Red Mantis Assassin

Larkos's page

574 posts (2,281 including aliases). No reviews. 2 lists. 1 wishlist. 18 aliases.

The basic idea of what I'm looking for is the Manakete from Fire Emblem. Manaketes, for those who don't want to or can't read the link, is a race/class of humanoids that turn into dragons.

I am aware of Dragonkin from Starfinder and the Taninim race from Rite Publishing.

Theses are fine options but I'd like the ability to play a human who can turn into a dragon. The best option I have so far is to tweak the Taninim race and their corresponding class Dragonic Exemplar.

Any advice?

I'm making a human Virtuous Bravo paladin. He's level 7 to start.

It would fit the character well but is it worth it mechanically to go to Devoted Muse or should I just stay a Virtuous Bravo?

2 people marked this as a favorite.

So what exactly is the range of colors a Lashunta can come in?

Pathfinder has them as mostly white and light pink from what I can find

This Lashunta from Children of the Void (2008) is maybe light pink but looks fairly Caucasian.

This Lashunta from the Gamemastery guide (2010) is flat out Caucasian-looking.

This Lashunta from the cover of Distant Worlds (2012) is also white especially in comparison to the two creatures.

This Lashunta from People of the Stars (2014) is far more pink than her predecessors.

The we flash forward to Starfinder (2017) where we only have two Lashunta to go off of.

First is our lovely Iconic Technomancer, Raia. She is grayish-green from what I can tell. She appears to be wearing makeup and has a glow from the Hologram on her arm making it hard to pin down the color. Either way, she is not white.

The only other Lashunta in the book is a mechanic. She is more gray than Raia and also certainly not Caucasian.

The ones from the Lashunta Page which I can only find the female of online (surprise surprise) are more pale brown than gray or white.

So what is the range? Are there black Lashuntas? Are there more fantastical colors like blue or full green?

Anyone have any better sources than I can find?

So one of Starfinder's big things is that 9th-level spells are gone. We can only cast up to sixth level and the distinctions between arcane, divine, and psychic are somehow loosened despite not being how magic worked for centuries before the Gap.

Coincidentally, the God of Magic has been replaced. Nethys, namesake of the beloved Archives, is inexplicably gone. He's not even mentioned in the Minor Deity section like Calistria or Torag. Nethys has simply vanished.

Core Rule Book wrote:

Whereas in the ancient past, magic in the Pact Worlds was broken into many different traditions, today magic is

seen as a single group of physically impossible phenomena,
regardless of where it comes from or how it’s manipulated.
Traditional distinctions like “arcane” and “divine” magic have
long since been abandoned, and while different casters may
access magic through very different means, from hightech
reality hacking to the study of occult items or the
channeling of divine power, all are simply different means
of accomplishing the same goals.

How did this happen? How did thousands of year of magical study fail to find that Divine, Arcane, and Psychic spellcasting were actually all the same thing and work completely the same?

I propose that it wasn't.

Nethys may have been the reason why spells were stronger and better demarcated. Eloritu is weaker but more egalitarian with magic, granting all he has to just about anyone. Or perhaps he had to make magic easier because of technology out pacing his sixth-level spells.

So in other words, Nethys left and took the big dog spells with him and his replacement just wasn't up to the task of embodying Magic.

Reading the dueling cape deed feat, I saw that the typical cape has hardness 1 and 3 hit points which is important since the enemy has to destroy my cape to remove entangled. But say I have a better cape than that like the cape of bravado or the cape of feinting.

Do wonderous items have more hardness and/or hp as a result of them being magical items?

The last thread about this was from 2012 so I was wondering if things had been clarified since then.

So the forever stun-lock of the cape of feinting was bad and I get that but a DC 13 will save? That seems seriously weak compared to a cloak of Resistance. Even with APB, there should be more reason to waste my turn locking down a single target.

Anyone have any suggestions to buff it back up a bit? Maybe make it a disarm check?

As part of the backstory for my Arcanist, I created a magical sport to counter the whole "weak, frail wizard" stereotype. Basically it's like an obstacle course but there's a defending team and an attacking team.

Anyway the teams are split by the schools of magic (just the traditional schools the elemental schools and such would be too much.) So they all get team names like the Yankees or the Red Sox. I already asked on Reddit and got some good responses. I was hoping I could get some more feedback from this forum.

My list so far:

Evocation: Tempests
Abjuration: Wardens
Divination: Seers
Illusion: Phantoms
Conjuration: Shepherds, Callers
Necromancy: Whitehearts, Vitalists, Banshees
Transmutation: Wildhearts
Enchantment: Masterminds
Universalists: Prodigies

I could really use new names for transmutation, enchantment, and illusion. I'm really partial to Wardens and Prodigies but the others I'm meh about. Also a deciding vote on the Conjuration and Necromancy teams would be excellent.

A few ground rules based on Reddit responses:

1. I prefer names like most sport teams where they're a plural of something cool so that it fits the others. So nothing like the Crimson Tide.

2. The school is in Andoran (the school itself is homebrewed) so no undead creation or fiend summoning allowed.

3. These names were chosen in-universe by the teams themselves. So it stands to reason that no one would pick anything too evil-sounding. This is especially true for the Necromancers who get enough prejudice even though they only teach White Necromancy.

Thanks Paizo forums!

For Posting and Approving Character Sheets

Male Overdeity 9001

For OOC chatter and GM clarifications

Male Overdeity 9001

Here our story begins.

If BAB is allowed to have a fast, medium, and slow progression, then why not saves?

There was already a thread about this idea but it died in 2008 and was on a different forum section.

The basic idea is a type of save progression that "would be as the poor save, but an additional increase of +1 at level 1, 10, and 19; bringing it to 9 max at level 20" to quote the above thread.

I think this would be a great way to help boost single save classes like the fighter, rogue, and swashbuckler.

I think it was be best as a choice depending on what type of each class you play.

The fighter would get his based on what weapon type he masters.

Originally my idea was this:

Resolute (ex): The fighter stands as a shield and inspiration to his comrades. The Fighter gains a fast will save progression. This ability is available to fighters who fight with a shield, close weapons, and two-handed weapons.

Into the Fray (ex): The Fighter is a whirl of weapons whose reflexes are honed to a sharpness that rivals even his weapons. The fighter gains a fast reflex progression. This is available to fighters that wield two weapons, double weapons, thrown weapons and to free-hand fighters.

That left out a lot of styles. This is where the middle saves come in.

Sharp of Mind and Instinct (ex): The fighter has been trained to be aware at all times allowing him to be ready for many types of attack. The gains a middle save progression to both reflex and will. This is available to fighters who wield bows, crossbows, firearms, natural weapons and who specialize in tactics and combat maneuvers.

The Rogue has convincing arguments for both fortitude and will.

They are used common fort problems like poisons and are used to adversity. There are common rogue archetypes like thugs, enforcers, assassins, and gamblers who should be healthy as well.

Willpower should be strong in rogues like masterminds, mafia bosses, spies, and con artists.

The greatest design philosophy problem of the rogue is that they try to be all those things so medium save progression could fit in with that. Archetypes can mess with the saves as appropriate. For example, thug archetype rogues get good fort and bad will. Spies get bad fort and good will.

The Swashbuckler is a trickier problem. They have less arguments for either save due to their novelty. The most common fix is to give them a good fort save because both their parent classes have them. Others rework Charmed Life so that it works like Divine Grace.

Either suggestion is workable to me but medium saves could be a good compromise if they are somehow too onerous for the GM to accept.

Barbarians get a will boost from the their and as such they usually don't get mentioned in the weak saves discussion. After playing a barbarian, I'd give them a medium save progression to their will saves. Combined with the rage boost, it should still be less than the cleric, druid, inquisitor, magus, skald, and warpriest. Bloodrager would also follow this rule.

Cavaliers don't get mentioned either and I have no idea why. Their focus on a particular style makes the Fighter example above not as necessary. I would give them a medium or good will save to help them out.

Basically the intent of this rule would be to do away with the idea of one good save without the comfort of 9 levels of spells to make up for it.

I checked and the last time the idea of Intimidate being based on strength rather than Charisma was in 2008 during the pre-release discussion. Those threads had a lot of vitriol that I'd like to avoid so I will be clear in my opening post.

I am not saying that Charisma should not be used for intimidation. I can totally see how a forceful but physically weak person can be intimidating by using threats, coercion, and blackmail to name a few things.

I merely believe that this is a trained talent, something that is learned through training. Intimidation through flexing your muscles and threatening physical violence is much simpler and shouldn't cost a feat to it. In my mind, spending a feat on something represents training.

If the Mountain That Rides and Conan the Barbarian

It is my opinion that Intimidation should naturally be based on Strength with a feat/rogue talent/class feature that allows for Charisma to be issued instead or in tandem. Something like Intimidating Personality, for example.

Therefore I would like the forum's opinion on variant rules for those who want them in their games or maybe as a new rules supplement a la the Armor as DR system in UC.

Option 1. The system I mentioned earlier.

2. You choose at character creation which stat you want to base your Intimidation off of and therefore which feat you could take to add to that i.e. CHA as a base and Intimidating Prowess or STR as a base and Intimidating Personality as a feat.

3.As above except it's separated by class. Bards, Rogues, Inquisitor, Gunslinger, Sorcerer, and Witch get a CHA base whereas Barbarians, Cavaliers, Fighters, Monks, Magi, and Rangers get a STR with options to switch that around.

For example, a trait that allows Druids, Paladins, etc. to get it as a class skill and use Str. Alchemists, Summoners, Wizards, etc. would use a different trait to get CHA Intimidate as a class skill. Thug archetyped Rogues would get STR as part of the archetype's class feature.

Also should this be in the Homebrew forum? I wasn't entirely sure about putting this here.

Hello all. I am experienced in Pathfinder but not in PbP. I'm in a regular campaign but I've got too many characters that I wanna play. I'm not very good with PbP so any group that will accept me will have to teach me some things.

The character I have now is a witch that I can play at any level but I'd prefer to play lower to mid levels. Somewhere around 6-9.

I would prefer a homebrew or just a game in Golarion. I don't own any of the APs.

I prefer fantasy games like the Golarion setting.

P.S. Is there a forum for players looking for groups?

I'm not entirely sure which thread to put this into but I think this one should do.

In the Changeling section, it says "Claws: Changelings' fingernails are hard and sharp, granting them two claw attacks (1d4 points of damage each)."

Changelings are born of Hags but they are raised by the nearest community that will raise them. The Hags have no love for their children but don't want them killed or to have much special attention to them. If the children have long, sharp nails, they'd be pretty noticeable. Check the art for Feiya, the iconic witch for example of what have these nails would look like. She's not a changeling but the nails hex does basically the same thing.

If these nails are natural for the Changeling and pretty noticeable, people would make special note of it. They might even know what a changeling is and what she could become. A bad family might kill her and leave her to the wolves. A good family might give her to a good church where she will be protected and not be allowed to follow the call.

Seeing as this is all necessary for Hags to reproduce, it stands to reason that changelings be both rare and unknown by most people. Therefore I houserule that changeling nails are retractable like a cat's to better allow her to hide them.

Is this a fair houserule and should this be the new standard for the race?