Bestiary of Erebus

[WarKirby]

A lot of interesting stuff here. Perhaps It will inspire me to make somenew units. I see potential for even mroe mercurian UUs

And a picture of a Beast of Agares! We so need a new model for that now.

 

[MagisterCultuum]

Are we sure that that is a Beast of Agares though, and not just one of the more bestial looking Balors? The Beast of Agares description made it sound like a more mundane animal infused with unholy energies, but which would probably still look roughly like the creature it used to be. That could explain why they look so much like bears now, because they basically are bears used as thralls. (I just got to thinking it could be interesting to make it so that instead of building them there was a spell that could turn animals or beasts into such creatures in cities with Demons Altars, and where there were different versions with different art and abilities based on what creature was used. You couldn't get much stronger than infusing Gurid with dark power and making him a beast of Agares.)




"Colubra often work as mercenaries for less morale warlords..." - I believe you meant moral, not morale. Perhaps ethical would be better?




I thought that Nagas were supposed to be the Kuriotates arcane line? It seems quite odd that these would be evil servants of Ceridwen if that is the case.

Edit: I'm confusing Nagas with Lamia, aren't I? That wouldn't have happened if Lamia had made it into the Bestiary, but you seem to have forgotten about them. Would they be creations of Patrian Mages (which I think you've said before, but which would seem to conflict with the statement that "Of these beast formed by men only the centaurs retain some part of their noble nature"), creations of Amathaon (perhaps even Aasimar descended from the God of Fertility's angels), or maybe a group of Nagas or Colubra who have been redeemed?


I'm not really a fan of the Goblins, Orcs, and Ogres all being descendants of the Bannor. While Bhall was most popular among the Bannor, I believe it had been established she was revered in all good lands, even among the elves. I prefer to think that Goblins are descended from the Bannor's Elven allies, and many of the Barbarian Orcs (as opposed to the Clan of Embers) from lesser humans. I'm not sure how I'd rather Ogres have been created, perhaps from hybrids of Orks and Trolls or Hill Giants?

The pedia (mostly clearly in Capria's entry) strongly implies that Orcs have smooth skin as young children and only gain their protruding bones and inhuman appearance with age. I feel this should be stated in their Bestiary entry. I also think you should make note of the Bhall Orcs, and the fact that only they and a few Shamen still know the Old Orcish tongue (which is probably identical to Old Bannor and a little closer to Modern Bannor than to Modern Orcish, but much more verbose and melodic than either, as it is best suited for passionate love poetry and heroic epics rather than barking out orders) which most Orcs are physically incapable of speaking.



Hadn't you stated before that the experiments with Death were considered at least a little worse than those of Life? What made you change your mind?

 

[WarKirby]

The Beast of Agares description made it sound like a more mundane animal infused with unholy energies, but which would probably still look roughly like the creature it used to be. That could explain why they look so much like bears now,

no, nobody made decent unique art for them. That's why they look so much like bears now

I think seZereth mentioned he might do some if he gets the time. if not, perhaps I will.

There's a lot of nice inspiration to draw from in there. I particularly liked the look fo that Magic Immune angel for a mercurian Immortal UU, perhaps.

 

[MagisterCultuum]

There can be multiple reasons for them looking how they do. I excel at rationalizing things in lore appropriate ways much more than making game art, so I'll stick with my explanation until given a good reason to abandon it.



What would happen to the Valkyries if the Mercurians got a magic immune immortal UU? (Unrelated, but does anyone else think that Valkyries should really have a chance to spawn Einherjar or Angels from Combat?)



Also, I get the impression that Dagda's angels would not like the Mercurians at all. They are there to enforce the compact, while Basium is defying it. They are the essence of Neutrality, while Basium hates Neutrals about as much as does Zapp Brannigan, thinking anyone who is not for him is against him.


If Runewyns were added to the game, I'd say they would probably have to be in events or be Force sphere summons. (Hmm...the ability to "cross all barriers" sounds like it could mean they would have no trouble entering the Ring of Carcer. Of course, that doesn't mean they should would be able or willing to let Brigit out.) Actually, I rather like the idea of a Force III summon that is Magic Immune, targets Arcane units in stacks of stronger units, defends first against arcane units, has a large bonus vs arcane units, and maybe has a post combat python call or spell to remove channeling and/or spell sphere promotions from enemy mages and maybe dispel summons.

 

[Avahz Darkwood]

There can be multiple reasons for them looking how they do. I excel at rationalizing things in lore appropriate ways much more than making game art, so I'll stick with my explanation until given a good reason to abandon it...

Basically give him good art and he will adapt pretty quick. Also its nice that WarKirby is doing art now, BUT they seem to all be creeping into FF =)

 

[WarKirby]

Basically give him good art and he will adapt pretty quick. Also its nice that WarKirby is doing art now, BUT they seem to all be creeping into FF =)

The last two occasions I've submitted art for FFH (improved griffon and dwarven champion), nothing happened. Kael never posted, it never appeared in FFH. I sent him a PM about the latter, but got no response....

I still do art for FFH stuff, like a recent Orcish champion, and all my stuff will appear in FF. But if kael isn't interested, there's nothing I can do about that.

in any case, if kael, or anyone else making a modmod, wants to use my art, they just have to grab stuff from the latest version of FF. Feel fr ee. I'd be happy to see stuff used in other places.

 

[MagisterCultuum]

The art has to be up to my standards for me to adapt, and has to fit the overall theme. I may like rationalizing the art based on the lore or filling in gaps in the lore with new lore consistent with the art, but I really don't like changing the lore to fit new art that wasn't designed with established cannon in mind.

I'm not a fan of the units originally made for the Warhammer mod, and still oppose Yvain being made a Treant. I think that rather than making him a Woodelf again though I'd prefer making the old description of him as "the favorite son of Cernunnos" literal, meaning he would be a Satyr Druid. (I picture him as taller and thinner than most Satyrs with flowing robes instead of bark armor, with thin horns that spiral almost straight up for a couple feet above his head, with flowing hair that has begun to gray over the millennia, and with flowers and foliage in this hair and horns that seem to form a crown.) I'd like him to be the youngest Satyr of the first generation but the oldest still living, born before the signing of the compact but after Gower's death. I rather like the idea that Gower and Yvain had the same mother, who likely died giving birth to Yvain, and that the two of Cernunnos's three mortal wives who survived continue to rule the summer and winter courts to this very day.


Personally, I prefer the old Orkish Champion and the old Rantine graphics. I don't think Rantine should be as tough and bony as Champions. (I prefer to think of him as a more sophisticated orc of Bhall-Orc lineage, probably the only survivor of the priestly family that kept the Scepter of the High Priestess of Braduk safe until Orthus murdered them to steal it and make his axe. We know Rantine hates Orthus, and that seems like a pretty good reason why.)


I was also mildly annoyed by the newer Arthendain graphics bearing the Runes symbol, as despite being a dwarf and an RoK hero the only god the lore seems to tie him to is Sucellus, not Kilmorph. I was planning on making him not be connected it any religion, but I don't want to waste his art or for it to conflict with the lore.

 

[loocas]

Kael, as I read it I marked up the little mistakes I found. I know it's still a work in progress, but I did it just in case you might find it useful. I really enjoyed reading it

 

[MagisterCultuum]

Nice catches loocas

Are you sure all those "that"s need to be "who?" I was under the impression that either one would do.

I don't consider "whom" particularly formal, and it should be used whenever one uses "who" in any case other than the nominative. (I'd probably use "that" a bit more often though.)

Wouldn't the plural of Phoenix be Phoenices rather than Phoenixes or Phoenix's? Ok, Firefox agrees with loocas, but it would be Phoenices in Latin and probably (transliterated) Greek.


Pacalis is a singular adjective for peaceful, so shouldn't it be Pacales if referring to multiple pre-fall Chaos Marauders?


I see no reason to change "Praying to Camulos" to "He prayed to Camulos," and in fact consider Kael's use of a nominative absolute to be the superior wording. It des however require a comma where you say there should be an "and." On second thought, usinng both "praying" and "changing" could be confusing, but I think it would be better to change the latter part. Maybe to make it clearer to those who don't know what lycanthropy is it should be "Praying to Camulos for more loyal followers, Camulos blessed him with the ability to infect others with lycanthropy, hat is, to change his victims into ravenous werewolves."


I personally have always preferred the European spelling of grey. It seems more sophisticated or something, is closer to the vowel sounds as they would be in Latin, and there are plenty of players of FfH anyway.


I don't see why "raises as a demon anyone placed in it" is any better than "raises anyone placed in it as a demon"


Kael's "During the Age of Magic men dabbled in the arts of Necromancy much as they do in the Age of Rebirth." is correct; the Age of Rebirth is the current age.


I believe Sailors Dirge should be Sailors' Dirge, not Sailor's Dirge

 

[loocas]

Nice catches loocas

1. Are you sure all those "that"s need to be "who?" I was under the impression that either one would do.

I don't consider "whom" particularly formal, and it should be used whenever one uses "who" in any case other than the nominative.

2. Wouldn't the plural of Phoenix be Phoenices rather than Phoenixes or Phoenix's? Ok, Firefox agrees with loocas, but it would be Phoenices in Latin and probably (transliterated) Greek.


Pacalis is a singular adjective for peaceful, so shouldn't it be Pacales if referring to multiple pre-fall Chaos Marauders?


3. I see no reason to change "Praying to Camulos" to "He prayed to Camulos," and in fact consider Kael's use of a nominative absolute to be the superior wording. It des however require a comma where you say there should be an "and." On second thought, usinng both "praying" and "changing" could be confusing, but I think it would be better to change the latter part. Maybe to make it clearer to those who don't know what lycanthropy is it should be "Praying to Camulos for more loyal followers, Camulos blessed him with the ability to infect others with lycanthropy, hat is, to change his victims into ravenous werewolves."


4. I personally have always preferred the European spelling of grey. It seems more sophisticated or something, is closer to the vowel sounds as they would be in Latin, and there are plenty of players of FfH anyway.


5. I don't see why "raises as a demon anyone placed in it" is any better than "raises anyone placed in it as a demon"


6. Kael's "During the Age of Magic men dabbled in the arts of Necromancy much as they do in the Age of Rebirth." is correct; the Age of Rebirth is the current age.


7. I believe Sailors Dirge should be Sailors' Dirge, not Sailor's Dirge

Good points.

1. Either "that" or "who" would do and neither is incorrect when referring to people etc., but I think it's a subtle and useful difference. For my own piece of mind, when I'm talking about someone I don't like, I'll use "that" and think to myself, "See that? I just depersonified you with my grammar." Anyway, I say it's more respectful to use who, even if it's a demon.

"Whom" can suck it. In the fluid development of English, "whom" is definitely on its way out. Not only do few people know when to use it, its misuse or lack of usage pretty much never lead to ambiguity or misunderstanding. Formal usage is usually the only time you see it, especially used properly. It's on its way out, and for now it just hangs around like a fart in a Russian space station.

2. I'm certain you know the answer here better than I. The Latinate issues are beyond me. I was thinking Phoenii.

3. "Praying to Camulos for more loyal followers Camulos blessed him with the ability to infect others with lycanthropy..." indicates that Camulos was praying to Camulos. The subject needs to be Duin, not Camulos.

4. I agree. I flagged it as a consistency thing. In the Compendium I had to consolidate the works of different authors on either side of the Pacific, and I chose to use American spelling because that's where Kael's from, or lives.

5. "Raises anyone placed in it as a demon" could, although not likely, be understood as the person having to be a demon in order to go in the pot. I wanted the sentence to be less ambiguous.

6. Whoops.

7. Maybe it ought to. It's "Sailor's" in the game though. It should also be italicized, as it's the name of a vessel. Forgot about that earlier.

Thanks for the extra pair of eyes, MC.

 

[MagisterCultuum]

3. "Praying to Camulos for more loyal followers Camulos blessed him with the ability to infect others with lycanthropy..." indicates that Camulos was praying to Camulos. The subject needs to be Duin, not Camulos.

That would certainly be true if we were dealing with a simple present participle, but I'm pretty sure it is fine (apart from needing a comma) if it is as I assumed the much less common nominative absolute. At least, it is ok for the "subject" to just be implied in a Latin ablative absolute, which is where English's nominative absolutes originates. Of course, such an ablative absolute could also be interpreted as in the passive voice, especially since Camulos appears to be second declension and so would be the same in the dative and ablative and so could interpreted as being in apposition with the participle as easily as being its indirect object. It would also be simpler to just start the sentence with a present participle for praying in the accusative case so it would be obvious to everyone that the one praying is the one being "blessed." (The case system is so useful, I don't see why we had to give it up. I'm still clinging to its vestiges like "whom" in the probably futile hope the rest of system will make a comeback. I for one have had a few misunderstandings on account of people using "who" instead of "whom.")


Still, I think it is worded as clearly as the second amendment.

 

[TC01]

I note there's a mention of "the Age of Invention" in the Bestiary. Is this a canonic reference indicating that the "5th Age of Erebus" (or one in the further future) will be the age where magic dissipates so much that it's impossible to use?

 

[loocas]

That would certainly be true if we were dealing with a simple present participle, but I'm pretty sure it is fine (apart from needing a comma) if it is as I assumed the much less common nominative absolute. At least, it is ok for the "subject" to just be implied in a Latin ablative absolute, which is where English's nominative absolutes originates. Of course, such an ablative absolute could also be interpreted as in the passive voice, especially since Camulos appears to be second declension and so would be the same in the dative and ablative and so could interpreted as being in apposition with the participle as easily as being its indirect object. It would also be simpler to just start the sentence with a present participle for praying in the accusative case so it would be obvious to everyone that the one praying is the one being "blessed." (The case system is so useful, I don't see why we had to give it up. I'm still clinging to its vestiges like "whom" in the probably futile hope the rest of system will make a comeback. I for one have had a few misunderstandings on account of people using "who" instead of "whom.")

I think you've just made the case for why the system has fallen out of fashion. Any sentence that spawns a paragraph like that needs to be fixed. One shouldn't have to consciously "assume the much less common nominative absolute" in order for a sentence to make sense. A comma won't help it because it's still a dangling modifier.

Still, I think it is worded as clearly as the second amendment.

Well put

I note there's a mention of "the Age of Invention" in the Bestiary. Is this a canonic reference indicating that the "5th Age of Erebus" (or one in the further future) will be the age where magic dissipates so much that it's impossible to use?

I don't think so. My guess is that the Age of Invention is specific to the dwarves' history. But the magicless future is apparently what will happen.

 

[Grey Fox]

Cool, going to check this out when I get home.

 

[Kael]

Kael, as I read it I marked up the little mistakes I found. I know it's still a work in progress, but I did it just in case you might find it useful. I really enjoyed reading it

Great work on this, I definitely appreciate the editing help between your feedback and MC's. I updated the document with either your direct fix or a rewrite that was more clear.

 

[MagisterCultuum]

The description of the Cipi as appearing like tall white statues that stand on the boundaries of Erebus and guard it from Ceridwen's angels makes me think it is from the Latin word Cippus, meaning pale, stake, tombstone, or palisade (if plural). Was having only one p intentional or a misspelling? (Its not like anyone else would have if its wrong, so this is a very minor issue.)

 

[Kael]

Thats exactly where it came from. I didn't like it having 2 p's because it reminded me of the Hippus and I didn't want the word to have that link.

 

[Avahz Darkwood]

The last two occasions I've submitted art for FFH (improved griffon and dwarven champion), nothing happened. Kael never posted, it never appeared in FFH. I sent him a PM about the latter, but got no response....

I still do art for FFH stuff, like a recent Orcish champion, and all my stuff will appear in FF. But if kael isn't interested, there's nothing I can do about that.

in any case, if kael, or anyone else making a modmod, wants to use my art, they just have to grab stuff from the latest version of FF. Feel fr ee. I'd be happy to see stuff used in other places.

Oh wow I missed those Orcs (COME ON KAEL THESE ARE GOOD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! )

 

[Lone Wolf]

I've misread the thread title as "Bestiality of Erebus". My mind has been very dirty recently, it seems.

 

[loocas]

I've misread the thread title as "Bestiality of Erebus". My mind has been very dirty recently, it seems.

It could be, given the "Perversions of Life" section. I'm wondering if Leucetios's experiments are related to:

Body—Kezef (whose experiments killed all the animals on the Grigi plains)

Are those instances related? Those experiments sound like a body magic sort of thing, so maybe both magics were used? Body to meld the animals and life to bring them back?