Jason Rice's page

It's a she, not a he! Just because she can't speak for herself and has to use fly spells to move around doesn't mean you can debase handicapped people!

Ah, give him a break. After all, it's just a head. Hard to tell the gender from just a severed goblin head. Can you tell one goblin head from another?

:)

EDIT: Maybe you can. After all, you are "Gark the Goblin".

:P

How is it your Hp for 11d12 are only 55? Should be 115 [(6.5*11)+44]

If you give her max HP for that 1st HD, its even higher. 12 +(6.5*10) +44 = 121

Maybe he meant her HP increases an additional 75 which would make it 130 HP. Closer to the average, and I for one don't think a villan needs to be exactly average (I know from the comments that I am in the minority on this).

However, you make a good point. If he meant an additional 75, that's what should have been said. If he meant what he said, then that's too low. Either way, it's a mistake.

You were one of my favorites in round 2 and got one of my votes. Unfortuntely in round 3, I'm currently undecided if you are going to get another vote.

Problems:

1) AC of 22 for a 13th level monk is low.
2) I don't like the fact that someone obsessed with wealth leaves a diamond statue on his victims.
3) The new feat, while occasionally useful, is not that imaginative. As Montalve said in an above post, a new combat style would have been good. If you didn't feel that was allowed, perhaps a new Monk substitute power. Your feat was just too "safe". Another option was to give his Ki Strike an additional energy damage. He's a disciple of a blue dragon, he should have an electricity attack. Disciples of red dragons would have flaming hands, you get the idea. Just imagine Lord Jeroim's fists crackling with electric arcs as he pummels the PC's. Underground, the flurry of blows would look like a strobe light as each punch found it's target.
4) You should have made his Dex higher (more important to a Monk) and his Cha lower (he spent 100 years talking to the same person, er, dragon) He's just out of touch with humaniod customs and etiquette. More so than your average dwarf. Perhaps you increased the Charisma for a higher leadership score. I don't think it makes story sense, and I'm not sure it's necessary for your character concept.
5) His minimum starting age is 47. Add 100 years training, that makes him 147, and middle aged for a Dwarf. Middle aged modifiers don't seem to be applied. (Heroic Melee stats: 15, 14, 13, 12, 10, 8; Jeroim's starting stats: 15, 14, 13, 12, 10, 8) I am probably in the minority, but for my part, I would have been OK with a "high fantasy" point value using the purchase option on page 5 of the PFRPG. However, I don't think this option was used. Regardless, while adding the age modifiers would hurt his offense, it might have HELPED his defense in the form of a higher Wisdom. His low AC was a major complaint with a lot of people. Didn't David Lowery and Roguerouge point out his age as an issue in the discussion thread for round 2?

Good Stuff:

1) Good idea on disarming the wands. I'm suprised I never thought of that. Disarm (and sunder) are under-used in the games I've played.
2) The poison tactic is good, if the target doesn't know Lord Jeroim is a Monk.
3) I still like the idea of "the Hoard". But I went over that in round 2.
4) I like even more that he trained for 100 years as a monk. With a dragon. An ACTUAL dragon. Wow.

I'm on the fence with Lord Jeroim. I still have more entries to read.

On a related note:

Monks are a pretty weak class, so I guess I shouldn't be too surprised. Given their inherent weakness, I'd think you could have afforded to give him a better "special rule" to help him out.

I actually think Monks are one of the better classes. Perhaps just behind Sorcerer, and possibly Cleric. Using flurry of blows, Monks get more attacks per round than any other class. They eventually get +60 speed, which is just AWESOME. They can never be disarmed. They dont have to waste time putting on armor if attacked at night. They can't be poisoned. And they share the best ability in the game with the rogue, Improved Evasion. Fireball? What fireball? Monks KICK tail! Get it? They are Monks. They kick... never mind.

This is MUCH improved over round 2, and hints at the genius you showed with the Spider Hook in round 1. You have fixed most (but not all) of my objections in round 2, and I thank you for it.

My favorite part of this was your "new rule", which seems to be my favorite part of most of the submissions. You found a story-driven way to increase Malgana's statblock threat to the PC's. Nicely done. As the party increases in level, she gets more of her bits-and-pieces back and increases her threat (and CR).

I still have an objection to the party helping Malgana (plot #3), so points off for that. They are just not going to fall for it. The Silent Spell/Still Spell combo was a no-brainer (because of the lack of hands and movable mouth), and I would have been dissapointed if you hadn't done it. So that's a "push" (to use a Blackjack term). However, you took our suggestions to heart and got rid of the "unkillable" bit from round 2 (which I hated), gave her a minion (someone else suggested this), and made her a Lich instead of a Ghast (which makes more sense). Also, nice catch to increase the Sorcerer level to 11 so that she could be a lich. Positive points for all that.

Also, I like that her phylactery is "hidden" in plain sight. Most PC's will be looking for a box, gem, amulet, or some other item. Will they be able to "see the forest for the trees"? Technically, a phylactery needs to be an item, not a living thing (like a tree), but I'm willing to ignore that and include it with the other bits about regaining her body parts, into one gigantic "new rule". One minor nitpick is that I would have described the tree in more detail. The example phylactery in the MM describes a metal box containing strips of parchment with magical phrases. Perhaps the Black Oak has magical symbols carved into the bark? Maybe that is coming in the next round, but if it's her phylactery, it should be included here.

Overall, nice job. I still have more to read, but this is a contender.

I like this version a little better than round 2. The changes I saw were minor, but added to the flavor. Stretched limbs that bend in unnatural places...nice!

In comparison, I thought your magic item was a little bland. It just didn't wow me.

There seems to be a debate on the fact that the dignitaries would choose to come back. Maybe it just speaks to my own personal trust in politicians (not high), but I would say it depends on where the dead dignitaries will end up if they don't come back. Maybe these particular souls will end up with Asmodeus. Maybe they will go someplace very, very bad, and are highly motivated at another shot at life (or at least want to put off punishment as long as possible). I am totally buying that they would come back. Should one of them decide to stay dead, the world always has more politicians.

This "new rule"...um...rule for round 3 is probably my favorite part. Kudos to Paizo for doing it.

I like what you were attempting with your spell, but I also agree that it is too powerful for it's level. Someone pointed out a "patient 0" effect, and I'll admit, as I was reading your spell, I was thinking the same thing. Thats what you should have done.

However, my take would have been slightly different. I would have a "target: You". YOU become patient 0, meaning you don't cast this unless you can cure yourself. Or you are suicidal. That would tone it down some. Also, reduce the duration. 24 hours is too long. I would go with 10 minutes, but then you dont get the effect I think you are looking for. Perhaps 1 hour/level? Even with that, this spell should be higher level.

One slight cosmetic thing. Just a personal preference. I would have people infect each other by coughing or sneezing on their target (ranged touch attack, with a range of 5 ft?) I like the imagery better than simply touching your target. Hack, cough! Ewww! That went into my mouth. Gross.

I think you would have been better served by making a new disease instead of a new spell. The DMG only has 10 diseases.

I'm on the fence with your submission. I'll have to read the others. I hope this was constructive.

That's not nearly maxed out, let alone MAXED OUT. For one thing, it's doable for a character to start with a 20 in one stat. Then, add in a belt of strength +6. Then add haste, bless, enlarge person, inspire courage +4... that's hardly MAXED OUT (there are the inherent bonus books, other buff spells, flanking, etc), but it puts him at +11 to hit over your example, which means his attacks are at +45/40/35/30, meaning he needs 5/10/15/20 to hit. Those are entirely reasonable numbers.

*grin* I just KNEW that someone was going to bring up a 1/2 orc, so I'll concede the 20 strength. Even if a 1/2 orc is more likely to choose Barbarian over Fighter due to the new Pathfinder features for favored classes. Also, I'll concede the +6 belt and also say that there are other sources of goodness for melee combatants from the almost countless number of sourcebooks for D20. However, I said I was looking at a maxed out fighter, not a maxed out fighter+cleric+wizard+bard. At best, the fighter won't have those spells and effects on him till round 2 (probably much later). More likely the spellcasters are going to focus on thier on backsides first with defensive buffs for themselves, then try an attack spell or two, THEN buff allies. By then, your fighter is dead.

Also, as Steven said, you have 2 buffs that dont stack. So, the new math looks like this: +38/+33/+28/+23.

That means, a maxed out fighter will have to roll 13/18/20/20. A raging, maxed out barbarian will have to roll 16/20/20/20. A maxed out Paladin will have to roll 18/20/20/20, with a "Smite Evil" of 14+ IF they also have an 18 charisma (EXTREMELY unlikely).

I disagree with your use of the word "reasonable" when referring to those attack numbers. The point I was trying to make is that this is the BEST POSSIBLE scenario. 99.9% of the parties that will encounter Vashkar will be less effective than this ideal. I mean, really, folks. How many PC's will have rolled a natural 18 at creation, AND be a 1/2 orc, AND have chosen Fighter (instead of barbarian or paladin), AND bump strength every time, AND have a +5 weapon, AND have chosen correctly for weapon training the 1st time, AND have Weapon Focus + Greater Weapon Focus, AND have a belt of strength +6, AND had Venus on the cusp of Aquarius with Saturn rising...

...You have 8 variables that all have to be exactly right in this example. It just IS NOT going to happen. Not all of it. Not unless your DM is a) Monte Hall or b) Santa Claus. This kind of power gaming doesn't appeal to me. Not as a player or as a DM.

Just take the 1st step, rolling an 18 for an ability score. It's not that likely, even with 4D6 (ignore the lowest). What's the odds on that? If you use the point system, that example Paladin above is never going to have an 18 strength and an 18 charisma. And those buffs from the other PC's that you mentioned will come too late for the fighter to make use of them. He'll already be dead.

If you still think his AC is acceptable, then intead of comparing it to the attack value of a hypothetical PC (which I think is the best way) compare it to the AC of other monsters with HIGHER CR's. From the 3rd ed MM (results may vary for 3.5):

Titan, CR21: AC 22, 210 HP
Great Wyrm Brass Dragon, CR22: AC 42, 536 HP
Great Wyrm Green Dragon, CR23: AC 43, 551 HP
Great Wyrm Blue Dragon, CR24: AC 44, 565 HP
Great Wyrm Red Dragon, CR25: AC 41, 660 HP

In fact, I cant find a single example of a printed "official" monster with a higher AC. I'm sorry, but the more I think about it, the more this AC bothers me. It actually bothers me more than the improper use of the vampire template. But then again, his AC is so high BECAUSE of the improper use of the vampire template.

Eventually I'll learn. The "post monster" ate my post. From now on, I'm saving the post to a word doc before submitting. That teaches me for doing this while watching "Lost". Here we go again, and apologies if the math is off this time around...

...First, let me say that I like this version better than your round 2 version. Thank you for explaining the source of the Monk levels, and thank you again for getting rid of the "pleasure palace". This is a better submission in my opinion for both of those changes, and a more interesting one with the new background.

I do have a few problems.

Problem 1) AC 50 is insaine. You gave him Dodge, so He'll be AC 51 against the party's best melee combatant. As everyone seems to agree that it's a 17th level party fighting Vashkar, lets see what a MAXED OUT 17th level Fighter has to offer. Lets assume he rolled an 18 for strength at 1st level and bumped it at every opportunity to a 22 strength. With attacks of +17/+12/+7/+2, a +6 Strength Bonus, a +5 Magic Weapon, Greater Weapon Focus, and +4 from Weapon Training (Pathfinder's Fighter version), his attacks will be +34/+29/+24/+19. A maxed out fighter will have to roll 17/20/20/20 to hit Vashkar's 51 AC. He'll be lucky to hit once per round, and Vashkar's got 310 HP.

Heaven Help the party that has a front line combatant thats not a fighter. A MAXED OUT, Raging barbarian will have to roll 20/20/20/20 (no Weapon Training, no Greater Weapon Focus, +4 Strength). He can spend 4 rage points for "Suprise Accuracy", but that strategy will only last so long, and Vashkar's got those 310 HP. A MAXED OUT Paladin will need to roll 20/20/20/20, and even if he rolled a second "18" for abilities, and put it in Charisma, he still needs an "18" with "Smite Evil"

Problem 2) Even if the stat block is legal (I believe a vampire template on an outsider is not), it's TOO MUCH. In the words of an old SNL skit, "Simmerdownnow." You may be able to run your "Big Bad" (Buffy the VAMPIRE Slayer reference) with your eyes closed, never opening a book, and a D20 tied behind your back. We, the people that will buy your adventure, can not. You've tried to do too much. Kudos to your design ability if all the math is correct, but most of us don't even want to see if it is. It's too much work. It all becomes white noise with a stat block like that, and it's going to be almost as much work to run Vashkar in an encounter, much less a campaign.

Problem 3) With all due respect to roguerouge (see above post), there is no way I'm going to buy that a Monk is not an "associated class." As I said in your round 2 submission, I'm a 3rd edition guy, not 3.5, so this "associated class" stuff is new to me. However, it seems to me that Monk works nicely with Vampire AND Rakshasa. It may or may not be legal (again, the Vampire template issue), but I'm going to have to agree with Steven T Helt (see above post), that Vashkar's CR should probably be higher than 20.

Despite these problems, I think this submission was an improvement over round 2. I DO think you have tallent. I just think you need to work on your execution, and try not to do so much with a single character. I'll have to read the rest of the submissions before I decide who to vote for.

Clark

In advance, thanks for the feedback. I am sure we all appreciate it.

CHALICE OF THE KING
Aura faint conjuration; CL 7th
Slot --; Price 56,000 gp; Weight 3 lb.

HISTORY
Originally created by the paranoid Tybarus the Tyrrant, the Chalice of the King disappeared after his assassination. Tybarus had artisans loyal to him make an enchanted cup of gold, covered with gemstones, that would remove any poisons in his drink. He feared, correctly, that citizens of his kingdom sought to remove him from power. The goblet served its purpose well, and Tybarus indeed thwarted many attempts to poison him. Ironically, he was assassinated by a poisoned blade, from which the mighty chalice was unable to save him.

DESCRIPTION
This large cup is made of solid gold. Green gems, mostly emerald and jade, are embedded on the sides and base of the cup. This chalice constantly casts neutralize poison (as the spell) on any liquid it contains. This has the additional effect of removing alcohol from any beverage drank from the cup. The chalice cannot remove poisons already affecting the victim however, or delivered from any other source (such as injury, contact, or inhalation poisons).

CONSTRUCTION
Requirements Craft Wondrous Item, neutralize poison; Cost 28,000 gp

This is amazing. When I entered this contest, I created several items, so that I could have a variety to choose from for submission. This was one of them (that I didn't submit). A cup that neutralized poison AND alcohol. I invisioned a King paranoid of assasination, and a rogue who cheated at drinking games. My thoughts on it were that it wasn't flashy enough, and probably wouldn't be an item people would be excited to get. I DO think it would be useful, though.

Jason Rice wrote:

Some of you may cite the whole midichlorean nonsense, and say that Vader had more Force potential. I contend that POTENTIAL does not equal current power. Also, That midichlorean thing was mentioned before Vader became "more machine than man".

You used the 'm' word. Twice.

Take it back.

Twice.

You don't like the word "more"?!? Strange.

Just kidding. If I could, I would go back and replace "the M word" with "that which shall not be named", and a spoiler for those that don't get the reference.

I take it back.

I take it back!

<:o

<Redacted>

Let me just say that a vote for Bricius is a vote for . . . FREE BEER!!

Just in time for the Superbowl. What kind?

Seriously, though, Bricius doesnt seem to be getting much love, and I think part of that is because he's not flashy or "gonzo", whatever that means (aside from the Muppets, this is the only place I've heard that word). For my part, Bricius is in my top 8. I don't know if he will get my vote yet. I'm going to sleep on it.

Single classed humans CAN be villans. In fact, they might even make up the majority of villans. Not every villan needs to be a multiclassed feindish half-breed monster. However, I think you would have gotten more praise if there was at least 1 thing "special" about him. Forests are overdone. Perhaps placing him in a different type of terrain would have appealed to more voters. Most druids (and rangers) players encounter are from forests. Maybe Bricius could have been the druid of a desert oasis, and Anthia was the spring's Nixie. He could spread disease by infecting a city's only water supply for miles around. Instead of Lizardmen (which are also overdone), you could use Lamia. Whatever the change, I think it would be a good idea if at least one feature of the villan was out of the ordinary.

I don't think it's a bad entry, just sort of common. There are certianly others I disliked more, and that's why you are in the top 8 for me. I just dont know if you are getting my vote...

Now, about that beer...

No worries—it's not your job to decide if the contestants violated the rules. That's one of the judges' tasks.

Thanks for the clarification, and I hope the "It's not your job" part was not a hint of annoyance. I was trying to do the right thing, which is why I asked the question before voting. I did not take part in Superstar last year, as a contestant or a voter, and when I came upon that FAQ question, it caused several people, including myself, some confusion. I appreciate your time in answering the question, and can vote with a clearer conscience.

Trevor, Don't worry. As I said before in your thread, your submission's got more mojo than a bag full of Austin Powers. I've narrowed the entries down to 8, but you are currently in my top 4. I would be suprised if you didn't advance, and I still cant wait to see your rules-fu.

Thanks Roguerouge. I appreciate it.

I give that post a 4.

Now THAT is funny. I dont care who you are.

New grist for the mill:

"Q12: Can I create new abilities, feats, spells, powers, items, or rules for my villain?

No. This stage of the contest is about story, not about mechanics. Resist the urge."

I am assuming that you saw this in my reply to your post on the Bracht Darkhouse thread.

I'm concerned that some of the authors took this, as I did, to mean that "you had better stick to our system, or else." It seemed pretty clear to me (until I read Wolfgang's post) that new abilities were not allowed. Question: "Can I create new abilites..." Answer: "No."

Maybe my skull is as thick as a dwarf's, because now I am confused, when before I thought I was crystal clear on the rules.

Wolfgang, when you said "That's exactly right. Statting out powers, feats, etc was not the goal of Round 2.", that seems to imply that CREATING new powers is OK, as long as you don't STAT them. But the FAQ specifically says you can't CREATE new powers. Is that what you are implying? Can you CREATE new powers?

It seems like an unfair disadvantage to those authors that stuck to the format. Yes, I loved the description of Bracht Darkhouse. But perhaps he was so cool because Trevor created a new power (or spell). Then again, perhaps he didn't create something new. There could be some legal way to give Bracht those powers that I don't know about. We can't know that until round 3 because stat blocks were not allowed in round 2, and he is restricted from commenting. And so the mystery remains. Is it legal?

I could use some precise guidance on the rules before I submit my votes. I would hate to vote for a "lesser" submission because I mistakenly thought someone violated the rules. I would hate even more to reward an unfair advantage because of a rule violation.

My problem is that this guy is really a lieutenant. A lieutenant with ambitions but... already a few posters have referred to the dragon as the big bad. The dragon's more physically powerful and taught him everything he knows.

This guy is a creation of an existing big bad. That spells important minion, not villain to me.

At least one of the judges has used Darth Vader as an example of a good villan on numerous occasions. Didn't Darth Vader serve Emperor Palpatine as his apprentice. In fact, in "A New Hope", Vadar was ranked below Grand Moff Tarkin. Wasn't Palpatine more powerful, and taught Darth Vader everything about the dark side? Some of you may cite the whole midichlorean nonsense, and say that Vader had more Force potential. I contend that POTENTIAL does not equal current power. Also, That midichlorean thing was mentioned before Vader became "more machine than man".

So, if Braxulthis is the equivalent of Emperor Palpatine, that makes Lord Jeroim the equivalent of Lord Vader.

Being a lieutenant does not mean he cant also be a good villan. Vader served Palpatine. The Witch King served Sauron in "Lord of the Rings". It's all about who the party directly confronts, and how they are presented.

I like this guy, and he's getting one of my votes.

Actually, they specifically say you can't.

"Q12: Can I create new abilities, feats, spells, powers, items, or rules for my villain?

No. This stage of the contest is about story, not about mechanics. Resist the urge."

I do like this guy, and will vote for him. He's got more mojo than a bag full of Austin Powers. I just hope round 3 is not a violation, or I am seriously gonna feel let down.

As Clark Peterson and Roguerouge pointed out...

Mechanics issues:
He lacks the caster level to create flesh golem manuals, incidentally.

He lacks the character level to qualify for Brew Fleshcrafting Poison.

I find myself torn. This is the second submission where I really liked the writing, but have trouble getting past the nuts and bolts of the submission.

All of the judges reccomended you for advancement, but I think you've "painted yourself into a corner." If you are limited by the rules to using or referencing the Pathfinder Beta, 3.5 SRD, and published Pathfinder Chronicles material, then I don't see how you are going to get past the next round without breaking the contest rules. You are OK this round because no mechanics were required. I think next round, mechanics-wise, you are screwed. I hope you prove me wrong, and I am really looking forward to seeing your Rules-Fu. If you somehow pull this off without violating the rules, I may just vote for you on principle all the way to the end.

I really wish I could see the stat block now.

Here is the good and the bad.

This I Like:

Hecataeus, Master of Constructs

Description: In his own mind, at least, the wizard Hecataeus has no peer: he cannot listen without interrupting, speak without insulting, much less smile without sneering.

You were concise with your description of how he should be roleplayed. Good use of word space. Well Done.

Also, I like the fact that the constructs look like him. I once had a PC create a construct (just one), and he did the same thing. Why WOULDN'T you make it look like yourself? People erect statues to themselves all the time in the real world. These statues move. Thats MUCH cooler.

This I dont like:

Even in a world where wizards are real, Hecataeus' very appearance seems cliché. Tall and thin, with a jet-black goatee, he dresses in purple and gold robes festooned with pseudo-mystical symbols.

"Even in a world where wizards are real" should not be part of the descrption. We know wizards are not real in THIS world, and we are all familiar that they exist in Pathfinder. You should get to the point sooner. 500 words are not very much, and you wasted some here. Also, I dont like the "pseudo-mystical symbols." If this is "a world where wizards are real..." they either ARE mystical, or they are just decoration.

I respectfully disagree with the opinion others have stated that Hecataeus would not be memorable. I think he would be very memorable. It's human nature to remember an annoyance far longer than politeness. Hecataeus is set up to be a big annoyance for the PC's. Aside from his personality, he's got the "mini-me" constructs, and all those spells at his disposal. He could be very annoying.

Unfortunately, being annoying isn't enough. My greatest criticisim is someting that I mentioned in another submission. This villan's CR does not match his goals. He wants respect. And...thats it. A 1st level Expert wants respect. Hecataeus should want more, or he's just an annoying waste of time for the PC's. I think you would have had a much better submission if you had reduced his level and gave him a long term goal...

I hope you take all that as helpful advise for the future. Congrats on advancing.

OK, the messageboard ate my post. TWICE. Hopefully I can still explain my thoughts as well the third time...

I dont feel that Avon is a villan. World domination does not necessarily mean evil domination. Frank Herbert's "Dune" series is a good example of this (after the 1st book). From a certain point of view, parents can be said to dominate their children, and many a teenager has felt this way. They can force their kids to do things the kids dont want to do, and break up fights between thier kids. This certainly does not make them evil. Avon refers to those he dominates as "family", and he could simply see himself as a father figure to the world (hence the desire for the Starstone). He is simply forcing the world to do what is in the world's best interest (world peace). His evil intent needs to be explained better.

Likewise, taking the starstone test does not make one evil. Two established Pathfinder dieties of good became gods through the Starstone (Cayden Cailean and Iomedae).

Also, if you are going to use a non-core race AND two non-core classes, you need to lead the readers by the hand a little more. I don't use psionics, and have no idea what it means to be Elan, Psion, or Thrallherd. Worse, I'm not even told where to look for more information. You left me with no idea of this character's capabilities or background. DISCLAIMER: As I stated in another post, I still use the 3rd ed. Monster Manual. if any of this is explained in the 3.5 MM, I apologize and retract this statement.

Finally, the use of Avon as a name was not a good choice, regardless of origin. I immediately thought of cosmetics. If you do advance, hopefully you can "make up" any ground you lost with some of the readers.

I couldn't resist.

Like others, I was put off intiially by the name Rustin Harp. However, I grudgingly admit that it could work for a fey name. I'm not fond of it, but it does seem like something a fey creature might be called. They are goofy like that.

Then again, don't Satyr's come from Greek mythology? Nah, I dont like it. The name seems more appropriate to an Irish farie. I think you were trying to be too clever, and it backfired.

As for the submission, I feel kind of "meh". It's not the worst I've seen, but it's not the best either. You missed some opportunity for coolness and staying power here. Handcuffing him to a slow moving, easily noticed caravan, with frequent, extended stops in every village wasn't the best idea. The PC's are always going to know exactly where he is, and where he will be, and will make short work of this villan.

Now THIS is a monk. Compare Lord Jeroim to Varrush. Varrush picked up a few things between orgies. Jerroim trained for a HUNDRED YEARS. THAT is the dedication I like to see in monks. Varrush plays Don King for a fighting contest. Jeroim studied under an actual dragon master. THAT is the pedigree I want to see. Good job.

Also, I've always had a fondness for dwarves. And unlike others, I don't see a problem with the merchant thing. The last PC I played succesfully convinced his entire adventuring party to become wine merchants. And I started playing in the middle of the campaign, with a group of guys I had never met until the first game night. I still chuckle about that. heh. I should run for office. Anyway...

The key to Jeroim is "the Horde". I had to re-read it to fully get it. He's Megalomaniacal. Not suprising, considering he spend 100 years with a dragon. That's got to warp a psyche. What's his, is his. What's your's, is his too. In fact, YOU are his. He wants it all.

Don't hate him for being a rich merchant. That's just one aspect of Jeroim, and a means to aquire MORE. He's also a bandit lord. He is a murderer. He extorts food to the starving. And it's not enough. He wants MORE.

My one complaint is that you dont tell us where the dragon fits in. WHY did he train Jeroim? It's not enough to keep me from voting for you, but it does keep this from being a perfect entry. Overall, good work.

I still have 14 more entries to read, but so far, Jeroim is a top contender.

I'll admit...

I've never heard of Elric (of Melnibone) either. So, I can, without a doubt, say that I have learned something in this contest, even though I did not advance. Google any names you want to use. Got it.

Thank You, Clark Peterson, for the advise.

Now, I can excuse the name, considering I MIGHT have made the same mistake. And I do assume it was a mistake, and you didn't know the name had been used. However, this was not a good submission. The premise behind villan is too close to the movie "Dragonslayer" (great movie, considering the technology of the time).

Dragonslayer spoiler:

Also, A villan that's bound to a valley doesn't pose much of a threat to the PC's. They can just leave, and thats the end of the threat. Thats a likely outcome if most of your PC's are "the ends justify the means" guys. You also shouldn't use terms like "might accidentlally" or "could be asked". It's too hypothetical. I want to know what DOES happen.

I'm beginning to see a disturbing trend of impotent, couch potato villans.

Malgana the Twistwood Witch

female, undead goblin (ghast), sorceress 8th

Whether or not this myth holds any truth, one thing remains certain: the Twistwood Witch cannot be killed by conventional means.

I tend not to like this sort of thing, but that's just my personal preference. I hate Superman heros and unstoppable villans. I want vulnerability in my characters. Exploitable flaws, for both heros and villans. Still some people like that sort of thing, so thats not where your fatal flaw is...

Assuming the PCs comply, Malgana leads the PCs to her severed tongue and stares imploringly at it. If the PCs reinsert the organ, she can speak again, and begins to convey many useful details about the goblin tribes (locations of lairs, names and classes of important villains, etc.) She even asks the PCs to take her with them, claiming she must be reunited with her defiled remains before she can find eternal rest.

...THIS is where I think you messed up. You are assuming the PC's will do something. In fact, you are assuming 2 things. The first is that they will understand what your villan wants. A difficult assumption given that her mouth is sewn shut, and she has no tounge. The second assumption is that they will actually help her, once they understand. An even more difficult assumption given that she is a goblin AND undead. That's two strikes against her for most PC's, even before she opens her mouth. I ask all the DM's here... How many times has your party won initiative in an encounter and attacked an orc/goblin/gnoll/whatever before the monster even acted? PC's just assume that a goblin is evil, and 99% of the time, in 99% of the campaigns, they are right. You don't even give Malgana a chance to plead for help before the PC's decide on the best way to have fun with, er, I mean dispose of, a severed goblin head.

Lastly, you made another mistake in making this a villan that couldn't DO anything. This is even worse than the Pacafist Bone Devil. At least he could act if he chose to. Malgana doesnt even get a choice.

I was a big fan of the Spider Hook, and really wanted to like your next submission. Unfortunately, I feel let down. You may still get my vote, but only by default. I'm 1/2 way through the villans and haven't found one I liked yet. If I do vote for you, consider this your "Get Out of Jail Free" card. I know you can do better. The Spider Hook was inspired. This just fell flat.

Jason Rice wrote:

Would you mind letting me know where the "Associated Classes" are mentioned? I don't want to come off as sounding confrontational. I am genuinely curious. As I look at the DMG, the only reference I find is to PC or NPC classes (page 37), and Monk is definitely a PC class. I'll admit that I haven't read through the entire "Pathfinder Beta" PDF. I've gotten to page 141, so this reference to "Associated classes" may be new to the Pathfinder system.

Monster Manual, the chapter on advancing monsters.

Non-associated classes are something of an art more than a science--rarely is it spelled out what specifically is or is not associated. Monk, however, doesn't bolster the rakshasa's strengths (spellcasting, crazy DR) very much. Besides, we have a precedent. Pathfinder 9 has a monk rakshasa NPC with the levels in monk counting as non-associated in terms of its CR.

I think I may see the problem...

...My group only recently converted to 3.5. I have a 3rd edition Monster Manual (3.5 is hard to find now), and the only thing the 3rd edition Monster Manual says is that creatures that aquire a class "follow the rules for multiclassing described on page 55-56 in the Player's Handbook. The creature's character level equals the number of class levels it has, plus the total Hit Dice for such beings..." "...The monster's class is always it's favored class" No mention whatsoever of associated classes.

So, it's simply a rules difference based upon which system you are using (Pathfinder is marketed to, and compatable with, both systems).

There is no real reason to buy a 3.5 monster manual right now, if I could find one, as I intend on buying Paizo's "Pathfinder Bestiary", which should become the "official" book once they are out of Beta playtest.

Jason Rice wrote:

3) The CR of the villan DOES NOT match the goals of the villan. I mean cripes! If I'm not mistaken, he's CR 17 (possibly higher), yet his main concern is petty kidnapping and his next "high"? This is not the kind of things that a CR17 villan is concerned about.

Just to correct you here, Varrush isn't CR 17. Monk's not an associated class for rakshasa, so you add 1 CR for every 2 Monk levels, making him CR 14. The fact that this leads to fairly silly stat blocks in some cases is another matter entirely..

Would you mind letting me know where the "Associated Classes" are mentioned? I don't want to come off as sounding confrontational. I am genuinely curious. As I look at the DMG, the only reference I find is to PC or NPC classes (page 37), and Monk is definitely a PC class. I'll admit that I haven't read through the entire "Pathfinder Beta" PDF. I've gotten to page 141, so this reference to "Associated classes" may be new to the Pathfinder system.

Also, Roguerouge:

I think you are confusing Challenge Rating (CR) with Encounter Level (DMG, Page 48). I would agree with you that the difficulty of any particular creature depends on other factors than their CR, but I respectfully disagree that this particular submission should be easier because Rakshasas "play" below their CR. If anything, it should be MORE difficult when compared to similar creatures. Three of the four adventure hooks require that the PC's enter the "pleasure palace", where they will be surrounded by hundreds, possibly thousands, of Varrush's servants, allies, addicts, and like minded individuals. This is by no means an easy encounter.

As to the question of if this creature should be a monk, the 1st sentence of the Monk class in the PHB spells out the essence of a Monk for me. Those who "...who pursue personal perfection..." Somone who is a "spirit of vice and corruption", who has "numerous excesses", and who enjoys "wanton excess, sensual indulgence", is just not capable of becoming a monk. It's not a question of Lawful/Chaotic. They don't have the time, patience, self discipline, demeanor, or desire for the type of training required. I just come away feeling that the levels of Monk were given to Varrush because the author devised some cool ability/rules combo between his race and class, and wanted to show it off. It doesn't make any story sense to me, and why should it? It was never explained. Being the host of a Blood-Sport competition does not make one a monk.

Again. Eric (and Ninjaiguana and Roguerouge), I dont mean to sound completely negative, and it's not my intention to go on a rant. I was just stating an opinion, and defending my position on this submission. I'll admit that I might have missed something with a Monk not being considered an "Associated Class", but I can't find the reference. I would greatly appreciate it if you let me know where that is.

I do think that I would vote for this submission if, as someone else pointed out, it was a round dedicated to designing a lair. It's not. Eric shows promise in his writing, but we are tasked with "voting for your favorite villan." Eloquent writing doesn't equate to a well designed villan. Varrush just isn't doing it for me.

I have to agree with Sean Reynolds that I do not think this one should advance. While your quality of writing is certainly high, it's the execution of your idea that I have a problem with.

the main concerns are these:

1) You made him a monk (and a level 8 one at that), yet he surrounds himself with excess and carnal pleasure. That doesnt sound very monk-like, and by level 8, he should have more self discipline than this.

2) As pointed out by several others, the coolest thing about him is his house.

3) The CR of the villan DOES NOT match the goals of the villan. I mean cripes! If I'm not mistaken, he's CR 17 (possibly higher), yet his main concern is petty kidnapping and his next "high"? This is not the kind of things that a CR17 villan is concerned about.

I don't mean to sound all negative. I certainly enjoyed the description of his lair, and you seem to be a quality writer. It's just that I don't think you fully thought this villan idea through.

I'm extremely curious if one of the changes I made from this item's original version was a bad thing... They say to always go with your first instinct. I have the feeling I'm going to kick myself.

CANE OF YOUTHFUL VIGOR

Aura Moderate Conjuration; CL 10th
Slot -; Price 40,800 gp; Weight 2 lb.

DESCRIPTION

This appears to be a polished wooden walking stick, about 3 feet long, crafted from ash or oak. One end is sculpted to facilitate use as a handle, and the other end is tipped in brass. Creatures utilizing the cane as a walking or standing aid will discover the following properties.

* The cane suspends the negative physical effects of aging as long as it is held. This effect applies only to negative ability score modifiers, and has no other effect on the age of the creature using the cane. A 90 year old human will still appear to be a 90 year old human, and his maximum age will remain the same.

* Three times per day, as a free action, the cane may increase it's owner's base land speed by 30 feet for 1 round.

* The cane may be used as a club with a +2 enhancement.

Requirements Craft Wonderous Items, Restoration, Expeditious Retreat, DC 11 Craft (woodworking), Cost 20,400 gp

...Thanks.

I've never been a fan of bards. Someone breaking into song in the middle of combat just seemed a little too "West Side Story", and I hate musicals.

Despite that, I find myself liking this item. It might even be in my top 5, which only shows how great an item this is. It made me want to play a bard. Well, consider it anyway. And I love the fact that it is not a bardic item you can use while singing. Too many bards choose singing over an instrument, and this gives a player a reason to pick up an instrument.

Nice job.

Spider Hook

This eight-pronged grappling hook has an hourglass-shaped rune along its haft.

I like this item a lot. I especially like the "Black Widow" hourglass bit.

While animated, the spider hook can spider climb with a speed of 30 and it can leap up to 20 feet as a standard action.

Assuming the hook can "run" at x4 it's base movement, it can only travel 360 feet in the 3 rounds it's active. I'm not sure why there is 500 feet of rope.

Also, I agree that it would have been better to have the hook spin the rope, but I still love this item. Nice job.

OK, the "quote" didnt work.

If the user succeeds, a random victim up to 30 feet away must make the check or suffers the drain. If either the victim saves or perishes before paying the full drain, another random victim is targeted and so on until the cost is met. /QUOTE

First, let me say congrats on advancing. Then, permit me to add that this is my second post to the message boards (my item was the first), and I just discovered the BBCode tags. I'm still working out how to use them and hope the "quote" function works.

Now, to the "Heart" of the matter. Not to confuse the issue further, but is this...

30 feet from the target of the dispel,
30 feet from the Heart's owner, or
30 feet from the last victim to make his save?

Very cool idea, but as it's written this might be a difficult item to DM.

I was going to wait untill I read all the items before commenting, but I couldn't resist commenting right away on this one.

Again, congrats.