Inarea's page

Inarea wrote:

What feats do cavern elves have access to that will recreate a pf1e drow noble character? Isn't it just dark vision.

What is not available in the current set of "elf feats" (of which there are like 40) that you would need?

No heritage is going to carry significantly more benefits than another heritage, for obvious balance reasons.

I haven't played pf1e since pf2e came out so my recollection of the archtype isn't the sharpest, but being able to hover straight up made for a fun cat burglar rogue, and the extra magic was nice.

Also just had a thought, if wotc doesn't sue Dota for the Drow Rogue character would that be abandoning their copyright?

Inarea wrote:

Wotc doesn't own noble dark elves anymore than they own noble elves. Or Blizzard nightborne might be in trouble next.

I see the confusion though and yes, I agree cavern elves would cover the core idea of elves that live underground.

WotC owns the particular expression of dark elves as evil underground spider-adjacent matriarchal society torture-happy ever-scheming things called drow in the context of fantasy role playing games and the closer you get to that, the bigger your legal risks.

Didn't Paizo drop the spider thing a long while back?

There seems to be some confusion. I always knew Paizo would rework Drow further in their pf2e release. Probably most Drow fans understood that. Constantly saying "well Wotc owns spider matriarch drows" isn't addressing what anyone is saying here. It's kinda feeling like a straw man as I don't think anyone here has asked for a 1 for 1 wotc Drow/new non copyrighted dark elf.

Wotc doesn't own noble dark elves anymore than they own noble elves. Or Blizzard nightborne might be in trouble next.

I see the confusion though and yes, I agree cavern elves would cover the core idea of elves that live underground.

Inarea wrote:

Pronate11 wrote:

Jacob Jett wrote:

The Raven Black wrote:

Paizo's original top management (and owners) identified early on that supporting concurrent settings that were cannibalizing each other was one of the pitfalls they had to absolutely avoid.

I do not think they will change this stance.

Weird. It's not a bug in D&D and they don't cannibalize each other a bit (and never did)...

Have you seen what's happened with all the latest DND setting releases? Do you really want Paizo to release their own 5e Spelljammer? Or Strikshaven? Or literally any of their other setting books?

I've been hoping for a pf2e spelljammer equivalent so much. That would be awesome and a lot better of a product I'm sure.

I would recommend Starfinder. It already fits the Pathfinder in space feel.

Not the same itch. I want over the top magical spaceships in my fantasy, not magic in my sci-fi.

Jacob Jett wrote:

The Raven Black wrote:

Paizo's original top management (and owners) identified early on that supporting concurrent settings that were cannibalizing each other was one of the pitfalls they had to absolutely avoid.

I do not think they will change this stance.

Weird. It's not a bug in D&D and they don't cannibalize each other a bit (and never did)...

Have you seen what's happened with all the latest DND setting releases? Do you really want Paizo to release their own 5e Spelljammer? Or Strikshaven? Or literally any of their other setting books?

I've been hoping for a pf2e spelljammer equivalent so much. That would be awesome and a lot better of a product I'm sure.

Inarea wrote:

The Raven Black wrote:

Inarea wrote:

The Norse own the copyright to "dark skinned elves that live underground", not wotc.

And these are not drows, nor recognizable as such by those who love the TTRPGs drows (ie DnD's drows and their variants).

So, it would never be enough to satisfy those who berate Paizo for not keeping the drows.

Except it would. If there was rules supporting it people can make their own lore or use someone elses. As it is now we are left mechanicless.

Paizo's cavern elves seem able to fit that bill. And now they will finally receive specific lore in the setting.

What feats do cavern elves have access to that will recreate a pf1e drow noble character? Isn't it just dark vision.

Inarea wrote:

Will be interesting long term how devesting DnD analogies will impact the recent converts from wotc latest "screwups". A big selling point was "it's DnD but better rules and company".

Sure, I'll remind you of this post in five years or so, I hope you'll be around to respond.

Probably not. This is probably the one decision that could have got me to switch systems. Been beating the drum to get my friends to join me in pf2e, dutifully buying all the hard bound products since the core came out, even if they didn't interest me, because I was "supporting the product" waiting for the day it would be the underdark's time.

If I'm not egging my friend group on to Pf2e we'll probably be back to 5e or maaaybe pf1e.

Will be interesting long term how devesting DnD analogies will impact the recent converts from wotc latest "screwups". A big selling point was "it's DnD but better rules and company".

Inarea wrote:

The Norse own the copyright to "dark skinned elves that live underground", not wotc.

And these are not drows, nor recognizable as such by those who love the TTRPGs drows (ie DnD's drows and their variants).

So, it would never be enough to satisfy those who berate Paizo for not keeping the drows.

Except it would. If there was rules supporting it people can make their own lore or use someone elses. As it is now we are left mechanicless.

The Norse own the copyright to "dark skinned elves that live underground", not wotc.

If anyone wants a game about Drow that's nowhere near the OGL, then Spire: The City Must Fall (and the excellent spiritual successor, Heart: The City Beneath) are both absolutely lovely.

This looks awesome, will check it out

Exactly. Lot of new TTRPGs are coming out. Let your love of the old lore die and try something not Wotc or Paizo.

Drow had the noble feat tree in PF1e and seems like with an update it would be a great inspiration for PF2e drow feats.

Striking Spell as a flourish makes sense if that's what is meant by making it a limited resource. X times per day wouldn't be fun though.

I'd like the potency and rune focus spells be combined so potency isn't made useless by upgrading your items, would improve the action economy slightly, and free up design space for another focus spell.