...okay. I'm trying to figure out how we went from not automatically presuming that the setting is quasi-Tolkienian, to lightsabers and playable demons.
The real reason is that despite claims/appearances to the contrary, D&D and its derivatives (such as PF) are not really setting neutral. There are a whole host of setting assumptions built into the core system, such as Vancian magic, the existence of certain iconic magic items, the core races, the core classes, alignments, etc. World-building is influenced by these assumptions, to the point where a GM has to specifically call out exceptions and omissions (see 2e Dark Sun for example).
I don't see Vancian magic as particularly setting-specific, but ehh.
In my local group this was the reason for a lot of the anti-4e backlash, because so many of the fundamental assumptions were changed/tweaked that it felt like we couldn't run games on the same worlds without drastically altering the worlds.
I had my issues with 4e. How much it upset the standard fantasy model was not on the list. Hell, as far as I'm concerned, D&D already had quite the tradition of doing just that.
So it's kind of a circle started by tradition that the core races are core: 1e had those races, so people built worlds that had those races more prominently featured, so new editions have to have those races so that people could keep using their worlds. Honestly, this book will be a step towards a more setting-neutral system as it will increase options for GMs wanting to branch away from the traditional set.
Indeed. And as far as I'm concerned, that's a good thing.
Richard Leonhart wrote:
the reason is that they were core races in 3.5. (nobody said that they are core for a good reason)
Point, but that sounds suspiciously like "because they just are." Which is less a reason—good or otherwise—than an attempt to evade the issue altogether.
Because they are the most populous and accepted races.
Except Mikaze pretty much covered it when he said:
[...]this book is supposed to be setting-neutral.
A type of evil fey that can change into any humaniod(even specific ones) and feeds off of emotions and gains power from it.
I see what you did there.
And there, too.
Agreed on all counts, especially "more fey." (I was unreasonably thrilled about the nuckelavee making it into B3.)
And while I suspect that there could be copyright issues - being able to throw some vildvittror at player characters wouldn't hurt anyone.
They weren't anything special in the original book (at least the translation that I read). Just harpies with no captivating song (or talent for subtlety).
We have deer out in the east coast. Unsure about west coast but I imagine they do too.
White-tailed deer on the west coast. There's also a species called wapiti; they're also commonly called elk, but are actually closer kin to European red deer than to moose.
Race of Humaniod or Outsider(native) that have a third eye.
Take back what you said about Agathions not having hyena forms; hyenas have very caring, close-knit family communities. They take proportionally longer care of their children than any other animal (other than humans), and are not deserving of their nasty reputation at all. Lions steal hyena kills more than the other way around.
Crocutals are known for their tenacity and resourcefulness. They have a generally friendly but occasionally heated rivalry with leonals, and dislike being mistaken for gnolls. :)
Also, they cast hideous laughter.
Jess Door wrote:
And those of us that complained about the cover got a lot of "You just want all women in art to be ugly like you!" type comments.
Yeah, that's another thing: Comments like that always crop up. And, worse yet, some people seem to actually treat them like valid arguments.
Keep in mind that I like the occasional pin-up. But it's different when it's meant to be a pin-up, know what I'm saying?
Ion Raven: Agreed wholeheartedly.
Fionnabhair: Do you have a newsletter? I wish to subscribe. :)
If it's that kind of game—you know, in the wake of a massive disaster, or something of the sort? Still having her milk teeth is not necessarily going to protect your character from having to play hero for real.
However, while child soldiers may not be unlikely in desperate times and situations, child supersoldiers strain my suspension of disbelief. And an 18 Strength on a ten-year-old is "child supersoldier" territory.
Calling it now: Fey with hold person as a spell-like.
Sorry man, but I'm afraid the Tarrasque is in fact based on a realworld legend, the Tarasque of Province, France. It was said to have been a dragon beast that rampaged across the land until it was charmed by Saint Martha. The city of Tarascon is named after the legendary beast. So, while still a wicked cool monster, it's not a DnD original.
The idea of the Tarrasque? No.
The Tarrasque as essentially a kaiju? That's new: The Tarrasque of the legend was a six-legged, fire-breathing, flightless dragon that was only formidable enough to terrorize a single farming town. It was eventually subdued by a saint, and killed shortly afterward by an angry mob.
Weird as this may seem, creepypasta might be worth looking into as a source of inspiration.
[...]his face looks somewhat similar to the race from the movie avatar but broader.
I don't know; only real similarity I see is the ears. And the bluish skin, of course.
Her pose, by the way, seems kind of weird. And I thought the Lashunta had antennae, or are they small enough that you can't see them from the...well, mostly from the back?
Planetouched in general, really. And half-orcs. I like to subvert and otherwise futz around with stereotypes, though.
Zuvembie. I'm not sure if he's referencing Pigeons From Hell or Black Canaan. I believe it's the former, which certainly gave me the creeps.
Definitely gave me a Pigeons vibe, anyway.
Apostle of Gygax wrote:
Non-evil undead, like the deathless from Ebberon.
"Undead" kept going by sheer force of will, because of some great and, in this case, benevolent cause? Something like archliches or baelnorns, maybe?
I imagine looking upon primordial/alien angels would be less like Qlippoths driving people crazy and more like the angels' lack of "calibration" with the local reality causing anything from headaches, seizures, blackouts, synesthesia, or the rare case of spontaneous temporary enlightenment and/or evolution.
So more like the original concepts of cherubim and/or seraphim, then?
At any rate: I'd still like to see dweomercats, lawful and chaotic planetouched, and possibly a "wolf race." (Not sure about the Blue Space Babes someone mentioned up-thread, though; depends on how they're handled.) And did the forester's bane/snappersaw plant make it into the Tome of Horrors? Because I could have sworn it did.
ETA: It sure did. So add that one to the list, even if it is a mindless plant that barely escapes being more "hazard" than "monster."
It really depends on your definition of "fantasy." As far as I'm concerned, something can be pretty far removed from the Tolkienian model and still count.
For one, I'd consider it entirely unnecessary for the technology to be quasi-medieval. Ditto sticking to the standard-issue races, or even using them at all.
Piet the Hagboy wrote:
Piet the Hagboy, who was really raised by a Hag, thinks that Feiya's real story must be pretty tragic (or worse, kinda boring), if this is the one she tells people. (The bit about being all physically scarred from years of torture, despite being a four-alarm hottie with flawless ivory skin, was a bit of a giveaway...)
Even if Spalding didn't call it? Her outfit may be snug, but quite a bit of her is actually covered.
I'm guessing her back, below the shoulders, looks like Nualia's belly. I'm also guessing that that's far too tame of a speculation.
That doesn't really answer my question.
Let's say that the facts of an incident are known. Again, who decides whether or not anyone was actually wronged?
Yes, racism and sexism do exist. But so too do false claims of racism and sexism. And to deny that is also beyond ridiculous. Hell, Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson have based their entire careers in the past decade or so on fanning the flames of racism in cases where it was often exceedingly minimal, if it existed at all.
So who, exactly, defines what accusations have and/or lack merit?
Freehold DM wrote:
Increased variables do not excuse churlish behavior on either end.
Yes, jumping on a guy's case and calling him a "misogynist" just for finding women attractive would be, as you put it, churlish. The thing is that it's rarely, if ever, just about finding women attractive; it's about expressing one's attraction in a disrespectful manner.
Sardonic Soul wrote:
Nobody said men were oppressed but we have been getting brow beaten for the simple act of finding females attractive. Oddly enough for enjoying the feminine form we get labeled misogynists and get the "to catch a predator " treatment.
It's rarely just about "finding females attractive." There are a hell of a lot more variables that play into it. (See: what Deathquaker said about people using discrimination and/or ideologies as scapegoats to dodge accountability.)
Lastly have you ever seen how we are portrayed in media geared towards women? Where are all the strong male role models on the limetime network? Men are either cast as the stalking psycho or the incompetent husband that can't understand house work.
I can't answer this, because I refuse to argue in favor of the Lifetime channel (and the majority of television in general) not being a bad joke on many subtle and not-so-subtle levels.
That said I'm done with this thread. I think I'll find one about "gaming".
I'm actually inclined to agree, unless we're actually going to be talking about whether or not Amiri's exposed belly is an issue. (As far as I'm concerned: she's Amiri, and it's probably a deliberate taunt.)
Sardonic Soul wrote:
For the record I never implied that women shouldn't complain if they get a raw deal because others have it worse. What I am saying is if I was a woman in the middle east and I could be stoned to death for taking off my head scarf and I saw waht others are so mad about I would be wondering "hey are you done I could use some help over here".
Sorry, but this is six of one and a half dozen of the other. What makes you to believe that the bloggers aren't doing anything to help? Blogging doesn't actually preclude one from taking action, y'know.
If people are so set on a gender war then people that just blog about it are kinda like draft dodgers.
I somehow doubt that anyone is interested in a "gender war." (No one who doesn't have some serious issues, at any rate.)
Regarding equating feminism with misandry: Most of the time, that seems to fall into one of three categories: anecdotes, deliberate strawmen, or second-and-third-hand accounts of one or the other.
Yes, there are biological differences. Until we have an entirely bias-free culture to examine, we will most likely never know exactly how deeply they run.
And I'd say that it's one thing for female characters to be attractive—or even attractive and scantily clad—and quite another for them to appear far more vulnerable than they properly should. (Amiri is a rather emphatic example of Doing It Right. Pretty lady in a rawhide halter top? Yes. Helpless? Most emphatically not.)
See, I think it's more that we're introducing the idea that the expectation that everyone at your table behave like a respectful human being (which, incidentally, includes not spouting sexist/racist/homophobic/what-have-you crappola regardless of who is or is not present) is not synonymous with special consideration.
Hear, hear. No one's talking about "special consideration;" we're talking about basic consideration and not acting like a pillock to begin with.
Well...I've been treated like an unwelcome interloper at the local game store. I eventually quit patronizing the place altogether. At other game stores, I've been treated like a valued customer (or at least as valued as it gets), so I tend to consider that place at least somewhat anomalous.
I don't like the whole "special butterfly" thing. In fact, I tend to prefer not being the only woman in the game group.
Most of the real nonsense I've seen has been on the Internet, where being openly female is considered a ploy for attention and sexist comments are considered cute.
kid america wrote:
I don't see wanting them to work the bugs out as particularly jerkish. That's always significant, as far as I'm concerned.
I ran a swashbuckling campaign where gnolls were matriarchal and polyandrous like hyenas, so the pirate gnoll captain's first mate and second mate REALLY WERE her first mate and second mate!!!!
I've always wondered why this isn't a more common take on gnolls. Sure, everyone's probably sick of Evil Matriarchies by now...but for gnolls, it makes sense.
And they all thought they were cursed werehyenas stuck in their hybrid form.
Something like that, if applied to the entire race, would also be interesting. An origin myth, as it were.
Look for Ironborn. There might be your solution.
Anyone had a chance to look at these guys?
I believe it is meant to be normal speed for their size which would be 20 feet as per halfling an Gnomes, Goblins have fast speed 30 feet for their size.
In my copy of the rulebook, gnomes and halflings are listed as "slow speed," which is defined as 20 feet. This is from the second print run; has that been changed since then?
My question as to wukong base speed has been answered anyway, so—as I stated—it's a very minor quibble.
It's not class-specific at all, although I may do class-specific ones at some point in the future. As for spacing, I'll see what I can do with the spreadsheet. (Getting things anywhere near interlocking neatly without crowding too much is a bit of a challenge. I'm still trying to figure out what's to be done about the lack of a space for iterative attacks.)
Three pages. Should be considered a work in progress.
I was attempting a compromise between "comprehensive" and "clean and simple" with this. If you've got any suggestions for updated versions, please let me know.
Download links (character sheet and separate spell sheet) can be found here. Enjoy. :)
Just snagged this. Wasn't quite as impressed with the shift as with the mangani and (especially) the wukong (nothing concrete, they just didn't appeal to me that much), but definitely got my dollar's worth. :)
Also loving the references in the names. :D
One tiny quibble: are the wukong intended to be listed as having "slow speed" (20, as per halflings/gnomes) or as actually having "normal speed" (which would be 30) despite being size Small?
Wolf Munroe wrote:
I think of them attacking ships, and mostly as a monstrous feminine face coming from a cave. Maybe I'm thinking of a different monster altogether.
I think that's Scylla, who was often conflated (or otherwise associated, usually as a daughter) with Lamia.
Scylla was on one side of a narrow channel. She would jump out and grab six sailors off of the deck (with her tentacles, or with her many yapping wolf heads, depending on the exact version of the legend) if she saw a ship. But she was considered the lesser of two evils: If you steered out of her reach, Charybdis, the whirlpool-maker, would then be within range to pull the whole rig under.