FC2 and a ramble about Baatezu numbers

Azriael,

Good call.

I think relative to the Dark Ministry and Bel, I'll wait till I actually get my hands on FC II. They may explain themselves a bit better, and so I'd rather not get my blood pressure up for nothing (but if they screw it up...)

As for the numerical comparison:

Baator may be infinite, but it has not been asserted that any layer has an infinite amount of Baatezu.

Therefore, it may be possible for there to exist a finite number of devils on the infinite plnae of Baator.

Going along with this line of thinking (which I recall is espoused in Faces of Evil and some other sources), such a finite number would be lesser than the oft used experssion that if there are an infinity of layers of the Abyss and if even if not all of those layers have demons, then there is still an inifnity of demons -and hence the numerical superiority of demons versus devils.

However, I know a lot of people cringe and rant whenever they either hear expressions of finite numbers of devils. (and I am not saying that I am for or against such a position).

To that end, consider this: not all infinities are equal.

For instance, there is an infinity fo numbers from the integer 1 to the integer 2, but such an infinity is less than the infinity of all the real numbers.

Thus, the inifinity of both the layers of Hell and/or the numbers of Baatezu could be less than the infinity of the layers of the Abyss and its demonic forces.

Perhaps he's just being given more rope to hang himself with by the higher ups, you know the ones you DON'T know about. (There is always another level isn't there?)

I love this quote:

Silly WotC.

-420

No, it doesn't. That quote only refers to the size of Blood War armies, not the races as a whole. We already knew the tanar'ri armies weren't infinite.

Tanar'ri are able to herd armies into the Gray Waste that are twenty times the size of baatezu legions. Considering how chaotic and individualistic the Abyss is, and how much it's at war with itself, it's not surprising they can't muster any more than that, even though there are many more tanar'ri in existence.

I think the numbers in the Fiendish Codex II excerpt are about the same as those in Hellbound.

I think the addle-coves down at WoTC may have to turn in their pentacles because of this one. Of course, if this Fiendish Codex is like the last, then probably it will give tons of different theories and regularly contradict itself. The problem is, we're getting just a small excerpt without the caveats and alternate theoies that may well litter the rest of the book.

As for the Stygia problem, we should note that there's a contradiction (or perhaps just an ambiguity) within the excerpt itself. At one point, it says that most of the combat in Baatezu territory takes place on Avernus, while later on, it says that Demons can't teleport to layers below Avernus. I don't think it says anything about not being able to use naturally occuring planar pathways like the Styx. Of course, most Tanar'ri footsoldiers can't teleport anyway, so I'm not even sure it makes much of a difference.

That said, WotC has a long history, of getting most of the stuff it adopts from Planescape right, but screwing up the details. This includes, renaming/misnaming Caina, Juiblex, and Nemausus, replacing Modrons with Inevitables for no good reason, altenatively ignoring and oversimplifying the Factions (and Sigil in general), and, particularly egregiously, giving Demagorgon hyena heads for no good reason. Really, we shouldn't be too surprised that they can't get a simple thing like "who's running the Blood War on Averus?" right.

What's odd though, is this seems to totally contradict what it says in the Manual of the Planes about Bel being a relatively minor player in Baatezu politics (he's there because he overthrew the old Lord of the First, and no one has bothered to replace him yet). I could see him being the one who is supposed to be in charge of the Dark Eight, but nevertheless having no actual power over them. The idea of a leader and his servants twisting their contracts until it isn't really clear who is actually calling the shots seems very Baatezu to me.

Just noticed this one myself. Demystification is one thing, but this is simply... no. Is that supposed to tie into the Warriors of Heaven thing, or what?

Here is an excerpt:

-420

Actually, I think the idea of Asmodeus as one of the two Serpents of Law is a good one; though it is not true in my campaign world. What I disliked about the Guide to Hell was most of the rest of it; if I recall correctly (it has been years since I've read it) most of the information on Baator apart from what pertained to Hell's nobility was simply taken from the Planes of Law boxed set. The writing was not of as good quality as was typical Planescape books. The selection of Jazirian as Asmodeus's good counterpart was definitely surprising but just doesn't sit well with me. And Asmodeus's connection to the Athar was infuriating in that it essentially amounts to saying that atheists worship Satan.

I know the Athar are not true atheists but they are certainly the Planescape equivalent of atheists, since the closest you can come to denying the existence of gods in a multiverse in which they undeniably exist is to deny their divinity. What does the lack of belief in anything actually amount to? If it amounts to the lack of belief in meaning and purpose we are talking about the Bleakers not the Athar; though it is the Athar that are mentioned in the Guide to Hell. If it is the rejection of the existence of the external world the book would have mentioned the Sign of One. But none of these factions are mentioned and since no faction actually entails the rejection of all belief none actually should be listed if Asmodeus gets the souls of those who don't believe in anything. But it is the rejection of the divinity of the Gods that is connected with Asmodeus. Thematically this amounts to a connection between atheists and Satan. All of the negative beliefs I listed are beliefs all the same and thus should have the potential to contribute to the Outer Planes. And if the Outer Planes reject the souls of individuals with entirely negative beliefs, why does a being of belief who lives in the Outer Planes get them? This just doesn't work for me.

It makes sense for Wizards to try to explain things like Asmodeus in a way that ruins their sense of mystery, but provides more concrete answers to unimaginative DM's. After all, in their eyes, Planescape has been downgradedfrom a setting to a supplemental part of a larger (and somewhat generic) setting. If you ignore the Book of Vile Darkness and Book of Exalted Deeds (and, let's face it, they are excedingly ignorable), this will be only the fourth 3E book about the Great Wheel. Unless and until Planescape is revived as a real setting, they will have a huge incentive to simplify things in order to attract new players. After all, one of the biggest reasons Planescape ran aground is it wasn't very acessible to new players. I blame the cant, personally.

Hey, I agree with you. I love Planescape. I'm just saying that there is a fine line between having a rich and compelling setting and having a setting be so complex that it alienates new players. The impression I've always gotten is that Wizards decided the setting was on the wrong side of that line, so they dropped the setting and started culling things from what they kept.

Now they've realized that they can't have a good setting without the planes and they have an entire player base clamoring for more details. On the other hand, they are determined to not repeat the decision that made Planescape a "failure." I think somewhere along the line they've decided that Planescape had too many elaborate Meta-plots (hence the aborted decision that it all took place "thousands of years ago"), had too many goofy or "unrealistic" characters (Poor Modrons), and that the whole thing was far too abstract (hence the chronic stating out of everything in site). I'm inclined to disagree with them on most counts, but I have gotten the impression that this is how they think.

I agree with Duckluck.

Iavas, the difference between Planescape and Forgotten Realms is not in detail (I'd say that Forgotten Realms probably has more detail anyways) but in level of abstractness and intuitiveness. Forgotten Realms is classic fantasy in the vein of Tolkien and almost the quintessential DnD setting. New players can be dropped in the Forgotten Realms and find their way around with little difficulty. This is far from the case with Planescape. The campaign I'm running starts uses the Forgotten Realms as a starting point and from there it will eventually expand into Planescape; this simultaneously allows my players (who are new to DnD) to gain their bearings in an easily understandable world and allows for greater amazement by the contrast between the Outer Planes and the material plane.
Wizards of the Coast is not going half and half with Planescape. They are largely ignoring it. The plane were conceived long before the Planescape setting was and it was originally used in much the same manner as it is now. Only later was the Planescape setting created that centered campaigns in the Outer Planes; and as much as we love this setting, most people apparently do not. I don't want to say that we should look down on the people who dislike Planescape, but...

Through the magic of the internet, it's going to be available just about anywhere... if you know what I mean. Amazon works too.

Re: Asmodeus the Fallen Angel
Unless my sources are totally screed last I'd heard was that that was being offered as a possible interpretation (along with a few others) - *not* as a hard bound fact. At least I'm hoping as such.

As far as canon is concerned I think Wikipedia said it best:

-420