The Gates of Heaven: Giving Celestia the Dicefreaks Treatment

[The Tygre]

Re-scrubbing Thought #1: If you've looked over the list from Rip, or you're just familiar with angelology in general, then you should be aware of a universal theme. Many, if not most, names of angels end in the suffixes 'iel' or 'ael'. In its original language, this roughly translates to the term 'of God'. So for instance you might have 'Sword of God' or 'Rain of God' or even 'Venom of God' as in the case of Sammael. I propose that we drop this for several reasons. For starts, 'of God' is no longer appropriate for the polytheistic setting. If we could translate it into 'of Heaven' or 'of Virtue', then that might be acceptable. Second, the iel/ael suffix could be viewed in the same light as the 'daemon/oloth' suffix of neutral evil outsiders. In fact I dare say it might be a direct counter, a bright mirror to the neutral evils. It could be applied to the Angel species as a whole, resulting in Solaraels and Planteriels and such. The various 'iels' and 'aels' would be refurbished on a case by case/name by name basis. So, for example, 'Ariel' would be shortened to 'Ar' and then extended as deemed appropriate.

[PairO'Dice Lost]

Originally Posted by The Tygre

Re-scrubbing Thought #1: If you've looked over the list from Rip, or you're just familiar with angelology in general, then you should be aware of a universal theme. Many, if not most, names of angels end in the suffixes 'iel' or 'ael'. In its original language, this roughly translates to the term 'of God'. So for instance you might have 'Sword of God' or 'Rain of God' or even 'Venom of God' as in the case of Sammael. I propose that we drop this for several reasons. For starts, 'of God' is no longer appropriate for the polytheistic setting. If we could translate it into 'of Heaven' or 'of Virtue', then that might be acceptable.

That's a great idea. A quick googling doesn't find any translator that recognizes "ael" or "iel," so translating "of X" into that form might be difficult, but it's worth a shot.

Second, the iel/ael suffix could be viewed in the same light as the 'daemon/oloth' suffix of neutral evil outsiders. In fact I dare say it might be a direct counter, a bright mirror to the neutral evils. It could be applied to the Angel species as a whole, resulting in Solaraels and Planteriels and such. The various 'iels' and 'aels' would be refurbished on a case by case/name by name basis. So, for example, 'Ariel' would be shortened to 'Ar' and then extended as deemed appropriate.

Hmm. I don't know if I like that idea as much. First off, it involves changing the naming scheme of all the angels, which might not be the best idea. Second of all, the NE yugoloths' -oloth suffix already has a sort-of reflection in the NG guardinals (avoral, cervidal, equinal, leonal, etc.), and none of the other exemplar races have the same schtick; changing the angels' names to mirror the 'loths when they're not strictly opposites doesn't seem necessary.

[The Tygre]

Good call there on the guardinals. I keep forgetting this stuff. Must be going barmy.

[Iamyourking]

As promised, here is the statblock so far for Principalities. I figured I'd start low and work my way up as I get a feel for the project, so these guys are about between a solar and one of the BoED Hebdomad in power; although I intend them to be primarily casters so they could easily end up very powerful.

Spoiler

Principality, the Patrons of Civilization
Large Outsider (Archon, Extraplanar, Good, Lawful)
Hit Dice: 29d8+261 (395 hp)
Initiative: +10
Speed: 50 ft. (15 squares), fly 150 ft. (Good)
Armor Class: 46 (-1 size, +6 dexterity, +10 armor (+5 moderate fire resistance mithril breastplate), +14 natural, +7 deflection), touch 22, flat-footed 40
Base Attack/Grapple: +29/+41
Attack: +6 defending, merciful quarterstaff +42 melee (1d10+18) or +4 flaming, holy, keen adamantine longsword +39 melee (2d6+12+2d6 against evil+1d6 fire) or slam +39 melee (2d8+8)
Full Attack: +6 defending, merciful quarterstaff +42/+37/+32/+27 melee (1d10+18) or +4 flaming, holy, keen adamantine longsword +39/+34/+29/+25 melee (2d6+12+2d6 against evil+1d6 fire /17-20) or 2 slams +39 melee (2d8+8)
Space/Reach: 10 ft./10 ft.
Special Attacks: Spell-like abilities, spells, turn evil
Special Qualities: Aura of Menace, damage reduction 15/epic and evil, darkvision 60 ft., immunity to electricity and petrification, low-light vision, outsider traits, protective aura, spell resistance 39, teleport, tongues
Saves: Fort +25, Ref +22, Will +28
Abilities Str 26 (+8), Dex 22 (+6), Con 28 (+9), Int 30 (+10), Wis 34 (+12), Cha 26 (+8)
Skills: 16 skills with 31 ranks and 1 with 26 ranks
Feats: Augment Summoning, Empower Spell, Enlarge Spell, Heighten Spell, Improved Initiative, Purify Spell, Quicken Spell, Spell Penetration
Epic Feats: Improved Metamagic (x2)
Environment: The Seven Mounting Heavens of Celestia
Organization: Solitary, pair, or delegation (3-5)
Challenge Rating: 25
Treasure: No coins, double goods, standard items
Alignment: Always Lawful Good
Advancement: By class level
Level Adjustment: –

[i]


Combat
As befits beings primarily concerned with the growth and patronage of mortal civilizations, Principalities are not particularly inclined towards combat and will only fight if pressed. Still, they are no cowards and will not hesitate to draw their blazing swords in defense of their pupils.

Aura of Menace: As per the Archon ability, save DC is 34
Spells Principalities can cast divine spells as 22th-level clerics. A principality has access to two of the following domains: Air, CommunityBOED, Good, Law, and Protection. The save DCs are Wisdom-based.
Typical Cleric Spells Prepared (6/8/8/7/7/7/6/5/5+1/5; save DC 20+spell level))
0—create water, detect magic, guidance (2), resistance (2); 1st—bless (2), cause fear, detect evil, divine favor (2), entropic shield, sanctuary*, shield of faith; 2nd—align weapon, bear’s endurance (2), bull’s strength, consecrate (2), eagle’s splendor, elationBoED, shield other*; 3rd—daylight, glyph of warding, invisibility purge, magic circle against evil, protection from energy*, prayer, refreshmentBoED, wind wall; 4th—death ward (2), discern lies, dismissal, greater luminous armorBoED, greater status*, neutralize poison (2); 5th—break enchantment, commune, dispel evil, hallow, mark of justice, plane shift, scrying, telepathic bond*; 6th—banishment, heal, heroes’ feast*, mass cure moderate wounds, mass owl’s wisdom, undeath to death, word of recall; 7th—bastion of goodBoED, ethereal jaunt, holy word, regenerate, repulsion*, symbol of stunning; 8th—earthquake, fire storm, greater spell immunity, holy aura, mass cure critical wounds, mind blank*; 9th— end to strifeBoED, etherealness, gate, mass heal*, miracle, sanctify the wickedBoED.
*Domain spell. Domains: Community and Protection.
Spell-like Abilities
Summon Archons
Turn Evil: As per the Cleric ability, but also functioning on evil outsiders and elementals.

The deflection bonus comes from their crowns, which are basically refluffed rings of protection made slightly more accessible by taking the head slot instead of the fingers. In addition, the staff is a symbol of their position and also serves as both a holy symbol and a rod of authority; although it just needs to be recharged after 500 minutes instead of crumbling to dust.

I can make a new thread for these if that is desired, but I figure that I might as well keep them here when we only have about 1 1/4 creatures. Speaking of which, any plans for Sandalphon yet? I'm quite fond of the guy and I'd hate to see a month's worth of work go to waste.

As for the -iel or -ael thing, I say keep it and just say it either means "Of heaven" or "Of Celestia" or nothing at all and is just a common naming trait for Archons; seeing as how the only members of the Hebdomad who don't have it are Pistis Sophia and maybe Erathaol.

[Eldan]

I think we should first agree on what archons we actually need before we start making new types.I'm still very much in favour of keeping the first seven classes, where the principalities don't really fit anymore... while the idea itself is solid, I'm not sure it fits with the flavour.
For organizations sake (which we should maintain), I think we should finish the big picture before we start going into details. Decide on the naming and mythology issue, discuss what types of archons there should be, lay down the geography and purpose of layers and rulers, before we start statting up creatures.

Now "Demon/daemon" (From Ancient Greek δαίμων (daimon, “a god, goddess, divine power, genius, guardian spirit”), from δαίω (daio, “to divide, to distribute destinies, to allot”).) and "angel" (From Middle English aungel, from Old English engel, influenced by Old French angel, both from Late Latin angelus, from Ancient Greek ἄγγελος (angelos, “messenger”).) are originally neutral terms. So is Archon. I'd say the use of those terms isn't inherently problematic. The naming scheme, however, is. What about angels not ending in -iel/-ael?

The seven are named:

Barachiel: "The Blessings of God", one of the eastern orthodox archangels. The angel of lightning. Problematic.

Domiel: ends in -iel, but is not mentioned on wikipedia. Google finds D&D results and a few people named domiel, but no translation.

Erathaol: seems to be an original name for D&D.


Pistis Sophia: "Faith in Wisdom/Wisdom in Faith" is, according to wiki, the title of a gnostic text. Also problematic.

Raziel: "The secrets of God". The keeper of secrets and mysteries (what a very fitting name for his D&D role). Also problematic.

Sealtiel: alternative spelling of "Selpahiel". "Prayer of God". Orthodox and catholic archangel. The angel of prayer. Also problematic.

Zaphkiel: I can find a "Zadkiel", but the name is problematic anyway.


So, our problem is that, in order to do this on this forum, we'd have to kick out six of the seven canon archons. Perhaps we should PM a mod and ask, mentioning that we are using the names, but not their real-world mythology?

And does anyone else think it's funny how WotC seems to have picked angels whose names totally don't fit with their roles?

[blackjack217]

Originally Posted by Zaydos

He sounds like he'd be Lawful Neutral, not Lawful Good and more up to Arcadia's methods (good no matter the cost) than Mount Celestia's.

Nah I guess I am not explaining him very well. The any tactic was a horrible turn of phrase. Lets give some examples:

Lets say he is fighting an epic level party consisting of a fighter, a rogue, a cleric and a wizard. He hits the wizard all the way into negative Hp (unlikely I know) he will immediately kill the wizard before he can be healed and brought back into the fight. That's not evil he's "good not dumb". If feasible he will give them a chance to repent and atone though he is not stupid about it. If one surrenders he will certainly not kill

If given a choice between saving the hostage from the tediously cliched deathtrap and chasing the equally cliched villain he will summon an Archon to do which ever task is safer while he takes the most dangerous task.

A third example is the lowly lantern archon who is about to be killed. He will gladly put himself in harms way for any innocent or member of his command from a first level commoner and the lowliest of archons to kings and Asmodeus his second in command

To him there is no such thing as an acceptable loss and that fundamentally, is what makes him good. Above all else he is a general who cares about his men.

Also Iamyour king about Sandalphon? His fighting style seems pretty similar to Zaphkiel so you could just rename him and change a few abilities and some minor refluff and we'll have the leader of the Hedebond

Edit: Also as for struture let me propose a list of questions we need to answer:
1. Outsider dominated or deity dominated?
2. Will we be keeping the Hedebond as the top LG outsiders and if not who?
3. Seven archons or are we just going to build LG counterparts to everything in the fiendish arsenal? (consensus seems to be building towards 7 but there are already more from WoTC so we would need to decide which)
4. One thread or many? I can see arguments for both but we should probably decide soon.
5. the whole mythos thing, what level of influence is acceptable? (my position is no archangel Micheal or other icons but beyond that I am pretty chill) And should I have even brought it up?

[Eldan]

Hmm. Now I'm confused. The way you describe him now, what makes him different from any other Archon? Those are just viable tactics, not anything special.

[The Tygre]

Actually, I did a little research on good ol' Zaphkiel yesterday. Our illustrious master of the Seventh actually has more in common with his alternate title, Cassiel. Cassiel is the master of the seventh heaven, angel of Saturn, and associated with the constellation... Okay, I actually forgot that. His direction is North (like, say, going North up a mountain?), and his profile includes solitude, the Kabbalistic ability to move through space quickly (teleportation?) and tears. Cassiel is a relatively inactive angel, spending most of his time sitting back and watching the cosmos unfold, rarely taking any direct action. He is focused on contemplation to attain a higher level of understanding and tranquility. Also, he rides a totally bitchin' dragon.

And do we -have- to get rid of Pistis Sophia's backstory? It's just so badass and awesome.

[Eldan]

I wasn't really saying that we would have to get rid of everything. Just that basically every Archon on the higher levels is directly lifted from one or the other Christian or Judaic mythology. Taking them all out would mean to basically rewrite Celestia on a level where nothing would remain as in canon.

[blackjack217]

Originally Posted by Eldan

Hmm. Now I'm confused. The way you describe him now, what makes him different from any other Archon? Those are just viable tactics, not anything special.

What is special is that he is frighteningly good at it. Also he is almost fanatic devotion to the care of the men under his command is his defining characteristic and he sets himself impossible standards and knows it.
His inspiration (a fictional character whom I mentioned in an earlier post) probably achieved a kill ratio well in excess of 5 to 1 despite being heavily outnumbered and deep in enemy territory (as in running out of fuel and weapons was a real possibility repairing damage had to be done on the move, ect)
edit: as a rule of thumb I would say that if you have to do research to find the inspiration its probably okay but if you pull the names and personalities directly from a well known mythological being be careful.

[The Tygre]

Technically Sophie is part of gnostic myth, but I see your point. I've had little luck finding angels that aren't based off one of the Abrahamic mythologies. There are few in Japanese myth, some in Buddhism, and the trusty Devas from Hinduism, but that's all I've got.

[Eldan]

If you make the definition sufficiently wide, pretty much any kind of divine messenger or servant counts, though many mythologies really seem to lack those. Einherjar and Valkyries are already taken by Ysgard, after all.

[Zaydos]

Originally Posted by blackjack217

Edit: Also as for struture let me propose a list of questions we need to answer:
1. Outsider dominated or deity dominated?
2. Will we be keeping the Hedebond as the top LG outsiders and if not who?
3. Seven archons or are we just going to build LG counterparts to everything in the fiendish arsenal? (consensus seems to be building towards 7 but there are already more from WoTC so we would need to decide which)
4. One thread or many? I can see arguments for both but we should probably decide soon.
5. the whole mythos thing, what level of influence is acceptable? (my position is no archangel Micheal or other icons but beyond that I am pretty chill) And should I have even brought it up?

Well still not seeing how he's anything abnormal now, or should be counted as 8th of the 7, if he's a legendary general that would mean he's equal to a Duke of Hell not a Lord of the 9. To answer the questions:

1. Outsider dominated. That's one thing about Planescape is that while the deities may or may not be infinitely more powerful, they are more concerned with the Prime than the Planes and leave the management of the Planes to a deity neutral 3rd party (the Oursiders).
2.I'd vote for keeping the Hedgemond and giving them a level or two in badass and some good fluff; they give us an easy counterpoint to the Lords of the 9 and we don't need something above their level. If you mean completely removing the current Hedgemond and replacing it that might work too (they've done that to the Lords of the 9 before).
3. Personally I prefer more than 7 with 7 main stages each linked to a layer and a Hedgemond member, but the consensus is 7 with subgroups.
4. Many, link them back, maybe add a tag to the title that marks them as part of this project, but it would get confusing quick.
5. I'd say at minimum steer clear of the well known ones: Raphael, Michael, Uriel, Gabriel, I can't remember the "7 Archangels" all off the top of my head, but I'd say at minimum don't use any of them (despite the fact that they're who I use for my on settings).

Those are just my 2 cp.

[Eldan]

You can't remember all seven archangels because different scriptures don't agree on what the seven are. Most of those in the BOED are among the archangels.

[blackjack217]

Originally Posted by Zaydos

Well still not seeing how he's anything abnormal now, or should be counted as 8th of the 7, if he's a legendary general that would mean he's equal to a Duke of Hell not a Lord of the 9.

In the fluff he is Asamodeus' ex-boss before he, 8th of the 7, was captured after holding the line allowing Asamodeus and the other two who founded Battor (in codex) to escape. The reason why he is special is that when given a choice to apoint 8th of 7, Asamodeus or Zaphkiel they went with 8th of the 7.
Also 8th of the 7 is not his official title but I gave him that because if he escaped and returned to celestia Zaphkiel would say "Welcome back, sir"

[Zaydos]

Except if we're doing like Dice Freaks there's nothing LG stronger than Zaphkiel so it doesn't really fit to have an 8th of 7 still.

Also if you're going with the Codex their direct superiors were the gods themselves because only the gods were stronger.

[blackjack217]

Originally Posted by Zaydos

Except if we're doing like Dice Freaks there's nothing LG stronger than Zaphkiel so it doesn't really fit to have an 8th of 7 still.

Also if you're going with the Codex their direct superiors were the gods themselves because only the gods were stronger.

Modified codex that is justified in that they basically say its not 100% true. Also they never say that Asamodeus was the first one chosen, I think, and besides like Asamodeus is ever going to admit he was the 2nd choice? In addition this guy has been trapped in the abyss since before Asamodeus fell and both Asamodeus and Zaphkiel think he is dead. Basically A DM is probably only going to use him if freeing him is a major focus of an epic level campaign.

[Zaydos]

Still if we're setting up Zaphkiel to be Asmodeus's counterpoint, putting someone in who is stronger than he was isn't a good choice. It undercuts his authority right there. Asmodeus is the biggest bad in Baator, and the biggest bad there ever has been there. If Zaphkiel is supposed to be his counterpoint then we need to keep him the biggest good for it to be effective.

[blackjack217]

Originally Posted by Zaydos

Still if we're setting up Zaphkiel to be Asmodeus's counterpoint, putting someone in who is stronger than he was isn't a good choice. It undercuts his authority right there. Asmodeus is the biggest bad in Baator, and the biggest bad there ever has been there. If Zaphkiel is supposed to be his counterpoint then we need to keep him the biggest good for it to be effective.

The guys been imprisoned for gods know how long he is hardly at full strength. He was originally designed to be Asmodeus' one weakness and the guy who saved his life before he fell. I can put him in as Zaphkiel's number 2 or his champion if you want but I want him to be a serious ghost for Asmodeus.

[Zaydos]

Originally Posted by blackjack217

The guys been imprisoned for gods know how long he is hardly at full strength. He was originally designed to be Asmodeus' one weakness and the guy who saved his life before he fell. I can put him in as Zaphkiel's number 2 or his champion if you want but I want him to be a serious ghost for Asmodeus.

As Zaphkiel's #2, or even just a unique celestial from way back he could have easily fought alongside and even saved Asmodeus's life and still be a major ghost for Asmodeus without having been the highest echelon of power. Although I thought we were trying to go neutral on whether the Twin Serpents of Law, Three Serpents of Law, or FCII cosmology was accurate.

[Eldan]

I agree on ancient cosmology, let's go the Planescape way:
"These are some ancient legends, there are many more. Only those personally involved know the truth, and they are not saying which are true. Perhaps none are."

[Zaydos]

Originally Posted by Eldan

I agree on ancient cosmology, let's go the Planescape way:
"These are some ancient legends, there are many more. Only those personally involved know the truth, and they are not saying which are true. Perhaps none are."

Well Planescape had possibly the best fluff of D&D so I can't help but agree there. Sadly lacking on the Upper Planes though and that's why we're here.

Okay so we need to whip the seven into shape, severely up the power of Throne Archons, and make the 2nd strongest Archons roughly as powerful as Cornugons?

[blackjack217]

The guys role is to be Asmodeus's ghost so its nearly impossible to fluff him without going into origin. If anyone has any idea how to do that I will welcome it. I have done an update on the origin in my first post though I am thinking to refluff him as Asamodeus's former second and most effective general from the codex wars.

[Zaydos]

Well making a cosmology neutral ghost for Asmodeus is harder, but not impossible. Leave it vague, say in one version X, although certain graybeards rattle their boneboxes about how he was actually that light of goodness that once existed in Asmodeus and the archfiend cast off. Or some such.

[PairO'Dice Lost]

On the Hebdomad naming front: I don't see any problem with keeping their names and basic D&D backstory without bringing any RL traits into things. D&D has done this plenty of times before with several lesser fiendish Powers and, in WotC's case, basically every vestige in ToM, where their names and spheres of influence all taken right out of the Lesser Key of Solomon but the fluff justifying it is 100% D&D.

On the varieties of archons: I really think keeping the 7 theme going is a good idea. Baator has many varieties of baatezu because they get promoted and demoted and therefore need a bigger variety of forms than just nine, so the archons, being in one form permanently, should probably stick with variations on a theme rather than entirely new archons. Also, Celestia has the theme of perfection going on with its LG-ness where the Hells have scheming and plotting and such, so having a much stronger "seven" theme than Baator has a "nine" theme would be appropriate.

On the "eighth of seven" guy: I'm not sure I like how it's turning out. Blackjack, you seem to be a bit too invested in him, trying to make him the best and coolest and most special and on par with Asmodeus and so forth without thinking of the rest of the mythology we're going to be making. If you're already thinking of making him the major focus of an epic-level campaign over all of the other archons with more traction and lore behind them, that's not a good sign. There's also the issue that it takes the side of the "Asmodeus is a fallen angel" story without offering alternate interpretations for others. I'd strongly suggest putting him on the back burner until we flesh out the background of more lesser Powers or a few of the Hebdomad.

On multiple threads: That's probably for the best; keeping track of everything here would be much more difficult than simply linking things in the OP. Once I get started on the different subtypes of archons (hopefully on Tuesday, after my tests and homework are all finished) I'm going to be posting a separate thread with the [Gates of Heaven] tag. Feel free to follow my example, or not, but making new threads for each creature group is definitely the way to go.

[Eldan]

So, sub-Project suggestions:

Creatures
Hound Archon
Lantern Archon
Sword Archon
Throne Archon
Trumpet Archon
Warden Archon

Paragons
Barachiel, the Messenger
Domiel, the Mercy-Bringer
Earathol, the Seer
Pistis Sophia, the Ascetic
Raziel, the Crusader
Sealtiel, the Defender
Zaphkiel, the Watcher

Geography
Lunia, the Silver Heaven and it's silver Sea.
Mercuria, the Golden Heaven and it's gentle green hills
Venya, the Pearly Heaven and it's snowy slopes
Solania, the Crystal Heaven and it's foggy valleys
Mertion, the Platinum Heaven and it's fortresses
Jovar, the Glittering Heaven and it's gemstone hills

The Illuminated Heaven is unknown and mostly unreachable.

[Zaydos]

What CRs are we aiming at for the 7 Archons? There are 16 ranks in Baator so we'll have to miss 8 of them (although 2 ranks sit at CR 7).

I'm guessing keep Lantern Archons how they are (stronger than Lemures), make Thrones CR 20, Sword or Trumpet CR 16 (missing CR 18), the other of those two CR 13, the next lower CR 11 or 10, then CR 7 or 8, CR 4, and CR 2 lantern archons?

[blackjack217]

consider him on the back burner

[Iamyourking]

I was re-reading the Gates of Hell for inspiration and I came across mentions of powerful archons that we haven't mentioned yet. I know we're trying to fit the two projects together, but do we have plans for Asha; the Virtue of Justice, Sanoi; the Holy Mother, Metatron, and Mikhail; the Virtue of Valor?

[Eldan]

Michael should be really, really out. That's one we just can't take.
The others... well, they aren't in canon, and we'd have to break the theme of sevens, unless we make them thrones instead of tomes.