J-Spee Lovecraft's page

Deadmanwalking wrote:

The LOWG Megafauna stuff may be not all you're hoping for thematically, but it seems very good mechanically to me.

Its pretty hard to introduce something unbalanced when it’s just reflavouring existing mechanics (prior to level 7 at least).

Precisely. It feels like Paizo is just sort of farting out a few things that have very little substance. That, combined with all of the errors in the Core Rulebook, is not a good look.

I think its a very good approach to the option. They could have spent a whole page detailing 5 or 6 such animal companions that for balance reasons wouldn't be much different that what the sidebar achieves anyway. The sidebar gives us a third specialization type that will add options to every animal companion that is printed from this point on that allows many more mount sized companions that don't have to be locked into Savage. That is smart design in my eyes.

I get that, but I guess I don't see why they couldn't have done both. They could've at least included a mammoth, which is pretty much the first animal people think of when the term "megafauna" comes to mind.

Sporelock wrote:

Spamotron wrote:

Archive of Nethys has the rules: https://2e.aonprd.com/Rules.aspx?ID=795

Essentially you take a vanilla animal companion from the core book and just say it's a megafauna version of that. Then when you receive access to an advanced animal companion you have another option to choose from to upgrade it. Just one for all megafauna though.

That's it? That's really lame. I was hoping for an actual mammoth or ground sloth or gigantopithecus.

Welcome to 2nd edition ;)

Seriously: not surprised they took that route. Disappointed, but not surprised. It's easier to reflavour something then provide rules and options. Perhaps they'll revisit it in a later product and do it properly.

I just don't understand why they would even bother making it a point to mention that particular option if it was strictly just to be like "Hey! Re-skin the old animals and pretend they're all prehistoric and crap. BYE." Just seems like a complete waste.

Make 'em come back evil and all jacked-up like in Pet Sematary. Or just make it rare or maybe even make them lose their memories. There have to be some sort of stakes or the game will be boring. If you can just get brought back later, there's nothing really to lose and that gets old really fast.

I'm pretty excited about these dudes being playable soon. Also, I'm impressed that you guys are going out of your way to give the "savage" ancestries a lot more depth. Kudos.

Thanks, folks. I'm still getting used to 2e and there are so many errors in the Core Rulebook, I'm never sure if something is a typo or a feature.

The number crunching is a precursor to play, I crunch out characters that do exactly what I want and it facilitates my roleplaying in game. I don't understand how these are separate.

Maybe it isn't different for some people. And maybe I didn't word it as well as I should've. I'm not against analysing character options. It's just that the way some people discuss their character building just seems so joyless and mechanical. But maybe for them, it isn't.

J-Spee Lovecraft wrote:

I should've said "overly concerned". It's great to choose options that help make your character more viable. I'm not opposed to that. But sometimes it's exhausting when people so thoroughly dissect the game. I mean, no shade to OP, but they have charts. That just seems so joyless and mechanical to me.

Part of it is the game itself telling people "every plus matters" is one of the cornerstones of the game. As such, the range from suck to viable is much smaller then the old pathfinder. Add to that the new crit ranges and a few points difference might mean more crit fails for players or more crit successes from foes.

I'm all for picking a companion you like but IMO what it brings to the table as far as mechanics is as much a deciding factor on "like" as other factors, as the mechanics make them all play differently and help enable different tactics. Dromaeosaur with is move and support ability make an awesome flank buddy, A cat can set up a ranged rogue for sneak attacks, horse is a Mount, snake stops reactions from foes so a ranged ranger can fire in melee...

See, that's great. They should all have special uses that make them viable and unique. I'm down for that. It's just annoying when people are like, "I've run the simulation over 500 times. Your favorite is trash." Like, just play the damn game. I'm not anti-data or whatever. People just sound like robots and I know that's partially due to the nature of this new edition.

J-Spee Lovecraft wrote:

I think it would be really crazy if someone picked a companion just because they liked the animal instead of being concerned with the math, but that's just me.

That's like saying 'I don't understand why people just don't pick a car that looks nice and instead worry about things like 'can I drive a stick shift' or 'does that electric car have enough range to get me to work''.

The game is built on math so, IMO, it's be "crazy" to ignore the math: it's freeform storymaking if the math doeesn't matter.

I should've said "overly concerned". It's great to choose options that help make your character more viable. I'm not opposed to that. But sometimes it's exhausting when people so thoroughly dissect the game. I mean, no shade to OP, but they have charts. That just seems so joyless and mechanical to me.

I'm definitely not saying that you shouldn't make sensible choices with your stats. You obviously don't want to make a character that sucks at their role. But there are so many players who minmax. Being that persnickety just sucks the fun out of the game for me.

J-Spee Lovecraft wrote:

Does anybody play this game just to have fun? Like, do you ever make a character just because you like the concept? I'm just curious. A lot of folks seem to just want to power build. I'm not judging. To each his own. I just didn't know if anybody actually made a character they liked without being completely concerned with the math.

Literally no one does that ever and--quite frankly--I am a little embarrassed for you for even asking that.

Okay, well, I'll let myself out.

I think it would be really crazy if someone picked a companion just because they liked the animal instead of being concerned with the math, but that's just me.

Mid to Late mutagenist looks a l ot of fun.

early one looks rough..

but honestly thats true for both churi and muti alchemists, and to a lesser extent, bomber. CHuri has a hard time IMO until lv 13. Muti has some dead effects.
bomber gets extra bombs and the splash restriction, which is t he best off at low l evel. but the perpetual has weird interactions with later stuff (but thats true of the other lines too).

I probably wouldn't start a muta from lv 1 .

I rather expect a few Alchemist eratta ideas probably around Oct or so, shortly after the next playtest opens.

Man, I really hope so. The issue with getting zero abilities at 1st level is just sad, but I also can't help but feel that mutagens themselves could be a bit better. I want my natural armor, dammit!

More than any other class, I was looking forward to making a Mutagenist. But it's plagued with too many issues and I can't help but feel that it was just sort of slapped together as an afterthought. Instead of taking care to give it the traits that everyone loved about Vivisectionist, Master Chymist, and the kooky and weird discoveries like tentacles and tumors, they just gave it abilities that do nothing (a lot has changed since the play test). Is the Mutagenist still worth it? Are the developers aware of the issues that plague the Mutagenist? Will there be errata fixing it? Do the developers even care? Please! I WANT ANSWERS, DAMMIT!

Why does the Annunaki have a bite attack? That's kinda weird.

Oliver Veyrac wrote:

Kalindlara wrote:

I kind of wish we could get the 3.0 Kaiju template back, but it's not Open Content.

I thought that Paizo.com was the owners of dragon magazine?

A: No, they were merely producing it under license. None of their Dragon content is still theirs, to the best of my knowledge.

B: The kaiju template is from Dragon #289, which predates Paizo's production of Dragon Magazine in any case.

I still have that issue! It's a cool template.

We need Dire Smilodons! Because Smilodon isn't powerful enough! CR 15 Smilodons! Yeah!

Make it happen! :-D

Oh wait...

We actually need Advanced, Giant, Half-Dragon, Fiendish, Nosferatu, Were-Smilodons.

And anyone, to the person who said we should drop it, this is still on topic, as it involves Megaprimatus. I know it shouldn't be that big of a deal and I know I could always change things with homebrew rules, but it just doesn't make any sense to me. I mean, maybe if they gave it some sort of rage ability that boosted its Str and Con, I'd say "yeah, sure, that's fine that it only has a Strength of 29, even though it's bigger than a house." But since it doesn't (it doesn't, does it? I guess I don't really know) I just don't understand the choice on the developer's part. I mean, how the hell am I gonna pit him against my dinosaurs now?! :(

Oh well. It's ok, Mega-P. I'm weak for my size too. I still love you. After all, everything is better with apes.

I do find it odd that a megaprimatus is a Gargantuan creature with the strength of a Large sized dire polar bear, and nearly half the HD of a T-rex. Even assuming Kong was an advanced version (since he defeated three advanced Rexs), this seems to be slightly off.

It's four times bigger than a smilodon, but barely stronger and no tougher. A little disappointing.

Yeah, my only beef with pathfinder is when it comes to animal/vermin stats. Some of them make zero sense. Firstly, they only give the gorilla a strength of 15. The same as a mastiff. And in Bestiary 4, the giant flea and mammoth flea have the same strength score, despite the mammoth flea being two size categories larger. I mean, what the hell, Paizo?

Um, no. Smilodon was a lethal predator that specialized in bringing down huge herbivores several times it's own size. A single "caveman" would not have been able to bring one down. It would've taken a large group and there would have been casualties. I think one would most likely win in a battle against a Pachy. Pachycephalosaurus was the largest of it's group, which mostly contained small or medium sized animals, but it was nowhere near the size you claim it to be, and a lot of it's length was it's tail. It would actually have been quite a bit smaller than a lot of the massive ground sloths, bison, rhinos, and elephant relatives the Smilodon would have hunted. If they had lived together, I could easily see the Pachy being prey for the Smilodon. Don't get me wrong, Pachycephalosaurus is a formidable animal, but nothing that Smilodon couldn't have handled.

You often get so carried away being opposed to "mainstream" or, more accurately, iconic, creatures that you forget that most of them have very good reasons to be iconic to begin with. Yes, I agree with you that lesser known monsters are just as cool, and I like to see them get used as well. But that doesn't make the iconic ones bad. And you can be really unfair when it comes to accusing the devs of only using the most popular, profitable creatures. Let me tell you something. There would be no Bestiary 5 if that were the case. The monsters in the book that I would say qualify as "iconic" or "mainstream" consist of the three on the cover, the Megaprimatus, the Reptoid, and the handful of robots. Almost everything else in this book is weird, obscure, or completely original. They would not be systematically giving higher power levels to more popular creatures and than make an Ophiotaurus CR 16, and Vilderavn CR 17, and a Glaistig CR 21. Almost any other publisher would have stopped at this point, since 95% of the high money-grabbing monsters have already been used. Paizo did not. Instead, we have a book full of oddball fey, obscure folklore...

Well said. Yeah, some obscure monsters are cool, but there's no need for anyone to be bestiary hipsters.

What all can the grays do? Are there stats for UFO's?

Oh hey, Hobkins are the Hopskinville Goblin, aren't they? If so, Kentucky monsters represent!

WHOA! I love that there are so many cryptids and aliens! Now we need a Flatwoods...

Animal Archives came out not too long ago and it was definitely one of my favorite paperback Paizo products, but I was a little disappointed that there were only stats for eight animals. Having said that, I'd like to take some time to type up multiple animals that I feel could be useful as companions or familiars (or food). Feel free to leave feedback or even post varmints of your own.

Thanks!

Herd Animal, Cow
CR 1

XP 400
N Large animal
Init -1; Senses low-light vision, scent; Perception +9
DEFENSE

AC 12, touch 8, flat-footed 12 (-1 dex, +4 natural, –1 size)
hp 19 (3d8+6)
Fort +5, Ref +2, Will +0
OFFENSE

Speed 30 ft.
Melee gore +4 (1d6+4)
Space 10 ft.; Reach 5 ft.
Special Attacks stampede, trample (1d8+4, DC 14)
STATISTICS

Str 16, Dex 9, Con 15, Int 2, Wis 11, Cha 5
Base Atk +2; CMB +5; CMD 15 (19 vs. trip)
Feats Endurance, Skill Focus (Perception)
Skills Perception +9
SPECIAL ABILITIES
Stampede (Ex)

A stampede occurs if three or more creatures with stampede make a trample attack while remaining adjacent to each other. While stampeding, the creatures can trample foes of their size or smaller, and the trample’s save DC increases by +2.
ECOLOGY

Environment temperate plains
Organization solitary, pair, or herd (3–30 and 1 bull)
Treasure none

Cattle are raised as livestock for their leather, meat, and milk but are sometimes used as draft animals. The statistics provided represent cows, while the statistics for the aurochs in the Pathfinder Bestiary can
be used to represent bulls.

Cow Animal Companions
Starting Statistics: Size Medium; Speed 30 ft.; AC +1 natural armor, Attack gore (1d4); Ability Scores Str 14, Dex 12, Con 12, Int 2, Wis 11, Cha 5; Special Qualities low-light vision, scent.

7th-Level Advancement: Size Large; AC +3 natural armor; Attack gore (1d6); Ability Scores Str +8, Dex –2, Con +4; Special Qualities stampede, trample.

Catfish CR 1/8

XP 50
N Tiny animal (aquatic)
Init +3; Senses blindsense 30 ft., low-light vision, scent; Perception +4
DEFENSE

AC 15, touch 15, flat-footed 12 (+3 Dex, +2 size)
hp 3 (1d8-1)
Fort +1, Ref +5, Will +1
OFFENSE

Speed swim 30 ft.
Space 2-1/2 ft.; Reach 0 ft.
STATISTICS

Str 2, Dex 17, Con 9, Int 1, Wis 12, Cha 2
Base Atk +0; CMB +0; CMD 6 (can’t be tripped)
Feats Skill Focus (Perception)
Skills Perception +4, Swim +11
SPECIAL ABILITIES Defensive Spines (Ex)

As a swift action, a catfish can lock its spiny fins into place to injure potential predators. Any creature attempting to grapple the catfish takes 1 point of nonlethal damage on making a grapple check. The catfish can relax its spines as a free action.
ECOLOGY

Environment any freshwater
Organization solitary, pair, or school (3-6)
Treasure none

These whiskered bottom feeders are among the most widespread fish on Golarion and can be found in nearly any body of fresh water. The catfish presented here is an 18-inch, 3-pound bullhead catfish but a wide variety of other fish exist.

Walking Catfish (CR 1/8): These strange fish are able to survive for long periods of time out of water. They are hardier than other catfish (Con 12) and have a base land speed of 5 ft. They also have the Water Dependency special quality.

Madtom (CR 1/4) : These tiny catfish possess venom glands near the base of their fin spines. Any living creature struck by these spines must succeed a Fortitude save (DC 9; frequency 1/round for 6 rounds; cure 1 save) or take 1d2 Con damage. The DC is Con-based.

Electric Catfish (CR 1/2): Found in the Mwangi Expanse, electric catfish emit a potent electric shock to stun prey and potential predators. They lack the barbed fins of other catfish but can make a touch attack (+5; Weapon Finesse bonus feat) with their whiskers that deals 1d3 electricity damage on a successful hit. On a critical hit, the creature struck must make a DC 9 Fortitude save or be stunned for 1d4 rounds. The DC is Con-based.

A spellcaster who can acquire a familiar can choose a catfish as a familiar. A catfish familiar grants its master a +3 bonus on Swim checks.

Penguin CR 1/6

XP 65
N Tiny animal
Init -1; Senses low-light vision; Perception +3

DEFENSE

AC 12, touch 11, flat-footed 12 (-1 Dex, +1 natural, +2 size)
hp 4 (1d8)

Fort +2, Ref +1, Will +2

OFFENSE

Speed 10 ft., swim 40 ft.
Melee bite -2 melee (1d3-4)
Space 2-1/2 ft.; Reach 0 ft.

STATISTICS

Str 2, Dex 9, Con 11, Int 2, Wis 14, Cha 6
Base Atk +0; CMB -3; CMD 3
Feats Endurance
Skills Perception +3, Swim +7
SQ hold breath

ECOLOGY

Environment cold aquatic
Organization colony (11-30)
Treasure none

Penguins are flightless birds native to Golarion’s polar seas and ice floes. They prey on fish, squid, and small crustaceans.

A spellcaster who can acquire a familiar can choose a penguin as a familiar. A penguin familiar grants its master a +2 bonus to Fortitude saves.

I'LL CALM DOWN AS SOON AS YOU STOP STARING AT ME WITH THOSE BINOCULARS.

Also, I'm not trying to create a trend of week-by-week animalistic race previews but I'd really like to see one for ratfolk. I want to make a ratfolk alchemist and I'm hoping there'll be some pretty awesome options for them.

I don't think the art should really matter that much to people. In case anyone has forgotten, this is a fantasy game and you can imagine creatures in it looking like what ever you want. And anyway, it's not bad artwork at all. Sure, it looks a little more cat than folk, but don't crap all over someone else's art just because because it didn't turn out the way you liked. Personally, I prefer Wayne Reynolds to most other artists who illustrates for Paizo, but I still appreciate other people's contributions.

I'm sorry if I seem grumpy. I just get tired of seeing everyone complaining so much every time a new preview comes out.

There aren't going to be any Kaiju in the Beastairy 3, it took up too many pages so it was cut.

Heart. Broken.