo are ©2008, Wizards of the Coast, a subsidiary of Hasbro Inc. and used with permission.