Saturday, November 23, 2019

Dragon spiders and spider dragons?

A concept I found while googling are the dragon spiders aka spider dragons. Dragons with arachnid (or other arthropod) traits, arachnids with draconic traits, or some horrible hybrid of the two? Who knows! They’re just plain creepy and I like it that way.

Some examples of spider dragons include:
  • The arachnidrake from Book of Drakes. It is a winged dragon with arachnid features, and has a swarm of spiders living on its skin.
  • The draconid from Tome of Horrors. It is a giant arachnid with two dragon heads on serpentine necks. No relation to the similar looking slassans below, but you could always posit a connection.
  • The slassan from Arcana Evolved. It is a giant arachnid with a dragon head on a serpentine neck; it is an intelligent creature with mystical abilities. In The Diamond Throne campaign setting, the slassan and mojh were hybrid descendants of the dramojh (fiendish dragons). 

I haven't really worked out any kind of background or theology for it, but I wanted to indulge in some brief world building ideas. I'm thinking that Tiamat, the primordial dragon of chaos and salt water, spawned a number of aberrant dragons. When they entered the mortal world, they appeared in the forms of spiders (a la Ungoliant) but their dragon nature showed through their new forms. And that's where the spider dragons come from.

I had ideas for other connections too. I was thinking of substituting Arcana Evolved's dramojh, slassan, and mojh with the manalishi from OSRIC, aqrabuamelu from MoP, and dragonborn from SRD 5. No firm idea of their relationship yet, maybe in later posts after I defined what the heck a dragon even is supposed to be.

Links

The vouivre, a weird wyvern/woman thing

The vouivre is a she-dragon from French folklore. The name derives from the Latin for "viper," and refers to the wyvern of heraldry or a mythical dragon inhabiting Lorraine, Jura, and other regions of France. In English, I suppose the idiomatic translation would be viperess or wyverness.

The following two pages from the comic book Vouivre: Thunder of Fury helpfully summarize the tales of this particular dragon:

The dragon is described as fond of bathing in her private cave and capable of assuming human form. This invites comparison to another French dragon, Melusine. Melusine became a dragon once a week and at this time bathed alone in her private quarters. A Book of Creatures calls the vouivres her spiritual descendants stripped of human form, with later accounts conflating the two to give the vouivre her womanly qualities where originally she lacked such attributes entirely.

Various regions of France and neighboring countries put their own spins on the myth. Traits include appearing as animals or balls of fire, greedily guarding treasure, dependence on magic gems (compare draconite from other folklore), and so forth. Your typical weird folklore stuff.

Modern sources put further spins on the monster:
  1. When she was imported to the video game Megami Tensei, the vouivre appeared as a demon with features of both woman and dragon. Indeed, the left half of her body appears human but the right half appears monstrous!
  2. When she was imported to the tabletop game Pathfinder, perhaps influenced by Megami Tensei, the vouivre became a bizarre creature resembling an amphisbaena with one end of the body appearing as a lovely woman. One wonders what was going through the writer's head, but I find it delightfully weird!

I like all these ideas so much. If I wanted to have the monster appear in all these forms, then I would use a simple explanation: the viperess' is a shape changer. Her power is flawed, however, and always reveals some obvious hint of her true nature. For example, the right or lower half of her body still appearing as a dragon, or she is followed by an entourage of vipers, or even that she sheds her dragon skin to bathe and is at the mercy of whoever steals it (echoing tales of the mermaid wife).

Research links

Gaming and popular culture links

Friday, November 22, 2019

Random generation tables for the basilisk and cockatrice

Since I made random generation tables for the manticore, I decided I might as well do tables for the basilisk and cockatrice. I wrote these tables to reflect the sheer variety of basilisk and cockatrice depictions in medieval and modern art and literature. Such as the inset image:
"Eating Chips and Salsa" @BlueBroxton
I counted all the different depictions I could remember together, so these tables should provide results that were never depicted before. Even so, I doubt I accounted for every possibility so you should feel free to change these tables up at your leisure.

I didn't include any specific mechanical effects because I don't know what rules you'd be using, so any mechanical effects are suggestions only. Feel free to introduce your own mechanics or treat the results as purely cosmetic. If nothing else, then it might come in handy if you are drawing.

These tables are organized by head, body, tail, and special attack.

Head features

Species. Roll 1d5 to determine general species of the head
  1. Rooster
  2. Lizard
  3. Snake
  4. Dinosaur
  5. Multiple heads. Roll 1d4 to determine species, then roll 1d3 to determine number of heads.

Crown. Roll 1d6 to determine the appearance of the crown.*
  1. Diamond pattern
  2. Feathery plume. Bonus to first impression.
  3. Rooster's comb. Charisma bonus against hens.
  4. Antlers or horns. Gains gore attack.
  5. Vestigial wings. Gains wing buffet attack.
  6. Literal crown. This crown counts as treasure, possibly even magic (GM's discretion).
  7. Roll 1d6 twice, ignore nonsensical results.
  8. Roll 1d6 thrice, ignore nonsensical results.

Tongue. Roll 1d4 to determine the appearance of the tongue.*
  1. Normal pointed
  2. Forked like snake. Gains scent ability.
  3. Spade ended. Bonus to bite damage.
  4. Has two tongues, one forked and one spade.

Neck. Roll 1d8 to determine the appearance of the neck.*
  1. Smooth scales
  2. Rooster waddle. Charisma bonus against hens.
  3. Feathery mane. Bonus to cuteness.
  4. Movable frill. Bonus to intimidation when unfurled and hissing.
  5. Patterned cobra hood. Bonus to intimidation.
  6. Long serpentine neck
  7. Roll 1d6 twice, ignore nonsensical results.
  8. Roll 1d6 thrice, ignore nonsensical results.

*Roll once for each head, if more than one.

Body features

Size. Roll 1d3 to determine the monster's size.
  1. Small
  2. Medium
  3. Large

Body covering. Roll 1d5 to determine the appearance of the skin.
  1. All scaled like snake or lizard. Charisma bonus against reptiles.
  2. Feathered body with scaly legs like rooster. Charisma bonus against birds.
  3. Smooth pinkish skin like a plucked turkey. Charisma penalty against everyone.
  4. Patchy mix of scales, skin and feathers
  5. Roll 1d4, and this time it is covered in eyes. Cannot be flanked. The eyes sleep in shifts, so it can't be surprised that way.

Movement. Roll 1d3 to determine stance and locomotion.
  1. Serpentine slithering without legs. Cannot be tripped.
  2. Walking on two or more pairs of legs*
  3. Serpentine slithering, with two or more pairs of legs*
*Roll 1d4 to determine the number of pairs of legs, if any. Each leg past the first pair boosts resistance to tripping.

Limbs. Roll 1d4 to determine appearance of the legs and feet, if any.
  1. Scaly like lizard
  2. Talons and spurs like rooster. Gains claw/stab attack.
  3. Feathered like second pair of wings. Gains bonus to flight rolls.
  4. Vestigial legs. Relies on serpentine slithering anyway.

Wings. Roll 1d8 to determine the presence and appearance of wings
  1. Wingless
  2. Bird wings
  3. Bird wings with talons. Gains claw attack. Allows climbing.
  4. Bat wings. Allow hopping and climbing.
  5. Feathery bat wings
  6. Pterodactyl wings. Allow walking and climbing.
  7. Feathery pterodactyl wings
  8. Flightless fan-like fins. Allow swimming.

Tail features

Length. Roll 1d6 to determine the length and appearance of the tail.
  1. Long reptilian tail
  2. Long reptilian tail covered in feathers. Gains tickle attack.
  3. Long colorful pheasant tail feathers. Gains bonus to first impression.
  4. Long reptilian tail covered in fan-like feather. Gains bonus to flight.
  5. Short feathered fan tail. Do not roll for tail's tip.
  6. Vestigial or absent reptilian tail. Do not roll for tail's tip.

Tip. Roll 1d6 to determine the appearance of the tail's tip, if any.
  1. No special tip
  2. Spaded tip. Gains stab attack.
  3. Feathered plume. Gains bonus to first impression.
  4. Snake's head. Gains venomous bite attack.
  5. Cockatrice's head. Gains petrifying bite attack.
  6. Basilisk's head. Gains petrifying gaze attack.

Special attacks

Type. Roll 1d3 to determine the general nature of the special attack. Roll once for each head, if any.
  1. Gaze attack
  2. Bite attack
  3. Breath weapon (same dimensions as a gorgon's breath)

Effect. Roll 2d4−1 to determine the effect of the attack and the monster's coloration.
  1. Petrify. Black coloration.
  2. Immolate. Red, yellow, and orange coloration.
  3. Liquefy. Sea green coloration.
  4. Evaporate. White coloration.
  5. Freeze. Blue coloration.
  6. Hemorrhage. Blood-red coloration.
  7. Poison. Forest green coloration.

Celestial spheres cosmology, part 2

I previously mentioned the Aristotelian/Dantean cosmology of celestial spheres. The OD&D game took inspiration from the concept when it developed its Mystaraspace cosmology, which would go on to inform the cosmology of Spelljammer. This cosmology was also adopted (or adapted) by retroclones including Blood & TreasureDark Dungeons, and Voidspanners. The specifics and jargon vary between settings, so I'll be using Dark Dungeons as my primary reference here.

The basics

In contrast to the Aristotelian/Dantean cosmology, the celestial spheres are much simplified in this model and take further inspiration from the obsolete scientific theory of ether and modern astronomy; it is unique as far as cosmography models go. The solar system generally behaves much as its does in reality, with the planets orbiting the sun (although some systems may be geocentric or weirder). However, Aristotle's firmament of the fixed stars remains as the sole celestial sphere ("crystal sphere" in D&D jargon). The interplanetary space inside the sphere is an empty "void"; unlike real physics, living creatures have sufficient personal gravity to carry a small supply of air and aren't in any danger of a zero pressure environment. The space and planets within the celestial sphere is mirrored in each of the adjacent inner planes (air, earth, fire, water, ether), which are called "inner planes" because they all exist within the sphere. Outside of the sphere is the luminiferous aether, which is the equivalent of interstellar space. Other celestial spheres containing their own planetary systems exist throughout the luminiferous aether.

Space travel is generally accomplished using spacecraft that are powered by magitech or exploit quirks of the fantasy physics, such as through engines, sails, or other means of propulsion. These vessels are generally modeled after sailing ships, and may even be capable of doubling as sea ships and/or airships.

The OD&D and AD&D games differ greatly when it comes to depicting the outer planes. In the original celestial spheres cosmology, outer planes aka demiplanes were artificial spheres created by the immortals (mortals ascended to divinity) that were anchored to a celestial sphere. In AD&D's Manual of the Planes, the outer planes became independent of the celestial spheres cosmology entirely; when it was retrofitted later as Spelljammer, redundancies were introduced such as the distinction between the "phlogiston" (luminiferous aether) and the deep ethereal plane.

One wonders whether Disney's Treasure Planet was influenced by the game.

Simple variations

Blood & Treasure and Voidspanners put their own spins on this basic model. Both settings are closer to the original Aristotelian Universe in that their universe does not extend beyond the firmament, as opposed to having multiple such spheres emulating real star systems. Both settings diverge when it comes to the nature of the planets, however.

In Voidspanners, the system is heliocentric and the planets may be visited and traded with as per the Dark Dungeons model. Furthermore, the void is full of breathable ether; although prolonged exposure may still be harmful. Overall, the differences from the standard model are minor. As a supplement for Basic Fantasy, no rules for the other planes' geography are included.

In Blood & Treasure, the celestial sphere model is combined with the "orrery" or "solar system" model mentioned in the guides for designing your own planar cosmology. Here the planetary system ("Land of Nod") is geocentric and the transitive, inner and outer planes are presented as concentric spheres and associated planets: the ethereal plane corresponds to the lunar orbit, the astral plane corresponds to the space beyond, the inner planes correspond to the inner planets and the outer planes correspond to the outer planets. Taking a further page from Dante, Hell is located inside the earth and Heaven corresponds to the surface of the firmament.

Since these settings are limited to single systems, it is possible for them to be integrated into the basic model by presenting them simply as quirky spheres floating within the luminiferous aether. IIRC, the D&D canon cosmology uses similar logic to explain the cosmological differences between the different official campaign settings: each celestial sphere may have its own set of planes that aren't necessarily the same as those of other spheres.

On another note, the surface of the celestial sphere is comparable to the outer plane "The Vault of Stars" from 3pp Classic Play: The Book of the Planes. If you want to have adventures on the literal night sky, then I highly recommend using that book (not that I found any alternatives, mind you).

Thursday, November 21, 2019

Hellhounds and other fantastic canines

In this post, I will direct my attention briefly to the numerous varieties of fantastic canines in fantasy gaming.

Variations of the great wheel

I haven't posted a planar post in a while so I thought I should get on that.

The "wheel" or "great wheel" cosmology is the default cosmology for the D&D status quo. Originally presented in the Manual of the Planes, it has since received a bunch of different variations. Years ago I tried my hand at reinventing the wheel (pun intended), but I don't recall ever giving a comparison of this cosmology with its several variations. So here we go!

Canonical

Below are the two generally accepted versions of the Great Wheel. The Great Wheel has generally remained the same across the various editions in which it appeared, with only minor changes. The most obvious between 2e and 5e would be the condensing of the lesser elemental planes into the elemental chaos and the addition of the shadowfell and feywild to the inner planes.
Great Wheel circa 2e
Great Wheel circa 5e

The Great Wheel is also called the Planescape cosmology. The prime material plane also has crystal spheres, but those are another can of worms also called the Spelljammer cosmology. When the two are used in tandem, the fandom jargon for the setting is "Planejammer."

Apocrypha

Plenty of GMs have adopted the Great Wheel wholesale with little or no change, such as Anethemalon.
Anethemalon Planes of Existence

The Planescape fans have since added tons of other planes to the wheel. These additions include extra elemental planes, extra outer planes, and extra transitive planes.
Elemental Planes by Sapiento
More inclusive Outlands

Other wheels

Since the Great Wheel isn't OGL, third-party publishers have resorted to creating their own wheels if necessary. For example, both Mongoose's Classic Play: The Book of the Planes and Paizo's Pathfinder present simplified wheels in which the outer planes have been reduced to nine (one for each alignment). Mongoose simply called this the "wheel" cosmology; Paizo called theirs the "Great Beyond."
A generic wheel cosmogram
The Great Beyond

Personally, I prefer simplified cosmologies like the omniverse or world axis because I think all the extra paraplanes and quasiplanes get silly and redundant after a while. But that's for other posts.

Wednesday, November 20, 2019

Some thoughts on the lusca (sharktopus)

The lusca is a cryptid reputed to swim the waters of the Caribbean, variously described as part shark, dragon, and octopus. In modern popular culture, like Pathfinder Bestiary, it is often depicted as a "sharktopus."

Ideas for catfolk

Catfolk are one of the standard beastfolk races in fantasy and scifi that features beastfolk.

There isn't really much I can say that hasn't already been said by the innumerable catfolk writeups in various fantasy supplements. Instead, I decided to put together some traits from various different catfolk in scifi and fantasy. I had this in my head for a couple years but somehow haven't posted until now.

My primary influences are: khajiit from The Elder Scrolls, artathi from Legends & Lairs: Mythic Races, and c'tarl-c'tarl from Outlaw Star.

From the khajiit: I take the concept of astrological birth signs determining the degree of anthropomorphism. Based on their birth sign, a catfolk may range in size from a talking housecat to a horse-sized panther and range in appearance from an intelligent feline to a human/elf with slight feline features.

From the artathi: I take the concept of a caste system based on their feline species aspect. These castes would include lion, tiger, puma, lynx, cheetah, leopard, jaguar, and snow leopard. As with other caste systems, each is pigeonholed into particular social and economic roles. Mixed-race individuals would be considered outcasts.

From the c'tarl-c'tarl: I take the concept of a shapeshifter who can change shape from nearly human to giant cat and everything in between. This would be considered a distinct birth sign.

Miscellaneous links

Tuesday, November 19, 2019

On the naming of demons

Demons (and other fiends, I don’t distinguish here) in fantasy gaming have undergone a few naming schemes over the last forty-odd years.

Originally they were named with numerals, but that quickly became unwieldy once they got to "Type V demon"/"Type 6 demon"/"Sixth-category demon" and beyond. Although the Dante’s Inferno-inspired supplements by Judges Guild and Spellbook Games apparently expanded this scheme by adding Latin letters, such as a "Type 3B devil". Similar numerical expansions are apparently used in other OSR products.

In later editions of D&D the demons got gibberish names (apparently meant to be demon language) by species like balor, marilith, and glabrezu. This also quickly becomes unwieldy because these names don't mean anything in English. There are a bazillion demons and those names aren't memorable.

Many writers across many 3rd-party publishers opted to use simple descriptions of the demon’s obvious shtick, such as ice devil, fly demon, two-faced demon, jester demon, etc. Pathfinder 2e takes this approach: balor becomes "fire demon", glabrezu becomes "treachery demon," marilith becomes "pride demon," shemhazian becomes "mutilation demon," succubus becomes "lust demon," vrock becomes "wrath demon", etc.

I see nothing inherently wrong with all of these approaches. I think it makes sense for all demons to have numerical indexes, names in the demon tongue, and descriptive names in English.


The arbitrariness of beastfolk

Fantasy gaming has many races variously known as “beastmen” or “beastfolk.” Catfolk, ratfolk, mongrelfolk, etc. I have alluded to these in past posts but didn't address them directly until now.

The basic premise of my world building attempt is that the beastfolk are worshipers of the beast lords, one of the groups of primal spirits or nature deities alongside the plant lords and elemental lords (a la Stormbringer, which D&D liberally copies). The beast lords are responsible for creating them, and each race is associated with a specific lord (or lords, as the case may be).

There are multiple ways to create beastfolk, not just heredity. This is because there are an arbitrary number of possible beastfolk and I don’t want to waste time on a bazillion entries for each race. Some may receive more attention than others, if only because fantasy gaming has focused more on them. For example, beastmen could be transformed humans, uplifted animals, or wholly original.

Here are some examples I thought of how a beastman’s animal aspect might be determined. I'm sure you can think of countless others.
  • When an animal is uplifted to a beastman, its aspect is determined by the animal it used to be.
    • This aspect may be changed through various means, such as the blessing of another patron, transmutation spells, etc.
  • Beastmen are born in an ambiguous humanoid form and gain their aspect later in life. (Alternately, their animal aspect is not fixed until later in life. Like the daemons in His Dark Materials, their animal aspects shift based on their emotions.)
    • A beastboy goes on a rite of passage to find his spirit animal or totem. After succeeding, he gains his animal aspect and is considered a man.
    • A beastboy receives magical tattoos that determine his animal aspect, a la Lunars in Exalted.
    • The animal aspect is determined by their faith or the blessing of their patron totem. Changing their faith (i.e. Beast Lord worshiped) changes their animal aspect.
    • The animal aspect is determined by hereditary bloodline. This may be general (mammalian beastfolk has mammalian children of any specific aspect) or highly specific (wolfmen are only born to wolfmen parents).
  • How quick is the transformation from one aspect to another?
    • As a beastboy matures into a beastman, his human visage steadily becomes more beastly until he is fully therianthropomorphic.
    • The transformation occurs more or less instantly upon the aspect being determined or changed.
    • A beastboy's animal aspect is present from birth. He may become more or less human as he matures or grows in power, similar to anime character power ups.
    • Beastmen appear as varying combinations of human and animal, determined by genetics, magical practices, or random chance.

Here are some examples of specific races that seem to show up fairly regularly (and not so regularly) in fantasy:
  • The reptilefolk are the descendants of the Atlantean saurian race (aka dramojh, sarruk, sli’ess, samat, etc). The saurian race selectively bred themselves into a caste system, each caste resembling different reptiles like serpents, chameleons and tortoises. This obscured the unstable nature of their bloodlines, and by modern times many display bizarre mutations. The serpentfolk engaged in crossbreeding experiments with freakish results. (Based on Slavelords of Cydonia, He-Man, Warhammer Fantasy, Robert E. Howard, etc.) They would be patronized by, depending on whether you care for real taxonomy, the Beast Lord of Dragons, Reptiles, Dinosaurs, and/or Birds.
  • The catfolk have highly varying degrees of anthropomorphism, ranging from nearly human to bipedal panthers. These are known as birth-signs since it is determined by astrology at their birth. Although they look identical at birth, close to humans in fact, as they age their appearance develops into that decided by their birth-sign. (Based on Outlaw Star, The Elder Scrolls, anime catgirls, etc.)
  • The ratfolk always look like anthropomorphic rats, although they range in size from halflings to ogres. They come in many different cultures, ranging from peaceful monastic orders, to alien biker gangs, to vicious hordes of mad cultists. (Based on Ptolus, Scarred Lands, Warhammer Fantasy, Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, Biker Mice From Mars, etc.) They would be patronized by the Beast Lord of Rodents and/or Muroids.
  • The mongrelfolk are the chimerical beastmen. I already wrote a post about them in which I posited they are the planetouched by the planes of discord and chaos. As beastmen, they would be patronized by the Beast Lord of Chimeras; s/he may well be a naturalized aberration or other demon of chaos.

In the future I would like to give more detail to various beastmen races. Perhaps expand the beast lords into a full-fledged feudal system to account for the messiness of real taxonomy.

Miscellaneous links

Saturday, November 16, 2019

Celestial spheres cosmology

The “celestial spheres” are an outdated model of the solar system dating back to Aristotle.

The Aristotelian universe consisted of the world in the center (composed of the four elements air, earth, fire, and water), the celestial spheres above (composed of the fifth element ether), and the spherical firmament of the fixed stars surrounding all.


People actually believed this was how the universe worked. It supplanted earlier models in which the world was flat, the heavens or “firmament” was a literal dome which separated the world from the “waters” of primordial chaos, and the underworld was another dome under the flat Earth which complemented the heavens. (A model I mentioned in past posts. It roughly informs the omniverse and world axis cosmologies.)

This model influenced some retroclone writers. The Pathfinder cosmology (specifically the Golarion campaign setting) based the organization its elemental planes on Aristotle’s. The Blood & Treasure cosmology (specifically the Nod campaign setting) adopts Aristotle’s cosmology wholesale, and combines it with that of Dante’s Inferno too. As I mentioned in a previous post, Nod’s cosmology goes even further and makes each of the planets an outer plane. ADDEDUM 11/21/2019: The Voidspanners setting also uses a variation of the Aristotelian celestial spheres. Unlike Nod, these are mundane planets and not outer planes as planets.

Why is this remotely relevant? It occurred to me that I was going about campaign cosmology all wrong. This should be common sense! There is no reason why the multiverse cannot contain multiple universes with different cosmologies. A flat world, celestial spheres, solar systems, etc.

In future posts I should like to describe a multiverse consisting of multiple universes with different cosmologies.

Friday, November 15, 2019

Walking dead and spectral dead intellect

An oddity I noticed in the distribution of undead intelligence scores is that the incorporeal undead are almost always of average intelligence. Of those in the MM, only the shadow has INT lower than 10.

I don’t understand why this would be the case. In general I would have expected the specter, will-o’-wisp, and wraith to have lower intelligence. I would’ve expected at least some spectral dead with comparable intelligence to zombies and skeletons.

Or perhaps, more likely, the writers didn’t give much thought to what effect intelligence had on the fluff. 

In real life, the voodoo religion tells of “astral zombies” as the spectral counterparts of regular zombies. These spirits are enslaved by bokors and used to perform various tasks.

In a future post, I plan on dedicating thought to a more thoughtful ecology of the spectral dead. With influence from The Lord of the Rings too.

We don’t need so many reptilian races

One of many oddities of D&D is that it has a bazillion reptilian races. As with goblinoids and orcs, I think it makes the most sense to treat all these chike/gatorfolk, kobolds, lizardfolk, serpentfolk/naga/ophiduan/inphidian, lernaeati/dorvae/manalishi, troglodytes/xulgath, dinosaurfolk, etc as members of the same monster family. For example, the reptilian races could be distinguished by categories like subrace, caste, size, tribe, degree of anthropomorphism, etc a la Warhammer Fantasy lizardmen.

Way back I briefly recapped the saurian race from Slavelords of Cydonia, which had several castes representing different reptile varieties like gators, chameleons, and turtles. I said back then that it made sense too, but this moment I wanted to add something else.

The reptilian races should be explicitly linked with dragons, dragonborn/dragonkin/dragonspawn, and so forth. In D&D-inspired media, this is already seen to a degree like the “dragonewt” race.

Furthermore, I think this family should (vaguely) include what amphibian races exist. A herptilefolk family? I alluded to this a while back when I discussed the Ogdoad of Ancient Egypt, a paired set of primordial deities in the forms of snakes and frogs. (Which are the parents of basilisks. Patterns are fun!)

In a future post I intend to explain about how I would define dragons based on comparative mythology rather than the idiosyncratic D&D norms.