My only major complaint with Pathfinder is that I had to cancel my subscriptions for 6 months. So, while I'm re-subscribing, I'll have to pick-up what I missed piecemeal.
I do love Pathfinder. Occasionally I'm disappointed with a product or a feature or a mechanic, but usually those are minor things.
I count eight "planetouched" races already. There may be more, that's just what I got off the top of my head.
1.) aasimar (descended from celestials and humans)
Of course it's possible not all fetchlings come from humans mating with shae, but it is mentioned in the shae entry:
From the Shae PRD entry:
My campaign has been running every 2 weeks since late Sept 2012 (7 months) and I consider it "just starting." The characters are level 3, and I've expressed to the players that the campaign is intended to run to level 10 or so.
To provide some feedback on who buys what though, most of my players own no Pathfinder print materials at all. (One owns a Core Rulebook.) I own almost every book produced since Pathfinder RPG launched (except for the last 6 months--I need to catch up), but two of my players own HeroLab and just buy Pathfinder add-ons for it. They have all the mechanics and none of the setting. They pick their deities from the list HeroLab provides, which mixes everything from the top 20 gods to the devils, to nascent demon lords, to the good-aligned outsiders worshiped in Magnimar (forgot what they're called). They all just appear in a long list and the players draw from them. I have to constantly ask "where is this from," and the players have no respect for the big 20 deities, nor know them any better than the others. (It frustrates me, they have no context.)
So yes, while most of Pathfinder's "users" are players, I'm inclined to believe, through my own experience, that most of Pathfinder's paying customers are GMs.
I am presently GMing a game set in Ustalav and playing in a game set in the Five King's Mountains. My Ustalav campaign has been running since Sept. 2012, and the Five King's Mountains campaign started a month ago so has only had two sessions so far--we play the campaigns on alternating Saturdays.
The second session of the campaign I'm in as a player was canceled due to another event that ran long in our play-space (we play at the FLGS), so I only have one session in the Five Kings Mountains campaign to reference so far, but I did find I was a bit bored at times, and I had to resist the urge to correct the GM once or twice. I also don't know how well my character will mesh with the party because I'm playing an LG ratfolk rogue that worships Erastil (and is seeking a new site to found a ratfolk warren--he left home voluntarily due to crowding), and the rest of the party leans toward Chaotic and/or Evil. (A CN human fighter, CE ratfolk alchemist, and LE dwarf fighter, and I forgot what the other character is.) At one point I asked what I thought would be an innocuous question ("What color are the kobolds?"), and ended up telling the GM about kobold colors and ecology from Classic Monsters Revisited.
The next session is supposed to be this weekend, so we'll see how it goes.
I would see a sorcerer kobold with a draconic bloodline fitting into Kaer Maga.
Medical Examiner is a skillset that could come with/from multiple classes. Alchemist might be likely though, isn't there a vivisectionist archetype? If a kobold had the means to keep safe and off the streets in Kaer Maga until he got a few levels under his belt, I could see a kobold alchemist fitting in.
The bolded text, does it refer to the creature that has the burn ability, or the creature that is on fire?
I -think- it refers to the creature with the burn special attack. So for instance, a Jabberwock can shoot beams of fire from its eyes that have the burn special attack. This segment of the rule means creatures striking a Jabberwock with natural weapons or unarmed attacks also risk the 6d6 burn attack as well, right?
Or does it mean the guy who was hit by the jabberwock and is now burning ignites creatures that strike him? That seems less plausible, but then again he is on fire.
The burn (ex) special attack also says it applies to melee attacks, but Jabberwock has it as a beam attack.
You know, some of the other words from The Jabberwocky got used as variants or attacks for the Jabberwock stat in Pathfinder.
Whiffling, as in "The Jabberwock, with eyes of flame, came whiffling through the tulgy wood, and burbled as it came" is an attack that the Jabberwock has in Pathfinder. What's whiffling?
Burble, from the same sentence above, is ALSO an attack that the Jabberwock has in Pathfinder. But whiffling and burbling are only defined in the Pathfinder rules, not the poem.
Heck, the fact that it was mentioned to have "eyes of flame" means it gets burning eye rays in Pathfinder.
And the only reason a "vorpal blade" exists in Pathfinder, and D&D before it, is because a vorpal blade slew the Jabberwocky in the poem by beheading it.
"One, two! One, two! And through and through, his vorpal blade went snicker-snack! He left it dead, and with its head, he went galumphing back."
(I'm recalling from memory so excuse my punctuation not matching the formal poem.)
So... because because he beheaded it with the vorpal blade, the vorpal blade gets powers related to beheading creatures. That's an interpretation though.
So who is to say that a manxome foe isn't a suitable template or variant for the jabberwock or other creatures? The word is meaningless, but since it originates with the Jabberwocky, my suggestion for it would be that the Jabberwock IS already manxome. Therefore, any creature templated with a manxome template should gain some feature that the Jabberwocky possesses.
Where does this appear?
Double post, but not on the same topic exactly.
If you think your players won't handle 'Norgerber' as a serious name, focus on the other contextual names he goes by, like Father Skinsaw, The Reaper of Reputation, and I can't remember the third on off the top of my head. Each of the different names is tied to a different aspect of his portfolio, so the can't really be used interchangeably, but the appropriate one for the situation could be used routinely in place of 'Norgerber' to lessen its potential for immersion-breaking parody.
I just want to add my two or three cents about a few things I hope to see in the book, even though I'm sure the list has been finalized a long time.
Of course I'm excited about nosferatu template the most, but also happy to hear about Cthulhu and Grendal.
Other things I'd like to see in the book are:
Oh, also the ARG mentions that ratfolk ride giant rats, which it explains are dire rats with the giant simple template applied to make them medium size. It doesn't give any information for purchasing or breeding giant rat mounts though, so I hope that information shows up somewhere.
Neither of them spoils the other, but they don't stack.
The dwarf has 60 ft. darkvision. So has it out to 60 ft. Darkvision is black and white-only.
The dwarf also sees in color in the light radius of the torch if it's beneficial (out to the two distances).
These overlap. Basically the character gets the benefit of darkvision or the light source, whichever is most beneficial to the character at the time, since both can function simultaneously.
Core Rulebook/PRD wrote:
Darkvision is the extraordinary ability to see with no light source at all, out to a range specified for the creature. Darkvision is black-and-white only (colors cannot be discerned). It does not allow characters to see anything that they could not see otherwise—invisible objects are still invisible, and illusions are still visible as what they seem to be. Likewise, darkvision subjects a creature to gaze attacks normally. The presence of light does not spoil darkvision.
Some races, such as fetchlings, have darkvision and low-light vision.
I saw this and my first thought was worry that it would cover Sen's Pass in Amaans in Ustalav. I've been running a campaign there for six months and I started thinking about how I'd have to ret-con it if it gets a write-up. I realized quickly though that there's too much weirdness in my version to ret-con.
In my version of Sen's Pass twins (both fraternal and identical) are very common as a side-effect of Viscount Oilic Galdyce's minions' experiments into vampire fertility. His experiments are failures, of course, but the waste by-product fertility contaminants entering the local watershed have produced a lot of twins in the area over the last twenty years. There's nothing wrong with the twins--they don't have special powers or deformities or anything. It's just an excuse to have a lot of twin NPCs (or PCs if my players had went for that).
F. Wesley Schneider wrote:
OK, I wasn't sure where to post this, so I figured I'd put it in the Homebrew section.
In the Announcing Bestiary 4 thread, F. Wesley Schneider requested I post this, otherwise I wouldn't. It's not beautiful and probably has flaws in the skills section, and may not have appropriate loot, or other issues. This is my version of Viscount Oilic Galdyce (nosferatu aristocrat 3/rogue 9) from Rule of Fear. I didn't build him from scratch but instead built him from the guild Master NPC (rogue 11) that appears in the GameMastery Guide, page 267. He uses the 3.5e Nosferatu template that appeared in Curse of the Crimson Throne, modified by Pathfinder Undead Type rules and in comparison to the Pathfinderized Nosferatu NPC that appears in Carrion Crown, to see how Pathfinder handled things like the nosferatu's oversized claw attacks. I might have made him differently if I had built him from scratch rather than from the guild master NPC. Note that he has an NPC boon that provides a permanent class skill. Obviously I could have omitted this but he does have this in my game.
Viscount Oilic Galdyce CR 13
F. Wesley Schneider wrote:
My PC is down so I don't have access to the Word Doc on my hard drive, but I started retyping it from my print-out.
It's not much to look at though, it's just a templated Guild Master NPC (rogue 11) from Paizo's GameMastery Guide (page 267). I took away two rogue levels and added 3 aristocrat levels to reach aristocrat 3/rogue 9 for the Viscount. (He's CR 13, not CR 14 like I said before.) His Skills may be incorrect because of the change from rogue 11 to aristocrat 3/rogue 9.
But anyway, I'm retyping him and will post him soon, flaws and all.
Edit: Posted here: http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2pqu2?My-version-of-Viscount-Oilic-Galdyce#1
James Jacobs wrote:
The template only appeared as a 3.5e version in the Curse of the Crimson Throne Adventure Path. There hasn't been a Pathfinderized version of the template published by Paizo. Blood of the Night has the nosferatu-variant dhampir, the Ancient-born, but no nosferatu template. Carrion Crown has stats for a nosferatu but doesn't contain the template itself.
Carrion Crown and Curse of the Crimson Throne spoilers:
The nosferatu statted in Ashes at Dawn (from Carrion Crown) is the same one as appears in Curse of the Crimson Throne. I think his class may have been changed from wizard to alchemist though. It's Ramoska Arkminos, or however it's spelled.
I've been waiting for a Pathfinderized nosferatu template. When I statted Viscount Oilic Galdyce (a nosferatu mentioned in Rule of Fear), I had to work with the 3.5e template and compare it to the nosferatu statted in Carrion Crown. I'll probably rebuild him once I get Bestiary 4. I doubt my party will be close to fighting him yet. At his current version he's CR14, I think. The party is level 3 right now. :-)
I want Reaper to make a Ramoska Arkminos miniature now.
Nosferatu Template! I hope it still gets its "over-sized" 1d6 damage claw attacks. The Pathfinderized nosferatu that appeared in Carrion Crown had them so I hope they don't get standardized to the 1d4 for medium creatures.
I LOVE the bestiaries.
I recognize the Cthulhu and the multiple nosferatu on the cover, but what's that other creature?
It has always been my understanding that Negative Energy Affinity (a trait shared by dhampirs, umbral dragons, and a few others) causes the creature to be treated as undead for the purposes of the effect. Therefore channeling positive energy to harm the undead would harm the dhampir or other creature with negative energy affinity. Channeling positive energy to heal the living would have no effect since the dhampir is not healed by positive energy.
In other words, treat the dhampir as undead for resolving the channel effect.
Negative Energy Affinity (Ex) The creature is alive but is healed by negative energy and harmed by positive energy, as if it were an undead creature. Format negative energy affinity; Location Defensive Abilities
One of the sample race-builder races that's actually printed in the Advanced Race Guide (which I don't have in front of me at the moment) has shorter grabbing appendages if my memory serves. You might look at that one and see how it's handled there.
I don't have any comment on the rest.
Lucifer is statted up in Tome of Horrors Complete but that doesn't mean he'd occur in Pathfinder's actual campaign setting, and in fact as a third-party publication Tome of Horrors wouldn't even be able to use Pathfinder Campaign Setting material. The Tome of Horrors is setting-neutral, generally.
Asmodeus and Hell are both free-for-all names though (being older than the games that use them), so they are mentioned in Lucifer's entry in Tome of Horrors. According to Tome of Horrors, Lucifer is an adversary of Asmodeus and Asmodeus kicked him out of Hell when he took over. So Lucifer dwells on another Hell-like plane. Such a plane doesn't actually exist in the Pathfinder Campaign Setting though. It exists in Tome of Horrors basically to give Lucifer a plane to be over.
According to some mythology of the Creation of the Multiverse presented in some of the Pathfinder Campaign Setting materials, Asmodeus is possibly the oldest living being in the multiverse (there was another as old, but he died), so he didn't come along and kick Lucifer out of Hell, he created the place. (Pathfinder Campaign Setting intentionally leaves creation stories as legends though, so they "might be true" but aren't actually confirmed as true.)
Lucifer doesn't actually exist in canon form in the Pathfinder Campaign Setting. You can add him to your game as an enemy of Asmodeus, or make Lucifer another name for Asmodeus, but neither of these would be canon for the setting as Lucifer isn't defined as an entity in the setting.
Can a wolf, worg or winter wolf be carrier of the lycanthropy virus/disease?
I was thinking wolves and winter wolves (cooler worgs) be infected with lycanthropy, but they aren't actual Lycanthropes their bite attacks cause Lycanthropy.
The lycanthrope template applies only to humanoids, and lycanthropy is listed as a curse, not a disease, so it wouldn't be a virus with carriers.
So, by the rules, no, a wolf, worg, or winter wolf cannot be a carrier for lycanthropy.
Lycanthrope Template wrote:
“Lycanthrope” is an inherited (for natural lycanthropes) or acquired (for afflicted lycanthropes) template that can be added to any humanoid.
Lycanthrope Template wrote:
Curse of Lycanthropy (Su) A natural lycanthrope's bite attack in animal or hybrid form infects a humanoid target with lycanthropy (Fortitude DC 15 negates). If the victim's size is not within one size category of the lycanthrope, this ability has no effect.
You can, of course, do what you like for your home game and feel free to give wolves, worgs, and winter wolves the Curse of Lycanthropy in your game. Don't forget dire wolves too.
The Rules don't support it (and this is the Rules subforum) so the official rules position is no, you can't do that. But it's your game to modify so you're not obligated to stick to the rules.
Of course it's always possible that there is a werewolf or dire-werewolf (either in animal form) mixed in with a pack of regular wolves, and a bite from that particular creature (only) transmits lycanthropy. If it's an afflicted werewolf, he may not even know he's a werewolf when he's in wolf form. (Of course by the rules, afflicted lycanthropes don't transmit the Curse of Lycanthropy. That takes a natural lycanthrope.)
Standard rules don't allow for lycanthropes based on worgs or winter wolves either because they're magical beasts, not animals, but a dire-werewolf would end-up similar to a winter wolf without the breath weapon.
In other words:
If it says OGL, it was written for "the 3.5e version of the rules" (aka D&D 3.5e, but they can't say D&D for legal reasons).
If it says PFRPG, it was written for the Pathfinder RPG rules.
The exceptions to this are the books in the Pathfinder Roleplaying Game rulebook line: the Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Core Rulebook and all the other rulebooks like Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Bestiary and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Advanced Player's Guide all say they are OGL. It IS the PFRPG rules though.
Supplements (modules, campaign setting, adventure paths, etc) say PFRPG, but the core rules still specify OGL. If you read the product descriptions it is made clear that they're for Pathfinder RPG though.
Basically, if it says Pathfinder Roleplaying Game in the title of the product and it says OGL in the parentheses, it's for the Pathfinder Roleplaying Game. But if it doesn't say the whole phrase "Pathfinder Roleplaying Game" in the title and it says OGL in the parentheses, it's for OGL 3.5e, which is a way of getting around saying it was for Dungeons and Dragons 3.5e. If it doesn't say "Pathfinder Roleplaying Game" in the title, it has to say PFRPG in parenthesis to distinguish it from a 3.5e product.
Does that help?
The thought also occurred to me that I might try modifying a halfling mini with a skaven head, but I'm no sculptor so that idea doesn't appeal to me too much when it comes to the idea of adding the ratfolk's tail.
I already have a plastic medium wererat rogue mini from the D&D Miniatures line, so if my options aren't any closer than it, I'll probably just stick with it.
Have you looked at Reaper's "mouseling" minis? I'd think they'd make good ratfolk.
I looked at them, particularly because Skaven are medium creatures, but I don't know how I feel about them. They're a bit to pudgy for how I imagine ratfolk, and they don't really have legs so much.
Right now Skaven are the closest I've seen. I've taken a look at some of the older metal Skaven since I do want a metal mini.
I also looked at a Reaper were-weasel mini, but it also annoys me because it, like the mouselings, sits on its haunches rather than standing on legs. And it has a bushy tail.
I'm probably going to end-up going with a metal Skaven or possibly a dire rat or some kind. I'm actually kind of surprised at how little there is in the way of small-sized rat-man minis.
This is from the campaign I'm running, last session.
Party last session is a N human alchemist, CN sylph cleric of Pharasma, CG kitsune "specialist" (ninja), CE beastbrood tiefling sorcerer, and the new character introduced at that session, a CN kitsune oracle with the Time mystery and tongues curse.
The party is given a quest by the mayor to stop some highwaymen that have been harrying people traveling from the village to the countyseat. The burgomaster/mayor specifies that he wants a particular bandit brought in alive because he's an ex-guard that deserted a few weeks before, and is also the son of one of the village elders. The town will pay 1000 gp if he's brought in alive without permanent injury, and will pay fifty gold for each additional bandit brought in alive.
The party sets up a "reverse ambush" for the bandits, including rigging a carriage with tanglefoot bag traps and starting a rumor that something valuable is being transported in the carriage, so it will serve as bait for the bandits.
The bandits attack the carriage as planned. The bandits consist of an armored human bandit (the town elder's son, using the CR 1 town guard from GameMastery Guide), two lightly armored bandits (Sczarni legbreaker and Sczarni smuggler from Pathfinder Campaign Setting NPC Guide, both also CR 1), and a standard tiefling rogue (CR 1/2, from the Bestiary). The bandits are defeated with no casualties. (Most reduced to negative hitpoints without dying.) All are stripped naked and bound.
Then it gets weird. The elder's son is put in the carriage so he can't see, then one of the other bandits (the Sczarni legbreaker) is tied between two horses and threatened that he will be drawn and quartered (halved, I guess) if he doesn't tell them where the bandit treasure is. Being a Sczarni legbreaker himself, he makes some threats back to the party, about the Sczarni seeking retribution if he's killed. The party assures him he will be killed, as a demonstration for the other bandits so the other bandits will tell them where the treasure is. The other Sczarni defers to the legbreaker and doesn't talk either.
The tiefling cracks and says he isn't Sczarni and he hasn't worked with these guys that long, and he'll tell the party anything they want to know if they let him go. He'll leave Ustalav and go back to Cheliax and they'll never see him again. He speaks to the party's CE beastbrood tiefling in Abyssal then Infernal, trying to find a language they can speak in privately, but the party's "CN" kitsune oracle understands both languages, so she's in on the discussion. She agrees to stay with the other prisoners while the tiefling takes the beastbrood and some others to the bandit treasure.
So the tiefling bandit takes them to the bandit treasure, which is quite extensive. Then they come back and they find that the "CN" kitsune oracle has been torturing the Sczarni even more with certain forms of genital distress involving ropes and also pouring acid flasks in their mouths.
The party gives the (still naked) tiefling a traveler's outfit (from the 35 they found among the bandit loot) and tells him they never want to cross paths with him again. They send him packing.
The session basically ended there because it was getting very late.
At this point, several things are relevant:
I actually had a quest in mind that the party would have to deal with a pair of con-artist rogues, where the ideal outcome would be the rogues becoming hirelings for the party and working at their base-of-operations, but given the way these bandits were treated in this questline, I think the quest giver for that other quest might be hesitant to give it. (And he's the town healer, so he'll be aware of the condition of the Sczarni when they're brought in.)
Oh well, the way the party handled those bandits was kind of an OMG moment for me as I was running it. I definitely foresee more conflict between the party and the village if they continue down this line.
Wolf Munroe wrote:
I'll read up on incorporeal touch before I make any changes, but it's cool if the incorporeal touch is a point higher--makes the berbalang a bit more dangerous in astral projection mode.
PRD Universal Monster Rules wrote:
An incorporeal creature moves silently and cannot be heard with Perception checks if it doesn't wish to be. It has no Strength score, so its Dexterity modifier applies to its melee attacks, ranged attacks, and CMB.
So dexterity for the incorporeal touch it is, because the berbalang gains the incorporeal subtype when it's astral projecting, so loses its STR score as part of the incorporeal subtype. That means its CMB also increases to +10 when astral projecting.
OK, so the incorporeal touch attack is correct at +10 because it uses DEX instead of STR but the bite has nothing supporting the +10 in the stats? I'll probably just adjust the bite down to +9 then. I'm going to be adding another handful of cleric levels so it will be going back up again anyway.
The d20PFSRD entry Vod Canockers linked has the same stats I linked from the Paizo PRD but d20PFSRD indicates the melee attack bonus is miscalculated and suggests changing both the bite and incorporeal touch to +9.
I'll read up on incorporeal touch before I make any changes, but it's cool if the incorporeal touch is a point higher--makes the berbalang a bit more dangerous in astral projection mode.
Basically what the subject says.
I was looking at the berbalang in Bestiary 3 (because I plan to add class levels to one) and I noticed the bite attack is +10 to attack and the claw attacks are +9 to attack. The incorporeal touch is also +10 to attack.
But I don't know how the bite and/or incorporeal touch is +10 to attack.
The BAB is +6 (as an 8 HD undead). The STR is 17 (+3 modifier). The monster doesn't have any Weapon Focus feats to great it +1 to any attacks.
Why is this creature getting +10 to its bite and incorporeal touch? As far as I can tell they should only be +9, the same as the claw attacks.
Am I overlooking something?
OK, so I'm adding a spellcaster class to a monster that normally is considered a combat role monster. The monster's base CR is 6. If I add 5 or less levels to the monster, I understand that its CR increases +1 every two levels, but once I add that sixth level of spellcaster, do all that levels added count at +1 CR per level, or only the ones added once the class level matches the CR?
Classes that are marked “key” generally add 1 to a creature's CR for each level added. Classes marked with a “—” increase a creature's CR by 1 for every 2 class levels added until the number of levels added are equal to (or exceed) the creature's original CR, at which point they are treated as “key” levels (adding 1 to the creature's CR for each level added).
I'm inclined to think the levels below the CR cut-off are always treated as non-key and only the ones equal-to or above the CR are counted as key levels, but I'd like to know how it's normally handled.
I plan to start playing a ratfolk rogue with a tailblade in an upcoming campaign. Do you guys have any suggestions for a ratfolk rogue that fights with two claw attacks and a tailblade? He's wearing one of those 1 AC armored cumberbunds (forget the item name) from Ultimate Equipment, as well as a traveler's outfit and a masterwork backpack. Ratfolk is a small creature.
Metal minis are preferred to plastic.
So, basically, any suggestions for a ratfolk with a tailblade?
Sean K Reynolds wrote:
I found a photo online of it standing next to another mini. It is very tall.
Thanks a lot! That's exactly what I was wanting to know.
Sean K Reynolds wrote:
Pretty close, and their human-sized ones do tend to run on the tall side.
I'm working on the assumption that the base of the human-sized mini is a 30 mm base. If that's right then I can put the rest of the mini into appropriate scale.
I got the Reaper Pathfinder Minis marid (a large creature in the Bestiary) and was disappointed with its scale. It's probably closer to that Anima Tactics human mini than to what I'd consider large. I still plan to base it as large, but I'll be relying on the base itself to build it up some.
That Macbeth mini is cool, but I don't know if I feel like it's worth $27 at that size. Might have to wait for a Christmas discount code AND Pathfinder Advantage (once I restart my subs) to pick that up. (That would get it down around $21, which is much more appealing.)
Liz Courts wrote:
I know the feeling. Thanks a lot for looking.
Wolf Munroe wrote:
Actually, I don't think his CR is adjusted for PC gear. I think he has NPC-valued gear. CR 5 is appropriate CR for a dread ghoul rogue 5 with NPC gear. I think I equipped him with NPC gear for slow advancement at high fantasy. (I can't remember precisely.)
Even though my primary computer is down (and I don't have access to my Word documents of custom NPCs), I realized I can still add class levels to the berbalang because I hadn't actually done anything to him yet, so I'd be starting him from scratch (well, from at least baseline berbalang).
What's a Menadoran Festrog?
They're large festrogs made from giants instead of humans. The festrog condition affects giants somewhat differently and they have very low intelligence scores, like INT 2 or 3--can't remember which off the top of my head.
They're called Menadoran festrogs (and sometimes just Menadorans) because their festrog-variant was first observed among the giants of the Menador Mountains of Nidal.
Along with vampire-festrogs, beastkin festrogs, and high festrogs, they're mentioned as festrog variants in Hungry Are the Dead, the 3.5e Pathfinder Module where festrogs first appeared as the monster in the 2-page bestiary spread.
A Menadoran festrog also appears with Pathfinderized stats in the Carrion Crown Adventure Path.
Carrion Crown spoiler:
He's in Ashes at Dawn
I built mine using the basic rules in Hungry are the Dead, and just compared him to the Carrion Crown version. I think he ended up with higher strength and lower HD, but I can't remember. They weren't a perfect match, but close enough. I use a D&D Miniatures cerebrilith miniature to represent him on the table. (I use carnage demons to represent the vampire-festrogs and a ravenous ghoul to represent a regular festrog.)
Thanks for the reply. Been a busy week or so, including my computer going down for reasons yet-to-be-determined.
I had a couple festrogs with the ghouls, and last session the party fought a standard festrog (CR 1), two modified Green Ronin Advanced Bestiary dread ghouls (both warrior 3, in heavy armor--CR 2 each), and and a menadoran festrog (I forget his CR. CR 4 or 5), in addition to a pair of medium spiders and the incorporeal form of the berbalang. They actually sent a party of friendly and helpful NPC characters ahead of themselves to clean-up minor undead on the way in, because they kept getting worn down by the low level stuff and forced to retreat from the higher level stuff that came after. So basically I had the NPCs go in, I rolled about a dozen d20s in sequence (stopping to look at each result), then had the time pass, and when the PC party showed up the dungeon was already cleared of a lot of undead. (I let them think the d20s actually had some bearing on how the NPCs fared.)
They're actually only level 3 at the moment, approaching level 4. The incorporeal form of the berbalang has been harrying them some, but they won't encounter the full-on berbalang in his glory for a few levels yet. (They think they destroyed him when his incorporeal form was destroyed--I awarded them XP for it.)
There's another undead faction that uses CR 2 vampire-festrogs (festrogs with the advanced simple template, and fast healing+turn resistance identical to a vampire spawn). I kept their CR at 2 in spite of them gaining fast healing 2 and turn resistance on top of the advanced simple template under the same logic that ghast is still only CR 2 when it gains its stench ability on top of the addition of the advanced simple template.
While my computer is down I probably won't be advancing the berbalang right away. I figure I can squeeze on a couple cleric levels without affecting his CR too much though, and it will make him more menacing and memorable than just some generic Bestiary version, especially if he gets the Command Undead feat.
I apparently never posted my dread ghoul warriors on the Internet, so they're trapped on my hard drive, but I did find a dread ghoul rogue 5 the party already met but haven't discovered is a dread ghoul yet. In modifying the dread ghoul template, I used both the Advanced Bestiary template itself and one of the recent adventure paths has a dread ghoul in it too, but it's called something else and is depicted as very fat. I also gave my dread ghoul's bite attack the disease ghoul fever because I get that they have a create spawn ability to make more dread ghouls, but what kind of ghoul doesn't have ghoul fever as an option? So my version can make dread ghouls or regular ghouls depending on how the victim dies.
This dread ghoul's CR is increased by 1 because he's equipped as a PC rather than as an NPC.
My Dread Ghoul rogue 5:
<NAME REDACTED> CR 5
Variant human dread ghoul rogue 5 (Advanced Bestiary 76)
CE Medium undead (augmented humanoid)
Init +3; Senses darkvision 60 ft., scent; Perception +10
AC 18, touch 13, flat-footed 15 (+3 armor, +3 Dex, +2 natural)
hp 52 (5d8+30)
Fort +4, Ref +7, Will +3
Defensive Abilities channel resistance +4, evasion, trap sense +1, uncanny dodge; Immune undead traits
Speed 30 ft., climb 30 ft.
Melee +1 alchemical silver short sword +7 (1d6+1/19–20) or
bite +6 (1d6+1 plus disease and paralysis) and
2 claws +6 (1d6+1 plus paralysis)
Ranged mwk shortbow +7 (1d6/x3)
Special Attacks command ghouls, create spawn, paralysis (1d4+1 rounds, DC 14, elves are immune to this effect), sneak attack +3d6 plus 3 bleed
Str 12, Dex 16, Con —, Int 16, Wis 14, Cha 18
Base Atk +3; CMB +4; CMD 17
Feats Civilized Ghoulishness (Classic Horrors Revisited 32), Combat Reflexes, Deceitful, Toughness, Weapon FinesseB
Skills Acrobatics +10, Appraise +8, Bluff +12, Climb +13, Craft (traps) +10, Diplomacy +10, Disable Device +10, Disguise +10 (+20 to appear human), Escape Artist +10, Handle Animal +6, Intimidate +10, Knowledge (dungeoneering) +8, Knowledge (history) +4, Knowledge (local) +8, Knowledge (religion) +6, Linguistics +8, Perception +10, Perform (Dance) +10, Sense Motive +8, Sleight of Hand +8, Stealth +10, Survival +10, Swim +8; Racial modifiers +8 Climb, +10 Disguise to appear human, +8 Survival
Languages Aklo, Common (Taldane), Goblin, Necril, Varisian
SQ rogue talents (bleeding attack, finesse rogue), trapfinding +1
Combat Gear potion of inflict moderate wounds, potions of invisibility (2); Other Gear +1 alchemical silver short sword, +1 leather armor, masterwork shortbow with 20 arrows, smoke arrows (5), hammer, thieves’ tools, traveler’s outfit, wires (4), wooden stakes (4)
Command Ghouls (Su) A dread ghoul can automatically command all normal ghouls within 30 feet as a free action. Normal ghouls never attack a dread ghoul unless compelled.
Create Spawn (Su) Any creature killed by a dread ghoul that lies undisturbed and uneaten until the next midnight rises as a dread ghoul at that time. The new dread ghoul is not under the control of its creator. A protection from evil or gentle repose spell cast on the corpse prevents this.
Disease (Su) Ghoul Fever: Bite—injury; save Fort DC 14; onset 1 day; frequency 1/day; effect 1d3 Con and 1d3 Dex damage; cure 2 consecutive saves. The save DC is Charisma-based.
A humanoid who dies of ghoul fever rises as a ghoul at the next midnight. A humanoid who becomes a ghoul in this way retains none of the abilities it possessed in life. It is not under the control of any other ghouls, but it hungers for the flesh of the living and behaves like a normal ghoul in all respects. A humanoid of 4 Hit Dice or more rises as a ghast.
What the undead and the player characters don't realize, is that a kere psychopomp has recently taken residence in the graveyard. The kere's Veil of Tears ability affecting the graveyard is the only reason the party wasn't wiped out by the Menadoran festrog, I daresay.
Sorry it took me awhile to get back to this. I have to come back to my "recent posts" to find stuff I've asked sometimes.
Thank you for the reply. It doesn't quite answer my question though.
I'm trying to figure out how to explain what I meant without sounding like a jerk, but I'm not sure if I accomplish it. I do appreciate that you've taken the time to provide an answer and answered with what information you have available.
I get that the Anima Tactics miniatures are 28-32 mm "in scale," but the description of this miniature says that the character "carries on as a large suit of armor," so, much as I might ask what size the Reaper Miniatures Red Dragon--Core Rulebook Version is for the Reaper Miniatures line (also scaled to 28 mm--and its description only says Reaper Minis are 28 mm minis), I'm asking if this miniature is sized to be a large/huge miniature in the scale of the product line.
Given that this miniature costs $27, I'm hoping it's significantly larger than 32 mm. Depending on the size, it might be useful as a giant or a golem of some kind. Outside of the Anima Tactics campaign, I mean.
I was just reading in the Advanced Race Guide yesterday and saw that ratfolk are said to commonly travel on giant rats (dire rats with the giant simple template).
Giant rats have no price listed in the equipment lists for ratfolk in the Advanced Race Guide. Are they priced/listed in Animal Archive?
I don't have Animal Archive yet (or anything else since December), so just want to know if it's in there.
Here's a linkified album link:
Paizo forums don't allow embedded images in posts, and for some reason your URLs have a space in them too.
I could see that 'hogman' being used as some kind of were-pig or perhaps a degenerate throw-back pig-faced orc.
I have an NPC in my campaign that speaks with a Russian accent. The campaign is in the county of Amaans in Ustalav, but he's from the county of Varno. If I could do a half-way decent slavic accent, he'd have a slavic accent instead.
I agree with Irrisen as being a place with Russian accents.
Maybe Brevoy and the Kellids too? I don't know as much about them. Definitely Irrisen though.
Well, if Havenguard Lunatic Asylum serves "as a lodge" in Caliphas, and there's a lodge in Caliphas named the Vodavani Lodge, then perhaps the lodge at Havenguard Lunatic Asylym is the Vodavani Lodge. One could be the fraternal lodge name, and the other could be the location name. They don't need to be in conflict.
That "rule" about three 20s isn't a rule of Pathfinder, it's just a house rule. It's always important to clarify House Rules as soon as possible when joining a game.
I GM a Pathfinder game. I do not use the three 20s VARIANT because I don't like it. My game does use Crit House Rules though, because I use Critical Hit AND Critical Fumble decks. (Fumbles themselves being a non-standard variant house rule.)
I don't necessarily like killing the player characters, but I do like to keep the illusion that they could die at any time. The illusion is far more fun than the reality of killing them because it keeps them on edge. The problem arises though that in order to maintain the illusion, close calls are mandatory. Close calls are scary and fun, but they're also a serious risk to character mortality--and sometimes I roll my dice in the open so fudging isn't always an option. So far in the current campaign we haven't had any character deaths, but we've had multiple party members in negative hitpoints at the same time at least twice. There haven't been any character deaths yet simply because the monsters have elected to focus on active threats rather than finishing off fallen enemies. At one point three of four party members were paralyzed and it would have been easy to coup de grace at least one of them, but it was more fun, and better for the game, I thought, if maybe the monsters chased the last PC around some to give them time for it to wear off.
Critical Fumble cards are vicious, but nobody has lost a hand yet. Had a PC crit-fumble when he decided to attack a stone statue (because it was there) with a sword. Lucky he just got stunned 1d4 rounds. It was pretty funny. I use the fumble "rule" where Weapon Focus in the fumbled weapon allows the fumbling character to draw two cards and pick his fumble from between them, so that usually helps martial characters some when they fumble, and gives a little bonus to the feat.
But anyway, my point is just perception of threat of PC death makes the game more intense, but it can be hard to do without killing a PC sometimes.
Of, and that three 20s thing isn't a standard rule.
In my current campaign I have a berbalang villain who has ghoul and ghast minions, and some dread ghouls too. (He created his minions by feeding prisoners ghoul flesh to give them ghoul fever, though the dread ghouls are mercenary, not of his creation.)
I want to give him class levels before he meets the PCs and I'm looking at cleric as a possibility, but does cleric of Kabriri make sense for a berbalang? Some of the dread ghouls have had Kabriri unholy symbols among their possessions, so I'd rather stick with Kabriri if it makes sense for a berbalang to worship him, but .... well.... I'm just looking for general opinions on the idea of a berbalang cleric. The dread ghouls are mercenary, so the berbalang need not share the same faith as them.
He's dwelling in Amaans in Ustalav so this is far removed from Nemret-Noktoria, so the way Kabriri worship is done in the Darklands isn't significant.
Would it be better for him to worship Urgathoa instead?
Yeah, depends on whether all vampires are evil in your campaign world.
If all vampires are evil, then he'd have to go for the NE alignment to be a druid.
It might mess with the Wildshape class ability though, since I think undead type might clash with it, but vampires can take other forms anyway, so you might handwave it if there's a clash.