Dicefreaks d20 Community

So far, previous glimpses into The Abyss have revealed the potency of one of its demon prince's greatest weapons, the most common groupings of extant demons, their extreme variability, and the powers of the demon lords themselves. A small fragment of their prowess at inflicting random evil upon Creation has been showcased. However, demons exist in myriad variety and each presents its own array of threats. For this month's teaser, the DICE are proud to present two denizens of The Abyss: the mighty balor revised, and the malign asakku.

Do you dare to descend further into the Horror?

The balor is listed as using a bastard sword, except under Treasure, where it's a greatsword. It also seems strange that the weapons are listed as treasure, since they can't normally be taken from it.

Why a gore?

Why does the balor have feats invested in its slams when it's nearly impossible to deprive it of its weapons?

The asakku introduction story was incredibly creepy and scary.

The asakku's dread word sla is followed by - BoVD instead of ^BoVD.

Is Horrors going to rewrite the Rapidstrike feat? Because normally, it doesn't have a space, can't be taken by Outsiders, and can only apply to natural attacks that come in pairs or greater.

Any particular reason the advancement for Asakku doesn't go up to 48? Also, is there any particular significance to its DR being penetrated by silver rather than by cold iron?

WarDragon wrote:Why a gore?

It has massive horns. When it stabs people with these horns, it is known as a gore attack.

Why does the balor have feats invested in its slams when it's nearly impossible to deprive it of its weapons?

Sometimes, it just likes to beat the hell out of things barehanded. That was sort of the intent of giving the balor a better natural attack routine to begin with.

The asakku introduction story was incredibly creepy and scary.

It was, wasn't it?

Is Horrors going to rewrite the Rapidstrike feat? Because normally, it doesn't have a space, can't be taken by Outsiders, and can only apply to natural attacks that come in pairs or greater.

Guess they are. Most of those restrictions were meaningless to begin with, without any good reason for them.

Glabrezubane wrote:Any particular reason the advancement for Asakku doesn't go up to 48?

Not sure, actually. It might be a relic from an older version with less HD or it might be very intentional. At the end of the day though, it doesn't matter. Advancement rates are like 'always alignment's. You can break them if you want to. The idea is to give an expected range of what you might find crawling around.

Also, is there any particular significance to its DR being penetrated by silver rather than by cold iron?

Yes.

I like the upgrade to the death throes to take higher HD balors into consideration (I usually replaced it with 1d8 per HD because it's more chaotic that way, but this is good too). The innate weaponry ability was a good move too.

Cleave and Great Cleave continue to be dumb choices for something with that many weapons and natural weapons. If staying as true to the MM balor was a priority, you wouldn't have given it a bastard sword.

I think balors should just be immune to fire be default, and then have an additional random immunity in keeping with their mazza'im traits.

The 666 Torments of the Abyss? Oooookay...

The story itself was a bit of a yawn. You can only reference so many things that I know nothing about before I lose interest.

KingCrazyGenius wrote:Cleave and Great Cleave continue to be dumb choices for something with that many weapons and natural weapons. If staying as true to the MM balor was a priority, you wouldn't have given it a bastard sword.

Cleave and Great Cleave were put in before the changes to Pathfinder made them suboptimal choices. I expect them to be switched out once the finalized version is released. However, they are feats. Anyone can switch them out, they aren't part of the monster.

I think balors should just be immune to fire be default, and then have an additional random immunity in keeping with their mazza'im traits.

That was one idea considered and was shot down like a slow fat lazy pigeon.

Not sure what you mean by too many things referenced...I didn't get any of the references (if there were any) and had no problem enjoying the plot.

What plot? It was a guy writing stuff and saying "It is I of course who am right, not those dummy heads who call themselves scholars".

KingCrazyGenius wrote:What plot? It was a guy writing stuff and saying "It is I of course who am right, not those dummy heads who call themselves scholars".

You, ah, aren't talking about the asakku story then?

While we all need to hear things you don't necessary like, aside from the asakku story (which really is creepy as all hell), is there anything here folks DO like and want to see more of?

Glabrezubane wrote:Any particular reason the advancement for Asakku doesn't go up to 48?

To address this again, Glab, but not to invalidate my previous answer, it is common for creatures that do not change in size from advancement to advance to double their base HD. The advancement line should read 17-32 HD (Medium) however.

Kain Darkwind wrote:

KingCrazyGenius wrote:What plot? It was a guy writing stuff and saying "It is I of course who am right, not those dummy heads who call themselves scholars".

You, ah, aren't talking about the asakku story then?

Nope. You'll notice all my comments concern the balor alone.

KingCrazyGenius wrote:

Kain Darkwind wrote:

KingCrazyGenius wrote:What plot? It was a guy writing stuff and saying "It is I of course who am right, not those dummy heads who call themselves scholars".

You, ah, aren't talking about the asakku story then?

Nope. You'll notice all my comments concern the balor alone.

And yet you used the word 'story', which threw me, since there is no balor story.

I assumed that scholar-like burp was what passed for a story among you 'Freaks.

KingCrazyGenius wrote:I assumed that scholar-like burp was what passed for a story among you 'Freaks.

And when you assume you make an ass out of yourself and your home training. It's ok though, I forgive you.

The Serge wrote:While we all need to hear things you don't necessary like, aside from the asakku story (which really is creepy as all hell), is there anything here folks DO like and want to see more of?

I like how they have a much more potent full attack routine now. With four swords, three whips, two wings and a gore they're really terrifying in melee and makes that a more viable choice than flinging it's good spell-likes and summons out from afar. I also really like how you provided a way to improve the balor's death burst. Those are both good improvements and make the monster better to use. I really approve of upgrading Core material like that.

One question, though: With it's innate weaponry, what happens to it's weapons if it's disarmed or it's weapons otherwise survive it's demise? Is this meant to be a built in way to discourage PCs from looting a balor's signature weapons?

Ryu Hayabusa wrote:One question, though: With it's innate weaponry, what happens to it's weapons if it's disarmed or it's weapons otherwise survive it's demise? Is this meant to be a built in way to discourage PCs from looting a balor's signature weapons?

It was largely proposed as a compromise between making the weapons part of the balor and allowing the weapons to be upgraded as magical weapons. Essentially, the flavor of the ability should be that the weapons are formed from the balor itself. The mechanics on the other hand, use the standard magical weapon advancement.

Ryu Hayabusa wrote:

The Serge wrote:While we all need to hear things you don't necessary like, aside from the asakku story (which really is creepy as all hell), is there anything here folks DO like and want to see more of?

I like how they have a much more potent full attack routine now. With four swords, three whips, two wings and a gore they're really terrifying in melee and makes that a more viable choice than flinging it's good spell-likes and summons out from afar. I also really like how you provided a way to improve the balor's death burst. Those are both good improvements and make the monster better to use. I really approve of upgrading Core material like that.

Thanks. In general, there are going to be more changes like that ahead.

One question, though: With it's innate weaponry, what happens to it's weapons if it's disarmed or it's weapons otherwise survive it's demise? Is this meant to be a built in way to discourage PCs from looting a balor's signature weapons?

If it's disarmed, then as a free action, the balor could (and probably would) recall them afterwards assuming that some other being wasn't wielding them at the time. I would answer the second question as saying that this is more of an expression of the idea that a balor's weapons are incarnations of its destructive prowess.

KingCrazyGenius wrote:I think balors should just be immune to fire be default, and then have an additional random immunity in keeping with their mazza'im traits.

As Kain already mentioned, we dispensed with that idea fairly early. Some of the motives for this decision stem from the fact that in The Abyss there are a lot more diverse environs that balors exist within than just those where immunity to fire would be a continued-survival trait.

And that's where other immunities come into play. It's a freaking fire demon.

KingCrazyGenius wrote:And that's where other immunities come into play. It's a freaking fire demon.

Except when it is a mountain demon. Or a roaring demon. Or a manslaying demon. Guess you should have yawned a bit later into the story than...the second paragraph.

This is The Abyss. Chaos. There is absolutely no reason you can possibly give that would require a balor to be immune to fire all of the time.

By that logic, why does it have anything at all? Why do you even have mazza'im traits? Why isn't every demon a totally unique entity?

And even when its a stupid hill demon or puppy demon or whatever other dumb names you want to give it, it still has flaming body. Defend that.

KingCrazyGenius wrote:By that logic, why does it have anything at all? Why do you even have mazza'im traits? Why isn't every demon a totally unique entity?

Because you have to give some structure to the game, obviously. You aren't stupid last I checked, so why are you asking that question? Giving some structure does not require that you give absolute structure. The demons are created to be very variable, and that is exactly what they are. Your need to ensure fire immunity runs contrary to that goal, but for those who dislike the variability innate in the system, you can use the demons just as they are presented, without variance.

And even when its a stupid hill demon or puppy demon or whatever other dumb names you want to give it, it still has flaming body. Defend that.

Why bother? It has a flaming body and there is nothing to defend there. If you agree that it has a flaming body, you are correct in that matter. If you don't agree that it has a flaming body, you are wrong. That's relatively simple.

Because you have to give some structure to the game, obviously. You aren't stupid last I checked, so why are you asking that question? Giving some structure does not require that you give absolute structure.

Structure comes in the form of things like hit dice, skill points, feats, and so forth. You don't need specific demon traits in order to have demons, and making every demon unique won't make the game collapse (thought it might slow it down some if you don't plan ahead).

Why bother? It has a flaming body and there is nothing to defend there. If you agree that it has a flaming body, you are correct in that matter. If you don't agree that it has a flaming body, you are wrong. That's relatively simple.

Fine, I'll elaborate further. You want to pretend it is sometimes not a fiery demon, yet it always has flaming body? Why not have the flaming body as variable as its immunities? Give cold immune balors freezing body, acid immune balors caustic body, electricity immune balors static body, and sonic immune balors thundering body. Seems kind of funny that you go out of your way to break convention in some instances only to cling to it like a security blanket in others.

KingCrazyGenius wrote:

Why bother? It has a flaming body and there is nothing to defend there. If you agree that it has a flaming body, you are correct in that matter. If you don't agree that it has a flaming body, you are wrong. That's relatively simple.

Fine, I'll elaborate further. You want to pretend it is sometimes not a fiery demon, yet it always has flaming body? Why not have the flaming body as variable as its immunities? Give cold immune balors freezing body, acid immune balors caustic body, electricity immune balors static body, and sonic immune balors thundering body. Seems kind of funny that you go out of your way to break convention in some instances only to cling to it like a security blanket in others.

How on earth are we doing what you're accusing us of doing?

KingCrazyGenius wrote:

Because you have to give some structure to the game, obviously. You aren't stupid last I checked, so why are you asking that question? Giving some structure does not require that you give absolute structure.

Structure comes in the form of things like hit dice, skill points, feats, and so forth. You don't need specific demon traits in order to have demons, and making every demon unique won't make the game collapse (thought it might slow it down some if you don't plan ahead).

And yet the goal here is to showcase both chaos and similarities. Running trends and how the demons themselves defy those trends. Reasons why demons have been categorized strictly before (such as in 1e, 2e and 3e, where they had very specific qualities) and reasons why these qualities aren't consistently followed. Making every demon unique would defeat the purpose of being compatible with the existing edition's work on the matter, as well as preventing any trends from being established, even if they are established only to be diverged from.

Why bother? It has a flaming body and there is nothing to defend there. If you agree that it has a flaming body, you are correct in that matter. If you don't agree that it has a flaming body, you are wrong. That's relatively simple.

Fine, I'll elaborate further. You want to pretend it is sometimes not a fiery demon, yet it always has flaming body? Why not have the flaming body as variable as its immunities? Give cold immune balors freezing body, acid immune balors caustic body, electricity immune balors static body, and sonic immune balors thundering body. Seems kind of funny that you go out of your way to break convention in some instances only to cling to it like a security blanket in others.

I've never said it was sometimes not a fiery demon, I said it was not always a fire demon. Was the nuance lost?

Warps and ravages might indeed grant a balor a freezing body, but there is no good reason to tie the immunity to the energy damage dealt by the body. What possible benefit does a correlation between those provide?

As for breaking convention, a revision by its very nature retains some earlier material while changing other portions. That's what this is, a revised balor. If one wished to come up with something entirely new, that bore no resemblance to balors of old, they should call it something new and be honest about the originality.