SenahBirdR's page

After reading this adventure I am very excited to run this Path. My hope is to begin an in person group next fall, but maybe I'll set a goal to play these in the appropriate season.

The inclusion of recipes is wonderful! We love moon cakes so a recipe to try out is a great treat.

SenahBirdR wrote:

The APG had 42 archetypes, two of which were the multi class archetypes for Investigator and Witch. My suspicion is we will see reprinted the 40 archetypes plus the eight multiclass archetypes. A few seem possible for name changes, but I don't think we'll see any new archetypes.

Swashbuckler and Oracle didn't have multiclass archetypes? :p

Oops! Yes, 44 Archetypes. Four of which were multiclass archetypes.

Positive and Negative should probably change as well. Void works well as a trait for Void creatures, but probably something else than Vital for Creation's Forge creatures.

The APG had 42 archetypes, two of which were the multi class archetypes for Investigator and Witch. My suspicion is we will see reprinted the 40 archetypes plus the eight multiclass archetypes. A few seem possible for name changes, but I don't think we'll see any new archetypes.

Remember, Paizo isn't making decisions solely on how an IP case would likely be ruled, but also to avoid a case whatsoever. Plus Paizo really wants to emphasize the specifics of the Pathfinder IP. Even though the names and descriptions are fairly generic it is best to focus on new takes when keeping a monster. That includes name changes that might not be strictly necessary.

After the remaster hits I am planning a game that will include a more fully owl aesthetic stryx, and found this thread. In 2ed stryx have already widened from their 1ed descriptions. I agree with new take that the syrinx are the Arcadian population and don't need a separate ancestry. The current heritages can already work well for syrinx but I imagine a syrinx update will also add a few more.

Personally I think allowing the wide-eared swept-haired elfish faced people on one end with beak-faced feather avian-headed on the other is a reasonable variety within an ancestry that doesn't need rules differentiation. Plus room for mixing in between as wanted by players. In that sense I think additional isolated populations of owl-folk can be revealed to be the same ancestry with different recent histories and aesthetics.

This reminds me how the Bastard!! manga/anime has numerous characters, places, and even spells based on rock/metal bands, musicians, and songs. Turning songs into actual plots is a great use of inspiration! Definitely something I would love to play in.

What images are on tile 1A/B? I have a copy I am considering getting replaced (from another store) that is missing tile 1.

This Thursday I am hosting Session 0 of Serpent's Skull. Running Souls For Smuggler's Shiv has been on my mind for years.

For me Legendary Adventures will come out ~$25 more than Ruins of Lastwall, ~$40 more than Kingmaker and Jungle of Despair. For a larger incentive and a number of huge figurines instead of large that doesn't seem like a terrible increase. The cost of a case is the same, the incentive a little more (but the still steep discount), with most of the increase coming in shipping. Overall that doesn't seem terrible, but obviously it isn't great. Looking at a few other sites I still cannot find the set any cheaper.

I haven't been able to find shipping weights for Icons of the Realms cases, but I've found some for bricks. I've noticed the sets with many huge figures break 3 lbs. Sets without or just one huge figure sit around 1.5 lbs. Sets with a smaller set of huge figures seem to fall between. This seems to roughly match up with the jump from 7 to 12 pounds we are seeing in the Pathfinder cases. So this isn't an issue with Pathfinder Battles, but with huge figures. I suppose that might have been one of the factors that made them not worthwhile in the past?

Since Paizo gives a big discount on their licensed miniatures instead of free shipping, we are just not used to seeing this sort of issue that other sellers are probably seeing with Icons of the Realms. Looking at my Rise of the Runelords case the shipping came out to around $50, but I know that shipping rates have changed since then. The case seems to have also weighed 12 lbs.

Maybe going forward the better idea will be have a smaller share of huge figures? Obviously not always the big playset incentives either. Some of the larges in Pathfinder Battles can get quite weighty as is. This is a tough balance. I'm not sure where the line is on weight that causes a huge increase in shipping, but targeting that might be preferred. If huge figures are only present in bigger numbers every third or second set that probably isn't an issue for me.

My plan is to sub at least through the the initial offerings provided in six months. Paizo produces quality and even if P2 ends up not being my preference I want to give it a solid attempt. To me it is the same service and subscriptions, so it makes sense I don't have to re-up to continue them. The rules may change but that has happened before.

Also place me as someone who wants the PDFs to remain as the big incentive to subscribe. I wish more companies made the print/pdf bundles more accessible. The new format of the World Guide line in hardcovers is a great replacement to the two softcover player and GM focussed lines. For Paizo's finances, mix use RPG books tend to sell better. For our customer finances, I like that it isn't every month.

Good luck on the transition!

I'm very happy to see the sets go with a large/huge split. WizKids seemed to be experimenting in that direction in the Icons sets. Since budgets can be spread across the set and rarity this opens up a lot of possibilities. Obviously over hanging figures such as the Water Lord Huge Elemental doesn't fit in that method, but it allows less massive and simpler figures that wouldn't be as good a draw for incentives or special release sets.

Seeing repeats is less interesting, but at least they look different and hopefully isn't too much of a pattern. Plenty of gobs is going to be alright with me. I wonder if the hobgoblins have much of a change other than appearance. Paizo doubling down on their iconic goblin look is probably a good idea as they pull further away from 3.x DND. I wonder if bugbears would have been more interesting with oversized heads as well.

The goblin village is nice, but the play sets are starting to dominate. I would prefer to alternate. There are still plenty of awesome gargantuan creatures to feature.

Overall, I'm excited to see the new direction even if not everything is getting me full barrel yet.

Any suggestions for displaying the poster maps from the Map Folios? Storage has been easy since they fold down into paper size, but I still haven't found a great way to display a map during gaming. My wants are to set a map up as something the players can view without taking up the play area since these tend to be regional/city poster maps instead of gaming maps. Hanging is an alright option, but I would prefer a way to lean it up against a wall since I sometimes run games at other places than my own.

I have tried a 24x36 toploader. Unfortunately at that size they are not rigid (despite Ultra Pro claiming theirs are), so they could be hung but don't have a built in way for that. There are of course frames for that size poster but I'm trying to avoid anything too expensive or difficult to swap out maps in between sessions. MCS makes decent affordable poster frames in the smaller sizes, but at the size large enough for the map folios they are no longer solid pieces and tend to fall apart.

What have been your solutions? Even ones that don't fit my thoughts above since I'm curious how others use them.

Weapon traits look great. Really improve how weapons are distinguished from each other.

Do we know if strength is added to damage on a crit or is a crit now just extra dice and special mechanics?

I think I would prefer no strength. Curve the extra damage on crits down a bit, but that is compensated by interesting effects.

----

Like some others have mentioned, I would like weapons names to better align with the common terminology. Such as long sword being a 2 hander, falchion being a one hander.
The one hander sword (PFe1 longsword) being called an arming sword. A curvy two hander (PFe1 fachion) possibly being a kriegsmesser.
I can understand the desire to keep the names the same. I feel fairly rational about this.

What I do not feel rational about is "studded leather armour".
/rant
OMG there is not such thing as "studded leather armour". It's troll poo! The studs are actually rivets for plates that lie between two layers of leather. Two examples of historical armour are the Jack of Plates (lighter) and the Brigandine (heavier). Please get rid of any reference to "studded leather armour".
/rantoff

Expect more ranting in the armour preview.

My hopes are not high, but I would like this as well. Longsword/Arming sword is the set I am least concerned about, but I would overall like to see weapons and armor match more closer the real world inspiration. Plus plenty of fantastical weapons from previous editions and media that work because they are cool.

For instance, buckler could be a low die martial weapon with the parry trait. Add in other traits that match up with binding and grappling. Make it into one of the off hand weapons of choice (dagger being another popular choice).

Hopefully for alchemists these items in general have a scaling effect, not just bombs. Otherwise we run into the same system seen previously with spells. As you level you would need higher level formulas to do more powerful effects instead of the automatic heightened effects that spells will now have. Maybe items, like spells, could have a heightened entry that triggers off of the alchemist level instead of alchemist having a blanket +d6 to bombs periodically. Call it something like "experimentation" or "ingenuity" level.

Overall though, I am liking where alchemy is going as a basic part of the system.

The blog posts now, mostly, have the logos in their front page picture links. I noticed the recent PACG post did not. Still moving forward! Unfortunately navigation is still poor in the current state. I ended up switching to some fan sites when needing to look up FAQs and the PRD before my game last night.

Mark Seifter wrote:

It's cool to see all the different speculation, particular those in this thread who were clever enough to predict that "Attack of Opportunity" might have some extra benefits now for fighter and friends, and that someone dedicated to interrupting without that reaction could ready an action. AoOs are pretty nice at interrupting actions nowadays, and they're not the only game in town for these kind of "attack when the enemy does something particular" reactions; they're just the one that's most recognizable. A certain character might hate magic enough to attack whenever someone casts any spell, even one they thought was safe, and another might be so skilled at combat that they get an attack whenever an opponent misses them by 10 or more! The reaction system allows characters to have all sorts of different reactions that surprise and confound their foes!

Let me get this straight. If I want to be able to stop a guy from drinking a potion or casting a spell right next to me, I either have to have special training to react to this situation, or I have to devote part of my turn to preparing to interrupt the action?

Are there going to be penalties to performing actions that would normally provoke an opportunity attack? (Like casting defensively)

It feels kinda video game-y to just have to stand there while someone does something utterly defenseless because I lack special training.

I don't see what is so special about swinging your sword at someone who let's their guard down.

I'm going to argue that this isn't any more video gaming than taking turns has been since 3.0. Your actions on your turn are supposed to represent what you are doing during the round. A character isn't standing still while other characters act, that is a conceit to manage the game. The whole structure is video gamey! I actually enjoyed the everyone declare then everyone act structure of older style games but they tended to be slower and harder to wrap your mind around. Shadow of the Demon Lord sort of brings it back with their quick and slow action system.

If a character wants to pay more close attention to their opponent's actions and attempt to disrupt it, it sounds like the ready action should be good for that since it works off of reactions and only requires one action. My hope that the ready action allows a degree of open endedness (I hit them if they let down their guard). Ready in 3.x style games had a huge opportunity cost. Now it is one of three actions and depending on how readying a third attack works might be a really good circumstantial option even without reaction abilities.

AoO were a way to make combat feel more dynamic, live and simultaneous. They did good at that. But now actions are being broken down a little more fluidly in a turn. Since the opportunity cost of the ready action is significantly lower, it makes sense to meld everything together. That some characters will be better at this sort of thing does not mean that other characters will be horrible. They will just likely have different incentives.

Rogue-like characters being good with AoOs is a style I hope carries forward in the system. I just don't expect it to work out exactly the same. My suspicion is that Fighter types and Rogue types will have a very different feel to the reactions, and opportunist style rogues will still be a thing.

I think one thing to keep in mind is that actions and turns are nebulously simultaneous. Turns, rounds, actions, initiative, ect are all abstractions to provide structure to the chaos. Narratively each character isn't spending 6 seconds doing something, then waiting around 6 seconds time the number of other characters to do something.

Hopefully in PF2 this is better emphasized and actions can be simultaneous or sequential as the needs of the moment require. Think of the three actions as how much concentration is required. When spell casting you don't do the chant then the gestures, you do them both at the same time but it takes two actions because they are both complex procedures requiring focus.I think this is a better way to translate the structure of the rules into the narration of the action.

I already house ruled this into games that I have run, original 3.x action economy or RAE. Yes, this effectively eliminates Shot on the Run and such but it feels more natural for less experienced players when describing what they want to do.

My thoughts:

3) When it comes to Sword and Board and Two Weapon Fighters, their standard attack action should encompass BOTH hands. Having to burn an action on readying a shield is nonsense, especially if you have formal training (maybe you have to use an action for your shield unless you are proficient?) especially if you have done any HEMA. Your shield and sword work together to attack and close off angles simultaneously.

The same goes for TWF. If my character isn't getting any real mechanical advantage out of attacking with 2 weapons, why bother?

How I would handle S&B and TWF:

While using 2 weapons/weapon and a shield, you have 3 attack options:

a) Single attack.
b) Dual attack.
c) Attack and Block.

Single Attack lets you attack at no penalty with one hand, but you gain no benefit from your other weapon/shield, as ONE Action. Requires no feats or special training. (Essentially, this is just a standard attack. You just happen to be holding another weapon/shield.)

Dual attack gives you a slight penalty (-2?) but you may attack with each weapon (or attack with your weapon and bash with your shield) as ONE Action. Requires a Feat or Special Training.

Attack and Block gives you a slight penalty in your...

I think this concept is going to be easy to portray in this system. A shield isn't a passive defensive item. It is something actively use to block and shield yourself with. So option c) is one action to attack, one to defend, and the third action for movement or whatever. Option a) is essentially just attacking multiple times. The character is focusing on offense instead of offense and defense in that action. Option b) really comes down to how they handle two weapon fighting in the system.

Two weapon fighting is something that is hard to handle well in RPG systems. Holding two weapons doesn't give you more actions in real life. You already have a second hand. The second hand, empty or with a weapon, gives more options that can be in tandem with your main weapon. Locking weapons, double strikes, grappling, feints... ect. So rather than see something like extra attacks as previous D&D systems have done, I would rather see a series off hand actions to represent using your second hand more fully.

I am another player in love with the Unchained RAE. Seeing this change in PF2 from the get go will be an immensely good thing in my opinion. My current games haven't been using it because I didn't want to add the complexity of having to double check against something else for some of players who struggle with some things as is. But when I have played with it in use, it has been great.

As for Attacks of Opportunity now a learned instead of base Reaction from the sound of things.. I think this will still work. At the very least, you can attack twice or move/attack then ready an action to hit if your opponent drops their guard. So it is a tactical decision to either focus on your own actions or to focus on that of your opponent.

Archers vs Melee Disparity: Archers already have the advantage of standing still to get many attacks while melee has to get in close. So that isn't a new issue. In my experience with the RAE it is alleviated by more dynamic turns. The real issue will be in balancing the feat/ability choices that play into ranged attacks.

Gish and swift action characters: Will obviously be designed differently in this edition. Already, it will take less work to make a Magus style character with the base Wizard class. So a Magus class if added down the line will have unique features that play off the current system.

Fighters having easier access to things than others is a good thing in my opinion.

Looking forward to seeing the action system in action.

This is a change I am happy with! While rough, and a patch to a preexisting system, the Revised Action Economy is basically why I bought Pathfinder Unchained. My preference is for more tactical combat and this will help encourage that.

Hopefully, all of your actions can be done during your other actions so that you don't need multiple action to move before and after an attack. I think that would flow more naturally.

Action cost can be more nuanced in balancing magic. Hybrid characters that rely on spellcasting to buff can be easier to design if buff spells only cost one act.

My preference would be to generalize names and to ditch the old naming system. The in setting names could be localized. Plus a customization system. A great sword could refer to things various things like a claymore, flammbard, ect. An area could even use the same name for multiple types of weapons, like actually happens.

I doubt either will happen, but that would be my preference.

Glad to see the blog posts back on the front page! The front page does look very sexy now. :D The page also manages to avoid being too busy.

Anguish,

I see your point. I am probably going to click on blogs based on the punny title or the art, but not everyone will. The Paizo blog posts all have a logo for what section they belong to at the top of the post. Maybe a miniaturized version of those logos could be in the black bar to the right of the date/time stamp. Maybe the Store blog can receive it's own logo. Probably more doable is to have the tags be the hover text instead of the first so many characters of the blog entry itself.

On my Chrome desktop browser... From the landing page the Store function is below the search bar and is a drop down menu with no blog entry listed as an option. None of the options take directly to the storefront page. From any other page (such as browsing this thread or store page), the store function is above the search bar and is a direct link to the store homefront including the blog built in. The store homefront (paizo.com/store) looks similar to but not exactly like the previous main Paizo page.

The way signs work are great. The utility of copying another sign in your hand is a great way to increase usefulness. I am amazed at just how varied the Blessings category has ended up with very different feel of mechanics while supporting the idea of dice addition.

I do love the look of the landing page. Overall it is much more modern and in keeping with other gaming sites. The line with current month releases, with the option to scroll back or forward one month is a great idea. The "featured" section is not auto scrolling for me on Chrome, but is a wonderful addition. I love having the art showcased in this way and it keeps the landing page fresh and dynamic.

The look of forum post pages still appears a little off to me. The font is bigger, but I feel the real issue as others stated is the width. The text wrap is working fine if I resize the window in desktop Chrome, but that also means keeping my Paizo tab open in a separate window instead of a different tab. A minor nitpick I know but just giving feedback. The width seems good for browsing through the thread titles, with the caveat of the font feeling a bit too large.

Forum browsing on my phone I feel is much better. The font still feels a little big but the width is perfect. Browsing topic threads the width feels too small, but it also feels quicker.

Personally, I feel the biggest loss on the front page is the Blog. Paizo's blog feels much more interactive and widely read than many company sites I frequent. There are many elements I would not have noticed without the blog calling to me. The store blog has especially been useful of informing me of product you carry from other companies. The Paizo blog has been great for introducing me to new ideas and keeping me informed of what the company is up to. Something other gaming companies sorely lack. My suggestion would be to have the most recent store and Paizo blog posts in the "featured" scroll. EDIT: To add to my point, yesterday's blog post for PACG has zero responses after almost 22 hours.

Overall the site is running significantly faster and it feels like it takes less bandwidth. I am looking forward to see what other new features are in the works once the roll out issues are finished. Great work!

My set is now fully opened up!

Pros:
- The paint apps overall have me wowed. I would mistake a number of commons as uncommons! A few uncommons could be mistaken as rares.
- That assassin vine is massive!
- The large rares in general tend to be quite intimidating. The nightmare dragon and minotaur really stand out.
- One of each rare yet again! My doubles on dressing were the suit and the door.
- Three of every large uncommons. 3-5 for small/medium uncommons. 2-3 for medium uncommons. Collation remains great on these sets.

Middling Points:
- The pretty goblin would have been better as an uncommon in my opinion. Even with no paint apps.
- The halfling butcher was fine but I would have rather he be uncommon with a more interesting look. The most boring figure in the set in my opinion, and it isn't a bad figure. The medium base mistake is funny but thankfully not a terrible issue.
- Good mix on the species appearing. Plants are something under represented. The minotaurs are good though I don't know how many of each I would need. A few that are a little niche but could easily substitute.
- I could have used the fungal and druid pieces a month ago!

Negatives:
- The medium brass dragon is very heavy in the wings. With care it can be stood up, but cannot withstand almost any vibration or graze. I notice most raised up flyers have swept forward wings to balance out their figures. This figure needed more weight nearer the base to make up for the wings. A gorgeous figure though!

- This is probably my own errors, but the sea drakes are a pain to remove. Two of the three snapped where the base meets the stand trying to get them out of the plastic. The problem I feel is they are held at both the top and the base. The one I removed without error I had to carefully shimming alternating between the top and bottom. That was on my second try, and was unable to do it on my third. Maybe I should cut those figures out in the future. Should be an easy glue fix, as I've broken a few stands on flying figures before, but I feel they can be packaged a little better.

- My Portcullis has a pretty severe warp. The two ends have folded in, so they cannot rest flat on a table and the the thinner bars have a wave. In all fairness I live in Texas so it could have been the heat of transport. Did anyone else experience this? I'm trying to decide if I should try for a replacement or if I should attempt a hot water dip to try and straighten out the figure.

Still really enjoying these cases and look forward to the next set!

My set is now opened and over all I am very impressed! A few issues I'll post over in the product thread though. The paint overall for this set is wonderful. Many of the commons I would mistake as uncommons just based on their appearance.

Eh, economy. How ordinary. Unless...

** spoiler omitted **

If not, I'm happy if there is something neat in the centerfold. I like stuff such as the maps in the People of... series and Faiths & Philosophies.

Cannot wait for that nightmare dragon. My group just finished In Search of Sanity and we plan to continue the horror!

SenahBirdR wrote:

Is it just me or does that golem remind people of a Glitterboy/Chromium Guardsman? I am very much enjoying the aesthetic of the Starfinder art. There is a lot I like about the sci fantasy setting here, but I'm still waiting a bit before jumping in.

Battletech - Hatamoto chi.

really close match... even the "helmet" design...

That does look closer. The helmet mostly so which is what made me think of the Glitterboy.

Is it just me or does that golem remind people of a Glitterboy/Chromium Guardsman? I am very much enjoying the aesthetic of the Starfinder art. There is a lot I like about the sci fantasy setting here, but I'm still waiting a bit before jumping in.

Mark Seifter wrote:

Yeah, it looks like the problem is that sea-dwelling mammals like dolphins and whales lack the aquatic subtype since they technically just hold their breath a long time (except a few that erroneously do have it). They are fundamentally aquatic (in the English term rather than the subtype) creatures, and like Adam says, should be fine with it as well. The point is that terrestrial creatures like an elephant or a catfolk wouldn't benefit.

Hopefully we can get this clarification in the Campaign Clarifications for PFS, so GM's don't have to fight with players over whether a dolphin gets a penalty underwater or not.

Maybe this could be a revision of the Hold Breath special quality. I am not certain, but suspect all of the aquatic animals that do not have the aquatic subtype have this special quality. Perhaps creatures like boggards and lizardfolk are edge cases, but I cannot think of any monsters off hand with the SQ that absolutely shouldn't be skilled under water. EDIT: Actually, looking through it looks like the cockroaches have the Hold Breath SQ. I honestly don't know how well they are supposed to be underwater.

These are all great ideas, everyone! I love the idea of an Undead Mutagen and Necrotic Bomb ideas!

I agree that the reanimator is a bit underwhelming.

What if they gained an undead companion (like a druid's animal companion, except undead)? I always thought that the animate dead spell was a bit cumbersome, because it forces you to create a new stat block whenever you zombifie a new creature.

Basically the Promethean archetype but an Undead companion and Alchemical zombies instead of the craft construct discovery. That is something I also considered. Some like my player would rather keep the bomb and doesn't want a big permanent undead to start with though. It is a good alternative take.

One of my players is an alchemist of the reanimator archetype. The concept is flavorful and I like some of the fun that can be had in our campaign. After a few sessions my feeling is the archetype gives up too much for and over values the undead creating spells. Giving up a single level of bomb damage for the individual extracts might be worthwhile, but reducing damage to d4's with no other exchange feels harsh.

So here were my thoughts on an alternate. A single new ability that replaces a few others rather than bomb damage. The first four spells overlap to an intentionally great degree. The restriction of touch and a single creature makes animate dead less efficient than a Cleric or Wizard of equal level but does open up variant undead. Even as a 5th level extract Create Undead comes in later than for cleric/wizard. No Greater Create Undead since that was for incorporeal undead which was restricted. Temporry Resurrection seemed like a fun idea for a reanimator to play with.

What do people think?

Reanimate: At 2nd level and every 3 levels after the reanimator adds a specific spell to their alchemist formulae book. When using these spells as extracts, rather than drinking it, the reanimator injects the extract into a single corpse with a range of touch.

2nd Level - Grasping Corpse (1st level extract)
5th Level - Lesser Animate Dead (2nd level extract)
8th Level - Animate Dead (3rd level extract)
11th Level - Torpid Reanimation (4th level extract)
14th Level - Create Undead (5th level extract)
17th Level - Temporary Resurrection (6th level extract)

This replaces Poison Resistance +2, Poison Resistance +4, Poison Resistance +6, and Persistent Mutagen.

Maybe they decided to delay the singles to give subscribers a chance to receive and open their cases. A good idea if so in my opinion.

I am happy with the set overall. Bendy sword/lance/spear syndrome is fairly common unfortunately. The mounted large rares are great. Tempting to buy more of them when the singles go live. My case yielded one of each rare again. The collation has been very spot on in these sets. My extras on dungeon dressings were the lectern and the stocks. I might try to sell the extra lectern. That grave monument is spectacular. More totems is very tempting.

I see the special promo dungeon dressings from the Dungeon's Deep and Rusty Dragon Inn sets are still in stock. There wasn't one for Deadly Foes either. I wonder if that means that isn't working out. I want more totems and arcane pillars.

My set shipped very fast. It left Paizo Monday afternoon and arrived today. The case incentive is shipping with the books and hasn't left yet, but time for me to open my box and see if I need to order any singles. They definitely prioritized the set over other packages, so hopefully everyone else in North America receives theirs this week in time to consider singles.

Pathfinder Battles usually has a different street date from the standard lines, since it is a WizKids product not a Paizo product. Paizo, while owning the IP and licensing it to WizKids with Paizo maintaining design approval, is effectively acting as a retailer for the miniatures. Albeit one with a special relationship. Unfortunately it looks like Paizo received their shipment late. I recall their preview copy was late this time and it looks like that filtered into the commercial shipment.

I don't like that my shipment won't arrive before singles go live, but I understand they still have to compete with other retailers and be reasonable in their warehouse logistics.

Agreed with the above. I have four or five copies from the subscription and have all of them in my Skull & Shackles box.

The thrones have differences. The king's besides being more faded, compared to the queen's vibrant, has tattered cloth. The top piece, I feel their must be a name for this, is bent at an angle. The relief above the head is also different, though that just may be the bending making it look so.

Swiftbrook wrote:

I think Berk the Black has spotted something. The single curve tentacle is on the left in both views. The curvy "W" tentacle is on the right in both views. Either way, it's still a cool looking mini.

(I could be wrong. There seems to be some blending of colors.)

Look again; both outside tentacles do W-curves.

When looking at the rear image, the (our) left tentacle starts right at the base of the three back-spikes, and is heading back away from its head. It then curves up and to the left, starting roughly at the butt (curve #1). Then it goes up to just beside the back-spikes and curves backwards again (curve #2). It heads back for a while then curves up (curve #3).

When looking at the rear image, the (our) right tentacle starts right at the base of the back-spikes and is heading back away from its head. It then curves mostly away from the main body (curve #1). Then it goes to the side for a while before heading away from the body again (curve #2). It heads away for a while then curves forward somewhat (curve #3).

Again, the creature's left tentacle ends in an upright attitude in both images while the creature's right tentacle ends at a much lower angle in both images.

Okay, I can now see it properly! I was definitely wrong. I suppose my mind doesn't do well with flat views of renders :D

Anguish wrote:

Berk the Black wrote:

Something bugs me about the otyugh pair of images. Either the forward facing or backward facing image is reversed. Not a big deal, over-all. But just something that annoys my mind when I am looking at the pictures.

I don't think that's true at all. The otyugh is nearly symmetrical. The main difference is that the left tentacle (our left, seen from the front) is lower and pointed at a 45-degree angle relative to the ground while the right tentacle is in high-five position. If you then look at the back-facing picture, that positioning is maintained. The tentacle on the right is at a 45-degree angle and the tentacle on the left is in a high-five.

I think Berk the Black has spotted something. The single curve tentacle is on the left in both views. The curvy "W" tentacle is on the right in both views. Either way, it's still a cool looking mini.

(I could be wrong. There seems to be some blending of colors.)

The central stalk is bending to our right with the end pointed left in both views as well. One image is definitely reversed from the final orientation chosen. Not a big deal. The great thing about renders is it allows for experimenting on which orientation has the better aesthetics.

Class Deck Witches gain the Arcane skill through the use of Cohort cards that represent familiars. The cohort starts in your hand after drawing the initial hand and can be immediately displayed to grant the Arcane skill. It creates a very different dynamic to other casters in the card game. Familiar cohorts grant a second skill in addition to Arcane, as well as an ability that puts them on top of your deck. There are also a number of staff cards in the Witch deck that let characters burn spell cards for extra effects so even a Witch that is temporarily without the Arcane skill has a chance to use the spells for something.

With the suggestions others are giving I think Paizo and WizKids could come up with a really nice forest or wilderness theme for a set. I tend to use darker natured fey and have seen others do the same. So even traditionally ally type figures could see some really good use.

At 52 figures that likely means the 2 announced/rumored huge case incentives, 6 dungeon dressings, and 44 standard figures. With the name of Deadly Foes my current suspicion is a theme of traps for dungeon dressings. Which suits me just fine!

A vizier archetype for mesmerist. I assume this comes standard with a red parrot familiar. Interesting new niches filled in this book!

Yesterday and today I finally opened my case and incentive. All around I am very pleased with this set. Rusty Dragon Inn definitely fills a niche we do not commonly see. The collation was very spot on for this set in my box. One each of every rare. My two doubles for dungeon dressings were an extra table and extra crate. The bar is a wonderful incentive and I am very happy with the modular nature of it. Down the line I might pick up another or two as it has good utility for a lot of environments. Many of the figures are good placements for important humanoid characters of all sorts. Great job! Looking forward to the announcement of the next set later today.

Will the Bunyip character have a power that requires killing another character as a cost?