Collective words for alignment-races?

[ZeroiaSD]

Demons. Devils. Archons. Azata. Proteans. Modrons.


All of these and more are exemplars of their alignment, coming from their planes, are each other's rivals, and have a certain symmetry to how they work.


Is there a good word for 'em? It's not just 'outsider,' because not all outsiders are part of such a group or serve as such representatives of an alignment or cause.

[Slayer Lord]

I'm not quite sure I understand the question. Are you asking for a collective word for them based on broad alignment? I generally use Fiend when talking about evil outsiders as a whole, or Celestial for good outsiders. I can't think of any collective name for neutral outsiders off the top of my head.

[Jay R]

The quick answer to your question (which I assume you already know) is this:

No. There is no collective term for the races that are alignment-avatars.

Now, let's move on to the real question:

Should there be such a term, and if so, does anybody have a suggestion?

[Seto]

Huh? I thought they were called Exemplars. (not the class)

EDIT : At least that's what I call them. I picked up the word in afroakuma's thread, but it's very possibly a misuse.

[ZeroiaSD]

The quick answer to your question (which I assume you already know) is this:

I suspected, but held out the possibility that I may be wrong.

Now, let's move on to the real question:

Should there be such a term, and if so, does anybody have a suggestion?

Seto's Exempler suggestion is pretty good.


Hm, to spitball more... Embodiments?

One could get poetic and call them 'the Wills of the Planes' or something.

[Psyren]

You mean one word that collectively encompasses Celestials, Fiends, Proteans/Slaadi and Inevitables/Modrons right?

Yeah I'm not aware of one either, but Exemplars and Embodiments both sound fine to me.

EDIT: forgot Aeons. (does 3.5 have an equivalent? A race of TN outsiders?)

[hamishspence]

EDIT: forgot Aeons. (does 3.5 have an equivalent? A race of TN outsiders?)

Rilmani (Fiend Folio).

[shaikujin]

Closest things that come to mind are the names of the templates that give creatures alignement subtypes - axiomatic, anarchic, celestial and fiendish.

[Inevitability]

Aligned or Aligned Ones?

[Jowgen]

From my ganders about Afro's thread, I am quite positivie that Exemplars actually is the appropriate term. Even if not, it's what they seem to go by amongst Planescape fans.

Archon, Guardinal and Eladrin are celestials and Exemplars; not sure whether Angels also qualify.

Baatezu, Yuguloth, Demodands, Tanar'ri and Obyrith are Fiends; although whether all of them qualify as Exemplars or whether only the dominant or original Fiends qualify as exemplars, I'm not sure about either.

Modrons, (Inevitables,) Slaad and Rilmani are exemplars, but since only Mechanus has (arugably) 2 races of exemplars, there is no name. Azata and Protean are seemingly Pathfinder terms, don't know 'em.

[ZeroiaSD]

Aligned Ones is a good term... I'd be tempted to put in different names for them from different cultures. Or different examples of them have different terms- Aeons have no problem classifying them all as the same types and view them as necessary, and maybe call them Exemplars since Aeons view all as necessary. Archons view that as too complementary considering some are clearly better than others, and call them Aligned Ones.

Oh, here's another possible term- "Emerged." Since they come from their planes.

Archon, Guardinal and Eladrin are celestials and Exemplars; not sure whether Angels also qualify.

I'd include angels in, even if they're a very weird example in that they can be multiple alignments on one axis.

Modrons, (Inevitables,) Slaad and Rilmani are exemplars, but since only Mechanus has (arugably) 2 races of exemplars, there is no name. Azata and Protean are seemingly Pathfinder terms, don't know 'em.

Proteans are the CN/slaad equivalent only more snake-like and less 'infect/eat others' (honestly like 'em better, Slaad always struck me as weirdly biological compared to the others, and were a bit too 'only there to fight'. Formians had a similar issue, and got bumped to the side in favor of the Modrons and Inevitables).

Azata are simply a different name for Eladrin but have all the classic Eladrin types.

[Psyren]

Azata and Protean are seemingly Pathfinder terms, don't know 'em.

Pathfinder came up with Azata, Protean, and Aeon because Eladrin, Slaadi, and Rilmani (respectively) are IIRC trademarked/product identity.

[Necroticplague]

Proteans are the CN/slaad equivalent only more snake-like and less 'infect/eat others' (honestly like 'em better, Slaad always struck me as weirdly biological compared to the others, and were a bit too 'only there to fight'. Formians had a similar issue, and got bumped to the side in favor of the Modrons and Inevitables).

Actually, there's a good reason the Slaadi are wierd as exemplars of CN: they weren't supposed to be. Limbo producing something so uniform as a strict lifecycle of the current Slaadi would be very unusual. The current way of things is the result of a couple powerful creatures setting up the system to make sure Limbo wouldn't make things more powerful than themselves. Were this system destroyed you would get much less formed and uniform creatures.

[Werephilosopher]

As others have said, they're called "Exemplars," because they are created from their home planes to exemplify that plane's alignment.

I'd include angels in, even if they're a very weird example in that they can be multiple alignments on one axis.

Angels weren't considered Exemplars because they weren't meant to exemplify a given alignment, and because they are not created by their home planes but rather by Good deities. They still kinda exemplify Good, though, in a broad sense.

but since only Mechanus has (arugably) 2 races of exemplars

IIRC later editions of D&D stopped talking about modrons at all, so when Pathfinder came along they decided to just use inevitables as the representative race of Law instead since people were more familiar with them.

[ZeroiaSD]

Pathfinder came up with Azata, Protean, and Aeon because Eladrin, Slaadi, and Rilmani (respectively) are IIRC trademarked/product identity.

And they range from 'exact same thing, different name,' (Azata), to 'new things' (the other two).

Aeons are much more concerned with more cosmic balance rather than ethical balance, and each Aeon a specific area. Like one does life/death, another does freedom/fate, and some just are there to make sure the universe doesn't get ripped apart.

I have the idea of sticking them both in the same game and have Aeons be ones who arise from the souls of those with more druid-esque 'serve causes beyond people,' neutrality, Rilmani from souls of people who are either more apathetic on neutrality or who simply held contradictory morals.

Rilmani do feel far more 'human' in their neutrality, with a lot apathetic or watchful, some concerned with balance-of-power-in-factional/nation-sense stuff.

Actually, there's a good reason the Slaadi are wierd as exemplars of CN: they weren't supposed to be. Limbo producing something so uniform as a strict lifecycle of the current Slaadi would be very unusual. The current way of things is the result of a couple powerful creatures setting up the system to make sure Limbo wouldn't make things more powerful than themselves. Were this system destroyed you would get much less formed and uniform creatures.

Yes. They always felt shoehorned.

The Proteans explicitly arise in a variety of ways (they sometimes are souls of chaotic mortals, sometimes directly from the planes, and sometimes reproduce) and embody chaos muuuch better. Though they still have a weird 'caste' system thing which IMO feels they're still short of the ideal. CN exemplars shouldn't care about status.

IIRC later editions of D&D stopped talking about modrons at all, so when Pathfinder came along they decided to just use inevitables as the representative race of Law instead since people were more familiar with them.

Pathfinder Inevitables being a clear blend of Inevitables and Modrons- One-eyed balls present and all that.

[ekarney]

Well I misinterpreted the thread.
I thought the OP wanted collective nouns for individual alignment races.

"A magistrate of *Lawful good race*"

"A worker's union of Kobolds"

"A tavern fire of Adventurers."

[ZeroiaSD]

Well I misinterpreted the thread.
I thought the OP wanted collective nouns for individual alignment races.

"A magistrate of *Lawful good race*"

"A worker's union of Kobolds"

"A tavern fire of Adventurers."

A Collision of *Chaotic Evil race*.

[PraxisVetli]

Well I misinterpreted the thread.
I thought the OP wanted collective nouns for individual alignment races.

"A magistrate of *Lawful good race*"

"A worker's union of Kobolds"

"A tavern fire of Adventurers."

A Collision of *Chaotic Evil race*.

I love where this is going.

[Gildedragon]

A Host of *N/LG*
A Cabal of *LE*

[Falcon X]

Axiomatic. The term is Axiomatic races if they are intelligent, or axiomatic creatures if they are not.

[edit] No wait, I lied. Axiomatic is only for the Law and Chaos spectrum.

[edit 2] The closest I've come to call them are the "Planar races". However, that term often includes their offspring and minor races of their planes. Both archon and aasimar are planar races. Inner planes creatures are all called elementals and prime material people are all called either "Primes" or whatever we normally call them.
Wikipedia does a pretty decent breakdown of the major ones here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Major_planar_races

[Gildedragon]

[edit 2] The closest I've come to call them are the "Planar races". However, that term often includes their offspring and minor races of their planes. Both archon and aasimar are planar races. Inner planes creatures are all called elementals and prime material people are all called either "Primes" or whatever we normally call them.
Wikipedia does a pretty decent breakdown of the major ones here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Major_planar_races

ummmm Genies aren't elementals and they are native to the inner planes...

[Bohandas]

As others have said, they're called "Exemplars," because they are created from their home planes to exemplify that plane's alignment.

Angels weren't considered Exemplars because they weren't meant to exemplify a given alignment, and because they are not created by their home planes but rather by Good deities. They still kinda exemplify Good, though, in a broad sense.

This brings up some issues. Exemplar is the general overall term, but what do we call the subset not made from the spuks of the dead (ie, Obryiths, Slaadi, Yugoloths, Angels, Inevitables) vs the subset made up of he souls of the dead (ie
Tanar'ri, Baatezu, Archons, etc.). And into which category do Modrons fall (similar case with Demodands); they're arguably made from the souls of dead Modrons, does that count?

And what about the ones that span multiple planes (Angels, Yugoloths) or multiple forms of an alignment (Angels, Slaadi)

Pathfinder came up with Azata, Protean, and Aeon because Eladrin, Slaadi, and Rilmani (respectively) are IIRC trademarked/product identity.

Isn't "eladrin" more properly a Tolkien term and property?

Baatezu, Yuguloth, Demodands, Tanar'ri and Obyrith are Fiends; although whether all of them qualify as Exemplars or whether only the dominant or original Fiends qualify as exemplars, I'm not sure about either.

Modrons, (Inevitables,) Slaad and Rilmani are exemplars, but since only Mechanus has (arugably) 2 races of exemplars, there is no name. Azata and Protean are seemingly Pathfinder terms, don't know 'em.

The Abyss, Hades, and Baator both have at least as much a claim to multiple races of exemplars as mechanus does (The abyss has Tanar'ri, Loumaras, and Obryiths, Hades has Yugoloths and Hordelings, Baator has Baatezu and Baatorans). Plus, Mechanus and the Abyss arguably have up to three (Modrons, Formians, and Inevitables, and Obryiths, Tanar'ri, and Loumaras, respectively)

[Falcon X]

ummmm Genies aren't elementals and they are native to the inner planes...

Eh, good point. The game is never clear on this.
I'll have to research better before I can say anything firm, but I think you might still call a genie an elemental. It's one of those terms that's broader than we normally think.

Point still stands that we aren't including the Inner Planes in this discussion. We are looking at the alignment planes.

[Eldan]

This brings up some issues. Exemplar is the general overall term, but what do we call the subset not made from the spuks of the dead (ie, Obryiths, Slaadi, Yugoloths, Angels, Inevitables) vs the subset made up of he souls of the dead (ie
Tanar'ri, Baatezu, Archons, etc.). And into which category do Modrons fall (similar case with Demodands); they're arguably made from the souls of dead Modrons, does that count?

And what about the ones that span multiple planes (Angels, Yugoloths) or multiple forms of an alignment (Angels, Slaadi)

The Abyss, Hades, and Baator both have at least as much a claim to multiple races of exemplars as mechanus does (The abyss has Tanar'ri, Loumaras, and Obryiths, Hades has Yugoloths and Hordelings, Baator has Baatezu and Baatorans). Plus, Mechanus and the Abyss arguably have up to three (Modrons, Formians, and Inevitables, and Obryiths, Tanar'ri, and Loumaras, respectively)

Exemplars were not originally made from the souls of the dead, that is a newer development, cosmically speaking. Not all of them are, either: Slaad, Eladrin, Modrons and probably a few others are not.

Modrons are the Exemplars of Mechanus. Inevitables are not exemplars, they are constructed and Formians aren't even from Mechanus, originally, they invaded it from Arcadia.

Depending on theory, the Baatezu and Tanar'ri aren't native either. Some Yugoloth claim they made the Baatezu and Tanar'ri. Some say the Baatezu are fallen archons. Some think they were made by the Obyrith and Baatorians, respectively. But they aren't hte original inhabitants of their planes, in any case.

Angels (Aasimon) are something else entirely. They are not exemplars. They are not made by the planes themselves, they are made by the gods as servants. I've always thought hte lack of non-good angels was a big lack in the cosmology.

[Psyren]

Isn't "eladrin" more properly a Tolkien term and property?

Is it? I have no idea. I doubt D&D could use it so freely if it was property of the Tolkien estate, just like they can't use (or at least haven't seen them use) Ainur, Sindarin and Istari.

[Falcon X]

Is it? I have no idea. I doubt D&D could use it so freely if it was property of the Tolkien estate, just like they can't use (or at least haven't seen them use) Ainur, Sindarin and Istari.

Really? Please let me know if you find out. I'd really like to make a compendium of stuff D&D ripped off and from where, mostly so I can dive into source material in my games.
[edit] Ah, Tolkien had a term for certain elves called "Eldarin". Must learn more...

I love that I am having this same discussion on how D&D steals half their stuff in the forum post on Necropolitans (I make a claim that they are taken from DC/Vertigo and have been rebuffed).

[Deadline]

Really? Please let me know if you find out. I'd really like to make a compendium of stuff D&D ripped off and from where, mostly so I can dive into source material in my games.

I love that I am having this same discussion on how D&D steals half their stuff in the forum post on Necropolitans (I make a claim that they are taken from DC/Vertigo and have been rebuffed).

Well, there's this if you are interested:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catego..._and_mythology

Edit - Actually, pretty much the only things that aren't from folklore and mythology are the things that you can't find in the SRD. Check the Monster Manual and the SRD, and whatever is missing are the unique items. Things like Beholders, Mindflayers, and the like. These things are public domain, and freely usable by all. This isn't even that uncommon. Take a look at the vast majority of Final Fantasy monsters, for example.

Edit 2 - And here you can read a bit about Halflings, which were originally blatantly lifted from Tolkein, and then renamed and re-imagined to avoid legal troubles.

[Falcon X]

Well, there's this if you are interested:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catego..._and_mythology

Edit - Actually, pretty much the only things that aren't from folklore and mythology are the things that you can't find in the SRD. Check the Monster Manual and the SRD, and whatever is missing are the unique items. Things like Beholders, Mindflayers, and the like. These things are public domain, and freely usable by all. This isn't even that uncommon. Take a look at the vast majority of Final Fantasy monsters, for example.

Edit 2 - And here you can read a bit about Halflings, which were originally blatantly lifted from Tolkein, and then renamed and re-imagined to avoid legal troubles.

Nice, thanks. Though I'd be tempted to go further into speculative ones.
I still wouldn't call Mind Flayers and other aberrations unique in origins. They are clearly inspired by the Lovecraftian mythos and I will argue this one. Heck, mind flayers are like mini-Cthulhus. Still, D&D has laid on the flavor that has far changed them from those origins.

[Deadline]

Nice, thanks. Though I'd be tempted to go further into speculative ones.
I still wouldn't call Mind Flayers and other aberrations unique in origins. They are clearly inspired by the Lovecraftian mythos and I will argue this one. Heck, mind flayers are like mini-Cthulhus. Still, D&D has laid on the flavor that has far changed them from those origins.

They are unique enough to be legally distinct, which is about as unique an idea as you can get nowadays. Nothing new under the sun and all that.

[Bohandas]

Edit 2 - And here you can read a bit about Halflings, which were originally blatantly lifted from Tolkein, and then renamed and re-imagined to avoid legal troubles.

They really don't have any reason to be in the game. They went from being a blatant knockoff that made no sense in-context to a stripped down shell with no outstanding or interesting traits whatsoever. Why they still haven't been removed from the game is beyond me.

EDIT:
Or alternately instead of being stripped down to empty shells sometimes they get turned from knockoffs of hobbits to knockoffs of kender. Which raises the even more vexing question of why they didn't just flat out replace halflings with kender after dragonlance came out. Did TSR threaten to sue themselves?