Winter Tide is my favorite of the new subgenre being critical/loving of Lovecraft while calling out his racist and sexist BS. It weaves several short stories together with historical events, but mostly deals with one woman, her found family, and her attempts at reconnecting with her lost heritage. The main character was a little girl when the government destroyed Innesmouth and put everyone in camps. The adults all died when the change came upon them. She and her brother are the last. There are parallels to Black Wall Street and to Japanese Internment. It's really good and I'm doing a bad job explaining.
Prequel novella "litany of stone" should be up on the tor website. Google is your friend.
Anyway, I'm mostly a lurker, but Tor is giving away free ebooks of the book itself(as opposed to prequel novella)until Friday ends so I'm spreading word. You have to sign up to their newsletter. Hard copies are expensive, I'm guessing this is to drive up amount of readers to get a chance at an award. It's good enough to win, though I don't know if enough people will read it.
https://www.tor.com/2017/10/17/tor-com-publishing-winter-tide-ebook-downloa d/?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=twitterpost&utm_term=tordotcomtwfo ls-tordotcomalltweets&utm_content=na-visit-blogpost&utm_campaign=to rdotcomalltweets
The only reasons not to go #4 is if you don't think you can get it balanced right, or if it will piss if your other players that she is getting something outside of the rules/extra attention.
I'd also consider just retraining/rebuilding as Druid, or retraining/building all but one level(so proficiencies, equipment and backstory don't need retconning)
Fire gnome Theologian Fire domain cleric. He was convinced he was special/chosen super smug, naive and condescending. Often the straight man. In combat he was a little tank. Heavily armored, tons of HP and great firepower, plus he healed people. Eventually flaming undead minions. He was super slow, effective against most things way above his CR yet pits with water at the bottom killed him twice. Eventually rode around on a flaming floating giant Wyvern skull. He was set up to be the villain in another hypothetical campaign or killed by the party. He was convinced that if people really *understood* they'd be okay with making the material fall into the plane of fire, where the faithful(hopefully everyone) would become elementals and the unfaithful would burn forever. People just didn't *get* it.
He was good in combat, memorable and fun to RP.
I've got a dwarf inquisitor NPC who has that infiltrator variant that lets him change how his alignment seems. He worships Pazuzu but pretends to worship Desna. I'd like him to have a few ways of calling upon his patron while seeming to call on Desna. Can you help me think of some cool titles to use?
Make a some tiny plauge zombies, keep them in an extradimensionsl space when not in use. Use spells /channels to control the zombies they create. Won't be most effective, but can get around onyx restrictions. But yeah bloody skeletons, burning bloody if GM oks it( seems grey area of rules). Also if Gm ok's it, the heads of big critters make great flying mounts if gm okays creating "beheaded" .
Yeah, "sorcerer kings" as a descriptor predate D&D I think, and I'm pretty sure the first ones to show up in D&D predate sorcerer as a class. The Dark Sun sorcerer-kings were epic level Wizard/Psychic Multiclasses. That said, sorcerers have a high charisma so they'd probably do pretty well as a king, fluffwise at least. They'd probably need more skill points.
If the goal is to make charisma less likely to be dumped by adding benefits, how about letting players pick extra class skills equal to their charisma bonus? It can represent their force of personality by following through interest in areas that are considered "not for them", plus people with strange talents and interests are usually more charismatic/memorable than average people.
Arturius Fischer wrote:
I did not call it bullying. I still stand that the use of a slate when everyone is supposed to voting their personal choices is gaming the system (by focusing votes which would otherwise be more spread out) and therefore dishonorable. If you do not see it that way... I am not sure I can bridge the gap.
Arturius Fischer wrote:
To the best of my knowlege it is. It is the first visible one. An invisible slate would be useless since its power comes from focusing voters. People have published who they think is worth considering and hosted pages for people to post what they think in comments. This is multiple people pointing to the same list, and a tone shift from "this is who I like" to "vote the party line to take back the award". One could make the argument that it is the same kind of thing that has happened before just upped in organization and intensity, I disagree with that, but even in that case they have escalated things.
Arturius Fischer wrote:
I must have been unclear. In my view they did not do that, just that I would have been fine(well a bit salty but not actually upset) if they did. If they had joined and voted for who they thought best it would have been different. Instead they joined and voted on a slate to game the system, it was not majority rules, it was coordinated voting defeats people following the letter and spirit of the rules.
Arturius Fischer wrote:
It is better to have none. For 62 years the Hugos managed it. I think you are wrong about a there being a party before Sad Puppies. Next year there may be two parties and then the award will not go to the book the voters like most, but instead to the pick of the winning party.
Sorry I lurk, but don't really have much experience posting or writing posts. Answering more to the idea behind the thread:
Honestly I think that in the long run this will only make the Hugos better. While I fully believe that there are some disingenuous trolls, I think that most of them are just fans who think their voices are not being heard.
If they lose despite three years of trying to game the system it proves them the minority. Worldcon profits from the money they paid to vote.
If they win this year, then the trolls out to prove their superiority and power will lose steam having "proved" their point and will have trouble orchestrating such a large bloc again. The honest people who want their voices heard will hopefully remain and "fun" will weigh a bit more, "literary" will weigh a bit less and the Hugos will reflect the fandom that much better. I think too many believe themselves to be the good guys for them to keep gaming the system after winning a victory. I think many would start voting for what they personally think should win rather than blindly following a slate. If this changes the direction of the Hugos then it is a direction the Hugos should be going in. There will always be the Nebulas and Tiptree.
Worst case is next year there are competing slates, basically creating political parties. I think the professional world (minus lunatic fringes) is too big and interconnected for that to happen.
The use of a slate, while not against the rules, is gaming the system and many view it as dishonorable. "Sad Puppies" did not start the trend of people publishing lists of who they think should be voted for, but it is the first instance of multiple influential people pushing the same list. Voting together on a slate when everyone is supposed to vote their own personal choices gives the slate disproportionate strength. These people think they are taking back the fandom, but they see no problem with gaming the system for every advantage rather than just voting for who they think should be on the ballot and letting their "superior numbers" win the day for them.
One of the things on their slate I also voted for, and several of them, IMO, are not undeserving. There are also some people I view as despicable in the running now as well as some things I enjoyed but do not think are good enough to be on the list. I just hope everyone reads everything nominated and votes for what they honestly think is best rather than voting as a bloc to troll/"take back" the fandom.
I'm not super familiar with what being "feral" means, but a technical issue I see is that your eidolon knows the languages you know. Thus if you don't know any languages, your eidolon wont. Thus your eidolon can't be the "character".
Are you sure?
"An eidolon has the same alignment as the summoner that calls it and can speak all of his languages."
is what I think you are referring to. To me it does not seem to say that an eidolon could not learn more languages by putting a skill point in linguistics. Is there more that I am missing?
I have an character idea half though experiment half waiting in the wings in case of death for a local non-PFS game, but the build will be losing many class features, and I would like ideas on how to make up for the lack, using only paizo material.
Starting stats I'm thinking
Feral alternate racial trait so he won't know any languages. He will miss out on spells and the summon spell like abilities, but be pretty good in combat. Basically I want the summoner so be more like a companion and the eidolon to be more like a character (eidolon will be able to talk, I'll give it linguistics if I need to)
Depending on the which game has character death first he'll be level five or seven. How do I optimize him and what feats/items/evolutions should I look into?