Kan Himaa's page

I'm not sure what you're getting at.

Like yeah, using magic to support other aspect of adventuring life is a great tool. That's why spells like tailwind are so good for travelling, stuff like instant armor to don your fullplate real fast, etc etc.

I don't think the Magus is something that makes sense in its current form is what I'm getting at. Technically, the witcher makes a bit more sense with using very quick and small spells to throw someone off guard while they mostly use good sword work to get the job done. Something like the wizard dedication on a fighter feels more correct.

This is coming from a rather outside game mechanics position, but having both spells and swordplay skills sounds more like the same kind of diversification someone would have taking longbow training and also having training in melee combat. (Longbow training IRL took a lot of years to get good at).

The main advantage is that the warrior in question can enhance their own weapon and armor to bypass magical defenses. They aren't going to waste their time increasing the destructive force of a single strike unless they are doing something like trying to break through a gate during a siege, because it would take too much time to both use the incantation and then actually swing the sword.

Mobility is the second potential use of magic that might be useful. But again, the benefit has to outweigh the extra cost in time to incant. Such a character would probably be using magic to reduce the burden of long forced marches across terrain instead of trying to use it readily on the field while in active engagement.

Now a tradition that doesn't use incantations but does something like channeling magic in less aggressive ways could work. Like you have charges that are prepared in the morning where the individual is actually doing the incantations, and the warrior would then expend the charges during combat or over the course of the day. This would pair well with enchanting a weapon in the morning so that it can bypass magic defenses.

Kan Himaa wrote:

The Tolkien dwarves are a twist on the gnomes where they basically became these stout and strong beings living in the earth that are hardy workers.

Not quite.

Tolkien's dwarves were not based on earth-spirit gnomes/goblins/kobolds (a lot of overlap) from (IIRC) Celtic/Gaul/Germanic folklore. Tolkien based his dwarves mainly on Norse myth, with some "borrowing" from the Twelve Tribes of Israel (changed to the Seven Dwarven Kindred).

Ah, that actually makes more sense.

Pathfinder gnomes honestly completely sold me on gnomes as a fantasy trope. I can't put my finger on it but I really like pathfinders gnomes, and I agree. they should be more obviously fey-like. Maybe a greater emphasis on pointed ears and wild hairstyles.

That's because the DnD gnomes and dwarves are both cut from the same cloth. The original gnomes in folklore are humanoid spirits that live in the earth and have a relationship to the natural elements of the world. Their most common depiction is an elderly man with a conical hat and fuzzy white beard.

The Tolkien dwarves are a twist on the gnomes where they basically became these stout and strong beings living in the earth that are hardy workers.

Snow White and the seven dwarves has so many direct callback to the folklore gnomes in the form of the seven dwarves it is kind of on the nose.

DnD ended up having gnomes become this intermediary between dwarves, elves, and halflings. (Also the halflings happen to live inside hills, so they also are somewhat related to the folklore gnomes).

Pathfinder 2e gnomes basically have nothing to do with the folklore gnomes outside of being magical creatures. They're more loosely related to Seelie Court fairies from scottish folklore but do carry over some of the classic gnome with burrowing animals. Gnomes don't live underground themselves in PF2e and need to constantly be doing something adventurous or slinging a good story to keep themselves alive. This tends to jive more with fairies that childishly go around playing games.

This is kind of a funny problem to have, but one thing I noticed a lot is that halflings and gnomes end up having a lot of the same character portraits. Even though they are supposed to be physically distinct in lore, when someone tries to draw the two a gnome usually ends up looking like a halfling who has a cyberpunk or rainbow dash colored hair, or the gnome can look like an older halfling.

In the interest of differentiating them more from the DnD gnomes, maybe having them get more satyr-like or fey-like features would help them out? Having horns or some other clearly visible physical sign of difference would probably make them stand out more as a choice.

DMFTodd wrote:

What's a party with no cleric supplied to do when they encounter a haunt, have no positive energy to destroy it?

Scooby Doo and gang provide some good old 1st edition wisdom here:

RUN. Run for your lives.

Run away, it works!

Seriously though, players get in a mindset that everything is like a monster that must be confronted and defeated. Not so. I realize they want to be heroic. I appreciate that. But a haunt is more like a lit stick of dynamite with a story to tell. Sometimes prudence is the only course.

To be as vague and non-spoiler like as possible, I remember a particular haunted room that did funny things to players and running probably would have saved our lives.