So, I'm just going to take "succubus" and use it as a catch-all term for "female demon".
Sure, there's got to be female demons that might be some other type like marilliths or unique demons, but for the most part the only female demons you meet are going to be succubi, and with the origin of the whole succubus idea tracing it's way up a lineage of female demons that exhibited a wide variety of forms and powers throughout the centuries, I don't think I'm really amiss at just using "female demon" as the definition for succubus.
The whole "sex demon" business (the manipulation, the seduction, the dream invasion, the soul stealing, etc. ) kind of goes hand-in-hand with the question of "what kind of evil would a female demon do?", but I'd definitely consider the whole "female" part to be more important than the "sex" part.
Rolled 65 (1d100)
>>46023664
I think the word you're looking for is "demoness". It means female demon; without the sexual bits of a succubus.
>>46023664
That's like calling all breakfast food items pancakes because one breakfast food is called a pancake.
You're dumb
>>46023824
The "sexual" bits of the succubus seem to be less of a point inherent with the subdivision of "succubus" and more of just the subdivision of "female demon."
In hebrew and christian lore, female demon and succubi are largely interchangeable, to the point where Lilith and her children, the only female demons that are ever really mentioned, are defined as succubi once the term succubus was coined, which was several centuries after the concept of Lilith and her daughters.
Basically, succubi are less about sex so much as all female demons use sex, since that's just happens to be one of the tools available to them. The key thing to understand is that even though Lilith and her daughters include sex/seduction in their repertoire and they are succubi, they are not exclusively about sex/seduction, but include a variety of "feminine" evils, such as cursing babes out of jealousy and spite.
Succubi being sex demons seems to be more of an exaggeration of the most obvious "feminine" evil, but it's strange that that's what they've become entirely defined by in these later centuries. Succubi being simply "female" demons rather than "sex" demons brings them closer to their origin without relying on the shorthand interpretation that came about by later authors. Remember that Lilitu, the female demon of Babylon that inspired Lilith, also exhibited a wider range of "female" evils beyond seduction.
>>46023664
So do you call all male demons incubus or...?
>>46023664
You research enough to have a distinction!?
I find your faith and devotion lacking.
LESS FUCKING MORE SMITING, ANON!
>>46023664
>>46023664
God OP.
When you put this much effort into Trolling. Is it even really trolling anymore? I mean, you've had to at least get to know /tg/ some. Then push the right buttons. Not quite like (most) other board where there is a big easy flame-topic. There is enough material there to be an actual thread for a worth while discussion.
Is it worth it? Are the tears more succulent? Or perhaps you don't get as much as you expected?
>>46023664
>So, I'm just going to take "succubus" and use it as a catch-all term for "female demon".
The marilith coils her tail, lowering herself to look you in the eye. "Did you just fucking call me a slag?"
>>46024885
Yeah you fucking bitch, get back across the pond, we only like yoga pants on our sluts here you piece of shit.
>>46024885
You're just jelly cus succubi have vags.
>tfw no marilith waifu
>>46023664
So, I'm just going to take "faggot" and use it as a catch-all term for "OP".
Sure, there's got to be OPs that might provide some other content, like starting an interesting thread or dumping neat stuff, but for the most part the only OPs you meet are going to be faggots, and with the origin of the whole faggo idea tracing it's way up a lineage of shitposters that used a wide variety of baits throughout the centuries, I don't think I'm really amiss at just using "faggot" as the definition for OP.
The whole "faggot" business (the shitposting, the stupidity, the leaps in logic, the weak baits, etc. ) kind of goes hand-in-hand with the question of "what kind of shit faggot OP would do?", but I'd definitely consider the whole "shitposter" part to be more important than the "faggot" part.
>>46023664
>So, I'm just going to take "succubus" and use it as a catch-all term for "female demon".
>>46023664
Did someone say succubus thread?
>>46024988
You realize they get 6 attacks per round?
With a thaco0 of 9?
They have 50 hitpoints!
They have 60% magic resistance!
And they have 6 attacks
Dagger: 1d4
shortsword:1d6
longswrod: 1d8
spear:1d8+1
Scimitar: 2d4
Axe: 1d4+1
Nothing does that much damage! NOTHING!
>>46025706
You. You understand what must be done.
Do it anon. Do what you were born to do.
>>46025706
You. You know what must be done.
Do it anon. Do what you were born to do.
>>46023664
>but for the most part the only female demons you meet are going to be succubi
Maybe if your campaign is boring
My party fought a Marilith last session
>>46023664
You do realize that succubi aren't even strictly female or demons, right?
>>46025706
OP's bait is so bad I can't get it up to post pics of sexy succs.
When you sex up a succubus and she's making that "my hips are moving on their own!" thing. Is that an act to further entice the guy or is she genuinely into it because they are very sexual beings and you're just that good at it?
>>46023664
I know this is a bait thread, but I honestly wouldn't give a shit if you did this.
>demons
>>46023664
That does make a degree of sense.
Pretty often demons don't reproduce like mortals: the purpose of the original folklore succubus was that it stole semen because demon't can't create new life on their own, and even in DnD, where you do have half-fiends and tieflings, demons are generally born from larvae created from souls of evil mortals. So any demon to taking an obviously feminine form (as opposed to a genderless appearance or one that's designed to intimidate mortals) would probably have a specific reason for doing it, although that might not be specifically about sex (for example, Lilith's children if I recall correctly were sometimes described as taking the appearance of attractive women to lure men to them so they could kill them).
>>46028517
Depends. On. The setting.
Usually succubi are demons (even in DnD where they split the beings inspired by mythological demons into different kinds of fiends, they've usually been proper demons and only in the later editions turned into first devil and then non-specific fiends).
Whether they're actually female varies. The whole "succubi transform into incubi to impregnate women with stolen semen" thing wasn't present in the initial succubus-related folklore (the original version was pretty much just a demon that gave you wet dreams, and it was only when the concept had become established did theologists bother "studying" them and coming up with a proper purpose and "ecology" for them). Lilith and her daughters, who are pretty much the proto-succubi, were explicitly female, as well.
>>46025706
Sure, post succubi.
>>46024826
He doesnt care.
Hes a (you) junkie.
>>46029711
>Depends. On. The setting.
Well -
>Usually succubi are demons
Alright, so you're talking about modern -
>Whether they're actually female varies
Okay, so we're talking about the pre-semitic folkloric -
>The whole "succubi transform into incubi to impregnate women with stolen semen" thing wasn't present in the initial succubus-related folklore (the original version was pretty much just a demon that gave you wet dreams, and it was only when the concept had become established did theologists bother "studying" them and coming up with a proper purpose and "ecology" for them).
Hah, yeah, the witches' hammer and de Leon's medieval Dianetics were pretty fucking stu -
>Lilith and her daughters, who are pretty much the proto-succubi, were explicitly female, as well.
And now you're talking about medieval-era Jewish memes...
Your head-canon gives me whiplash, faggot.
The word "succubus" refers to 12th century era Christian demons who molest sleepers, are explicitly female (hence the word construction in Latin) and theologized as the daughters of Lilith in the 13th-century Zohar fraudulation.
The Witches' Hammer proposed that succubi steal semen, the literary origin of that idea, but actually says that incubi receive the sperm from succubi in order to work their evil, and are entirely separate beings.
The original folklore is of a specifically female evil spirit, not demon, inflicter of sleep emissions and night-terrors, with literally nothing to do with Judaeic myth, predating the kabbalah.
>>46030679
This was a cool post. I like this post.
Not much to add to conversation, though, so succubi for everyone.
>>46030679
I consider "succubi are usually demons" and "succubi may or may not be actually female" to be generic statements. It varies depending on the the source, even within a given time period.
Christian folkloric succubi were demons, and sore are most modern descriptions (although I've seen some portrayed as non-demonic supernatural beings as well). However, the name has also been applied (often retroactively; Lilith predates the medieval succubi, but has been "identified" as a succubus in later writings) to sort of similar beings from other myths.
And what exactly is the relation of succubi and incubi, and whether succubi are truly female or shapeshifters that can take the form of a woman varies a lot in different accounts.
>>46030679
>The original folklore is of a specifically female evil spirit, not demon
You seem to fail to recognize that this "distinction" is hardly one that was used in the past. Evil spirits and demons were essentially one and the same.
>>46031049
I think you missed a spot on the leftmost succubus.
>>46030966
>Evil spirits and demons were essentially one and the same.
If you ignore their actual definitions, sure.
>>46031121
not again
>>46023873
Autistically subdividing and categorizing different types of monsters and beings is literally worse than cancer. If you want them to feel mythical and different you can't define them so precisely.
>>46031159
If you don't try to make up definitions that people didn't actually use, sure.
>>46026011
They get SEVEN attacks in 5e: one for each hand (2d8+4) and a tail slap (2d10+4, and a DC 19 to avoid being restrained).
Magic Resistance is no longer a percentage, but it does get advantage on saving throws against magic (not to mention proficiency in four saves).
198 hp and 19 AC might be a problem, but they seem average for CR 16. It gets a parry (+5 AC) each round though, so that makes it tougher if everyone isn't ganging up on it.
Since we're talking about the definition of succubi and such, how do you like them?
Actually pretty or hiding hideous appearance with illusions? Undercover agents that seduce and corrupt people to their masters' cause, predatory beings that use sex to lure victims, or collectors of semen to create more demons?
Unusual or human skin colour? Wings or no wings? Pointy tail or tail-mouth?
>>46031478
>>46032968
>Actually pretty or hiding hideous appearance with illusions?
The former. I only like playing pretty girlslike I'm not.
>>46033032
Yes. That's an improvement even, as griffins are the worst of the commonly used fantasy monsters.
>>46032968
Actually pretty. Their main goal is to fuck and anything else is secondary. They're demons of lust, not demons of scheming or being rational in general.
If you want to remove the sexuality from the sex demon because ebin subversions, why even have a sex demon?
>>46033827
>If you want to remove the sexuality from the sex demon because ebin subversions, why even have a sex demon?
To be pretentious.
>>46033827
>Their main goal is to fuck and anything else is secondary. They're demons of lust, not demons of scheming or being rational in general.
There's a difference between being demons 'of' sin and demons that 'inspire' sin. I think the latter makes more sense, since there isn't really anything for the demons to gain if they commit sins themselves (they're already irrevocably damned to begin with), while getting mortals to commit sin will damn them and give the demons access to their souls.
Although I do imagine the categories overlap a lot. A demon that inspires lust would probably be into fucking, since that's a big part of its job and being naturally driven to it would make them easier for whatever demon lord or Satan-analogue you have to manage (since you don't have to force your succubi to go out and seduce people as they'll go do it on their own initiative).
>>46034377
I think demons related to lust or anger/rage/whatever would be very unreliable ones. Because it's not just considered sin, but the emotions related to those concepts are so extreme they'd just tend to ignore authority and do whatever.
For example, the Slab Hardbeef berserker demons would always be wanting to beat up mortals, beat up angels, beat up other demons, beat up their superiors, beat up eachother, and they'd beat up themselves if it was logically possible.
Meanwhile succubi would be prone to just going off on their own to wherever, hiding out on the mortal world off everyone's radar, running off with someone who can dick them enough, etc. Most havoc they cause would be purely accidental, like high-profile people getting into trouble for adultry or for consorting with demons.
>>46032968
Actually pretty, although possibly with ability to shapeshift into a more inhuman form if they have to fight (pic related).
As for the time, for purposes of RPGs, I prefer a mix of first and second. The third one would be the most accurate to the original source, but have little purpose in a game aside from some background fluff about how demons in the setting work. Second alone just make them your standard "gotcha! monster" (ie. "oops, the barmaid your bard wanted to sleep with turns out to be a succubutt! Roll a new character!"). Making them manipulative seducers who use sex to get their way (and can also use it to kill you if necessary) makes them pretty good villains, as they can manipulate things behind the scenes and create a situation the PCs have to investigate and uncover.
>>46034377
>There's a difference between being demons 'of' sin and demons that 'inspire' sin
I recall one thread where somebody presented an idea that succubi and incubi represent those two kinds of sin demons. Succubi inspire lust, seducing people to have sex with them. Meanwhile, incubi embody lust, raping people.
You could also expand the same idea to other sins, with all having a pair of demons (male and female) associated with it, one inspiring the sin in mortals and other embodying it. Like a "wrath-incubus" would be your standard not-Khornate rage demon, while a "wrath-succubus" would goad mortals to flip out and beat the shit out of anybody who annoyed them.
>>46035062
That could work. Usually you see various sin demons either inspiring or embodying the sin (or both) without much consistensy (like most wrath demons are angry motherfuckers but you hardly ever see a sloth demon that's all about being lazy and not doing anything), so having both types for every sin would be "neater" at the very least. Would they all be split between male one embodying the sin and female one inspiring it, as with incubi/succubi, or would that vary?
Sloth and envy would be pretty hard to embody, though. A demon that embodies sloth should logically not bother doing anything, and what exactly would a demon than embodies envy do? Be jelous at other demons for having a better job and more nice stuff?
>>46034911
I love battlemode succubi. Too bad they're such a rarity.
>>46032968
>Actually pretty or hiding hideous appearance with illusions?
For a demon the distinction is meaningless.
I've lately had an idea that there should be a game about succubi vs paladins (mostly because /tg/ seems to like pitting them against eachother). Something about succubi trying to collect mortal souls and paladins trying to expose and smite them, but I don't really have any idea on the actual mechanics.
>>46023664
It's kind of amusing, since the succubus you posted comes from Castlevania. Where the succubi actually seem more like female vampires.
>>46024251
That had more to with the fact that the only time demons would even have genders assigned to them in writings was if they were sex demons. A demon of gluttony for example, could and probably would be asexual and even androgynous since gender and sexuality are not in its aspect. Even if it is trying to tempt someone into sexual gluttony (over masturbating or constantly hiring multiple prostitutes every day instead of actually doing anything useful etc.), the demon itself doesn't really have to be sexy it just has to point the person to the right vice and egg them on.
>>46038008
Seems like it would get boring. Instead make a game about paladins fighting all sorts of evils that test their commitment to various aspects of the chivalric ideal.
>>46038919
Was thinking a board/card game more than and RPG, with one player playing on the succubus side and other on the paladin side.
>>46023664
>succubus
It sucks.
At least add a cart for your succubutt to ride on in style.
>>46032968
Being actually attractive would be more effective than illusory prettiness if you're being strictly realistic, but the illusory charm is more dramatically effective so I want to go for that in a plot based game.
Look like whatever their mark wants them to look like.
Their purpose is whatever makes sense at the time.
>>46039778
>I am the weirdest boner
