The tanar'ri in John Shirley's "Demons"

23 posts / 0 new
Last post
Nemui's picture
Offline
factotums
Joined: 2004-08-30
The tanar'ri in John Shirley's "Demons"

I've read it just a few months ago, and although the book itself turned out to be somewhat ... dissappointing, I still loved the way he describes the demonic invasion of Earth, and especially the demons themselves.

Shirley's demons are very obviously both Chaos and Evil, more so than any PS tanar'ri I've read about.

Who else has read "Demons"? How do you think they compare with the RPG demons of Planescape?

Here's an excerpt. Rated ... "R" or "PG" something, I don't really know...

Quote:
The demons certainly have given us no whys nor hows nor wherefores. They delight in communicating only what confuses.

Though the demons will talk to us sometimes, they are, of course, notoriously unhelpful. When the President went with a delegation, including the Vice President, to see an apparent demon clan chieftain -- we don't know for certain he was a chieftain; their hierarchy is arcane, if they have any at all -- who was stalking the West Wing of the White House, they had a rather extensive conversation, nearly fifteen minutes, that was recorded and analyzed and that offers exchanges like this, transcribed from near its end:

THE PRESIDENT: And why is it, please, that you have come to -- to us, now?

GNASHER CHIEFTAIN: Home is where the heart is. Boy Scouts have a salty sort of taste, with marshmallow overtones. I like your tie. Are those Gucci loafers?

THE PRESIDENT: Yes, yes, they are. So you're familiar with all our customs?

GNASHER: I've never killed a customs agent. Are they good to kill? Never mind. Where is your wife?

PRESIDENT: My -- she's... in Florida.

GNASHER: Does the Vice President have sex with her? Which vices does he preside over? I'm just fucking with you about that. But seriously: Do you like sweet or salt best?

PRESIDENT: Could you tell me please why you have come here and if there's something we can give you... some arrangement we can make....

GNASHER: I wonder what you'd look like inside out. Like a Christmas tree?

PRESIDENT: We are willing to negotiate.

GNASHER: I can almost taste you now. You once had a dream you cracked open the Moon like an egg, and a red yolk came out and you fried it on the burning Earth, didn't you, once, eh? Did you? Do speak plainly and tell me: Did you?

PRESIDENT: I don't believe so.

GNASHER: You did. You dreamt exactly that. People think someone like me would delight in the carnage of a battlefield, but I prefer a nice mall, don't you?

PRESIDENT: Yes, certainly. Perhaps in that spirit--

GNASHER: You wish to sell me cuff links? Can you breathe in a cloud of iron filings? Let's find out. Let's discover a new jigsaw, a new 3-D puzzle, shall we? The human body, disassembled, might be put back together in a way that makes sense. You could make a fine buckyball out of the bones and a yurt from the skin and a talk show host of the wet parts. What an imaginative people you are. We stand in awe at the outskirts of Buenos Aires in the summertime, each fly a musical note. Can we send out for ice cream? For girls who work in ice cream parlors and their boyfriends in their electric Trans Ams? Taste this part of my leg. It tastes differently from this part. You won't taste? I have a penis. Would you prefer it? Do you like salty or sweet? Seriously. Choose one. Would you like to see my penis? I asked for it special. There's a catalog.

With that, a steaming green member pressed from a fold on the Gnasher's lower parts, and as the President tried to back away the Gnasher caught him in a long ropy sweep of its arm and pulled him close and forced him to his knees. In front of the TV cameras.

An eruption of gunshots from the Secret Service had no effect, of course, on the Gnasher. It was the Vice President -- a decisive man, who'd been broodingly biding his time for two years -- who took a pistol from the President's bodyguard and shot the President in the back of the head. It was obvious to everyone there, and to a sympathetic Congress the next day, that the Gnasher, after all, was choking the President to death with his engorged, steaming green penis. It was a question of restoring dignity to the President and the office. The Vice President fled the scene, sacrificing a number of Secret Service men ordered to delay the pursuing demon while he escaped.

"It's profoundly tragic," the Vice President said afterward, "but it's God's will. We must move on. I have certain announcements to make...." He is reported more or less safe in a certain underground bunker.

But I should tell you how it began...

:twisted:

But maybe I should've posted this to the Urban Planescape board?

Kaelyn's picture
Offline
Namer
Joined: 2004-05-10
The tanar'ri in John Shirley's "Demons"

That's pretty amazing. I'm currently listening to "A Spirit Steals a Child" by the Residents, which is also amazing in a very similar way. Or not. I like this better as inspiration for general Planescape than segregating it in Urban Land.

Anyway, good stuff. I have a book of John Shirley's short stories, some of which I've even read. Apparently he also wrote a book called The View from Hell, which I guess is similar.

Edward Lee might also be worth a look.

Fidrikon's picture
Offline
Factor
Joined: 2004-12-19
The tanar'ri in John Shirley's "Demons"

So they eat people, and their very very chaotic...

Sounds more like the Slaad to me.

Bob the Efreet's picture
Offline
factotums
Joined: 2004-05-11
The tanar'ri in John Shirley's "Demons"

And that is the problem with the Slaad. They're painted too evil, most of the time, when in actuality they should be pure chaos.

__________________

Pants of the North!

Anarch's picture
Offline
Namer
Joined: 2004-05-19
The tanar'ri in John Shirley's "Demons"

Ah, college...

Shemeska the Marauder's picture
Offline
Namer
Joined: 2004-04-26
Not that I have a sick sense of humor at any point... really

That was incredibly amusing. I need to find and read it Laughing out loud

Krypter's picture
Offline
factotums
Joined: 2004-05-11
The tanar'ri in John Shirley's "Demons"

Fidrikon's right. That's more a description of a slaad than a demon, and the writing is almost as awful as the scene. That's not the way I would run any kind of demons in my game. The problem with filtering everything mythological through the strict lens of the D&D alignment system is shown quite clearly here in the forced evil+chaotic setup. The Blood War is another forced dichotomy that just doesn't work for me and seems very contrived.

Nemui's picture
Offline
factotums
Joined: 2004-08-30
The tanar'ri in John Shirley's "Demons"

"Krypter" wrote:
Fidrikon's right. That's more a description of a slaad than a demon, and the writing is almost as awful as the scene. That's not the way I would run any kind of demons in my game.

I don't know how you came to the conclusion that the writing was awful by reading an excerpt that was mostly one-liner dialogue? I wouldn't know, since I read a translation of the book, and that changes a lot, but as I said, the plot was interesting and poorly developed IMHO. I guess what I liked best about the book was the feeling of utter helplessness of prime humans when the tanar'ri appear. Which gets lost along the way. *shrugs*

The Slaadi would definitely not act as Shirley's demons do. The latter are extremely malicious, and despite all their chaotic beahaviour, it's a pretty safe bet that they will disembowel you once they're done toying with you. The former are as likely to disembowel you as they are to buy you flowers.

Kaelyn's picture
Offline
Namer
Joined: 2004-05-10
The tanar'ri in John Shirley's "Demons"

I agree: the demon here exerts a threatening malevolence that one should back away from when playing a slaad. A slaad should be somewhere between this and the principled freedom-loving nature of an eladrin. Or, rather, a slaad is like an eladrin without the moral reasons for its embrace of chaos, championing its alignment merely for the pleasure it brings. PCs should be wary of a slaad, but not feel like it's merely toying with them as a prelude to a meal.

I don't think all tanar'ri should act like this - they're all individuals, after all. But I think it's perfect for some of them.

It's the same with the Blood War - not every fiend fights in it, or cares about it, but some will, and some do. Not all fiends should necessarily put a great deal of effort in opposing Good, either.

From the brief excerpt, the writing looks of professional quality.

Anarch's picture
Offline
Namer
Joined: 2004-05-19
The tanar'ri in John Shirley's "Demons"

I forgot to post this here a while back, but I think the problem with the slaad is that their version of chaos -- well, the way their exemplary chaos is portrayed -- is a little too humanistic. Slaad, IME, are basically portrayed as ravening bundles of id, sort of humans-with-the-brakelines-cut. For what does the id require? Food, reproduction, "brutish pleasures", that sort of thing... which are exactly what the slaadi are portrayed as seeking.

Now that's fine for a portrayal of human chaos -- that is, what would happen to a human, or to human society, if law were removed -- but it's severely underwhelming for a portrayal of archetypal chaos. Truly chaotic behavior should be like Delerium from the Sandman chronicles, or like Xanxost finally was in Faces Of Evil, I think it was: someone who would as soon chase pretty butterflies with a yo-yo as rip out your spleen to read it dirty limericks. That's a much, much harder mold to work with and it becomes much harder to work them into adventures too; it's so much easier to have the slaad come in, eat, spawn, and leave than it is to come up with -- and control! -- truly random behavior.

Which, if you think about it, is sort of the point. Adventure modules are all about controlling the flow of the narrative (otherwise they'd just be "hooks") and the slaadi are, by their very definition, an obstruction to that process. They're not an insurmountable one, mind, but it takes a willingness to commit to a certain mindset that I think TSR/WOTC found/finds either too difficult or too unprofitable.

On that note, I'd be really interested to hear how the fan community has dealt with slaadi in their campaigns. Are they hard to run? Hard to integrate into a scenario? How do players react to truly random behavior? How do DMs run truly random behavior? I confess that I suck at dealing with slaadi so I rarely run them; can anyone offer any insights that might convince me to give them a try?

Anarch's picture
Offline
Namer
Joined: 2004-05-19
The tanar'ri in John Shirley's "Demons"

Or -- he says after one too many DVD watchings tonight -- the slaadi could be portrayed like GIR from Invader ZIM. 'cause I like biscuits! Let's make... biscuits...

Kaelyn's picture
Offline
Namer
Joined: 2004-05-10
The tanar'ri in John Shirley's "Demons"

"Anarch" wrote:
Or -- he says after one too many DVD watchings tonight -- the slaadi could be portrayed like GIR from Invader ZIM. 'cause I like biscuits! Let's make... biscuits...

I agree. I want tacos!

Anarch's picture
Offline
Namer
Joined: 2004-05-19
The tanar'ri in John Shirley's "Demons"

"Kaelyn" wrote:
I agree. I want tacos!

Ohhhhh, such tacos will I give! Laughing out loud

Nemui's picture
Offline
factotums
Joined: 2004-08-30
The tanar'ri in John Shirley's "Demons"

"Anarch" wrote:
Now that's fine for a portrayal of human chaos -- that is, what would happen to a human, or to human society, if law were removed -- but it's severely underwhelming for a portrayal of archetypal chaos.

The celestials embody the human(ish) concept of goodness, the fiends the human concept of evil, and the modrons are boxes with human faces painted on. Why would... I mean, how could slaadi be different? It's a setting designed by humans for humans.

"Anarch" wrote:
Truly chaotic behavior should be like Delerium from the Sandman chronicles

Yes, well, why do you think the slaadi look like frogs? See Endless Planes.

Eco-Mono's picture
Offline
Namer
Joined: 2004-05-10
The tanar'ri in John Shirley's "Demons"

"Nemui" wrote:
The celestials embody the human(ish) concept of goodness, the fiends the human concept of evil, and the modrons are boxes with human faces painted on. Why would... I mean, how could slaadi be different? It's a setting designed by humans for humans.
Actually, the concepts embodied by the four Alignments are called Good, Evil, Law and Chaos simply because they're the closest human concepts to the archetypal ideals. The tug-of-war between self and selfless, between individuals and the status quo... these aren't perfect matches to what we would call "Law" or "Evil". But since we have these words, we use them; they're close enough. </tangent>

Back on topic...

"Nemui" wrote:
:twisted:

Anarch's picture
Offline
Namer
Joined: 2004-05-19
The tanar'ri in John Shirley's "Demons"

"Nemui" wrote:
The celestials embody the human(ish) concept of goodness, the fiends the human concept of evil, and the modrons are boxes with human faces painted on. Why would... I mean, how could slaadi be different? It's a setting designed by humans for humans.

I'm not saying that the slaadi shouldn't be humaniform or that the chaos elementals should be the proper exemplars of Chaos (though that would be pretty neat). What I'm saying is that, as portrayed in too much of the canon material, the type of Chaos they represent isn't the same as the type of Law the modrons represent. And to a lesser extent the Good and Evil of the celestials and fiends, but that's a little more complicated.

To wit, if the modrons were represented in the same type as the slaad, their Law would simply be an exaggerated human-type Law. They'd be, I dunno, nothing more than box-shaped OCD-types, the idiot savants beloved of crappy prime-time dramas (yes, I'm looking at you NUMB3RS). At worst, they'd be reduced to lawyerly control freaks. They're not, though; they are, in many respects, completely and utterly alien in their emotional core to the humans which nominally spawned them, viz The Great Modron March or any of a dozen other examples. They have no individuality or sense of self, they perceive the external world in terms completely unlike the players, they react differently to stimuli etc. They're exemplars of Law, which places their nature beyond the natural limiting point of humanistic law-type behavior.

Contrast this with the slaad. True Chaos, true randomness, should look like Delerium from Sandman [yes, I did like your piece :)] or GIR from Invader ZIM or Yandros from Louise Cooper's Time Master Trilogy (better yet, from the Star Shadow Trilogy); the actions of an exemplar of Chaos should be equally alien to humanity as the motivations of the modrons. Instead, in most canonical material -- and again, I want to make this clear that I'm speaking only of the majority of canonical material, not of all canonical material and certainly not of all fan material -- what we have are basically ravening bundles of id. They want to eat, fight and reproduce with anything that moves, as well as being possessed by that ever-so-classy touch of mild sadism. That's not alien to our emotional core; that's not so chaotic as to be beyond the limiting point of humanistic chaos; heck, that's not even foreign to our species! Their chaos is a small and petty one, undeserving of Capitalization, and it's for this reason I think that slaadi have generally (and deservedly) been considered the weakest conceptualization in the exemplar races.

[In fact, I'd go further and posit that the reason for this is that modrons were conceptualization because we have an "intelligence" more ordered and alien upon which to draw our emotional paradigm: computers. There's no equivalent "life-form" or emotional paradigm on the chaotic side. It takes effort to be truly random IRL, which means that we've been stuck with the stimulus/response crap of canonical slaadi.]

This is, I think, the root of what Bob the Efreet et al. were commenting upon when they said that this passage sounded more like slaad than tanar'ri. I think they're wrong insofar as the way slaad should be portrayed -- the malice in the quoted passage far exceeds the malice or even the focus of what slaad should possess -- but I think they're bang on insofar as the slaad are typically portrayed in canon material. For a truly awful example of this trend, consider the description of the Blue Slaad in MM3.5:

Quote:
Blue slaadi gather to wage horrific battles against other societies and their own. They are bullies that value only strength and power.

or the Green Slaad?

Quote:
Green slaadi are self-centered, arrogant louts that think only of themselves. They lust after magical power, eventually transforming into grays if they find it. Green slaadi work in groups if doing so suits their immediate needs.

[And don't even get me started on the fact that the ultimate expression of slaadic power, the Death Slaad (or Black Slaad if you're into Epic stuff), is tainted with evil...]

If I may be so bold, these are a really really crappy description of an exemplar of Chaos and the most explicit expression of the failure to understand the slaad that has permeated TSR/WOTC since their inception. I categorically refused to run them, in fact, until exposed to Xanxost; now, I run them sparingly so as not to spoil their ever-changing surprise.

And since this has gone on too long, I'll stop Smiling

Nemui's picture
Offline
factotums
Joined: 2004-08-30
The tanar'ri in John Shirley's "Demons"

I do agree that the official Slaadi aren't fit for the role of Chaos exemplars, but as I've said before, D&D is a human game, so it's as much as we get. This game requires stat blocks and brief behavioral descriptions, in that order. You simply cannot represent Chaos with the capital X in the format of a Monster Manual creature entry. Neither can you do this with the exemplars of Law, Evil, or Good. As you say, modrons are easier because we have the concept of unliving consciousness as an example. In religion we have the examples for miscellaneous demons, devil, and angels, but where is the Chaos? I guess what I'm saying is, if you want a more fitting representation of Chaos as a concept, you shouldn't be playing a game that ranks creatures by how hard they must be hit before they fall down. Don't get me wrong, I love the cheap philosophical musings that PS is based on, but PS died and FR lived. Go figure.

Speaking of FR, yeah, it does suck that the slaadi are made "tainted", but simple players need simple dualism. They think in black-and-white, and if Obeying The Law is seen as "good", than Multiversal Anarchy Bowwow Puce Vomit Wombat equals (more or less) "evil". The modern humans being creatures of order, and disorder usually being presented as the "bad" option, it's no surprise that we get death slaadi and Lord Arioch.

Going back from Moorcock to Gaiman, and the Delirium example, as much as I love the way the Endless are portrayed, they're no more adequate than the slaadi are for archetypal "exemplars". The girl Delirium is a young mental patient with supernatural powers, and while amusing and charming, she is not actually Delirium. You can't draw Delirium and you can't put it in a comic book, no matter how you color the words in the bubbles. When trying to represent archetypes, you can only do as much as humanly possible, which is never enough.

So it goes.

Kaelyn's picture
Offline
Namer
Joined: 2004-05-10
The tanar'ri in John Shirley's "Demons"

I have a slaad page: http://www.geocities.com/ripvanwormer/slaadi.html

(Disclaimer: it was written something like six years ago. It's not exactly what I would make today. Maybe it's better, though.)

Anarch's picture
Offline
Namer
Joined: 2004-05-19
The tanar'ri in John Shirley's "Demons"

"Nemui" wrote:
Going back from Moorcock to Gaiman, and the Delirium example, as much as I love the way the Endless are portrayed, they're no more adequate than the slaadi are for archetypal "exemplars"...When trying to represent archetypes, you can only do as much as humanly possible, which is never enough.

You're confusing two related concepts here, though: one is the distance of the approximation to the ideal, the other is the ability to compare two approximations. Certainly, our ability to understand -- and therefore depict -- the Endless is infinitely far from their true existence, but that doesn't mean that all depictions are equally true. [As a thought experiment, try to imagine a being of which that can be said. When your brain has stopped dribbling out of your ears, give me call ;)] A character whose emotional arc is inspiring and uplifting is not as accurate a representation of Despair as the canonical one (fat naked woman self-mutilating herself through eternity), even if they're both infinitely far from the true Endless nature of Despair herself.

To give a mathematical illustration: both 5 and 7 are infinitely far from "infinity", whether conceptualized as a limiting process or the realized infinity aleph-0 (or omega or |N|, take your pick). 7 is, however, a "better" approximation to infinity than 5 in any of a number of ways. 2^80 is even better. Skewes' number, 10^10^10^34, is better still. All of them are fatally flawed, of course, being finite... but I can distinguish between them as being better or worse approximations.

In the case of the slaad, I think this distinction is yet further blurred by the fact that the slaad have been rendered not just comprehensible, but even animalistic, in their chaos. [The Great Modron March, when talking of the modrons journeying through one of the upper planes, has a note to the DM that they are so orderly as to be almost indistinguishable from chaos; there is no equivalent note for the slaad.] It's not just a poor approximation in the sense of not being an accurate (albeit human) portrayal of chaos, it's poor because it's an approximation to the wrong kind of chaos. That's my problem with it: the canon writers are, by and large, simply pointing in the wrong direction. It makes them flat, boring, uninteresting and hideously limited, and limiting, in their possibilities.

Now I should, in fairness, add that there is indeed a way to explain them (albeit one I don't like). Slaad aren't exactly exemplars of Chaos, with an abstract capital C, any more than modrons are exemplars of Law. They are planeborn, and the planes themselves are born not of Chaos and Law (and Good and Evil) but of people's beliefs about the nature of chaos and law. [Presumably the aggregate force of their beliefs, but let's not get technical here.] If it happened that a lot of people believed that chaos wasn't writing love poetry to daisies because you thought it would help you win the Superbowl, but instead believed that true chaos consisted of behaving like a brutish beast, it seems likely that the slaad would exemplify that belief. I don't buy it in this context because that's not true of Limbo, which (one would think) is more sensitive to the character of belief than the sentient, autonomous exemplar races... but it is conceivable.

[The slaad can also be excused on the grounds that their natural "evolution" was straitjacked by the Slaad Lords into this present, brutal form. To which I say, cop-out.]

Or, in short: Purple is my friend, because it likes to sneeze. Would you like a flounder?

Nemui's picture
Offline
factotums
Joined: 2004-08-30
The tanar'ri in John Shirley's "Demons"

*brain dribbles*

Quote:
Slaad aren't exactly exemplars of Chaos, with an abstract capital C, any more than modrons are exemplars of Law. They are planeborn, and the planes themselves are born not of Chaos and Law (and Good and Evil) but of people's beliefs about the nature of chaos and law. [Presumably the aggregate force of their beliefs, but let's not get technical here.]

Yeah, this has been suggested before, but always in some "look-it's-just-weird-like-that-OK" context. Speaking of which, I like to imagine the planes of belief changing as the prime worlds change, but also back and forth through time.

For example, the serpentine races were once dominant on the Prime, and their beliefs were the ones that shaped the planes; that means all the exemplars probably had more scales than they do now, not to mention the yuan-tiish views on morale and ethics, but that's beside the point. However, once us weak-bodied bipedal mammals took charge, the planes of belief and their exemplars became what we saw as Law, Chaos, Good, and Evil - and the past also changed, so that all those outsiders had been more or less humanoid all the while. Soon enough, when the cats take over, it'll be (will have been) their views will shape the planes and planars, and will have been shaping them all along ...

... nah, Magnum Opus explains it way better than I ever could, and she doesn't resort to Hitchhiker trans-temporal verb use, either.

What was my point, anyway? Anybody?

Anarch's picture
Offline
Namer
Joined: 2004-05-19
The tanar'ri in John Shirley's "Demons"

"Nemui" wrote:
Yeah, this has been suggested before, but always in some "look-it's-just-weird-like-that-OK" context. Speaking of which, I like to imagine the planes of belief changing as the prime worlds change, but also back and forth through time.

Yep, that's certainly the view I hold: reality in the Outer Planes is mutable subject to the force of mortality's gestalt belief, and reality includes time.

Interestingly, however, the same is not true of the Inner Planes...

Quote:
For example, the serpentine races were once dominant on the Prime, and their beliefs were the ones that shaped the planes; that means all the exemplars probably had more scales than they do now, not to mention the yuan-tiish views on morale and ethics, but that's beside the point.

I'd argue differently, that that's entirely the point, but that's a disagreement of emphasis I think and not of substance.

[I'd also heard this theory somewhere -- Mimir.net, maybe? -- as being the saurials who were once "in charge". There's also an interesting historical anomaly that the Illithid Empire of old apparently didn't deform the planes to their belief system. My explanation for this, in short, is that a) they weren't around long enough because b) "reality" has an assload of inertia but that c) they were -- and are -- able to leave their mark enough to install Ilsensine in the Outlands.]

Quote:
However, once us weak-bodied bipedal mammals took charge, the planes of belief and their exemplars became what we saw as Law, Chaos, Good, and Evil - and the past also changed, so that all those outsiders had been more or less humanoid all the while. Soon enough, when the cats take over, it'll be (will have been) their views will shape the planes and planars, and will have been shaping them all along ...

Ayup. One of the things I try to encompass in my writing and IMC is that although we talk about That Which Came Before in humaniform terms, that's a failure on the part of we moderns to properly understand the ways of antiquity.

Quote:
... nah, Magnum Opus explains it way better than I ever could, and she doesn't resort to Hitchhiker trans-temporal verb use, either.

I've not heard of the writer; PS email list?

Quote:
What was my point, anyway? Anybody?

Dribble! </slaad>

Kaelyn's picture
Offline
Namer
Joined: 2004-05-10
The tanar'ri in John Shirley's "Demons"

Magnum Opus is a medusa living in Sigil. She runs the Musée Arcane. The specific article being discussed is called The Ancient Planes.

Kaelyn's picture
Offline
Namer
Joined: 2004-05-10
The tanar'ri in John Shirley's "Demons"

I was just reminded of a post I originally made to the Wizards of the Coast planes boards:

Rip: Hey.
Tertian: (licks its lips)
Rip: So, uh, I'll cut right to the chase scene here. Why do you kill and eat good and neutral aligned beings? It's just because you feel like it, right?
Tertian: Moo.
Rip: Yeah, that's what I thought. Murderer!
Tertian: (three of its eyes dart rapidly back and forth)
Rip: What do you have to say for yourself, murderer?
Tertian: What do you have to say for yourself?
Rip: Mortal.
Tertian: What?
Rip: You're supposed to call me "mortal."
Tertian: Why?
Rip: Because you're a slaad.
Tertian: You're a slaad.
Rip: That's beside the point.
Tertian: You're beside the point.
Rip: Yeah, well, you're a murderer!
Tertian: I must respectfully disagree. We kill and eat in order to cause chaos. Killing and eating sentient beings just happens to cause more bedlam than killing animals does.
Rip: Bedlam, eh? Interesting choice of words. You're from Pandemonium, aren't you?
Tertian: You're from Pandemonium.
Rip: That's beside the point. Answer the question.
Tertian: Bedlam is a town in the Outlands, not Pandemonium.
Rip: It borders Pandemonium, weisenheimer. You're as pedantic as a modron.
Tertian: (sweat oozing from the symbol of chaos on its forehead) That's ridiculous. And who says "weisenheimer?"
Rip: Are you or aren't you from Pandemonium?
Tertian: We're a race of natural anarchs, capable of surviving in anything Limbo can throw at us. We manipulate the Soup more easily than you can breathe. We aren't nocturnal creatures that creep around in tunnels who live to create fear and paranoia. We don't have howling breath weapons. We have nothing to do with Pandemonium.
Rip: Besides being evil.
Tertian: Pandemonium is the plane of madness, noise, and night terrors. It's the side of Chaos where creativity becomes sickness. Its inhabitants kill because they're mentally ill, not because they're evil. You might be thinking of the Abyss.
Rip: A likely story! Fine, how do I know you aren't just a bunch of hezrou from the Abyss?
Tertian: Because we're perfectly adapted to Limbo!
Rip: So are githzerai, and they're from the Material Plane.
Tertian: Githzerai? Please. They can't even be submerged in water without drowning.
Rip: Have you been drowning githzerai?
Tertian: Have you?
Rip: Besides the point! You creatures are nothing more than fiends! You kill for fun! You kill because you love the sound of snapping bones, the delicious scream of an innocent, the look of terror in a baby's face before you smother it with a pillow...
Tertian: Stop it! You're creeping me out.
Rip: Or maybe you're creeping me out.
Tertian: That doesn't sound as clever when you do it.
Rip: Besides! The! Point!
Tertian: Look, man, you've got us all wrong. You think you understand us, but you don't. You anthropomorphize us, try to impose your motives on our actions like the githzerai impose their creativity and will on Limbo's ever-changing terrain. We're not like you. We're personifications of Chaos. That means we do what Chaos does, regardless of what your system of morality thinks we should be doing. We kill for the same reason a blizzard kills, or a sandstorm. Also because we're hungry. Also to make pretty patterns.
Rip: And that doesn't sound evil to you?
Tertian: No, man! You're acting like it's personal with us. It's not. It's all for the cause. To end the tyranny of bones and flesh. To break the walls of skin and will that keep you mortals from experiencing the universe outside.
Rip: I knew you couldn't resist calling me a mortal.
Tertian: Yeah, yeah.
Rip: You needed to. You crave it.
Tertian: Yeah, yeah.
Rip: But you have a different justification for your actions every time I ask.
Tertian: Duh. Personification of Chaos? Remember?
Rip: Why don't you just admit it's because you're a perverted psychopath?
Tertian: Maybe you're the... nah, too easy. Look, you're starting to bore me. You have no idea what we slaadi are thinking when we kill, and you're not going to get any closer to the way we think with that "logic" crap. Why don't you accept that we're dangerous inhabitants of Limbo, just like the unexpected balls of fire, cubes of fire, abstract squiggly shapes of fire... the lightning... the vacuum... the xenophobic githzerai...
Rip: Are you going somewhere with this?
Tertian: Yeah, buddy, I am. Just accept that we're not your friends, but we're not your fiends either. The occasional death slaad aside, we're pure chaos, not good, not evil. We're not trying to conquer the multiverse; we're just trying to make it a little more fun.
Rip: Why should I believe that?
Tertian: Screw you. Heh. Actually, I already did.
Rip: What?
Tertian: Did you ever see the movie Alien?
Rip: You mean... I'm going to be a mommy?
Tertian: No, you're going to be the crib.
Rip: That's evil!
Tertian: It's not... oh, jeeze. It's always one note with you, isn't it?
Rip: Evil! Evil! Evil!
Tertian: I'm bringing new life into the worlds! New chaos! And not even one of my kind, it'll be a blue. I'm not doing this for myself.
Rip: You're killing a sentient being, one that never did anyone any harm.
Tertian: I very much doubt that. You're a creature of boundaries and edges. You tyrannize reality just by existing.
Rip: And slaadi don't?
Tertian: Don't think I haven't implanted plenty of slaadi. I implanted a gray once; that was pretty sweet.
Rip: So you admit you killed the gray slaad because it gave you pleasure?
Tertian: No, I took pleasure in overthrowing an authority figure. It's not my business what my
spawn do.
Rip: But you know they'll kill their hosts!
Tertian: They don't always. They didn't kill Ylem - they fused with it.
Rip: You're referring to the rogue modron from Uncaged: Faces of Sigil.
Tertian: Yeah. Actually, it's not that uncommon for slaad eggs to end up creating a half-slaad.
Unearthed Arcana mentions them happening this way, too. It depends on what will cause the most chaos, really.
Rip: Implanting everyone is still probably fatal.
Tertian: Look, if you don't have access to a cure disease spell, you shouldn't have come to Limbo.
Rip: We're in Detroit.
Tertian: Same thing. Sure, we don't care about mortal life. We're reckless with your safety. We don't seek to destroy all life, though - just all order.
Rip: Life depends on order to exist! Without order, there'd just be formless nothingness. Absolute entropy is law!
Tertian: We disagree. Perfect Chaos is birth, death, and rebirth all at once, forever.
Rip: Sounds bland.
Tertian: It's better than what the modrons want. Existence without change is death. I don't hear you complaining about the modrons wanting to end all life, but that's exactly what they're aiming for.
Rip: Modrons don't arbitrarily kill sentient beings!
Tertian: Of course they do. They're big believers in the death penalty.
Rip: They only kill lawbreakers. That's different.
Tertian: How is it different? You didn't vote for their laws. Modrons kill people for loitering, for improper grammar, for tresspassing, for simple acts of reproduction...
Rip: You mean like planting eggs in people?
Tertian: Exactly! My point is, they pass laws and make penalties for laws with no regard for non-modron life. It's just as arbitrary as what we do, except they don't even eat the remains of those they kill, or use them as incubators. That's wasteful, not to mention evil.
Rip: It's different with modrons. They don't really comprehend individual existence.
Tertian: And you assume we do?
Rip: And they don't kill out of lust or pleasure. They just follow the edicts of their alignment.
Tertian: It's exactly the same with us.
Rip: So... what you're saying is... all neutral planeborn are really evil?
Tertian: (buries its face in its claws) Yeah, that's what I'm saying. Idiot.
Rip: I knew it all along!
Tertian: Nice talking with you, but I've gotta go. More chaos to spread, and all.
Rip: Oh. See you.
Tertian: Yeah, I'll catch you later.
Rip: Bye.
Tertian: Bye now.

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.