So Zariel is the big boss lady now, but does anyone know when Tiamat and Bel ruled, respectively (and if there's any named references of rulers prior to them)?
Here's what i have (mostly from Fandom)
before Tiamat?? (names lost to history but apparently many)
Tiamat (maybe?).year - year
(Unknown name, maybe Zariel). year - 1372
Bel. 1372 - 1444 (sometime after 1385, Asmodeus offered rulership back to Tiamat, but she declined)
So the Forgotten Realms wiki article Fandom has Tiamat as a god who falls from godhood and becomes an archfiend at -1071 DR, after which Asmoedeus gives her rule of Avernus. It seems like Bel replaced, but I don't think there was ever a Zariel then Bel then back to Zariel (I could very well be wrong there).
As for before Tiamat, remember Avernus wasn't always the battlefield that would make the most use of Tiamat's nature. It was originally designed as garden of temptations (probably inspired by the Bosch painting The Garden of Earthly delights, if you ever want inspiration for Hellscapes, Bosch is someone to check out) to lure mortal souls to Hell, but then the Styx flowed in with the Abyss's Blood War incursions and it's not what it is. So I imagine whatever Arch Devil governing it was probably something outside the Warlord mode of Tiamat, Bel and Zariel.
I found this in 'On Hallowed Ground' from 2nd edition, before Zariel regained her throne...but didn't know if there's a novel out there somewhere that talks about more.
The true Lord of the First is said to have been imprisoned by her warlord, the pit fiend Bel, who now rules Avernus in her place. ....
It's no secret that the current lords aren't the same ones who came to mortal knowledge long ago. The noble baatezu serving below the original lords learned the politics of their masters well and eventually overthrew the domineering devils. No dbout they were overthrown by their servants in turn. Fact is, it's probably happened dozes of times over the eons.
What happened to the original lords - the ones known to ancient mortals? Most are long since dead, probably consigned to the larva pits of Avernus. If they were reborn into lesser forms, they've certainly not shown the aptitude for brilliance they once had. But two of the original pack have survived intact: Dispater, Lord of the Second; and Tiamat, queen of evil dragonkind.
...so if there was someone before Tiamat, she probably remembers.
although i'm really trying to get to whether or not any soul coins have been minted with anything other than a Z, T, or B on the front. So a better question would probably be 'when did they start minting soul coins?' although I don't think that can be answered as soul coins didn't come about until 5e so who knows. I suppose there could be one or two soul coins out there with an M on them...maybe Mammon had a couple stamped with an M in his arrogance, but kept them out of circulation.
I don't understand the Z, T, B minting, or am not familiar with where that's coming from. While the illustration in DiA does look like there's a T on it, they're described as being inscribed with infernal writing. Mammon mints them (as well as keeps literal account for soul transactions in the 9 Hells) and they're supposed used as currency through the 9 Hells, so I'm not sure why the Arches of Avernus would get special branding rights. I'm interested though if there's a source you're using that points that out.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
the front of the soul coin is just the letter Z in infernal (along with probably a crown and maybe blades? who knows). Why a Z? Because the first layer is ruled by Zariel (imo). So stretch that back and for whatever reason, i'd say Mammon mints coins with the letter of whoever is ruling the first layer.
Just all my own opinion though....except the letter Z on the coins, that part is pretty obvious. here's a 'z' in the infernal font noted in appendix G of the book, beside the coin in appendix C of the book.
1444 is only like 50 years before DiA, I checked the FR wiki and they say
she led Elturel's Hellriders into Hell which led to her fall in
1354 DR. But who knows how much mortal time would pass between an angel's fall and subsequent installment as a Arch Devil (I have no problem time working radically differenty and inconsistently on the Outer Planes in relation to the Prime Material, in fact I exploit the notion). So, 20 years DR sounds fine. Could've been a few minutes or a century or more in the Hells.
I really should dig into some of the prior editions lore, sounds neat. Wish there was like a bibliography.
That’s true! DiA specifically states that she was an angel when she stormed Avernus and fell to the dark side, which means she couldn’t have been an archdevil before she fell...
In all honestly, this is one timeline that makes absolutely no sense. I really like the whole story of BG-DiA, but it makes absolutely no sense if Zariel had previously been an archdevil and the ruler of Avernus before Bel, otherwise there would have been news about a previous redemption, which in turn totally undercuts BG-DiA. Therefore, for me, she cannot be the previous ruler of Avernus before Bel.
Per multiple previous products (both 2E and 3E), Zariel was the Lord of Avernus prior to Bel being in charge. In fact, many of those sources speak as to how Bel eventually overthrew the fallen angel and somehow was siphoning her power to fuel his own. While most of the other Lords of the Nine wanted to dethrone this "upstart" pit fiend, they couldn't openly strike against him because he had the support of Asmodeus.
Agree that the timeline doesn't make sense when you factor in the Descent into Avernus adventure, since Zariel has only been a ruler for a relatively short time since her fall from grace. The most likely reason for these timeline discrepancies is that the author(s) didn't account for all the other details that have been written over the last 25+ years. However, I could see two possibilities that could more easily explain the situation of where the adventure begins:
DIA occurs prior to Bel's coup. Zariel is the recently fallen angel that has been given rulership over Avernus.
DIA occurs after Bel's coup and Zariel's eventual regaining of her title and throne.
Again, the way that DIA is written makes it seem like Zariel took over rulership from Bel, which partly contradicts the previously established materials' timeline. But, if you really need to have that information fit with the main timeline, then I'd edit some of the book's details to fit with one of the two possibilities above.
I'm not claiming that any material is bad or obsolete, just that trying to put them together does not work at all
Agree that trying to tie Decent into Avernus together with other older materials is difficult (if not impossible in some aspect) to do. I am also not saying that DIA or any of the old materials are bad, though. I'm currently running DIA for two different groups and am enjoying the adventures as they unfold. Just trying not to let the old school Planescape player in me scratch my head too much with some of the updates/changes that DIA introduces.
Does not work because the sources in previous editions refer to a time which is prior to DiA, and in any case with what we know about one of the potential outcomes of DiA (and the more likely), it would absolutely invalidate it.
Also agree on this point...or at least mostly so. While I would say that a DM could still potentially go this route if that fits better with their games timeline and cosmology, the potential endgame options for DIA makes this option problematic depending on what choices/routes the players take to complete the adventure. Previously established historical timelines (even if fictional) would be significantly altered if DIA plays out in nearly any way other than what would allow Bel's coup and Zariel's imprisonment.
2. Does might work, but it would have made Bel's period extremely short and I think there would be traces of that in the story. In any case, it would weaken what Zariel looks like and stands for in DiA.
That being said, 2 could be very interesting to integrate into DiA if done correctly, but it would take quite a bit of work.
And agree again, especially on the Bel's reign aspect. Then again, as was presented in an earlier post, time progression can move differently on one plane versus another plane. Even though the FR calendar lists events occurring on certain years, a DM could always say that time in Avernus takes X-amount of time longer (e.g., 1 year in the Realms equals 20 years in Avernus). Not a fan of making these timelines overly complicated, but it could be one way to better fit DIA details into the previously established details. FR timeline of events remains unchanged, but more time passes and more things occur on Avernus during that timeframe...which means little to the fiends and other nigh immortal beings on the outer planes.
Article in Dragon 75 (by Ed Greenwood, 1983) says that Tiamat was the ruler. Dragon 223 (doesn't quote an author, 1995) refers to the original Lord of Avernus as a 'she' and 'not Tiamat, despite popular belief'.
Article in Dungeon 197 (by Robert Schwalb, 2011) talking about Asmodeus' daughter is a real outlier...says Zariel was the ruler in the very beginning, she took the throne of the First when Baatar was ripped apart into its current 9 layers. It actually claims ALL the original rulers of each layer were angels, including Asmodeus, who fell when he was influenced by a fragment of evil that created the Abyss, causing him to betray the god of Baatar (referred to only as 'He Who Was').
Article in Dragon 75 (by Ed Greenwood, 1983) says that Tiamat was the ruler. Dragon 223 (doesn't quote an author, 1995) refers to the original Lord of Avernus as a 'she' and 'not Tiamat, despite popular belief'.
Article in Dungeon 197 (by Robert Schwalb, 2011) talking about Asmodeus' daughter is a real outlier...says Zariel was the ruler in the very beginning, she took the throne of the First when Baatar was ripped apart into its current 9 layers. It actually claims ALL the original rulers of each layer were angels, including Asmodeus, who fell when he was influenced by a fragment of evil that created the Abyss, causing him to betray the god of Baatar (referred to only as 'He Who Was').
It is important to note that the second Article you mentioned was from the time of 4e, which had a very different continuity and world cosmology from 5e. In 4e, Tiamat was never part of Baator or it's hierarchy and instead inhabited Tytherion, the Endless Night (only existed in 4e), along with her rival Zehir.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Meddle not in the affairs of dragons, for thou art crunchy and taste good with ketchup."
I read somewhere (I forget where) that Graz’zt was an archdevil before he became a demon lord. What if he was the original ruler of Avernus? Then after Graz’zt fell to chaos he was replaced by the pit fiend Bel, who was in turn overthrown by Zariel after she fell to the dark side. Would that work?
I read somewhere (I forget where) that Graz’zt was an archdevil before he became a demon lord. What if he was the original ruler of Avernus? Then after Graz’zt fell to chaos he was replaced by the pit fiend Bel, who was in turn overthrown by Zariel after she fell to the dark side. Would that work?
Canonically speaking, It doesn't fully work with the idea that Bel took over control of Avernus from Graz'zt, since multiple sources all say that Bel dethroned Zariel and was siphoning her power to maintain his rulership over that first layer. Personally, if we're trying to incorporate DIA into previously materials, I would just have Zariel only be imprisoned by Bel for a short time before regaining her freedom. Bel wasn't destroyed by the fallen angel because Asmodeus's decree(s).
However, I really like the idea that Graz'zt was the Lord of the First before Zariel (or even Tiamat) were in charge. Various D&D products mention that Avernus was a [false] paradise when Asmodeus first descended to the nine hells. It wasn't until the demons of the abyss arrived and the Blood War broke out on Avernus that things eventually fell into ruin. I could easily see Graz'zt being the archdevil, who oversaw an Avernus that was meant to lure and corrupt. It was when he drove the demons back to the Abyss that he was himself corrupted by the chaos and converted from an archdevil to a demon lord.
I read somewhere (I forget where) that Graz’zt was an archdevil before he became a demon lord. What if he was the original ruler of Avernus? Then after Graz’zt fell to chaos he was replaced by the pit fiend Bel, who was in turn overthrown by Zariel after she fell to the dark side. Would that work?
Canonically speaking, It doesn't fully work with the idea that Bel took over control of Avernus from Graz'zt, since multiple sources all say that Bel dethroned Zariel and was siphoning her power to maintain his rulership over that first layer. Personally, if we're trying to incorporate DIA into previously materials, I would just have Zariel only be imprisoned by Bel for a short time before regaining her freedom. Bel wasn't destroyed by the fallen angel because Asmodeus's decree(s).
However, I really like the idea that Graz'zt was the Lord of the First before Zariel (or even Tiamat) were in charge. Various D&D products mention that Avernus was a [false] paradise when Asmodeus first descended to the nine hells. It wasn't until the demons of the abyss arrived and the Blood War broke out on Avernus that things eventually fell into ruin. I could easily see Graz'zt being the archdevil, who oversaw an Avernus that was meant to lure and corrupt. It was when he drove the demons back to the Abyss that he was himself corrupted by the chaos and converted from an archdevil to a demon lord.
I read somewhere (I forget where) that Graz’zt was an archdevil before he became a demon lord. What if he was the original ruler of Avernus? Then after Graz’zt fell to chaos he was replaced by the pit fiend Bel, who was in turn overthrown by Zariel after she fell to the dark side. Would that work?
Canonically speaking, It doesn't fully work with the idea that Bel took over control of Avernus from Graz'zt, since multiple sources all say that Bel dethroned Zariel and was siphoning her power to maintain his rulership over that first layer. Personally, if we're trying to incorporate DIA into previously materials, I would just have Zariel only be imprisoned by Bel for a short time before regaining her freedom. Bel wasn't destroyed by the fallen angel because Asmodeus's decree(s).
However, I really like the idea that Graz'zt was the Lord of the First before Zariel (or even Tiamat) were in charge. Various D&D products mention that Avernus was a [false] paradise when Asmodeus first descended to the nine hells. It wasn't until the demons of the abyss arrived and the Blood War broke out on Avernus that things eventually fell into ruin. I could easily see Graz'zt being the archdevil, who oversaw an Avernus that was meant to lure and corrupt. It was when he drove the demons back to the Abyss that he was himself corrupted by the chaos and converted from an archdevil to a demon lord.
Thanks 😊. Glad you like it.
I _really_ like this speculation. Graz'zt is described as a hedonist and libertine on top of being seductive, so could definitely see him (her, them?) being assigned to the "earthly delights" Avernus, not really caring for Asmoedeus's rules or quotas so enters the Abyss and leaves the doors open for the Blood War on his way out. Maybe that last clause is a bit much, but I do like the conjecture being made here.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
So Zariel is the big boss lady now, but does anyone know when Tiamat and Bel ruled, respectively (and if there's any named references of rulers prior to them)?
Here's what i have (mostly from Fandom)
(couple edits since replies)
Guide to the Five Factions (PWYW)
Deck of Decks
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
I found this in 'On Hallowed Ground' from 2nd edition, before Zariel regained her throne...but didn't know if there's a novel out there somewhere that talks about more.
The true Lord of the First is said to have been imprisoned by her warlord, the pit fiend Bel, who now rules Avernus in her place. ....
It's no secret that the current lords aren't the same ones who came to mortal knowledge long ago. The noble baatezu serving below the original lords learned the politics of their masters well and eventually overthrew the domineering devils. No dbout they were overthrown by their servants in turn. Fact is, it's probably happened dozes of times over the eons.
What happened to the original lords - the ones known to ancient mortals? Most are long since dead, probably consigned to the larva pits of Avernus. If they were reborn into lesser forms, they've certainly not shown the aptitude for brilliance they once had. But two of the original pack have survived intact: Dispater, Lord of the Second; and Tiamat, queen of evil dragonkind.
...so if there was someone before Tiamat, she probably remembers.
although i'm really trying to get to whether or not any soul coins have been minted with anything other than a Z, T, or B on the front. So a better question would probably be 'when did they start minting soul coins?' although I don't think that can be answered as soul coins didn't come about until 5e so who knows. I suppose there could be one or two soul coins out there with an M on them...maybe Mammon had a couple stamped with an M in his arrogance, but kept them out of circulation.
Guide to the Five Factions (PWYW)
Deck of Decks
I don't understand the Z, T, B minting, or am not familiar with where that's coming from. While the illustration in DiA does look like there's a T on it, they're described as being inscribed with infernal writing. Mammon mints them (as well as keeps literal account for soul transactions in the 9 Hells) and they're supposed used as currency through the 9 Hells, so I'm not sure why the Arches of Avernus would get special branding rights. I'm interested though if there's a source you're using that points that out.
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
the front of the soul coin is just the letter Z in infernal (along with probably a crown and maybe blades? who knows). Why a Z? Because the first layer is ruled by Zariel (imo). So stretch that back and for whatever reason, i'd say Mammon mints coins with the letter of whoever is ruling the first layer.
Just all my own opinion though....except the letter Z on the coins, that part is pretty obvious. here's a 'z' in the infernal font noted in appendix G of the book, beside the coin in appendix C of the book.
Guide to the Five Factions (PWYW)
Deck of Decks
I thought Zariel was an angel who fell from Mount Celestia in 1444 DR. How could she rule Avernus before then?
1444 is only like 50 years before DiA, I checked the FR wiki and they say
she led Elturel's Hellriders into Hell which led to her fall in
1354 DR. But who knows how much mortal time would pass between an angel's fall and subsequent installment as a Arch Devil (I have no problem time working radically differenty and inconsistently on the Outer Planes in relation to the Prime Material, in fact I exploit the notion). So, 20 years DR sounds fine. Could've been a few minutes or a century or more in the Hells.
I really should dig into some of the prior editions lore, sounds neat. Wish there was like a bibliography.
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
Okay cool. That makes sense.
That’s true! DiA specifically states that she was an angel when she stormed Avernus and fell to the dark side, which means she couldn’t have been an archdevil before she fell...
Hmm, thanks all.
I suppose though if an angel can become a devil, a devil could become an angel.....and then back down.
Guide to the Five Factions (PWYW)
Deck of Decks
very good points lyxen. thanks
Guide to the Five Factions (PWYW)
Deck of Decks
Agree with the Spoiler
Per multiple previous products (both 2E and 3E), Zariel was the Lord of Avernus prior to Bel being in charge. In fact, many of those sources speak as to how Bel eventually overthrew the fallen angel and somehow was siphoning her power to fuel his own. While most of the other Lords of the Nine wanted to dethrone this "upstart" pit fiend, they couldn't openly strike against him because he had the support of Asmodeus.
Agree that the timeline doesn't make sense when you factor in the Descent into Avernus adventure, since Zariel has only been a ruler for a relatively short time since her fall from grace. The most likely reason for these timeline discrepancies is that the author(s) didn't account for all the other details that have been written over the last 25+ years. However, I could see two possibilities that could more easily explain the situation of where the adventure begins:
Again, the way that DIA is written makes it seem like Zariel took over rulership from Bel, which partly contradicts the previously established materials' timeline. But, if you really need to have that information fit with the main timeline, then I'd edit some of the book's details to fit with one of the two possibilities above.
Agree that trying to tie Decent into Avernus together with other older materials is difficult (if not impossible in some aspect) to do. I am also not saying that DIA or any of the old materials are bad, though. I'm currently running DIA for two different groups and am enjoying the adventures as they unfold. Just trying not to let the old school Planescape player in me scratch my head too much with some of the updates/changes that DIA introduces.
Also agree on this point...or at least mostly so. While I would say that a DM could still potentially go this route if that fits better with their games timeline and cosmology, the potential endgame options for DIA makes this option problematic depending on what choices/routes the players take to complete the adventure. Previously established historical timelines (even if fictional) would be significantly altered if DIA plays out in nearly any way other than what would allow Bel's coup and Zariel's imprisonment.
And agree again, especially on the Bel's reign aspect. Then again, as was presented in an earlier post, time progression can move differently on one plane versus another plane. Even though the FR calendar lists events occurring on certain years, a DM could always say that time in Avernus takes X-amount of time longer (e.g., 1 year in the Realms equals 20 years in Avernus). Not a fan of making these timelines overly complicated, but it could be one way to better fit DIA details into the previously established details. FR timeline of events remains unchanged, but more time passes and more things occur on Avernus during that timeframe...which means little to the fiends and other nigh immortal beings on the outer planes.
Not that it fits, but interestingly:
Article in Dragon 75 (by Ed Greenwood, 1983) says that Tiamat was the ruler. Dragon 223 (doesn't quote an author, 1995) refers to the original Lord of Avernus as a 'she' and 'not Tiamat, despite popular belief'.
Article in Dungeon 197 (by Robert Schwalb, 2011) talking about Asmodeus' daughter is a real outlier...says Zariel was the ruler in the very beginning, she took the throne of the First when Baatar was ripped apart into its current 9 layers. It actually claims ALL the original rulers of each layer were angels, including Asmodeus, who fell when he was influenced by a fragment of evil that created the Abyss, causing him to betray the god of Baatar (referred to only as 'He Who Was').
Guide to the Five Factions (PWYW)
Deck of Decks
It is important to note that the second Article you mentioned was from the time of 4e, which had a very different continuity and world cosmology from 5e. In 4e, Tiamat was never part of Baator or it's hierarchy and instead inhabited Tytherion, the Endless Night (only existed in 4e), along with her rival Zehir.
"Meddle not in the affairs of dragons, for thou art crunchy and taste good with ketchup."
Characters for Tenebris Sine Fine
RoughCoronet's Greater Wills
What about this?
I read somewhere (I forget where) that Graz’zt was an archdevil before he became a demon lord. What if he was the original ruler of Avernus? Then after Graz’zt fell to chaos he was replaced by the pit fiend Bel, who was in turn overthrown by Zariel after she fell to the dark side. Would that work?
Canonically speaking, It doesn't fully work with the idea that Bel took over control of Avernus from Graz'zt, since multiple sources all say that Bel dethroned Zariel and was siphoning her power to maintain his rulership over that first layer. Personally, if we're trying to incorporate DIA into previously materials, I would just have Zariel only be imprisoned by Bel for a short time before regaining her freedom. Bel wasn't destroyed by the fallen angel because Asmodeus's decree(s).
However, I really like the idea that Graz'zt was the Lord of the First before Zariel (or even Tiamat) were in charge. Various D&D products mention that Avernus was a [false] paradise when Asmodeus first descended to the nine hells. It wasn't until the demons of the abyss arrived and the Blood War broke out on Avernus that things eventually fell into ruin. I could easily see Graz'zt being the archdevil, who oversaw an Avernus that was meant to lure and corrupt. It was when he drove the demons back to the Abyss that he was himself corrupted by the chaos and converted from an archdevil to a demon lord.
Thanks 😊. Glad you like it.
I _really_ like this speculation. Graz'zt is described as a hedonist and libertine on top of being seductive, so could definitely see him (her, them?) being assigned to the "earthly delights" Avernus, not really caring for Asmoedeus's rules or quotas so enters the Abyss and leaves the doors open for the Blood War on his way out. Maybe that last clause is a bit much, but I do like the conjecture being made here.
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.