Gamebook philosophy from the gamebooks Yahoo Group

***

1: I don't quite understand how "rank" is being defined in this discussion - clearly there isn't a single command hierarchy including Kekataag, Ixiataaga and Sejanoz, and their various positions are separated by gaps between different periods. The Darklord army had a definite rank structure, but a lot of the other figures were unaffiliated and did not appear to answer to anyone. For example: the leadership of the Darklord army switched with the deaths of leaders; Vashna, Zagarna, Haakon and Gnaag were all of the "same rank" but at different times. Ixiataaga for instance was supreme ruler of a very particular terrestrial area, but not apparently answerable to the Darklords prior to their defeat; similarly Sejanoz (and Shasarak) were supreme lords of earthly realms independent of the Darklord command hierarchy but owing some kind of fealty to Naar or his servants. I'm not sure what kind of situation would have entailed Sejanoz, Kekataag and Ixiataaga being required to take orders from one another as they were members of different command hierarchies (similarly there didn't seem to be a "rank" relationship between the Darklords and Zakhan Kimah, even though they fought together at Tahou, nor would I like to say whether Vonotar "outranked", say, Haakon). That the Darklords were unable to call on the Bhanarian, Ixian and Shadakine forces during the conquest of northern Magnamund, and that the Bhanarians did not intervene to support either the Darklords of Shasarak, suggests to me that the different groupings were completely independent, perhaps even hostile.

These kinds of "Naarist" creatures seem to be classic "chaotic evil" types, recognising no authority from others of their own except on the basis of might, and forming unstable balance-of-power groupings rather than fixed hierarchies. Given the way the Darklord leadership contests were portrayed in the "Legends of Lone Wolf" series, I would imagine that if a situation emerged where there would be a contest of position between these individuals, their relative ranking would come down to the strongest in combat or which could win the fealty of a greater or more powerful following. Kekataag (cs60-ep58) would seem to edge out Ixiataaga (cs60-ep39) in direct combat, but Ixiataaga's undead following (cs 45-47) are tougher than the average Agarashi demonspawn which Kekataag could maybe muster (cs in the lower 40s in LW and as low as 17-18 in Grey Star). As for Sejanoz, I've not been able to obtain statistics for him, and I've no idea why (perhaps he was to be the major villain in LW29/30?).

A: So by "rank" you're meaning a kind of "unholiness ranking", something like an Honour score for bad guys? Again I'd wonder if it isn't a dynamic thing - one would earn honour with Naar by killing his enemies and causing maximum possible mayhem, so at any given time those who have "failed" him will be looking to redeem themselves whereas those who are active will be higher in esteem - I would also expect there to be a difference in status between those (such as Kekataag) who are Naar's servants on his own plane (equivalent to house staff) and those (such as the Darklords and Ixiataaga) who are active in Magnamund (equivalent to generals), and again between either of these and the various human and free-willed beings who do deals with or services for Naar in return for personal gain (which would include Sejanoz, Shasarak, the Cener Druids, Vonotar etc).

There also seems to be a split between those beings (the Darklords, Shasarak, Vashna) who seek world domination, others (Ixiataaga, the Cener Druids, Lord Zahda of Kazan-Oud) who are quite happy to run their own mini-realm of evil, and still others (such as Agarash) which are pure forces of destruction. These would seem to reflect different philosophies of evil so to speak - all serving the purposes of Naar but by very different means. Again it depends how Naar's (anti-)ethical code is reconstructed - it's quite possible that autonomy and hostility among his followers is encouraged by Naar as a "survival of the fittest" strategy, that Naar would deliberately cultivate competition or bestow/withhold favours arbitrarily to encourage jealousies which would in turn make each follower more desperate to prove itself, that maybe favour is withdrawn disproportionately due to failure... After all, there must be some reason the likes of Vashna and Agarash don't rest on their laurels in hell, but keep trying to be resurrected over and over. I would imagine human followers "blessed" by Naar are viewed by him as tools and suffer eternal torment at his hands after death, though this is partly guesswork (we know "good guys" who fall into Naar's hands are tormented in a typically nasty way).

The levels difference between books is certainly very remarkable - an obvious response to the growing strength of the hero (notice similarly how a task which logically should only require basic Tracking of Hunting gets upped to requiring the Magnakai or Grand Master equivalent); though if I remember rightly, most of the later enemies are typified as "groups" of Giaks, Kraan, Agarashi etc to justify upping their level (actually the last Giaks are in Captives of Kaag, book 14, and appear as a "patrol" - single enemy - headed by a Vordak; similarly most of those in book 12 are groups). Agarashi can also be anything from a piddling little Burrowcrawler to a massive demon because they're basically mutants...

B: You do have a point. Somehow I've always thought of as Ixiataaga as a mini-villain, or a sidekick to someone (though in a way, all the badguys are, besides Naar of course). I also really liked the way Demonlord Tagazin seemed like a mini-boss. By the way, has anyone thought about how stupid and ridiculous Ixiataaga would seem before he died (unless he was kind of created undead, which is a bit weird, but still kinda works out)? I mean, the whole goat skull looks really cool, but how would Deathlord Ixiataaga look when he still had flesh on his face? But then again, he could have had one of those devil-worshipper guys, with those goat masks like in House of Hell, but that still wouldn't make proper sense. Never mind, my head is spinning!

***

A: Hi everyone. I'd just like to know who's the best gamebook villain in their opinion (I'm expecting a lot of Zharradan Marr, even though he's a bit of a wimp). Too bad no gamebook author has ever written a good Star Wars gamebook with Darth Vader, but Balthus Dire is the closest we get (we all know a lot of his cool lines are ripped off from Darth Vader).

B: IMPUDENT PEASANT!

Seriously, what lines were ripped off Vader? i guess their was the join
me.... thing and the die with your people thing, but those are kind of cheesy.

C: Zharradan Marr is kind of devious, but does have a tendency
to 'monologue' too much.

D: The Zagor-Demon in Legend of Zagor was girly, so he has to be crossed
off the list.

E: One thing that always bothered me was how the ponytails of Balthus and the Black Elf are kind of floating. Maybe Balthus Dire cast some sort of permanent Levitation Spell on his ponytail so that it would look stylish, and maybe the Black Elf had a wine that made his float up because he happened to be a big copycat of his master. Who knows?

***

And on running your own RPG:

"In general I prefer traps with a little flavour but rarely kill with them.

Interesting trap:

Large, glass ball hanging from a ceiling (contains water). The glass ball is attached to a chain, then end of the chain is held by an animated skeleton at the far side of the room. There is a large pool of acid below the container.(containing a spike to break the glass ball should it hit the acid) The skeletons orders are to release the chain if attacked. The resulting explosion should be devistating. (smallish amount of water added to largish amount of acid = nasty stuff) The adventurers can avoid the trap by not attacking the skeleton...clues could be left in treasure map, riddle, etc."