Developer
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
So we were at risk of derailing the Lost Omens Character Guide Discussion Thread and it was brought up that we should just start our own thread.
What does everyone think of kitsune in 2e?
I'll start.
I have a feeling it won't happen until we see them in a Bestiary, given that seems to be the trend. It'll probably coincide with a Tian-Xia module and/or adventure path, but I doubt we'll have a whole season of it in Society again.
I'd like to see racial devotion archetypes for sure, but I might be getting greedy.
I really want to see the relationship between kitsune and the kami expanded upon.
I really hope they aren't as Enchantment focused again. I doubt they will be, given how much more diversity the race got following their first two appearances.
I also hope we get more than two named kitsune NPCs in Society. We got more scenarios featuring Wayang and Nagaji, and the race doesn't seem anywhere near as popular.
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
I wonder if we'll get the tails feats, and if so they'll function like the Dedication casting Feats?
At level x you get an additional tail and spell and then when you hit level xx you get another tail and spell, and then at xxx you get another and another.
Then you have to take higher level feats to continue and get more tails/spells.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
On the stream today, they said they want Ancestries in books where they thematically fit, and said that a Tian Xia book would likely have them and Samsarans.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I have a feeling it won't happen until we see them in a Bestiary, given that seems to be the trend. It'll probably coincide with a Tian-Xia module and/or adventure path, but I doubt we'll have a whole season of it in Society again.
That seems like a smart guess to me. Every ancestry that appeared in Lost Omens World Guide and the upcoming Advanced Player's Guide was in the first Bestiary. I think there's a James Jacobs quote somewhere referring to kitsune / samsaran / nagaji / wayang in PF1 Bestiary 4 that goes something of the tune of, "They're in here because we always have Bestiary stats of our playable ancestries."
I'd like to see racial devotion archetypes for sure, but I might be getting greedy.
Personally, I think that the nine-tailed kitsune concept should be handled a la archetype. Given how feats work in PF2, it feels like the only real way to do the concept correctly.
I really want to see the relationship between kitsune and the kami expanded upon.
Personally, I think I kind of like it better if there isn't any special relationship between kitsune and kami. In Japanese folklore, not all kitsune are servants of the goddess Inari, and it's more interesting if it's the same in Pathfinder. Jade Regent #4 even supports this considering one of its characters' backstories.
I really hope they aren't as Enchantment focused again. I doubt they will be, given how much more diversity the race got following their first two appearances.
Same. Enchantment-focused ends up gross, no matter the ancestry. I've sat at a table with at least two players who played "gross" kitsune enchanters who just wrecked the table's fun with their builds.
I also hope we get more than two named kitsune NPCs in Society. We got more scenarios featuring Wayang and Nagaji, and the race doesn't seem anywhere near as popular.
Only "To Seal the Shadows" for wayangs and "Red Harvest" for Nagaji come to mind, what are the others? There's a kitsune as a major character in one scenario (won't say which considering it's a plot point), but I agree that scenario isn't really about kitsune and what their culture is like in Golarion.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I wonder if we'll get the tails feats, and if so they'll function like the Dedication casting Feats?
At level x you get an additional tail and spell and then when you hit level xx you get another tail and spell, and then at xxx you get another and another.
Then you have to take higher level feats to continue and get more tails/spells.
I think an archetype would be the best way to handle magical tails, but I also think that it should be an archetype that replaces your choice of ancestry feats or class feats.
Also, it shouldn't be one tail = one feat. PF2 doesn't make you do one-to-one for 9th level spells with its archetypes; no reason for kitsune to be any different.
Part of me would almost prefer an archetype that relied on ancestral focus spells instead of actual spells, though. I feel like spell points work better as a sort of "chakra" system.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
On the stream today, they said they want Ancestries in books where they thematically fit, and said that a Tian Xia book would likely have them and Samsarans.
That makes sense. Not to mention that Tian Xia itself could use a lot of cleaning up the way that the Inner Sea region got cleaned up in the Lost Omens World Guide.
Kitsune is one of my favorite races, so I can't wait to see them come to 2e
Same tbh, but that probably doesn't come as a surprise to anyone who follows my contributions. ;)
|
Developer
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Personally, I think I kind of like it better if there isn't any special relationship between kitsune and kami. In Japanese folklore, not all kitsune are servants of the goddess Inari, and it's more interesting if it's the same in Pathfinder. Jade Regent #4 even supports this considering one of its characters' backstories.
Oh, not all Kitsune should be buddy-buddy with the Kami, but we have some hints that they are one of the (playable) races with the closest ties. So it'd be a potential heritage! I'd be just as interested in playing an anti-kami kitsune!
Only "To Seal the Shadows" for wayangs and "Red Harvest" for Nagaji come to mind, what are the others? There's a kitsune as a major character in one scenario (won't say which considering it's a plot point), but I agree that scenario isn't really about kitsune and what their culture is like in Golarion.
I counted NPCs, not Scenarios. There are more named Nagaji and Wayang in those two scenarios than there are named Kitsune in the entirety of PFS. Not including Modules and Adventure Paths, only because I don't want to spoil them for myself.
I'm not trying to argue that we need more kitsune in more scenarios. They should be used when they are the best choice! When the author and/or developer are inspired to use them! It's just kinda fun to see the stats.
Catfolk, Suli, Vanara, Gahtlain, Ghoran, Changeling, Nagaji, Wyvaran, Undine are in at least 1 Scenario.
Kitsune, Skinwalkers, Sylph, and Androids are in 2 Scenarios.
Ifrit, Wayang, Vishkanya and Dhampir are in 3 Scenarios.
Leshies, Samsaran, Grippili and Hobgoblins are in 4 Scenarios.
Lizardfolk are in at least 5 Scenarios (and include a Venture-Captain now).
Tengu are in 7 Scenarios.
Ratfolk are in 8 Scenarios.
Tiefling are in 9 Scenarios.
Kobolds are in 10 Scenarios.
Goblins are in 12 Scenarios.
We have an Oread and Aasimar Venture-Captain so they show up quite a bit.
But there are Wayang in The Haunting of Hinnojai, The Deepmarket Deception and To Seal the Shadow.
Nagaji are only in Red Harvest, but there's lots of them.
Samsaran are also in Red Harvest and, of course, To Judge a Soul Pt 1, 2 and 3.
Kitsune are only featured in one scenario and just barely. There is a secret kitsune in a scenario, but no real way to find out he's a kitsune unless someone is going around spamming anti-shapeshifter spells. There is also a kitsune mentioned in the population counts of a village in a Season 4 scenario, and they are mentioned in Red Harvest in the sidebar about Nalinvati regarding Daikitsu. Oh, and they are mentioned in a typo in a sidebar in The Golden Guardian.
Again, not saying "we demand more kitsune in scenarios". In fact, the more a shapeshifter is used, the less special they tend to be. But it is a little noticeable given the high number of kitsune PCs in Society. You'd assume at least some of the agents would want to pursue topics of interest to their ancestry.
Those are some interesting numbers! When you said "scenarios", I was thinking of, "the plot or setting features the ancestry", not just a headcount. That is kind of stark that androids appear at all in as many scenarios as kitsune, though.
As for kami, an ancestry feat like the gnome one for a familiar could be pretty cool if said feat gave you a little kami buddy to hang out with!
|
Developer
|
Those are some interesting numbers! When you said "scenarios", I was thinking of, "the plot or setting features the ancestry", not just a headcount. That is kind of stark that androids appear at all in as many scenarios as kitsune, though.
As for kami, an ancestry feat like the gnome one for a familiar could be pretty cool if said feat gave you a little kami buddy to hang out with!
I mean, Verdant Wheel get a Leshy familiar. Does that count?
...Great now I want a Tamashigo Leshy who thinks they can become a Kami.
|
Developer
|
Not explicitly about Kitsune.. But I would love a legit Onmyouji class. Interjection Games had a great one. Paizo made the Occultist Talisman Master which was also really great.
I'd love something that went with that style. Tokyo Raven style.
Completely agree. I'm a huge onmyouji fan and can't wait to see what they do with the system. The new magic system as a whole is incredible (with the four traditions/disciplines etc...).
There is an onmyouji spiritualist archetype, by the way.
|
|
That feels little too mix and match, leaving them as Ancestry Feats should be fine, this wouldn’t penalize martial Kitsune this way.I think an archetype would be the best way to handle magical tails, but I also think that it should be an archetype that replaces your choice of ancestry feats or class feats.I wonder if we'll get the tails feats, and if so they'll function like the Dedication casting Feats?
At level x you get an additional tail and spell and then when you hit level xx you get another tail and spell, and then at xxx you get another and another.
Then you have to take higher level feats to continue and get more tails/spells.
Also, it shouldn't be one tail = one feat. PF2 doesn't make you do one-to-one for 9th level spells with its archetypes; no reason for kitsune to be any different.... that’s what I suggested.
Part of me would almost prefer an archetype that relied on ancestral focus spells instead of actual spells, though. I feel like spell points work better as a sort of "chakra" system.
That would be neat.
That feels little too mix and match, leaving them as Ancestry Feats should be fine, this wouldn’t penalize martial Kitsune this way.I think an archetype would be the best way to handle magical tails, but I also think that it should be an archetype that replaces your choice of ancestry feats or class feats.I wonder if we'll get the tails feats, and if so they'll function like the Dedication casting Feats?
At level x you get an additional tail and spell and then when you hit level xx you get another tail and spell, and then at xxx you get another and another.
Then you have to take higher level feats to continue and get more tails/spells.
I don't understand how giving a character a choice regarding whether to take a hypothetical feat as either an ancestry feat or a class feat (their choice of which) penalizes anyone. It lets you take the feat where you want to take it, regardless of which class you're playing.
|
|
Sorry, was thinking of two different responses and accidentally combined them. Letting them be Ancestry/Class Feats feels too mix and match and there’s a lot going on in there with possible unintended outcomes and the like.
Past that I’d like for them to be Ancestry Feats, rather than a Kitsune Archetype Dedication line set of Feats, since taking away martial Class Feats hurts them too much.
You’d also have to justify why this Ancestry gets to swap out Ancestry and Class feats like that when no other does (Human can get a 1st level one but that’s it).
I kind of hope they do have a strong emphasis on enchantment and illusion, it fits the folklore, if your players get gross with it you're playing with the wrong people.
|
Developer
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I kind of hope they do have a strong emphasis on enchantment and illusion, it fits the folklore, if your players get gross with it you're playing with the wrong people.
Wizards of the Coast had a great article many moons ago about how hard it was to pin down what their kitsune would do. In myth they can pretty much work with any of the schools of magic.
Abjuration: They are frequently shown as guardians and bless people with protective wards.
Conjuration: They can summon and seal things, including elemental spirits.
Divination: They are messengers of the gods and commune with both spirits and nature.
Enchantment: They seduce. They possess. They dominate.
Evocation: They control the elements, from fox-fire to retributive ice storms.
Illusion: They can create illusions, both of living things and nonliving things.
Necromancy: They control and feed off life-force. They cause people to get ill and die. They even heal!
Transmutation: They are shape shifters.
But that diversity in their myth across multiple cultures is what makes them a great PC race. There's no reason a human or an elf can't be thought of as a master any of those schools as well! We've seen kitsune as physically weak spellcasters who rely on guile to outwit hunters. We've seen them as master swordsmen who help smith on the side. It's entirely up to the player because the myth is versatile enough that nothing can be labelled "the archetypical kitsune".
Admittedly, I can't think of any Chimera-blooded Berserker Kitsune...
But my point is: I hope the tails do more than "here's a narrow selection of focus spells", although that was better than the 3.5 nine-tailed spirit point boon that was 100% fluff with no mechanical benefit.
That being said, keeping the tails tied to magic makes total sense, despite my desire to play a four-tailed swordsman who draws a different element into their sword from each tail. (Which works great as fluff with the tailed kineticist feats and a kinetic knight!)
I definitely appreciate the magic enchantment/illusion stuff. The main thing I'm interested in is the shapeshifting- Realistic Likeness was my favorite PF1 feat, and I'm a little worried about how something like that is going to fit in on an ancestry chassis.
It'll be nice making it a little easier to do a strength build on them than PF1.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm just excited for kitsune in 2e period. Holding off on really getting elbow-deep in it until then, which isn't gonna surprise anybody who knows me :P
I already wrote out some drafts and outlines of what I'd like to see in a 2nd Edition kitsune where every heritage non-exclusively focuses on a different aspect of kitsune-ness (shapeshifting, enchantment, trickery, illusions, etc).
I prefer my 1st Edition houserules for multiple tails: every kitsune gains extra tails depending on the highest spell level they can cast. Locking multiple tails behind feats in 1E meant you could not spend your feats on metamagic and other spellcasting options, which contradicts the flavor of the concept. I feel the same way with locking it behind an archetype, which would limit character concepts and builds for the sake of what is largely a flavor goal. Plus, if a kitsune can warp the fabric of reality with a way of his hand, I would expect him to have nine tails.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That helps kitsune spellcasters, but it means that kitsunes who don't invest in spells can never really improve their tails and that feels wrong to me.
I like the idea of keeping them separate. A kitsune wizard might be able to bend reality, but bending reality through rigorous study and book learning is fundamentally different than manipulating magic through your innate mystical abilities as a kitsune and I like having the design space open for the idea of a kitsune spellcaster who neglected their innate talents or a nonspellcasting kitsune who didn't bother learning traditional magic and focused instead on getting all nine of their tails.
Except that a cantrip, which we have several examples of being given by 1st level ancestry feats, would technically qualify you for extra tails.
Alternatively, their change shape ability might be treated as an innate cantrip, no feat required.
Actually...how will Change shape be handled? It seems pretty core to Kitsunes! Will all Kitsune get change shape, and their heritages will be really weak to compensate? Will they forgoe heritages for kitsune altogether?
|
Developer
|
I feel like Change Shape between just two forms isn't that powerful by itself. Polymorph is so much smoother in 2e anyway.
As for tails: I wouldn't mind seeing it just ruled that a kitsune gets a number of tails equal to their ancestry feats. Then make an archetype that gives you a tail with each of it's feats, to make up for the fact we don't have 9 ancestry feats. But I haven't actually sat down and given much thought to how kitsune will be done, as my plate has been rather full with other projects.
Except that a cantrip, which we have several examples of being given by 1st level ancestry feats, would technically qualify you for extra tails.
Alternatively, their change shape ability might be treated as an innate cantrip, no feat required.
Actually...how will Change shape be handled? It seems pretty core to Kitsunes! Will all Kitsune get change shape, and their heritages will be really weak to compensate? Will they forgoe heritages for kitsune altogether?
Just like you said, if you gain tails based on your highest spell level, then you can get extra tails with an innate spell, a class that grants focus spells, or an archetype that grants spellcasting.
In my draft, Human Shape and Fox Shape are 1st level feats, each working similar to humanoid form and pest form spells. Realistic Likeness is a 5th level feat. If you take the shapeshifter-focused heritage, you get Human Shape for free.
Thankfully, polymorph rules are fairly straightforward in 2nd Edition.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I am wondering whether kitsune might be introduced in the same book as anadi and perhaps other shapechanging ancestries such as the rougarou. After all, there would be a lot of common mechanics involved.
I definitely appreciate the magic enchantment/illusion stuff. The main thing I'm interested in is the shapeshifting- Realistic Likeness was my favorite PF1 feat, and I'm a little worried about how something like that is going to fit in on an ancestry chassis.
It'll be nice making it a little easier to do a strength build on them than PF1.
I totally agree; my kitsune bloodrager in PF1 was decimated in every other stat, and it looks like that won't be the case in PF2.
The shapeshifting is also my favorite part! Lots of fun. I have a couple of different sketches for what it could look like that I'm hoping I'll get to use someday.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I already wrote out some drafts and outlines of what I'd like to see in a 2nd Edition kitsune where every heritage non-exclusively focuses on a different aspect of kitsune-ness (shapeshifting, enchantment, trickery, illusions, etc).
Personally, I think it's important that shapechanging is something every kitusne can do. My preference is to use heritages to introduce what kitsune from different places could look like. It'd be mighty great to have a desert themed heritage for a fennec-style kitsune, for instance.
I prefer my 1st Edition houserules for multiple tails: every kitsune gains extra tails depending on the highest spell level they can cast. Locking multiple tails behind feats in 1E meant you could not spend your feats on metamagic and other spellcasting options, which contradicts the flavor of the concept. I feel the same way with locking it behind an archetype, which would limit character concepts and builds for the sake of what is largely a flavor goal. Plus, if a kitsune can warp the fabric of reality with a way of his hand, I would expect him to have nine tails.
I think it depends on what you want those tails to mean. Do they need to represent reality-warping power, or do they just mean you're highly leveled? I think tails are more interesting when they're a choice you make for your character; it's no fun if every kitsune sorcerer gets additional tails at the same point in their career. Makes it feel less special. But I also think that eight feats in Pathfinder was too much; I used a sizable amount of works both in First-Party products like Blood of the Beast and in Third-Party products like the Kitsune Compendium to try and take the sting off of that concept tax. I think there's a happy ground somewhere in between the two.
Except that a cantrip, which we have several examples of being given by 1st level ancestry feats, would technically qualify you for extra tails.
Alternatively, their change shape ability might be treated as an innate cantrip, no feat required.
Actually...how will Change shape be handled? It seems pretty core to Kitsunes! Will all Kitsune get change shape, and their heritages will be really weak to compensate? Will they forgoe heritages for kitsune altogether?
Canon that I contributed to Pathfinder Player Companion: Blood of the Beast says all kitsune can shapechange. I don't know if Paizo's going to want to retcon that. Personally I think that if a kitsune can't shapechange, that's probably treated like some kind of disability among kitsune (and shapechangers as whole).
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I am wondering whether kitsune might be introduced in the same book as anadi and perhaps other shapechanging ancestries such as the rougarou. After all, there would be a lot of common mechanics involved.
That's a really cool idea, to be honest.
I know someone on a recent stream (maybe the James Jacobs / Luis Loza aka Aliteration Squad) said that they would most likely show up in a Tian Xia themed World Guide. Hopefully that comes sooner rather than later. That being said, I do like the idea of introducing a bunch of shapechanger ancestries together in one book. I wonder how popular a book like that would be? Might be cool to see a PF2 shifter plus a bunch of shapechanger ancestries all in one place.
Might be too niche though.
I already wrote out some drafts and outlines of what I'd like to see in a 2nd Edition kitsune where every heritage non-exclusively focuses on a different aspect of kitsune-ness (shapeshifting, enchantment, trickery, illusions, etc).Personally, I think it's important that shapechanging is something every kitusne can do. My preference is to use heritages to introduce what kitsune from different places could look like. It'd be mighty great to have a desert themed heritage for a fennec-style kitsune, for instance.
I'm leaning this way as well. The interesting effect of it would be that most Kitsune heritages would be more or less the same: you get a shape change innate cantrip that allows you to move between two set forms, but the animal form for each heritages would be where you'd get the differences (and so would be the meat of the choice).
It'll be interesting to see how it works out!
I already wrote out some drafts and outlines of what I'd like to see in a 2nd Edition kitsune where every heritage non-exclusively focuses on a different aspect of kitsune-ness (shapeshifting, enchantment, trickery, illusions, etc).Personally, I think it's important that shapechanging is something every kitusne can do. My preference is to use heritages to introduce what kitsune from different places could look like. It'd be mighty great to have a desert themed heritage for a fennec-style kitsune, for instance.I'm leaning this way as well. The interesting effect of it would be that most Kitsune heritages would be more or less the same: you get a shape change innate cantrip that allows you to move between two set forms, but the animal form for each heritages would be where you'd get the differences (and so would be the meat of the choice).
It'll be interesting to see how it works out!
Very interesting indeed!
I'm not sure it would need to be a cantrip. Change shape is a universal ability in the Bestiary; that would probably work well enough with the usual kitsune stipulations.
How about instead of only getting Illusion or Enchantment spells per tail like in PF1, each tail gets to associate with one of the 8 schools plus metamagic? The base tail will always be Transmutation or Illusion for the specific humanoid shape business, in this case, with each Ancestry Feat gaining 2 tails per increment.
I agree with the preference for shapeshifting as a universal ability for all kitsune. However, the problems with that are:
1) The 2E ancestry chassis leaves little room for abilities that all members of the ancestry possess. This is an issue I've been struggling with when writing the cross-system book for my original race Runari. You have to either: A) weaken all ancestries to allow for the original ability, B) add it as an ability to all heritages at the cost of making the heritages more the same.
2) Most kitsune PCs do not use shapeshifting at all. Many players are content to simply play a non-shapeshifting anthropomorphic trickster or mystical fox. Others have no interest in it or see it as useless. (Personally, I think this is crazy and think change shape is heavily undervalued/underutilitized)
3) Not all mystical foxes in folklore can shapeshift and tales that involve kitsune say it's something the kitsune must learn how to do, which makes it sound more like it should be a feat.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
One of my players in a converted to 2E campaign is a kitsune, so I wrote up an entry for them. It's here if anyone is interested.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Desert kitsune would be Small, surely? ;)
Desert kitsune would be Small, surely? ;)Yes.
Might make having a human form a little peculiar, though!
Might make having a human form a little peculiar, though!Desert kitsune would be Small, surely? ;)Yes.
Desert kitsune have Halfling forms instead, naturally! In 1E, the stats even line up!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Desert kitsune would be Small, surely? ;)Yes.
My favorite wow race so far, even if my brain insists on seeing them as Corgis instead of Fennecs.
This does not lessen the appeal.| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I do like the right up on the kitsune for 2E. I do hope that they bring the kitsune to official status sooner rather than later. They are one of the more popular races in 1E correct?
Aside from the core races, at least-- if we're talking PFS, I have yet to meet another kitsune character except for my group that's all-kitsune.
That one's a ton of fun, by the way :D
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Including me!
I do like the right up on the kitsune for 2E. I do hope that they bring the kitsune to official status sooner rather than later. They are one of the more popular races in 1E correct?
That depends who you ask, I guess.
If you go by this survey that the Open Gaming Network ran in 2018, kitsune came up as the 10th most popular race from among the 10,000 people polled. (Specifically, they're at 1.9% of survey takers or about 1,900 people.) You can read the full dissertation here.
Now, at GenCon I heard that when Paizo was deciding which ancestries to include in the Lost Omens Character Guide and Advanced Player's Guide, the creative team leaned on the results of a survey heavily when making their decision. (It was either the one that the PFS did at the end of 2017 or the general ancestry one that the PDT did during the playtest; not sure which.) Regardless of which survey it was, kitsune surveyed at the bottom half of community-desired ancestries at the time, which was one factor in them not being included sooner. (Another is likely that the team feels they fit best in a Tian Xia focused product, based on James Jacobs and Luis Loza's comments on a recent Pathfinder Friday Twitch stream.)
What this means for kitsune, I'm not sure. I've always heard that Paizo likes to do stuff when there's community drive for a specific kind of content, but that they also don't like organized movements like petitions or whatever. For all I know, this thread could be grating them the wrong way. For the time being, I guess getting as many people as possible to say, "Yo, give us back these ancestries Paizo" is about as good as it's gonna get. I certainly want to see Paizo release them officially sooner rather than later. I basically have an entire draft of the ancestry done, sitting on my computer, in hopes that they'll ask me for it. ;)
I do like the right up on the kitsune for 2E. I do hope that they bring the kitsune to official status sooner rather than later. They are one of the more popular races in 1E correct?Aside from the core races, at least-- if we're talking PFS, I have yet to meet another kitsune character except for my group that's all-kitsune.
That one's a ton of fun, by the way :D
I bump into more kitsune at conventions than around Philadelphia, personally. But that's mostly because the Philadelphia large is hard-core into optimization and power gaming, and kitsune only tend to fit into that category if you're playing the insanely broken enchanter build.