CaptainRelyk's page

The real question is why isn’t it finesse? Especially when it’s depicted as a weapon people swing about quickly. Like you see characters like Samurai Jack swing like crazy while being mobile and agile. Idk about you all, but samurai jack and other katana wielding types come scores as dexterity based fighters or monks even

I know these shiny new Remaster dragons are likely to get the focus for such a thing, but it'd be killer to get options for the other non-OGL dragons down the line; between the Imperials in Tian Xia, and how cool a bunch of the others are (the formerly-Primal dragons, the Outer dragons), there's lots of ground to cover.

The chance to be a Half-Void Dragon/Android would be so perfectly indulgent.

EDIT: Man, I'm sad PF2 doesn't have Outer dragons yet. It's increasingly looking like we need a whole Wyrmkin supplement...

A half void drvaon android seems cool but does it make sense? Can androids reproduce?

CaptainRelyk wrote:

But some people are just gonna wanna play a half dragon that looks like a human with horns and maybe a couple scales, like Au’ra from final fantasy

*raises hand* Me, That's me! For myself, I prefer the more human-like ancestries as I relate to them easier. It's why I'll most likely never play a Conrasu but happily play a catfolk, especially as pathfinder allows them to "vary widely in how feline they appear. Some display few catlike features: just feline ears, a tail, claws, and a little fur or other features. Others are so catlike that they’re hard to distinguish from true panthers when not standing upright or wielding weapons." [Pathfinder #152: Legacy of the Lost God pg. 56]

So, it doesn't have to be an either-or situation, but could allow for a spectrum of appearances.

Yep!

*insert handshake meme with “Graystone’s human like half dragon” on the left and “CaptainRelyk’s Dragon like half dragon” on the right, with the middle saying “half dragon versatile heritage”*

CaptainRelyk wrote:

Not a fan of the head shape specifically the jaw and snout, but otherwise the design is super cool!!! I love that it’s lithe and skinny and not bulky like other dragons, which fits well

Unfortunately this post doesn’t have information on mirage dragon behaviors.

How do they act? Are they good and friendly like metallic dragons or are they evil like diabolical dragons?

How would a GM role play as one? Why would they be an npc that sponsors a party or sends them on a quest if they are good or why would they be a threat that needs to be dealt with if they are evil like diabolic dragons?

I think saving some of that info for the actual book is a good idea. But It could be some of these new dragons morality/behavior are not as tied to the group, and more based on the individual.

But we do have some qualities we can pick up on. They like to look at their reflections could be mean they are vain, and place a strong emphasis on visual appearance.

I still think they should give us some information on the dragon

I want to know if I can befriend it or if I have to fight it

Not a fan of the head shape specifically the jaw and snout, but otherwise the design is super cool!!! I love that it’s lithe and skinny and not bulky like other dragons, which fits well

Unfortunately this post doesn’t have information on mirage dragon behaviors.

How do they act? Are they good and friendly like metallic dragons or are they evil like diabolical dragons?

How would a GM role play as one? Why would they be an npc that sponsors a party or sends them on a quest if they are good or why would they be a threat that needs to be dealt with if they are evil like diabolic dragons?

keftiu wrote:

AestheticDialectic wrote:

WatersLethe wrote:

Did you see anything that makes you think half-dragon heritage is on its way?

Personally, I'd like Wyvaran to be the "looks very dragonlike humanoid ancestry" and Half-Dragon should be "adding varying amounts of dragon flavor to a base ancestry".

I'm noticing a pattern with Relyk, they REALLY like dragons. A lot

Having a special interest isn’t a crime (if it is, my 6k posts here will get me taken away), but I do wish OP luck in stressing about theirs a little less. All these books are like a year away.

It was not a criticism or a slight. I find it a bit endearing actually

I built my wife a dragon mtg deck for commander after all

I’m obsessed with dragons, but that’s something I love about myself

I’m glad you find it endearing.

There are some people who think “obsessing” or really liking a particular thing is a problem or other issues and are judgmental, which is wrong to think. There are people who have given me issue over it, such as some demanding I play something other than half dragon or Dragonborn in D&D servers, as if what I am playing effects them when it doesn’t. It’s what brings me joy and makes me happy you know? I don’t like My Little Pony at all but a lot of people are obsessed with it and call themselves “bronies” which is perfectly fine and I’m glad they found joy in that, even if it isn’t my thing

I’m fine with people teasing me over it though, people in my IRL D&D tease me and joke about my dragon obsession but that’s all in good fun.

Fun fact: my dragon obsession began with Wings of Fire by tui Sutherland. #Qinter

But yeah, I didn’t think you meant it as a criticism or a slight, even if it got perceived that way due to the way it was written

I think it sucks you are forced to take a feat to know about your own kind

Can’t a dm rule my ELF knows stuff about ELVES without the need of a lore feat?

I've written a lizardfolk society that largely worships Kazutal (her whole thing fits so well with what I wanted). And the lizardfolk view her as, well, as a lizardfolk rather than a human. I've always been more of the type of person to, unless the deity is one of those mortals-become-deity like Cayden, have their forms be mutable and shift depending on who is viewing them either because the deity actively chooses the form or it's simply how the people are able to comprehend them.

Note that like how the earlier mention of how Desna has a different form in Starfinder (as well as different art in Mwangi!), Kazutal also has a whole different name to the Matanji Orcs.

Another example, Arshea has the following text:
"Their form is seen as ideal by any species that look upon them."

And is something I often use as an example that their forms are definitely not fixed.

Ayrzul also has multiple people claiming he has different appearances.

Huh, so like a dragon follower would see Arshea as a dragon?

As someone who is obsessed with dragons… I would love more dragon gods and the introduction of new dragons is the perfect time to introduce more dragon gods

So far we only have Apsu and Uvuko (is Uvuko a dragon? There’s criminally low lore on him and that’s a shame) that are good aligned and thus PFS legal and allowed at most tables. All the other dragon gods are evil-aligned like Dahuk, though I don’t know much outside of Dahuk and Ragadahn, and a lot of tables ban evil characters and evil characters aren’t allowed in PFS

Perhaps good and evil (or holy and unholy) dragons that cover the other bases?

Like a healing and life based or beauty based dragon god or a musical dragon god, or a magic based one, or a dragon god of undeath?

A First World book a la book of the Dead is the top of my list for something like that, in part because we already have a diagetic name for it- "Masters of the First" (also I adore the Fae.)

Would love playable faerie dragons

If draxie can be playable so can faerie dragons

The ship has long ago sailed on these, since they came up in playtest, but.

Bring back a general feat at 1st level.

Give us ways to have scaling proficiency not tied to class and archetype.

Lay off on tagging any vaguely interesting character options as Uncommon. (Seriously, is the purpose of the rarity system to enforce power levels, or euro-centrism? It seems even the writers can't decide)

I hate that uncommon tags led to lizardfolk, tielfings and hobgoblins be others to being locked behind ACP in PFS

Not everyone wants to play Tolkien races

As someone who has character ideas for a tiefling (human) warpriest, lizardfolk investigator and other ideas, it sucks that the only PBPs online are PFS and I’m constantly told that I need to play PFS in order to “earn” the right to play a non PFS game… maybe I would be willing to play PFS if those uncommon tags that were slapped onto lizardfolk and tieflings weren’t there

I'd like to ask Paizo to remove the Anathema restrictions from Barbarians. I find it ridiculous that a class named "Barbarian" would have a code of conduct. Barbarians are supposed to represent pure violent, destructive chaos. Codes of conduct are just wrong on that class.

Eh… barbarians aren’t all destructive chaos. Violent sure, but a barbarian Chieftain who rules a clan and maintains a code of honor can still rage and tear enemies up on the battlefield. Lawful barbarians can exist and should be allowed to exist

That being said… yeah a lot of the anathemas on barbarian are stupid and unnecessary

Hilary Moon Murphy wrote:

To be honest, I would have loved it if Battlezoo's options had been published under Paizo, but they were not. What I would love more than anything is a Paizo half-dragon versatile heritage.

It's almost certainly too much to hope for, but PC2 is going to have a brand new versatile heritage, and it's the same book where the other dragon-focused material is showing up...

If half dragons are coming, I hope it can be versatile in appearance

I already know some people are going to go for the “human with horns” like D&D3e’s half dragons, but me and others are gonna want a very draconic look, with a head like a dragon and a tail and full scales and everything, like half dragons in D&D5e or Belmazog. https://2e.aonprd.com/Monsters.aspx?ID=1546 https://www.worldanvil.com/uploads/images/7e10fc404270ff23ab418867bebbee23. jpg

Belmazog is a half black dragon, and she has a very strong draconic appearence, and that draconic appearance is what I would like

But some people are just gonna wanna play a half dragon that looks like a human with horns and maybe a couple scales, like Au’ra from final fantasy

If half dragons are coming, they should have versatile appeared like Nagaji. Nagaji could look like a human with a couple scales or maybe just serpent eyes, or they could look very snake like with snake head tail and everything

Maybe if we could have a customizable background when we choose any lore, a skill, and any two stat boosts, and then a generic feat?

I always felt “antipaladin” was a bit lazy. Hey let’s create a class that is the opposite of paladin… oh yeah let’s slap “anti” on it and call it a day

I like ravager, I haven’t even heard of the term Reaver until today tbh

Though maybe naming it Reaver will introduce more people to the term

Errenor wrote:

ReyalsKanras wrote:

Errenor wrote:

A grin can be Cackle.

Cackle has the Verbal trait. Grinning might be the only suggestion that does not work. But wait, it does not have the Auditory trait. This is getting weird. Is grinning sufficiently verbal? Thus far the only strict requirement seems to be that the Witch is able to speak and it is difficult to conceal as a spell. Nothing about the affected creature being able to hear or understand.

I did get a bit too excited and haven't re-read the spell. But the main point still stands: you already can reflavour it in any way you like if you aren't breaking mechanics. And if you and your GM can abstract yourselves even further, you can even use flavour which seemingly contradicts mechanics, while still playing by the actual rules.

And anyway: if you add a short verbal spell to your grin, it would be even RAW and obviously applicable.

I think you might be confused about the meaning of the word. A grin is just a smile; a facial expression. There is no sound associated with it.

Yeah I don’t think a grin does or should count. We should be allowed to make any audible sound with our mouths but a grin ain’t audible

I am wanting to make this character but I have some questions

1: she is a Human (tiefling) wyrmkin domain warpriest of Apsu, what sourcebooks do I need to own?

2: does the ancestry feat “arcane tattoos” require ACP or anything else or is it free to use?

3: anything in general i should know?

I hope we can get a lovable social dragon like the brass dragons or a goofy prankster one like copper dragons (which is what mirage is going to be)

I also hope we get new dragon gods alongside these new dragons, both good and evil

Thank you,

I know I’ve been difficult, but despite my difficulty a lot of you responded in kindness and helped me realize what a major problem in my life was.

I’ve had a couple sour experiences, but overall this community is amazing and I feel really welcome.

You all are so kind, and understanding.

Not one but numerous people reached out and offered their PMs as a place for me to vent to, people have expressed concerned and throughout my difficulties people have still responded in kindness and understanding

So again, thank you

I’ve only been in this community for a couple months but I can already tell this will be one of the new online communities I have ever had the pleasure of being in

To end on a lighthearted note, I have an ancient secret about pathfinder dragons that I have found in the ruins of the TaalkTwoMuuch Temple that I want to share with you all!

I confess I don't think the issue of "can my witch chant instead of cackle" has come up at my lodge, but I believe the similar question of "can my 2e bard give a speech instead of sing?" Has and if I'm not mistaken the answer was no.

It probably hasn’t come up since currently cackle is optional and not a base class feature, meaning people whose witch characters wouldn’t make sense to cackle can just not take it

And if a bard can’t give a speech instead of singing, then your lodge is probably gonna rule a witch has to actually w oh laugh and can’t make any other verbal sound

All the more reason to either keep it as optional or if it must be part of the base class, change it to be “Witch’s Tone” or any other flavor friendly term

Before I say anything else, I am shocked at how many of you tolerate such terrible inflexible GMing. Go find an actually good GM or start a group among your friends. You don't need to deal with terrible PuGs and power-tripping online GMs.

Secondly, I don't think Cackle is the right choice to build the Witch around. I'd much rather see patrons and their teachings take a more central role and things like cackling, familiars, and even hexes become active choices you make when figuring out what powers your patron has granted you.

Unfortunately for a lot of us, finding a different GM or even playing PF2e in person and not online isn’t an option. (Btw what does PuGs mean?). Not to mention PFS by its very nature is very inflexible and wouldn’t let someone use cackle without having their character actually cackle.

Unfortunately these GMs are the best we can settle on, so having rules be more flexible with flavor so GMs or maybe even other players can’t use it as a weapon against our character’s flavor through rules lawyering, is for the best

In an ideal world, people would be more flexible and the goal would be to make sure everyone has fun and that we can reflavor to our heart’s content, where rule 1 was indeed the make important rule to all GMs and players, where there wouldn’t be any rules lawyers jumping in and telling us that our witch has to actually cackle and can’t sing a haunting hymn or angelic singing because any other sound than “cackle” isn’t “RAW”, or them jumping in and saying our tiefling can only be red colored and can’t be purple or green, etc. In an ideal world, we can just lead a table and easily find a new table with a different GM but a lot of us can’t because this isn’t an ideal world. I have yet to find a pbp text campaign or a westmarch server that allows battlezoo despite me really wanting to use those books for my characters

I doubt it was Paizo’s intention to limit characters flavor but seeing that it’s caused issues Paizo should try to make things more flavor friendly in these new remasters, though really the feedback in the original playtest about how people didn’t want cackle as a class feature solely for its flavor and how cackling didn’t fit all witches and not for any other reason should have been telling and should have resulted in them making it more flavor friendly instead of putting the mechanics into a focus spell

A hot take from me. I wish fighters and monks had sub-class level choices consistent with other classes. I'm betting this won't happen and am already on my fifth draft of my own solution. But if wishes were fishes...

I agree. Dnd has stuff like Psi Warrior or Rune Knight for fighter, or a plague doctor themed monk that heals people with punches or a dragon themed monk or even riffing off DBZ with sun soul monk

Especially fighter, I feel it’s a bit boring without any subclass things

Cleric: As a dream scenario, I would love for Warpriest to be a bounded spellcasting class like Magus.

Druid: Full scaling to 9/10th level of all Wild Shape spells like Animal Form. And allowing them to not require the size increase.

Wizard: Fix Eschew Materials. It at the very least needs to give the full material->somatic replacement that other classes get for free. And if it is going to continue being a feat, it should give some other benefit as well since those other classes mentioned get the replacement ability as a class feature.

I think that would be a good solution for warpriest, just make it it’s own class!

It still shouldn’t be limited to laughing, what if I want a haunting hymn or hum, or angelic singing, or whispering?

And besides, we all know by cackle Paizo meant the old hag kind of cackle

I personally like Cackle and was sad when it was removed during the playtest and the class suffered for it. I like the flavor of the witch invoking the power of their patron causing uncontrollable laughter, and the laughter itself can easily be flavored depending on the patron. Is it painful coughing laughter like when you laughed too long, is it joyous happy laughter like Santa, or maniacal insane laughter or child like giggles?

Maybe no laughter fits a witch? I can’t think of a single type of laugh that’s fits a fervor witch who made a pact with Apsu

I know I sound like a broke record saying this

But I’m worried they are going to make cackle a base class feature for witch and not optional due to people saying it’s vital or important

It’s too restrictive to flavor, not all witches are the black robe and hat, brewing a green brew, cackling with warts type

Wait what is wrong with cackling? There is literally no issue with just having a quick chuckle.

Also chant is on no way any better when the issue a person may have is "well I don't want to do that". Which is something solved at the game table, not at Paizo.

Now if we are talking about changing the mechanic so that its a focus cantrip instead of a focus spell. Yeah, 100% do thar.

The issue with cackling is it doesn’t fit all witches

CaptainRelyk wrote:

Wait, does Paizo own the license to smurfs or something?

Don't ask questions you don't want the answers to. :)

Smurfbold, a Smurf version of your usual pfp!

Is that a coincidence or did it choose that specifically because of your pfp?

WHA?!!?!