I like the 3.5 version. The Pathfinder version is not as scary to me so I fix it, and then let it kill players.
|
You could always just flip open the 1st edition Deities and Demigods and crib some ideas from the titans in the Olympian section (or from Thrym and Surtr, for that matter).
Take the baseline stats of a colossal titan, and give it a super-power of some sort, like gravity control or the ability to craft monsters from clay (or it's own spilled blood) like summon monster IX or whatever. Ignore the crapshoot list of SLAs, or class levels, or anything that takes it away from the core element you want to have as it's 'super-power.'
You don't have to use the actual titans of myth, either, and could just pick other things you'd want elder elemental forces of, like darkness or hate or thunder & lightning, and go with that, giving them the sorts of powers that would fit that primal concept. The titan of night, for instance, might be incorporeal (made of shadow) and be able to move along any surface (even the water) at a speed of 200. He couldn't fly, but suffered no reduction in speed for any sort of terrain, slithering silently across the ground, and rising up to engulf people with his blinding incorporeal self, that drains life from living things and leaves a trail of greater shadows in his wake. He has the usual cool defenses, and also takes no damage from any weapon that doesn't have a [light] descriptor spell cast upon it.
Go nuts. :)
Under no circumstance should you take a well known monster and delete it from the game just in order to "free up the name". Yes, archons in that other game, I'm giving you that look.
Just my opinion.
The epic elder titan can be a "greater" version. If you want a "titan with lazors" take a look at that.
Moreover, is OGL, so PAIZO can take it and rebuild it in a future bestiary.
Why do you keep saying "dndfinders"?
It just seems offensive to Paizo.
|
Paizo hasn't done any creatures for pathfinder that are of a godlike power level (the titans from mythology would be) and probably won't do for quite some time (not until there is a working epic level ruleset).
Many of the monster are not the same as their inspiration in mythology (and some monsters have very different roles in different mythologies to begin with)
If you wan't unique creatures inspired by the Titans of myth (or of movies), do them as individual creatures, you can label them XY, a Titan - or Spawn of Rovagug (or Knights of Nih or BadAssDestroyersOfWorlds or whatever you like)
Pathfinder Dragons are neither evil incarnate nor powerful elemental spirits.
Pathfinder Giant Scorpions and Pegasi (super)natural creatures, able to procreate, not the result of Gorgons blood falling to earth.
Pathfinder Will'o'Wisps are not humans condemned to walk the earth forever bearing with them embers taken from hell.
Mythological beings work best if developed for a setting, not for a game system. If you wan't a setting with different Titans, don't use the baseline Titan- Look at what Darksun did with the dragons - it was a cool idea, totally fitting for that setting, but the gods be thanked, TSR didn't decide to scratch the dragon out of their monster compendium to make room for the Darksun version, the Darksun version just replaced the MC Dragon for the Darksun setting.
No, I don't think Titans have to be redesigned at all.
BTW - I have absolutely no Idea, how scratching any monster from the Bestiarys would make the game better balanced...
Considering how an Elysian titan can cast as a 20th-level cleric for a low, low cost of +1 CR, I'd say it's one of the few creatures that are worth every point of its CR.
I think Titans are still pretty burl. Granted not like Greek myth level. And a simple answer is to just add class levels if you want one to be even more powerful. I also really like Set's idea of them as "elemental forces", I think I just figured out where Titans fit in the pantheon of my homebrew world. (Thanks for the inspiration Set.)
Off the main topic... I hate to in anyway side with Booger=Boy, having seen some of his posts in other threads... (Read this next part carefully.) But, to me Pathfinder is basically D&D 3.75 or maybe even 4th, since I think (actual) 4th ed. is more of a departure from any of the previous editions of D&D than Pathfinder. Hell, my group still calls it our D&D game. (Well, in fairness several girlfriends are told it is "guys night".)
Really whatever you call your game isn't going to change the product label, it's merely words. Also, the guys I Paizo (at least from stuff on the boards) seem way to chill to be offended by it being called such. Heck, I imagine they may even be flattered that for many people they have taken on the mantle of Dungeons & Dragons even if only on a personal level. Which they have never in anyway claimed... watch out for the Wotc lawyers :D
Though... really... DnDfinders? "Hey guys, I found some dungeons. Did anyone find the dragons yet?"
|
But, to me Pathfinder is basically D&D 3.75 or maybe even 4th, since I think (actual) 4th ed. is more of a departure from any of the previous editions of D&D than Pathfinder.
If you want to go down that path, neither 3.X, Pathfinder, or 4E should be called D&D, since 3.X was just as much of a departure from previous versions as 4E was from 3.X.
*applauds*
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Why do you keep saying "dndfinders"?
It just seems offensive to Paizo.
You may be abusing the term offensive.
Like it or not, the gaming community sees Pathfinder as another version of D&D. I've never seen any of the Paizo staff comment that they have a problem with this. And why should they? D&D is a great game, and Pathfinder is a good version of it. They should feel honored that people are willing to look at the two games interchangeably. It gives them a level of legitimacy that a lot of D20-compatible companies haven't attained. Besides, trying to separate itself from the D&D label would be elitist and silly. It's like 80% the same game, and they took pains to keep backwards compatibility. Look at the promotional posters. Do they say "D20 thrives?" No, I"m pretty sure they say "3.5 thrives" 3.5 what? That's right, 3.5 D&D.
Anyway, you guys are on a message board for a game where you roll dice and pretend to be Elves swinging magical swords. If you're so serious about it that you're actually OFFENDED by somebody calling it D&D, or worse yet, you feel the need to 'correct' him like you're some kind of internet academician, you may need to take a Prozac and a nap.
Removed a post. Please post nicely.
you can look at certain creatures as titans, ie creatures of immense god like power. the Image of the titans as giants is only one of the many images of them. sometimes they are elemental in form or in the form of monsters.
the best example is the Terrasque. Its already been described as one of the spawns of rovagug, which would contradict greco-roman myth for what a titan is, but when has that stopped anyone in the game, especially designers. back to the point though, the terrasque, the balor, the jabberwocky are all EPIC in power and if not actual titans they are great points from which to start in creating a titan for your own game.
as to the point of the 4th edition titan, i feel thats a lame copout. a titan should be its own creature or idea, or even title given to the uber powered monsters and creations of a certain size, but not advanced giants.