Should I / Could I play this race.


Advice

1 to 50 of 54 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Ok so I was going through Savage Species from 3.5 and I found the Lillend race and I really like the fluff and look of it. The classic naga look with wings.
But its quite powerful as its a total of a 13 level monster class.
But thats using 3.5 LA rules as well.
And PF uses CR which is 7, and the race has 7 RHD so that works. But this also means in 7 levels it gets the following:
Outsider (Chaotic, Good)
7d8 RHD
Full BAB; All good Saves
8+Int
Str: +10
Dex: +6
Con: +4
Int: +4
Wis: +6
Cha: +8
Tail Slap 2d6 +1/2 Str
Improved Grab (If Tailslap hits a foe its size or smaller)
Constrict
+5 Natural Armor
Fire Resistance 10
Large Size
Fly 70 ft (Average)
20 ft Landspeed
Bard Abilities: Starting at 2nd level, a lillend casts spells
and has the bardic music ability of a bard of half its class level.
Lillend World Powers (Sp): Beginning at 3rd level, a lillend
can use the following spell-like abilities once per day:
darkness, hallucinatory terrain, knock, and light. At 9th level
and higher it can use them three times per day. The lillend’s
caster level is its effective bard level + 4.
Lillend Talk Powers (Sp): Beginning at 5th level, a lillend
can use the following spell-like abilities once per day:
charm person, speak with animals, and speak with plants. Its
caster level is its effective bard level + 4.

I know this is insanely good but it does take 7 levels to reach this level and I would only be able to take this at 7th level and take only a class level at 8th level.


It is not a playable race as such so ASK YOUR GM. It would have to be something he was comfortable with and that the rest of the group would be comfortable with.

Having said that
I might allow it if the game started at over 8th level but probably not.

CR does not equate to level or level adjustment it has very odd effects which can make in sustained play a character weaker or stronger than you expect and also as the race abilities tend not to scale well it can be that when introduced at 8th level you are great but then 5 levels later your racial abilities have not scaled and you are too weak.

There are currently no rules for playing monstrous races in pathfinder. So everything you propose would be house rules based on converting a set of rules (that IMO) did not work well in 3.5 across in a confused fashion. You would need a gm who enjoys playtesting potentially broken house rules in his campaign and be willing to put up with sudden changes to your ability (up or down) in an attempt to balance things.

You could design a Lilend (Light) race using advanced race guide it would not give you all the huge stat bonuses you want , but you could get the feel of the race . Probably it would take more race design points than any other normal race making you a lot more powerful than the rest of the party unless they also use powerful custom races.


No, I wouldn't allow it. The bonuses are too strong, even if you have to spend 7 levels of not having a class.

If you want something similar, play an Aasimar bard. The can racially get wings and the variant of Aasimar have a variety of ability bonuses. You could refluff it as having snake scales and wings.


Monsters As PC
So I think there are official rules for playing monster races.
Specifically
For monsters with racial Hit Dice, the best way to allow monster PCs is to pick a CR and allow all of the players to make characters using monsters of that CR. Treat the monster's CR as its total class levels and allow the characters to multiclass into the core classes. Do not advance such monsters by adding Hit Dice. Monster PCs should only advance through classes.

If you are including a single monster character in a group of standard characters, make sure the group is of a level that is at least as high as the monster's CR. Treat the monster's CR as class levels when determining the monster PC's overall levels. For example, in a group of 6th-level characters, a minotaur (CR 4) would possess 2 levels of a core class, such as barbarian.

The reason I brought up level 7 is because it gets skills, RHD saves and proficiency just no armors so it could be played with a level 7.


Claxon wrote:

No, I wouldn't allow it. The bonuses are too strong, even if you have to spend 7 levels of not having a class.

If you want something similar, play an Aasimar bard. The can racially get wings and the variant of Aasimar have a variety of ability bonuses. You could refluff it as having snake scales and wings.

Except that it is not a snake-angel styled look. Its a human who's mommy or daddy was an outsider and they ended up with the shaft of being human with oddities and having scales and wings does not a Lillend make.

The amount of points it would take to properly map out its effects would definitely put it into a CR 3 or 4 range and at that point the 7 would just not be that much of a deal breaker.

And to be fair of course its more powerful its a proper outsider not some little humanoid from the material plane its going to be a higher tier of character. But 7 class levels is a LARGE chunk of a character development.

And in Savage its a 13 level class like I said, but 3.5 had a nasty habit of bloating LA.


3.5's LA/Racial HD was too harsh on monster PC's. PF's CR = level, then add extra levels guideline is too easy.

I think your lillend as listed would fall into the category 'Some creatures are simply not suitable for play as PCs, due to their powers' if using the guideline provided.


avr wrote:

3.5's LA/Racial HD was too harsh on monster PC's. PF's CR = level, then add extra levels guideline is too easy.

I think your lillend as listed would fall into the category 'Some creatures are simply not suitable for play as PCs, due to their powers' if using the guideline provided.

Is it really their powers or their ability score bonuses?

I mean Knock and Light are low level spells. Hallucinatory terrain doesn't exist in PF so would require it being converted and Darkness, Drow get that too and yet no one is saying we should outlaw Aasimar who get light as a spell-like. 3/day is rough but hardly that OP for a 7 level adjustment.

The ability to charm person, speak with animal and speak with plant are not all that powerful for a 1/day limit. As two of those are useless except for RP and charm person you can pick up more often a day as a straight bard.


You're a 6th level bard with BAB +7 (plus a good fort save as well) you have natural flight at 70' move, your ability scores are amazing (the equivalent of 69 point buy for a human), +5 natural armor and a natural attack with grab and constrict, all your weapons penetrate chaotic & good DR, reach 10' - and yes, you have seven mostly minor spell-like abilities. FYI, Hallucinatory Terrain.

If I were GM'ing it I would insist on modifying the monster or its effective level.


Also those are guidelines not rules, and are also different to what you were suggesting.
Its a bad idea


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I would just design a new race that is a reasonable cross between the style of a Lillend and the stats of an Aasimar.

Sovereign Court

No.


avr wrote:

You're a 6th level bard with BAB +7 (plus a good fort save as well) you have natural flight at 70' move, your ability scores are amazing (the equivalent of 69 point buy for a human), +5 natural armor and a natural attack with grab and constrict, all your weapons penetrate chaotic & good DR, reach 10' - and yes, you have seven mostly minor spell-like abilities. FYI, Hallucinatory Terrain.

If I were GM'ing it I would insist on modifying the monster or its effective level.

Well I could just play out the Monster class, but the +5 LA to make it a 13 level race seems a little steep all things considered.

Also I get bardic music equal to a bard half my level. Which means at level 20 a Lillend would have Bardic Music equal to a 10th level bard.
So at 8th level its the same as a Bard of 4th level.

And TY somehow I missed that when I was browsing the spells.

JohnHawkins wrote:

Also those are guidelines not rules, and are also different to what you were suggesting.

Its a bad idea

How did it sound from me? I was saying using the CR 7 as its class levels which worked out with its 7 RHD which matched its CR.

I do agree its powerful, but by higher levels its hardly game breaking. Sure if I went pure caster its good, if I went Martial its decent because I wouldn't get the high power that the other classes will get.

At level 20 a human fighter has 7 more levels of class features and feats compared to a Lillend fighter 20. Losing out on the last Armor and Weapon Training, 4 bonus feats, Armor Mastery and Weapon Mastery.
As well as 7 levels of inferior HD a d8 to a d10.

Question. If I reduced the Monster Class to a LA +3 and made its monster class run finish at 10th would it be fair?

Sovereign Court

It still wouldn't be recommended but anyway, not like it matters, just ask your DM, if your DM says yes, it doesn't matter what we say on the forum and have fun I guess.


Are the + to stats that scary really? What if they where put on base 10.
That would be a 20, 16, 14, 14, 16, 18 which is doable with a good series of rolls and a human bonus.


Like I said, PF's too easy, 3.x's too harsh.

First, consider justaworm's idea. Or, maybe, play a synthesist summoner. These are things which have reasonably well understood effects and will be easier to deal with.

Failing that, +3 LA sounds about right. If you are seriously going to advance it as a fighter all the way to ECL 20 I might reduce the LA to +2 after say 3 levels of fighter were I the GM. I mean, it seems best suited to either a grappling specialist or more bard levels, not a heavy-armored fighter.

BTW, I'm not sure where you're getting the 'bardic music equal to half my level' from. A base lillend has 6th level bardic music and no note suggesting it would improve further without bard levels.

RPG Superstar 2013 Top 32

Dastardly Cupid wrote:
avr wrote:

3.5's LA/Racial HD was too harsh on monster PC's. PF's CR = level, then add extra levels guideline is too easy.

I think your lillend as listed would fall into the category 'Some creatures are simply not suitable for play as PCs, due to their powers' if using the guideline provided.

Is it really their powers or their ability score bonuses?

If I were GM, I think I would invoke this part of the PRD before making a decision:

PRD wrote:
Ability Scores: ... while creatures with character class levels have the elite array (15, 14, 13, 12, 10, 8)...

Since it has most of the abilities of a bard, I would suggest it has 7 bard levels.

I realize it then says it should tell you the adjustments, but they can't (and shouldn't) do that for every monster. This creature is less suited to being a PC. Doesn't mean it's impossible, but if you want to sell the idea to the GM, you might want to think like a GM and anticipate compromise.

That said, if it has the elite array, we can derive its stats to say:

my math:
by reducing its size to medium (using the Monster Creation Rules - +8 STR, -2 DEX, +4 CON):

STR: 12
DEX: 19
CON: 17
INT: 14
WIS: 16
CHA: 19

Then we can take the elite array out of that (a fairly arbitrary arrangement based on priority).
STR: 8
DEX: 14
CON: 13
INT: 10
WIS: 12
CHA: 15

That gives us:
STR: +4
DEX: +4 (rounded down from 5, so assume the 4th HD stat point went here)
CON: +4
INT: +4
WIS: +4
CHA: +4

Adding the Size bonuses back in:


STR: +12
DEX: +2
CON: +8
INT: +4
WIS: +4
CHA: +4

Which is still massive, but slightly less, and a net 10 points are from its large size.

Now since I'm looking at it from a GM's perspective, I think it would unlikely your GM will allow this in a regular game. Even using the lower point bonuses, without size bonuses, it starts with a 14 in everything, which is a 30-point build, before the player ACTUALLY buys points and without considering its racial powers.

So it's kind of interesting to me that the CR system rates a 7th-level bard with 34 extra stat points and extra powers and immunities the same as it would rate a humanoid 8th level bard. It's like the system inherently acknowledges that bards suck.


I looked intk the savage species book and the half bard level is in the monster class list of features. So i get where its from. Beastery does not have it though.


If I was a GM i'd say F* no. Aside from the fact that - hey, why did the party decide to pick up this random, hyper-rare critter to travel around with, causing peasants and town guards to goggle and gawk - it just seems like you're picking this critter to rock out on some kind of super-build powergaming. Even with a class level of 2 and all those race benefits , you're not counting points buy (which will lift some stats to ridiculous levels) nor the power arc that's going to spike once you gain four or five levels. You'll outdps pure warriors with normal races, you'll outsurvive them too. Constitution +8? if you drop 5 pts buy into that, you're getting +7 hp per hit die. A human fighter with 5 pts in Con is getting 2 per level. you'll be 50% tankier, do 50% more damage, have natural cc's and spell like abilities - on top of your casting levels - and you're playing a support class? Sounds less like roleplaying and more like God Mode.

Though, if I was Gming and forced to take a pc with these stats, in the first village you approach, the peasantry would either flee in terror or gang up with pitchforks, not understanding that you just wanted to ask a few questions.


Here's my honest idea:

Scrap all those stats you have. Ask your DM to make you a lillend that he'd accept in his game, telling him about the aesthetic you want. Then you can level as a bard or a fighter or whatever.

But if you were to show me those stats with puppy dog eyes and your most winning smile, and you asked me if you could play this race as is, I'd smack you with a newspaper right hard.


No offense intended, but few things irk me about gming more than when someone shows up to game day, with their purple quadriped sufflumpigus outsider with +6 to all physical stats and dual wielding large katanas. There really are better ways to try new experiences as a player than to ge all extreme with your race picks. I mean, humans (and thusly, humanoids and half-humans, like 99%of the playable races) have a wide range of emotional and mental depth. The gm can challenge them and spin a story we care about. But who the heck above age 5 wants a katana wielding Barney with 4 arms to come to the party's rescue every 5 minutes, singlehandedly pwning all the mobs while singing about it? I mean, other than you, lol. Really dude? But hey, ask your GM, if he'll allow it, then enjoy! Give him at least one level of barbarian so you can get some foaming teeth.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

You are aware this is a snake-like being with angel wings. It looks nothing like Barney and thank you for the insults. Have a nice day.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

If you were running in one of my campaigns, sure. I've had ghaele eladrins, dragons, centaurs, pegataurs (back in 2nd ed when the Complete Humanoid Handbook was the bomb), intelligent magic items that possess their wielder and use him or her as a set of arms, etc, using Savage Species, a variety of 3rd party books like In the Company of Giants or even older rules. Is your PC going to be powerful? Yup. Should you play this in a standard point-buy game? Nope. It will cause a lot of jealousy and anger amongst standard groups, especially ones that don't have ultra optimal min/max super duper Pathfinder specialization web search fu as a default skill.

Here is the other question you want to ask. Why do you want to play a lillend beyond the OMG it looks cool factor? A nagaji bard with an alternate race trait that makes their legs into a snake torso (knocks land speed down to 20 feet) and gets wings of flying can do the same thing. You don't get the super high DR, but it covers most of the rest pretty easily. And realize that the lillend as it fits in Pathfinder also has the spellcasting and bardic performance of a 7th level bard + whatever other class abilities you took. Lastly realize the more monstrous of a character you play, the harder it is to deal with a human dominated society. In Golarion/Toril/Oerth, a city like Absalom/Waterdeep/Greyhawk probably isn't going to look twice a lillend with a bunch of adventurers, but wandering through the backwaters of Varisia/Cormyr/the Grand Duchy of Urnst is going to disturb a lot of people. Your character will have to deal with young scamps coming up and saying "Snaky angel, can you bless my friend's mommy so he gets a sister?" or city guards whipping out swords, not to mention every good aligned priest will assume you are sent to aid them from the powers on high. I make my players aware of this whenever they choose to play a really non-standard race, like the above.


stormcrow27 wrote:
Here is the other question you want to ask. Why do you want to play a lillend beyond the OMG it looks cool factor? A nagaji bard with an alternate race trait that makes their legs into a snake torso (knocks land speed down to 20 feet) and gets wings of flying can do the same thing. You don't get the super high DR, but it covers most of the rest pretty easily. And realize that the lillend as it fits in Pathfinder also has the spellcasting and bardic performance of a 7th level bard + whatever other class abilities you took. Lastly realize the more monstrous of a character you play, the harder it is to deal with a human dominated society. In Golarion/Toril/Oerth, a city like Absalom/Waterdeep/Greyhawk probably isn't going to look twice a lillend with a bunch of adventurers, but wandering through the backwaters of Varisia/Cormyr/the Grand Duchy of Urnst is going to disturb a lot of people. Your character will have to deal with young scamps coming up and saying "Snaky angel, can you bless my friend's mommy so he gets a sister?" or city guards whipping out swords, not to mention every good aligned priest will assume you are sent to aid them from the powers on high. I make my players aware of this whenever they choose to play a really non-standard race, like the above.

Quoting for truth.


Well never mind then if this is such an insane option I will play a human with Pathetic six times over.


hey man, like i said, no offense. Just being kind of facetious. I know you're not purple. But I am saying that nothing about the more moderate humanoid races is pathetic, just because they aren't large sized, flying, magical critters with +6-+10 bonuses on all stats. If you're insulted, well, I'm sorry. But the point I'm trying to make is that your gm WILL probably take one look at the stats and say "no." And if that's the case, then don't feel like the more "vanilla" options like Aasimars and humans are boring because they lack the big numbers - with a rounded personality and a half-decent build, they can be unique and competitive alike.


Like I said forget it it doesn't matter

Though I can only imagine the pants changing you must have if someone mentions Azlanti humans and their 27-29 RP point lay out with the totally terrifying +2 to all stats and a bonus feat.


Ha. No, no pants changing. I just put a RP limit on whatever campaign I gm, and anyone who's way under the limit (human, with his 9 RP, while the limit's say 15, or 20) can boost with some standard or advanced traits that make sense for their background. Example: Had a pc who was a desert ranger from Ossyria, also had an aasimar and a gnome. I let the human take a +2 to one stat just to balance the scales a bit, and desert runner. Let the gnome take an extra spell-like ability use and quick reactions (arcane slinger). Idea is for everyone to enjoy the game equally and not walk into it feeling like the guy next to them has some sort of super character.


Should you play this? From my point of view, both as a player and a GM, sure. Using the original Savage Species progression, which is a 13th level class. It's a monster who is also a bard of the same level, you can't treat it like it only counts as +1 level over all of its bard levels. The exception, of course, if is everyone else is playing a similar monster (Planetar Cleric, Nymph Druid, etc.).

Could you play this? Depends entirely on the GM. Not sure why you're asking us this unless you're soliciting opinions. In which case, no.


The problem with monster races is that they tend to be too good at one point, and then fade to "not good enough" since class HD are generally better than racial HD.

As for this particular monster most likely not. Maybe if I was already running a monster campaign where everyone got to be monsters.


The book says it gains Bard Music of half its level. I am not sure how that makes it a Bard of the Same Level +1


Pathfinder's Lillend casts and has the Bardic Performance of a 7th-level Bard.

Your best option is to condense the features of the Lillend that you care about into a race more comparable to the available ones via the Race Builder rules, then just level as a Bard. Be a baby Lillend or something.


Ok.. so whats the difference in playing it? You all say play it as a bard but if its already put as a bard why?
Also the Azata, Lillend has a +10 Con instead of the +4 the Savage Species guide goes off.

the Savage Species Lillend which is the source of this monster class has different rules, apparently much weaker.

Like I said forget it, it doesn't matter.

Also using the Race builder is a joke, the point values in comparison with actual race attributes hardly equals up half the time.
For example if I want an At-Will power of a 3rd level spell its 6 RP. If I want Fast Healing 1 its 6 RP... thats totally fair right?


The easiest option would probably to use the Lamia commoner stats from Kobold Press's Advanced Race series, which would give you the serpent lower body you want. If that is still not enough, I would work with the GM to homebrew some Aasimar variant of the latter race, maybe give it the Aasimar stats + magical abilities, but keep the Lamia abilities associated with the serpentine lower half (Speeds and the Snake Body racial trait).

Unless I was starting a campaign at Level 8 I would never allow a lillend PC. I assume that is what you are asking about, but if the other PCs are starting lower, than I don't see you getting to play this.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
avr wrote:

3.5's LA/Racial HD was too harsh on monster PC's. PF's CR = level, then add extra levels guideline is too easy.

I think your lillend as listed would fall into the category 'Some creatures are simply not suitable for play as PCs, due to their powers' if using the guideline provided.

That was intentional. WOTC never intended for Monster PC's to be come go to choices for PC races.. The Savage Species method was intended to keep them under control in a party whose members were mostly not monsters.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

That is true, they only really wanted you to play a human at least in early editions of the game where if you played other races you couldn't even level to 20. Which is also why all races are basically reskinned humans. Which after so many years gets boring.


LazarX wrote:
avr wrote:

3.5's LA/Racial HD was too harsh on monster PC's. PF's CR = level, then add extra levels guideline is too easy.

I think your lillend as listed would fall into the category 'Some creatures are simply not suitable for play as PCs, due to their powers' if using the guideline provided.

That was intentional. WOTC never intended for Monster PC's to be come go to choices for PC races.. The Savage Species method was intended to keep them under control in a party whose members were mostly not monsters.

I know. Nerfing monster PCs so that they would be unattractive to play is, IMO, a poor way of including the option in a game. Hence I describe 3.x's version as 'too harsh'.


Dastardly Cupid wrote:

Ok.. so whats the difference in playing it? You all say play it as a bard but if its already put as a bard why?

Also the Azata, Lillend has a +10 Con instead of the +4 the Savage Species guide goes off.

the Savage Species Lillend which is the source of this monster class has different rules, apparently much weaker.

Like I said forget it, it doesn't matter.

Also using the Race builder is a joke, the point values in comparison with actual race attributes hardly equals up half the time.
For example if I want an At-Will power of a 3rd level spell its 6 RP. If I want Fast Healing 1 its 6 RP... thats totally fair right?

The difference is that what we're advising is to take the Lillend, strip away most of its powers, and tone it down to serve as a race in whatever RP range your GM is comfortable with. Since that will, pretty much by definition, include removing the Bard powers in favor of it being playable from level one, you'd then level it going forward as, well, a Bard.

Here's the part that I think needs to be gotten through: Lillends are really, really good.

Some monsters are easy to turn into playable races. Orcs? Obviously simple. Minotaurs? Yeah, we can work with that and figure something out. But Lillends are different:

The version we're actually looking at is a CR 7, 7th level Bard. You seem to be crossing the streams back and forth between the two (I've seen you reference abilities that differ between the two using both 3.5 and PF mechanics), but we can't really do that. So we're going to look at the one we know, which is the PF one. I don't own Savage Species, personally, and really don't feel like going out and finding it. The same is true of the majority of the thread. So when you seem torn between them... well, we can only comment on one.

So it's a CR 7, 7th level Bard. Let's say your game starts at level 8, you've been okayed to play it by Pathfinder rules. You take your first level... of Bard 1.

Meanwhile, Timmy also wanted to play a Bard. He played as a Human, so he's a Bard 8.

Who's objectively more powerful, the 8th level Bard with Flight, better BAB, natural weapons, Large size, senses, some immunities, and Truespeech, or... the 8th level Bard with an extra feat and some nicer skills?

Those Bard levels are the problem. So, if you're serious about wanting to play the Lillend, you need to talk to your GM about a way to solve that problem. Perhaps the game starts at level 8 and you happen to be playing a mute Lillend who doesn't have Bard-fu. Perhaps the Lillend counts as ten class levels instead of seven. Perhaps you just neuter the Lillend's stats and abilities. You have options. But you have to do something.

As for the Race Builder... if you'd rather try to build a Human-equivalent Lillend without it, go for it. Most people seem to prefer having a framework that they can utilize, even if they have to patch over the obvious weak points, rather than work from scratch. If you're different, by all means do what makes you comfortable.


If players are truly interested in playing something "different" it shouldn't be a better option than the people who want to play core races. If you're truly interested in flavor than I don't see it as problem to end up being weaker.

Balance is hard, and I don't think anyone wants to seriously make monster races categorically superior.


Although I will say PF did boost the power of most races up a bit by allowing things like the Aasimar which were LA 1 or so before as regular classes.

I have a friend who argues Goliath should be included in that.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Claxon wrote:

If players are truly interested in playing something "different" it shouldn't be a better option than the people who want to play core races. If you're truly interested in flavor than I don't see it as problem to end up being weaker.

Balance is hard, and I don't think anyone wants to seriously make monster races categorically superior.

You and I very well know that there are quite a few players that are looking for that leg up with monster power. That's why we have all those "Drow Noble" threads.


LazarX wrote:
Claxon wrote:

If players are truly interested in playing something "different" it shouldn't be a better option than the people who want to play core races. If you're truly interested in flavor than I don't see it as problem to end up being weaker.

Balance is hard, and I don't think anyone wants to seriously make monster races categorically superior.

You and I very well know that there are quite a few players that are looking for that leg up with monster power. That's why we have all those "Drow Noble" threads.

I'm aware that several players individually want that.

So let me edit my previous statement, no developers or people who are interested a balanced game over character power. Pretty much only people who want to "win" over all the people they play with want monstrous characters to be better.


If you don't like the answers you're getting on this forum, do note that you asked if you COULD or SHOULD do this. We're just giving our honest opinions.

(By the way, yes: at-will third level spells and Fast Healing 1 costing a lot of RP IS totally fair. Those are really, really powerful abilities.)

Also, the accusation that all playable races are basically the same and are all "lame" or somesuch because of that is silly. I've designed plenty of races and I'd be happy to post a few to make a point later if necessary. I don't always abide to the rules within the Race Builder if I think I can make something a bit more interesting by stretching it a bit. I've also designed alternate racial traits for use in my homebrew games for different core races (including an alternate racial trait for dwarves that lets them throw a thrown weapon as part of a charge and THEN draw their normal weapon and finish the charge with that, all while maintaining the +2 bonus for both attacks... and it makes dwarves that much more enjoyable, I think).

Here's a rough mash-up for a Lillend you may consider using. Note: I'm listing RP costs as I go. I considered giving this Lillend the usual Lillend plane associations, but I'll let you fill those in if you wish.

(Those plane associations are: azata, chaotic, extraplanar, good.)

One more thing: by NOT having at-will abilities and instead having 1/day abilities you can get away with a lot more. I'm also tacking on a high CHA requirement to use those abilities, so you'll need a solid CHA score or you won't get them. This reduces the RP cost.

* * * * * * * * * *

Lillend (19 RP):

Type (3 RP): Outsider (native)
Size (0 RP): Medium (I considered Large, but that would cost you 7 RP)
Base Speed (0 RP): 30 feet
Flight (8 RP): Lillends have a fly speed of 50 feet with average maneuverability.
Flexible (2 RP): Lillends get a +2 bonus to any two ability scores of their choice.
Survivalist (2 RP): Lillends get a +2 bonus to their Survival checks.
Divine Lyricist (4 RP): Prerequisites: Lillends gain a +1 bonus to the saving throw DCs of spells of the enchantment school that they cast. In addition, members of this race with a Charisma score of 15 or higher may use the following spells once per day as spell-like abilities (caster level is equal to the user's character level): Charm Monster, Suggestion, Cure Light Wounds, and Sleep. The DC is charisma based. (This ability I'm iffy about, but a similar ability called Dreamspeaker (which allows the user to cast a 5th level spell, Dream, once per day) costs 2 RP. This, however, gives the user some spell-like abilities that are usable IN combat, so it needs to be worth more.)
Snake Body (0 RP): Due to their snake-like body, Lillends are unable to wear footwear of any sort. It is also slightly more expensive to make armor for them due to their unusual body shape (1.25x the normal cost). However, they also gain a tail slap natural attack dealing 1d6+STR damage.

Lillends begin play speaking Celestial and Common. Lillends with a high intelligence may choose any bonus languages they want barring secret languages. (1 RP)

* * * * * * * * * *

With this setup you have above average stats, a handful of useful spells (assuming you have decent charisma), a solid flight speed and a small skill bonus to something that Lillends have by nature. This is 19 RP race as is. I feel that I may have done a shoddy job with Divine Lyricist (as said, I based it off Dreamspeaker and increased the RP cost due to the use of more useful spells available to you, and multiple spells at that), but I based it off of Lillend spell-like abilities as best I could; it could be worth more RP than I rated it. 5 RP might be fairer. Either way, this gives you a race that's more powerful than an Aasimar but not necessarily overwhelmingly better than the other races you'll encounter.

This setup makes you useful in low level encounters thanks to flight, two useful combat spell-like abilities (sleep and cure light wounds), gives you a nice boost to a useful skill (Survival), AND lets you pick what two stats to focus on. Assuming you have the 15 CHA to use those spell-like abilities, you can also make social encounters easier with Charm Monster. Suggestion is useful for a variety of situations and should not be underestimated.

Were I to allow this race in a campaign, I'd make sure the other players had something to compensate for the power difference - perhaps increased starting wealth or some sort of divine boon that grants them a unique power. It would have to be a campaign involving a struggle of good vs. evil, I think, because a Lillend is so closely associated with the forces of good.

You also may want to find a way to cast Alter Self if you use something like this. It lets you stay hidden more easily.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Dastardly Cupid wrote:

Although I will say PF did boost the power of most races up a bit by allowing things like the Aasimar which were LA 1 or so before as regular classes.

I have a friend who argues Goliath should be included in that.

Than he can include it on his own. Unlike the other two races, Goliath is closed content.


@Inlaa, that actually seems decently balanced. I would most likely say that to balance it with other players, that the race would be 1 level behind, which would be rough at low levels but would be fine by level 5.

If you reduced divine lyricist ability to be less strong I'd probably just get rid of it altogether (get rid of the level adjustment). I'd also probably change it to just a +2 to one stat instead of to two.


Yeah, the easiest way to reduce the Divine Lyricist ability and still keep it fitting would be to strip away all the spell-like abilities except Suggestion. That'd lower the RP cost significantly, probably back down to 2, giving you a 17 RP race, or 15 RP if you only had a single +2 to a single ability score. 15 RP would definitely be usable in a standard game; the DM would just need to make sure some archers were around to snake the snakebirdwoman out of the sky.


I do have to ask why reduce it to only one +2 over the flexible ability?


The Dread Prince wrote:
I do have to ask why reduce it to only one +2 over the flexible ability?

I wouldn't unless I wanted to bring the race in line with less powerful races. If this Lillend is going to fly around with a human and a halfling, for instance, bringing her down to 15 RP makes her stand out a bit less in terms of power.

Otherwise, I think the 19 RP setup I made works just fine.


I agree according to the arg 20 and under has no level adjustment. So 19 would make it superior but just high end of thst . Like Kasatha is 20 and have no level. Though I would have tried specing it more like the arg centaur giving it high points to knock it a level back.


Making her worth over 20 points would be really easy. Slap on the Advanced Charisma racial trait; now she has a +2 to Charisma and two +2's that can go on any stat - including Charisma. So, yes, you could start with +4 CHA.

Makes her 23 RP and also puts her a level behind other characters.


Hmm isn't there a bard simple template?

1 to 50 of 54 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Advice / Should I / Could I play this race. All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.