Mechagamera's page

Behaviors that most would consider evil are often adaptations and coping mechanisms from experiencing trauma (and no, I am not saying everyone who has experienced trauma is evil), particularly when that trauma involves being betrayed. Even a high-level evil type who realistically can't be hurt by 90% of the world could still be carrying around memories of being a level 0 commoner who did get hurt by someone or some group and hurts others to make sure it never happens to him/her again. Remember even an ancient red dragon was a wyrmling once, and you know those copper dragons can be real jerks to wyrmling red dragons, so maybe it is better to burn the nearby village, just in case there is a copper dragon in disguise living there.

Of course, one could argue that truly good beings would be more interested in helping the evil ones heal from their trauma instead of killing them and stealing their stuff.

personally, I tend towards alignment is what you are at the moment: sure that orc might be a loving husband, great dad, and absolutely adores his pet badger, but when the PC's run into him, he is about to kill off a halfling family and ritually defile their bodies to show off his martial prowess; at that moment, he is CE. If the PC's kill him, it is up to the courts of the Boneyard to decide what happens to his soul.

Likewise, objectively a lot of PC's are...let's be charitable and stick with jerks. But when they are (mostly) selflessly saving a village from a red dragon, they are good (ish).

How about:

The real reason you lose your memories when you die is that all all the pieces of your soul that correspond to the alignments other than the one you spend your afterlife as an aspect of are cut away in the Bone Yard. Even for the most saintly paladin, the lack of the CG, NG, LN, N, CN, LE, NE, and CE parts of your soul (small as any of them may be) leave too many holes in your mind for you to be able to access any memories (or make sense of them if you could access them).

It is way too late to do this now, but if there was PF 2.5....

I would cut down the arcane list to be about the same size as the other lists and give wizards the ability to study magic from their schools from other traditions. When wizards level up, the new spells are arcane, but if a necromancer finds Orcus' scroll of divine animate dead, he/she can learn the spell and add it to his/her spell book after a couple of downtimes worth of study (1 downtime per level of the spell).

I believe the guidelines Paizo is using is that the default story for neutral champions shouldn't "step on the toes" of the champions of good or evil. One thing no one has ever accused paladins or champions of is subtlety. That might be a good core concept for TN (since balance knight is more of a LN thing in PF 2): your goal is to "fix" any problems you encounter without drawing attention to yourself or creating a spectacle.

It is also possible that different types of beings would perceive the outer planes differently. Most PC's are humanoids (or humanoid-like in PF1), so they perceive Hell as being full of humanoid-like fiends. A race of sentient plants that didn't have a humanoid-like form might perceive Hell as being full of plant-like fiends that have the exact same stat blocks as the humanoid-like fiends PC's normally fight.

Think of it this way: you had to sacrifice all but 1 hp to get the fiend, undead, or aberration. You can't regain hp's while eidolon is running around, but the evil critter likes hanging around, so it will loan you back a few hps to keep you alive so it can stay here (don't worry, you will be tortured greatly for the loan [and interest] when you eventually die).

CE--the monk's philosophical studies have taken him down a dark path, glimpsing things in mediation that man (or dwarf or elf or whatever the monk is) should never have seen. The monk believes that applying existing martial arts with wanton cruelty will eventually open his mind to creating a qlippoth stance or soul-wrenching ki spells.

CN--before becoming a monk, the person's life was rash and unfocused. At the monastery, she attained discipline, but that discipline was the result of being surrounded by the monastic culture. Now circumstances have forced her out in the world, and without the constant push of her fellow monks, her natural tendency towards capriciousness has returned, aided by the muscle memory of years of martial arts training.

Ly'ualdre wrote:

Which is probably why 2e Summoners have been implied to be able to choose their Tradition based on what their Eidolon is and how exactly it was created. If Traditions are the combination and manipulation of Essence to become magic; than I'd say and Eidolon is the combination of said Essence to become life essentially.

Interesting, I had not heard that they were a choose your tradition caster.

I wonder how the essences will tether to the Eidolon itself if that is the case, because I would expect some type of anchoring to exist in the same way the Witch/Sorcerer have powers tethered to the tradition.

Where did they imply it was a potential choose tradition? I had always heard the theory that Summoner was to be the "Spontaneous Arcane" caster, but perhaps that's not the case.

Maybe these "further reduced casters" will be getting their own set of each tradition + casting type (and these will be the new "gish" classes). If they land well, we might expect the Inquisitor to be in the same vein and a brand new Class takes the role of Spontaneous Arcane (if that ever becomes a thing).

The whole God Caller thing suggests a divine option.

Since an arcane summoner will likely have the full arcane list to draw on (or at least through 9th level spells), that could potentially create a grossly overpowered PC (summoner does as much damage as a wizard, then send in the eidolon for some extra damage). The simplest way to avoid that would be to make the summoner a divine caster, since the divine list isn't as damage heavy as the arcane or primal list (occult may work to). That isn't my favorite option; I prefer the eidolon has some vulnerability (like sharing hit points with the summoner) that strongly pushes the summoner to spend most of his/her casting to protect the eidolon while it is in the field. That vulnerability also creates some narrative space for the summoner.

In 4E was "walking the plank" a thing then?

I can't speak for anyone else, but the first time my party discovered "exploding minions" (fairly common in the Astral Sea, Elemental Chaos, and the Abyss), using push powers to kick things off the rock became a common tactic.

In D&D's Abyss, you can use the Plane of Infinite Portals on the Abyss to go directly to the layer you want to go to (assuming you could find the portal in question before the countless demons who are also using this as a mass transit system didn't kill you while you were looking). I believe in 4e, you could step off the edge of the motes (floating rocks, some the size of worlds, that replaced layers) but that was basically suicide, and even demons who could fly wouldn't do it voluntarily.

Having your eidolon be a full combatant and having the summoner being able to cast a spell would feel good. How to reign that in with power levels though might be tricky.

I suggest making the eidolon and the summoner share hit points. Hard to argue that the eidolon is "tougher than the party's barbarian" if it has wizard hp's, and that certainly motivates the summoner to spend most of his/her actions on casting spells to support the eidolon. As an aside, it also cuts down on the amount of bookkeeping since there is one less "character's" hit points to track.

Motivating the summoner to focus his/her casting attention on the eidolon seems particularly important if the summoner follows the sorcerer and witch with "choose your tradition" if you think of the summoner casting some high damage arcane or primal spells every round plus having the eidolon doing its thing.

I have a hard time seeing the summoner as a regular cater in PF2, more likely a focus caster. Mostly it is because any non-focus spells that boost the eidolon would be available to any other caster in the summoner's tradition.

I would guess the summoner can give up 2 actions to give the eidolon 3 actions. The eidolon will have base abilities that level up as the summoner does, with some basic battle forms that unlock as you level up, and focus spells that let you customize the battle forms.

The tradition that the summoner will be is an interesting question. The witch proves that PF2 classes won't necessarily be the same traditions as PF1 classes. Arcane from PF1, divine because the unchained summoner was practically divine, the "summoner doesn't know where the eidolon came from" story sounds pretty occult to me, and since I have justified everything else, might as well throw in primal. This would be consistent with monks choosing divine or occult for focus spells.

Personally I would prefer a broader "get power from bad things" class, where the "other necromancer" could reside. I would go with something similar to the 5e wild magic sorcerer, where there is a certain amount of risk involved. So something like if you wanted to summon a horde of undead, you enhance the "conjure undead" spell, and roll the dice: if the roll comes up really good, you get your horde (and it obeys you), the roll comes out really bad, you get your horde, but it attacks everyone, and if you get in the middle, you get the same conjured undead that any other caster (except I am assuming primal) can get.

Evil just wants you to create a catastrophe that benefits Evil. Your survival, if you do, is accidental.

I would like Agathions too, but I think it might be a good time to give them a little more distinctive gimmick to go with their distinctive look. Maybe they could be the opposite of daemons (embodiments of types of murder) by being embodiments of ways to save a life.

Something like:

Draconals representing healing magic
Cetaceals representing saving someone from drowning
Leonals representing heroically standing between a victim and danger
etc.

Claxon wrote:

As for whether or not creatures are brought, PF1 was very explicit in that these weren't real creatures and they weren't brought from someplace else.

If they've changed that in PF2 it's actually a pretty big shift, but I don't have a specific reference rules quotes that specifies one way or the other.

And unfortunately what you quoted about conjuration magic isn't specific about summoning magic.

Personally, I wouldn't like a change in the tone of the game that summoning magic would have if it did use actual creatures.

I would argue that it would almost universally make summoning creatures evil since you're pulling them from wherever they are, whatever they're doing, and forcing them to fight until they...dis-corporate and return to their original place. But it makes no mention of if they remember it or if they keep inflicted wounds, etc.

It's a huge change if summonsed monsters aren't temporary creations of magic that aren't real creatures and instead are creatures stolen from elsewhere.

Paizo has changed it.

James Jacobs (Mark?) wrote about the difference in a post about outsiders in the General PF2 Forum, if I recall.

So no more Planescape jewels seeking out creatures for those darn prime material plane summoners! That irked a few extraplanar folk in an adventure or two. And for some interpretations, no getting to know your regularly summoned creatures.

As for commands, there are nonverbal ways to command to, like pointing at the target you want them to attack. I think it's just that they aren't telepathically linked, so more complex actions (especially casting specific spells in specific ways) would require PC guidance. This also implies mindless creatures ain't gonna do much other than brawl with the nearest enemy. What the summoned creature can deduce on their own is left up to the GM, though knowing which creatures you think are enemies seems a given.

If you mean the "Outsiders need to sleep, drink, eat and breath in 2E?" thread (https://paizo.com/threads/rzs430bq?Outsiders-need-to-sleep-drink-eat-and-b reath), I think all he meant was that if a specific angel or demon (with a name and a history) was summoned and died, it was dead. As far as I know the only way to get Bob the Astral Deva specifically is with a ritual spell or to lure him through a Gate. And that summon X spells still only create temporary critters. Of course, there are a lot of threads, so I could be wrong.

JJ did say that "outsiders" can be brought back to life just like any other living thing, so if Desna gives you an azata from planar ally and it dies, she can bring it back. I don't know if the outsiders who show up for planar binding have any such backing, though....

Eh, 5 years from now, we will be arguing about which of the 3 LG champion types is the best one.

Not that there is any chance of this happening, but necromancy seems like the best matter/spirit thing (knowledge: medicine), so if anyone could think of a word that means the same thing as necromancy.....

If mind/life was going to be a thing, then bards would probably have been the caster for that and fey would be the outsider to use it. I think "fey trick primal magic to do mind stuff" is probably as close as we will get.

This isn't exactly an old spell, but I figure if magic users can summon dragons, giants, and constructs, they should be able to summon undead, just with the added limitation that they can't create spawn.

I actually kind of like the idea of splitting a soul into multiple outsiders, as we already know it's possible to make more than one outsider out of a soul, as that's how dretches form.

I have done something like this in the past where all souls split into 9 pieces which gravitate towards the outer realm that fits them, with the biggest 2 or 3 pieces becoming outsiders, and the other parts becoming part of the scenery. I noticed that I tended to run the neutral outsiders (LN CN N) as a lot more active in the world, which I think was my subconscious telling me that "winner takes all" benefits the neutrals (someone who was LG then LE averages out to LN in PF2, but in my system LN might not get much out of the soul, where LG and LE both would).

In Pathfinder the Next Generation, the ship's security officer will be a goblin with a beard (because all goblins will have beards a century from now), and if that doesn't tell you what Torag thinks of goblins (and who is responsible for the change in goblins), well there is no hope for you.

My first thought was "well a heightened to 7th level spell should be good", but then I looked up awakened trees and saw they were creature 6, and getting an 8 and 2 6's (even if they are all minions) for one 7th level spell does seem more than generous.

In regards to the Witch, I just hope Cackle was changed. Either removed, made so it actually does something aside from change a couple traits, or made less prominent in the class description. In the playtest, the formatting made it look as important as a Rage is to a Barbarian.

Not much chance of this, but I hope it ends up being something like "anyone who hears your cackle and makes a save against a hex has their level of success on the save lowered by one."

More Windsong Testaments please.

I think it also depends on the circumstances the PC encounters the other worshippers. The TN alignment is a flaw on the path to enlightenment, but it isn't necessarily a flaw that needs to be removed right away. Maybe if the wizard reaches a stumbling block that he can't get over, then advice about greater discipline would go over better.

I feel like the reason for a con "caster" is that the notion of "you channel magic in a way that harms you physically" is pretty easy to understand and yeah, that should be a con class.

You mean like the oracle?

The main reason for a con caster was for races with no mental stat boost, but so far in PF2, it looks like everyone gets a mental boost and a physical boost (or a free boost), so unless orcs or gnolls don't get a mental stat boost, there isn't much need for one.

That being said, I wouldn't have minded if things like number of rounds of rage or wild shape (or some kind of ability where the fighter does more damage if the fight lasts long enough) were based on your con modifier.

I figure most all the champions want the world to change in order to be more aligned with the alignment they are the champion of. But the only way to make the world more TN is to keep the world as it is (or at least no more fantastic than it is), so if the TN champion hears about a wizard developing an 11th level spell (or even a new 10th level spell), I think the correct response is to find the wizard, kill him/her, and burn up all his/her stuff. Ditto if the TN champion hears about someone trying to summon a bunch of demons (or angels).

It may not matter much. If all the casting is done by focus spells, the summoner could be just like the monk who can be either divine or occult. So whatever you choose the focus spell type to be will determine what type of eidolon you get (construct or fey for arcane, elemental for primal, fey or aberration for occult, and celestial or fiend for divine).

To simplify things, I think they will go the 4e summoning route, and the eidolon's strength score will be the summoner's charisma modifier and maybe the eidolon's defenses will be based on the summoner's wisdom modifier.

Most of the customizing will be done with feats and focus spells. The class will provide the general boosts, so a GM only needs to know whether you took the right feats to give Pichachu "lightning tail attack", not is it able to do X level of damage, since level of damage will 90% be determined by your class level.

What I would like to see is some kind of greater minion ability: the summoner uses 2 actions to control the eidolon and it gets to take 3 actions

I see neutral champions as I would the old 3.5 knight class, or the 1st Edition Order of the Cockatrice cavalier.

If anything, I feel they would be more like traditional armored knights or samurai (both heavy armor concepts) fighting on behalf of mortal traditions and beliefs rather than those of the gods.

The mercenary knight that follows coin and himself would be chaotic neutral. A samurai who follows their mortal master regardless of whether they do good or evil would be lawful neutral. Disenfranchised knights or ronin wondering the land would be largely neutral, at least until they can find a new path.

This could also represent a champion of Rahadoum, who hunts down champions and clerics of the faith.

I don't know how well that would fit with divine ally. Normally I would be okay with mad-libbing any pesky adjectives, but that one seems a little too detailed for that.

I could see the 1st focus spell being some kind of variant protection spell that protects you against both good and evil (you gain more protection but lose the ability to chose).

The balance cop is probably the best role for the LN champion, since I can't see the paladin or the LE champion (hope it is called the oppressor to keep the 'er' 'or' type endings) worrying too much about balance. How to make that work without being super annoying to the rest of the party is a big question.

For the CN champion, I would go with the Braggart Champion who swears to do big deeds and goes out and does them, regardless of whether they are good or not; more for the challenge and the glory (blame this on the talk of Valkyries and 5e's oath of glory paladin). I can see the liberator and the CE champion (hoping for defiler or corrupter, 'cause that's what demons do) doing that on occasion, but not their main gigs. Plus, I can see Besmara, Cayden, and Gorum being into this. And it isn't like every party doesn't have some bozo who gets them into trouble with his/her mouth anyway.

Nothing comes to mind for TN, hoping to see the NE champion (hoping for destroyer, 'cause that's what daemons do) to see what fits in between redemption and destruction (or whatever the title of the NE champ is). Preserver? Some kind of super body guard who doesn't care if the body he/she is guarding is good or evil, lawful or chaotic.....

My memory isn't what it used to be (the second thing to go, and I forgot the first), but I thought I read somewhere that they were going to focus on members of B1 races of celestials and fiends in B2 so that there would be a level 7 devil for summon fiends (for example) so you wouldn't have to settle for a demon (if devils were your thing) or you had a 15th level angel to summon if you spent a 10th level slot on it (which I admit I find reasonable). As I said, I could be wrong on that.

May is coming up pretty soon, so hopefully a list of critters will be coming up pretty soon too.

And they reintroduced velsacs (formerly known as kytons) in an AP, so Valkyries could show up before B3, even if they aren't in B2.

Mechagamera wrote:

I think it is worth quoting James Jacobs over in the other neutral champion thread (https://paizo.com/threads/rzs42og8?Where-do-you-think-we-ll-see-Neutral-Ch ampions):

"For example... I could see a place for a true neutral champion that's all about protecting the flow of life and death and souls, and would be a full-on fighter against undead and creatures that capture or consume souls. That would absolutely be enough meat to base a class around, but conceptually, that starts to feel like it's stealing some of the
lunch of the good champions who already do pretty well against undead.

The trick is finding a role for neutral champions that is interesting and can support an entire class but doesn't poach things from other champions. When (and IF) we come up with an idea there... only then will we start to look at possibly doing a neutral champion. But from the office of expectation management, that day might never come."

And in a separate quote: "All of them are on the proverbial table, but I don't think it'd be satisfying to do just the LN and CN ones and not the N ones. Furthermore, while a LN champion could be all about fighting chaos and a CN one all about fighting law... again, that starts to potentially step on the toes of other champions a little. They'd need more than that. "

It is nice that they want to do something interesting with the champions of neutrality other than mad-libbing some adjectives in other champion's abilities, but it doesn't sound like anything will happen soon.

I wish someone had posted this sooner. It's good to know exactly what they were thinking, but I kind of wish they were less rigid about this. Oh, well.

Either way, I want Paizo to do more with Valkyries.

I agree on the Valkyries; I have thought for a long time that the CN defining outsider should have been some kind of Muse that inspires mortals to do wild and crazy things, and Valkyries fit that bill.

There were a lot of ideas in response to those postings on that thread. Admittedly too many (including some of mine) where "just like a liberator champion but...." which were pretty much DOA, but there were other ones with potential. On the plus side, that might have been the first alignment thread that didn't degenerate into angry bickering....

It is frustrating to hear about champions of any alignment, and have three be put off. I am genuinely hopeful that it will be worth the wait.

I think it is worth quoting James Jacobs over in the other neutral champion thread (https://paizo.com/threads/rzs42og8?Where-do-you-think-we-ll-see-Neutral-Ch ampions):

"For example... I could see a place for a true neutral champion that's all about protecting the flow of life and death and souls, and would be a full-on fighter against undead and creatures that capture or consume souls. That would absolutely be enough meat to base a class around, but conceptually, that starts to feel like it's stealing some of the
lunch of the good champions who already do pretty well against undead.

The trick is finding a role for neutral champions that is interesting and can support an entire class but doesn't poach things from other champions. When (and IF) we come up with an idea there... only then will we start to look at possibly doing a neutral champion. But from the office of expectation management, that day might never come."

And in a separate quote: "All of them are on the proverbial table, but I don't think it'd be satisfying to do just the LN and CN ones and not the N ones. Furthermore, while a LN champion could be all about fighting chaos and a CN one all about fighting law... again, that starts to potentially step on the toes of other champions a little. They'd need more than that. "

It is nice that they want to do something interesting with the champions of neutrality other than mad-libbing some adjectives in other champion's abilities, but it doesn't sound like anything will happen soon.

I don't think they are struggling with mechanics for neutral champions. It is more they struggling with a story for neutral champions that doesn't step on the toes of the good and (upcoming) evil champions. Once they feel good about a story, then the mechanics will follow shortly. Once the evil champions come out, it should be pretty simple to create mechanics that are less selfish than theirs and more selfish than the good ones--instead of worrying about reacting to someone else getting hurt, you react to you getting hurt.

As an aside, I think they would have been better to make neutral champions before evil champions and then embraced evil for the evil champions. I figure there is a good chance they will pick not particularly evil-feeling mechanics for the evil ones to avoid "disruptive behavior", but is champion the place for "evil, but not really?"

I would like something like a martial sorcerer where you get better at hitting things (or get new and interesting ways to hit things) because of your bloodline.

It might be a little bit hard to be lawful and be in the wild order and your evil druids have to be selective about what they inflict wanton cruelty on for some of the other orders, but none of that seems insurmountable.

If you are immune to needing to eat, drink, and breathe in a Hellish landscape with no food, water, and plenty of poison gases, then you probably don't need to worry about not drinking in a mortal desert. That being said, nothing about the celestial, fiend, or monitor suggests that they are immune to suffering the effects of dehydration, starvation, or suffocation induced via magic.

For evil mortal races and monsters, most of them have a connection to an evil god, demon lord, archdevil, etc. and it would be a pretty incompetent Big Evil not to go as far as possible to hard code evil into them (socially, biologically, psychologically). I figure for most types, you need to make a choice to be evil (ritualized in most evil cultures), so the hard coding can't be 100%.

Because Kender are WotC IP. I kid, I kid.

"The war sucked and we don't feel like being evil anymore" is workable, but it feels like it is cheating the poor goblins out of a mythical moment. Everyone deserves a mythical moment, so:

My PC's heard from a drunk in a bar that it was because the 4th person to pass the StarStone test was a goblin who has been hiding out from Lamashtu ever since (and has been so successful that even Paizo hasn't heard about it).

Or....

Goblins love fire.
The Sun is made up of fire.
Sarenrae is the goddess of the Sun.
Sarenrae is the goddess of redemption.
Do the math.

I have a feeling a couple of these things (summoner, gunslinger, shifter, or anything else that had "issues" in PF1) might have long waits before they show up. I think they all will show up, but I think Paizo really wants them good (and be acceptable at most tables) when they do arrive and that takes time.

I don't think they are locked into 4 essences, but they made them so big that it will be hard to make more. When people talk about shadow, I think they are thinking about a handful of spells, and that is an order of magnitude too small.

I wonder if there will be a feat that lets you add things to your summoning spell lists, maybe as long as the thing uses your tradition for its innate spells. That would add Rakshasas to occult summoning list (I can see them adopting the Yugoloth fiendish mercenary role). I could see Oni as innately-casting-arcane fiends and Agathions as innately-casting-primal celestials.

Deadmanwalking wrote:

Sorcerers don't require actual material components (their blood is a material component), but still uses the same action with the same limitations. I would assume innate spells work similarly.

Likewise, I'd assume Verbal components require the creature to make noises and Somatic ones require them to have freedom of movement, but I would also assume that their specific forms are dictated by the creatures' anatomy.

So yes, a dragon must speak and gesture to cast spells...that's really not especially odd to me.

But that would be a house rule, yes? There's nothing about Innate Spells as written that makes them function like a sorcerer's class feature. I'm just trying to find out whether the intention is reflected in what's written.

And by what you're saying, then monsters will have to make noise to use their innate spells, which in my examples I don't think makes sense.

I would think Paizo's intent, one way or the other, would be apparent from whether they had a monster in an AP use components in casting an innate spell. So if a Cornugon was described as tossing guano at the PC's to use fireball, then I would argue that shows Paizo's intent.

I am sadly really behind on my Pathfinder reading, so hopefully someone more up to date can chime in.

I would expect some armor proficiency for Archon-blooded Aasimar.

With all those traps, I think int would make more sense than wis for kobolds.

I don't think they will make an int deficient race (or at least not until they PC up Xulgaths and maybe not then). That brushes a little too close to racism for some folks, especially when you are talking about orcs.

Until there is a PF2 version of the Unchained Summoner (assuming a Summoner will be in PF2 and that it will be based on the Unchained Summoner), I don't know if there is a compelling mechanical reason to create new kinds of celestials instead of creating new members of angels, azatas, etc.

While it isn't a need, I notice there are some occult-casting fiends (rakshasa), so some non-divine casting celestials might be interesting for the story of why they changed focus from souls to other matters if nothing else. I could see agathions as primal casters and sphinx-like celestials (like shedu) being occult casters.

If I had to speculate on their (now confirmed/ret-conned) specific existence, it seems like it would make sense connected to Apsu and his divine demesne... I could see them being an element of Tianjing in Tian Xia as non-"humanoid" parallel to "normal" Aasimar locals, with Celestial/Apsu alliance making sense in dragon-drenched history of Tian Xia. A presence in (Dragon ruled) Xa Hoi society also seems plausible IMHO, possibly deriving from Tianjing group. Really, "Metallic Kobolds" could be represented by Kobold Ancestry with Aasimar Heritage (with specific rules re: Metallic Dragon aspect): if Kobold+Aasimar do exist, why wouldn't they be Metallic?

That seems like the type of ret-con that maintains the coherence of old paradigm by properly carving out distinct exception rather than just ignoring the previous canon. They would be semi-celestial with significant presence only in specific corner of the world, avoiding broader impact to Kobold's global niche which had led metallics to officially "not exist" before (albeit maybe that overplays JJ's earlier take). Their rare existence on material plane and position in Apsu's demesne might also prompt Good-aligned (non-metallic) Kobolds to hold them in special status and so on, as blessed priest-servitor class in a way... Somewhat mirroring general vibe of Aasimar, but very focused and tied to specific Good deity and of course Kobold/Dragon ancestry.

I think metallics as aasimar is a most excellent idea. If sylphs become a universal race, then I could see the sylph kobold being the cloud dragon proxy.

Since we haven't seen them on Golorion before, it is time for the hidden kingdom of the metallic kobolds. I look forward to some Wakandan/Themyscian style arrogance: it is not your fault that your metal work is so poor, you are just a dwarf, but, take heart, it is levels about the cheap limericks elves pass off as poetry.....