Samaritha Beldusk

Seventh Seal's page

73 posts. Alias of Psiphyre.


RSS

1 to 50 of 73 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

Re_Kurgess:

Although he had been raised to demideity status by Desna & Cayden, he since may've become a full deity (mechanically, at least) in that he grants five domains.

(Full deities grant five domains; demideities grant four; quasi deities usually grant less than but potentially up to four. Of course, this only applies to PF1: No indications of how this pattern will be affected/changed in PF2...yet.)

So, yeah...


1 person marked this as a favorite.
KahnyaGnorc wrote:
Seventh Seal wrote:

^ Hmm...

Evidence for the presence of an ancient civilisation in what came to be Sumer is more & more pushing back to at least 6,000 BC. The date you're using only represents the first written records from the region (although that date is being pushed closer to the 3,500 BC mark as a result of more recent discoveries/research...).

Also, if written records are the only basis you're using for human civilisation, I'm sure there are a few cultures that'd disagree.

While Golarion's earliest civilisations would still be older by at least a millennium, they were given a jump start by aboleth-intervention, so...

<shrug>

8,088 BC is when those civilizations fell, meaning their rise was much older than that, and they may not even be the first civilizations.

<sigh>

My apologies if it seemed like I was invalidating your post.

I wasn't contradicting your point on the antiquity of human civilisations on Golarion & how they most likely predate human civilisations on Earth (at least as revealed in canon, so far).

I was disputing your assertion that one of the earliest human civilisations on Earth (Sumer) only dates to 3,100 BC when it was considerably much earlier than that.

Spoiler:
I feel that perhaps this tangent has gone far enough. However, if you feel you have to have the last word on it, no problem. (Or you could PM me if you really want?)


1 person marked this as a favorite.

^ Hmm...

Evidence for the presence of an ancient civilisation in what came to be Sumer is more & more pushing back to at least 6,000 BC. The date you're using only represents the first written records from the region (although that date is being pushed closer to the 3,500 BC mark as a result of more recent discoveries/research...).

Also, if written records are the only basis you're using for human civilisation, I'm sure there are a few cultures that'd disagree.

While Golarion's earliest civilisations would still be older by at least a millennium, they were given a jump start by aboleth-intervention, so...

<shrug>


Hey. Don't feel bad about not reading on. It WAS an interesting bit of lore, so I completely understand getting fixed on it. ^^
It is one of my favourite sections of the book!

Also, the font used in those sections is particularly difficult to read this time round (especially when compared to those used in the Chronicles of the Righteous & the 3 Book of the Damned).

So, no worries. :)


Umm...Did you finish reading the whole entry?

It said that, with the destruction of Gualti, EVERYONE no longer knows what twamni is. Hence the unease at what may happen if another Primal Inevitable were to cease to exist...

(It's most likely just a made-up word that probably represented some sort of ancient sport - like the Mesoamerican ballgame. As such, it doesn't mean anything, thereby simulating how no one remembers what it means in-game.

But were a developer to weigh in on "What is twamni?", then of course go with their answer!


Thank you for all your hard work!

It looks great!

Two nitpicks:

  • I take it that Vrock being LE is meant to be CE...
  • Is the Nightmare/Greater Nightmare meant to be tagged with Fire or Fiend (or even both)? Or is having each with a different tag correct?

Again. Thank you.


Awahoon wrote:
...Seeing there are 400 creatures in a 300 page book, <snip>

The Bestiary is 360 pages, according to the information released at the banquet.


BrunoZhy wrote:


How many pages does the book have?

It's part of the Pathfinder Player Companion line, so 32 pages.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
David knott 242 wrote:
It does look like the "Old Cheliax" region is a bit too small. Andoran, Galt, and Isger are in other regions even though they all split off from Cheliax in the last century.

Umm... Isger is part of the "Old Cheliax" region...


2 people marked this as a favorite.

^ Thanks for checking! I was not too sure...

I certainly intend to get it by the end of the month - I have heard great things about it!

:D


1 person marked this as a favorite.

^ Hmm... Pharasma is explicitly mentioned as taking part in the alliance of deities who opposed * Rovagug in Inner Sea Gods p.125 (Rovagug's entry).

Of course, canon may have been retconned since then... (I do not have Concordance of Rivals yet, if it does mention anything about it?)

<edit> * & imprisoned


2 people marked this as a favorite.

^ Re_Pharasma as the strongest deity:

Well... Rovagug may be stronger, considering it took a coalition of deities (which included Pharasma) to imprison him (not defeat, exactly...).

Then again, Pharasma may not have wanted to use more of her personal power than necessary (souls to judge - most likely including a few deities slain by Rovagug; maintaining the River of Souls; working within the limits placed by prophecies she may have been aware of; not wanting to diminish the relevance of other gods; etc.).

So, you're not necessarily wrong (& James did hedge on whether or not Pharasma was the most powerful, which is not a denial admittedly, so...)

(Of course, if you're referring to a more recent post than the one I saw, well... Never said you were wrong... <shrug>)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Ed Reppert wrote:

Well, if there's always say a 5% chance that a given arrow fired by a level one character will actually hit a dragon, then if there are 100,000 archers firing, roughly 5,000 arrows will hit. That's a significant amount of damage. How many hit points does this dragon have? :-)

If there's *no* chance that an arrow fired by a level 1 character will hit, then it doesn't matter how many are firing, the dragon will just ignore it all.

???

Umm... That's not how percentages work according to your phrasing (in italics & bold above), is it?

What "...a 5% chance that a given arrow fired by a level one character will actually hit..." means is that each arrow will only have a 5% chance to hit (& would, thus, be of almost neglible concern to the dragon).

For your numbers to work (5,000 of 100,000), it would have to be "5% of total arrows fired" (in a given situation).

Right??

I know, I know... It seems like I'm being pedantic. But what you wrote could be very misleading, so...


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Warning: Wild speculation below!

So, considering the title of the adventure path & Cole Deschain's hint above & the draconic implications...

Could Dahak (& most likely Apsu, too) have a role to play?

Continues speculating...


Dotting for when can view on laptop/pc...


You forgot the Tian-Hwan (=Korean) & Tian-Dtang (?ambiguous, as they are the most 'fantastical' of the various Tian ethnicities; Dtang seems to be Indonesian, yet the general geography could imply a group from the 'Indochina' region, like 'Burmese' or Thai).


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Sean Brinson wrote:

Uh. No. Not really. But if you REALLY wanted to stretch to reach for it, you might get Urgothua or Zon Kuthon. That's the closest I can think of.

Urgothua - CE deity, the first undead ever. She basically was super hedonistic in life, didn't want to give that up when she died, so she spontaneously became a deity of undeath. She likes her minions to indulge in excessive sex, violence and mayhem, as by the time she died she was well past the threshold of being able to get off from anything even remotely normal. Super self destructive, chaotic stupid/stupid evil crap.
...

...Umm, Urgathoa is NE, not CE. At least, in canon.

This doesn't necessarily invalidate the gist of what you were saying about her though.


I'll give you that.

:)


Yqatuba wrote:

hmm no good aligned ocean gods why?

anyway for Kelizandri- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tw5lIdSYFDM
Dagon https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pev0dINRaok

Lysianassa??


Dark Midian wrote:
The Gold Sovereign wrote:

That's surely a must have!

Again, what's a Monad?

Mentioned up above. New name for Aeons.

Err...

Isn't the Monad the god-like entity from which Aeons are derived &/or revere??


1 person marked this as a favorite.
ladydragona wrote:
I haven't even gotten last months issue let alone this months it is totally unfair that some people are getting Septembers issue when some people haven't even gotten August's issue yet. In july my copy of the armory was messed up they said they would fix it and send another copy and I haven't gotten that yet either. I seem to be lost somehow I have been paitent for 2 months now waiting for my return of the runelords subscription how much longer do I have to wait.

Perhaps you could make a post about this in the Customer Service forum so that the good folks at Paizo can look into your problem and offer you some assistance in resolving it?

Just a thought.


There is probably an island (or two - or even a chain!) in Minata that fits the bill over in Tian Xia...


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Souls At War wrote:
Rysky wrote:
Souls At War wrote:
Dragon78 wrote:

Well at least there is finally a term for all the neutral outsider groups.

Neutral on the Good-Evil axis, might still need one for the Law-Chaos axis.
We have Fiends for any-Evil, and (taking a guess) Celestials/Empyreals for any-Good. If you were talking about NE-N-NG groupings they don't really interact in the same way that CN-N-LN do.
Fiends/Fiendish/Unholy for Evil; Celestial/Empyreals/Holy for Good; we now have Monitor for Neutral on the Good-Evil axis; Anarchic/Entropic for Chaos; Axiomatic/Resolute for Law...

Umm...

Fiends cover Evil outsiders, i.e. LE, NE, & CE.

Celestials cover Good outsiders, i.e. LG, NG, & CG.

Monitors cover the remaining Neutral outsiders, i.e. LN, CN, & (T)N, which is the (neutral) Law-Chaos axis, right?

Or, at least, that's what I understood from what was written in the product description.

Am I mistaken here?


This isn't Mystara...


Erik Mona wrote:

The versions in the Playtest Rulebook are the "official" versions, at least at this moment. The changes were made VERY late in the game, and somehow we missed universalizing these changes during the edit of the Playtest Bestiary.

Kind of what I thought had happened, and I completely understand.

(I'm sure things are a little...hectic atm.)

Just calling attention to the descrepancies so that they can be addressed when the final version of the CRB & Bestiary are decided.

Thank you for your reply.


Posting this from another thread as it seems relevant to the topic? :/

There seems to be a bit of inconsistency regarding the names of the various languages in both the Playtest Rulebook & Playtest Bestiary.

E.g. Under the Dwarf Ancestry section in the Rulebook:
The names for many of the languages listed (incl. that of the Dwarf ancestry itself) are not the same as everywhere else in the book.

"Dwarf" should be Dwarven.
"Giant" should be Jotun.
"Orc" should be Orcish.
"Gnome" should be Gnomish.

Or the languages as listed in the entry are correct but those listed elsewhere are not?

In the Bestiary, this inconsistency is a little more widespread, e.g. Orcs speak "Orc" - which is fine. But then why have it as Orcish in the Playtest Rulebook? Also Ettin, Green Hag, Norn, Ogre, & Oni are all listed as speaking "Giant". Wouldn't it be Jotun, the language actual giants (in the book) speak?

Spoiler:
  • * I know, I know. It seems 'nitpicky'. And, fortunately, these are the playtest docs & not the final versions, so there will be some errors/typos/inconsistencies in them. And I'm fine with that.
  • * However, I feel that the 'language inconsistency' has the potential to creep into not only the finalised rulebook, but also into other products like the Bestiary itself - at least in the earlier years of the game.
  • * So, it may be a good idea to decide what are the languages for the ancestries/creatures & get everyone on the same page. Then, apply the decision(s) consistently.
  • * Also, will daemons be getting their own language in PF2?
  • * I appreciate that the team is currently focussed on gathering & processing feedback for the rules of the new game & how they play/work/not work. This isn't meant to be a 'naggy post' or a "Ha! Found an error! Paizo faaailed! <overly dramatic whine>" post.
  • * Rather, this is a "When you get to the finishing touches, be aware that there are some lore/rule inconsistencies spread about, so give it another look through - preferrably with the official list of languages/adjectives/etc. at hand ;) " kind of post.

TL;DR (the spoiler): Please pick which version of the language-name is official, & stick with it.

Thank you.


^ This also seems to be the case with many of the entries in the Playtest Bestiary, e.g. Orcs speak "Orc" - which is fine. But then why have it as Orcish in the Playtest Rulebook?

Spoiler:
  • I know, I know. It seems 'nitpicky'. And, fortunately, these are the playtest docs & not the final versions, so there will be some errors/typos/inconsistencies in them. And I'm fine with that, in general.
  • However, I feel that the 'language inconsistency' has the potential to creep into not only the finalised rulebook, but also into other products like the Bestiary itself - at least in the earlier years of the game (as was the case here & there in the earlier books of PF1 - it did get much better later on!).
  • So, it may be a good idea to get together & decide what are the languages for the ancestries/creatures (e.g. Will daemons be getting their own language in PF2?) & get everyone on the same page. Then, apply the decision(s) consistently.
  • I appreciate that the team is currently focussed on gathering & processing feedback for the rules of the new game & how they play/work or not. This isn't meant to be a 'naggy post' or a "Ha! Found an error! Paizo faaailed! <overly dramatic whine>" post.
  • Rather, this is a "When you get to the finishing touches, be aware that there are some lore/rule inconsistencies spread about, so give it another look through - preferrably with the official list of languages/adjectives/etc. at hand ;) " kind of post.

Still, enjoying what I'm seeing so far, so good work there!

TL;DR (the spoiler): Please pick which version of the language-name is official, & stick with it.

Thank you.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Under Dwarf Ancestry section:
The names for many of the languages listed (incl. that of the Dwarf ancestry itself) are not the same as everywhere else in the book.

"Dwarf" should be Dwarven.
"Giant" should be Jotun.
"Orc" should be Orcish.
"Gnome" should be Gnomish.

Or the languages as listed in the entry are correct but those listed elsewhere are not. Please pick one & stick with it.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
elvnsword wrote:
...I do like the new Totem/Anathema setup for the Barbarian albeit it feels off when it comes to the chaotic alignment they adhere too...

Umm...

Barbarians are no longer restricted in alignment, i.e. Barbarians can be of ANY alignment, not just the chaotic (or non-lawful) ones.
So...

Not really "off"??

________________________________________

I've noticed that a number of names for things (esp. setting related) have been changed (e.g. aeon stone instead of ioun stone, Jotun instead of Giant, etc.) - presumably to distinguish Pathfinder more from D&D.
Not necessarily a bad thing, but it will take a little bit of adjustment.

Icons, while a little more abstract than expected, are (to me) clear, simple & easily distinguishable once you learn them. (There are only THREE, & they are at most only two colors - white & dark reddish brown.)

I can't really comment on the actual rules until I've played a bit, so that's it from me.


Quandary wrote:
Igwilly wrote:
If there's a very small thing which can increase my enjoyment about this subject are alternate religion models like "tight" pantheons, monotheism/dualism, philosophies, etc.
Golarion does have things like Shimye-Magalla (Desna-Gozreh amalgam), Godclaw, and the Eternal Emperor cult centered in Po Li (albeit seemingly more Oracle focused than Cleric). That, and Osironi Pantheon to name another, are definitely things to look forward to, although I would guess only Shimye-Magalla has any chance at getting Core treatment if Bonuwat are Core ethnicity).

Hmm... The last I heard, Shimye-Magalla was going the way of the Darklight Sisterhood: Something COOL! that was mentioned in older books but is now receiving a 'soft'-retcon of not actually being a thing in setting by no longer ever mentioning it again.

Unfortunately.

But there's always a possibility that it might be brought back... Slight.

<edit> ninja'ed!

:-p


2 people marked this as a favorite.
avatarless wrote:

That's Orcs as their flavor text is currently written. But this is Pathfinder 2 -- we can update the lore!

It'd be nice to have Orcs aren't 100% pure evil traditional tropes. Sure, have some Orcish tribes reminiscent of Tolkien's Uruk-hai, Games Workshop's Orks, and AD&D Chaotic-Evil experience point containers...

Umm... Orcs were LE in AD&D. They only became CE from 3rd Ed onwards.

Right?

Just saying...


Also relevant to Yaldabaoth is that not only is he the demiurge (=creator) of the material world (usually attributed to the Judeo-Christian god), but an alternate name of his is Samael, one of the many identities of Satan in Judeo-Christian beliefs. This link between Satan & the creator of the 'evil' world was part of Catharic belief in particular.

Also, in some sources Samael is equated with Azazel (perhaps mistakenly), as well as with Ashmedai (a variant of Asmodeus...).

So, it's really not that difficult to see why the Gnostics (& their 'spiritual inheritors', the Cathars) as a group were declared heretics and stamped out during the early days of Christianity...

DISCLAIMER:
The above is strictly in reference to the beliefs of some - not all - gnostics in the past. This post isn't meant to be an attack on anyone's beliefs.
But, as religion can be a little polarising: my apologies if it does bother you somehow.
Please flag the post so that the forum moderators can review it & decide whether or not it should be modified or removed.

<edit> Added the Disclaimer.


Thank you!


Wicked Woodpecker of the West wrote:
...There is vague shape of continent, few nations barely mentioned, once city, one specific god and that's all. ...

!!

What!?

Where? Who?

Oh, & Camazotz doesn't really count as he is mentioned in context of the Inner Sea Region (somewhere in the Mwangi Expanse - or was that Vyriavaxus?).

Please & thank you.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
General Dissa Ray. wrote:

Can't wait to see stats for the Lady of Pain and the Paizo take on Sigil.

Any chance Tim Butler can legally bring any Planescape stuff with him?

Unlikely for anything you've just requested: both The Lady of Pain and Sigil (the City of), as well as much of Planescape, are Wizards IP & so cannot be used by Paizo.

Unfortunately.


Will we be getting a blog post summarizing the deities of Azlant, much like was done for the Ancient Osiriani gods?
(At least, for those of us who will have to wait awhile to get this product…)

Spoiler:
CorvusMask's post certainly was nice, but there was quite a bit lacking, like who is the twentieth core deity (I only saw 19 mentioned - are there 20?) Or the same treatment for Acavna & Amaznen, who have only ever been given a very general description before this book...

Please & thank you.


David knott 242 wrote:

...

So the Eoxians have been reliable allies of the non-evil Pact Worlds races for over two (nearly three) centuries, while the Vesk have been allies for only a quarter century or so -- but nobody is talking about attacking Vesk on sight, even though there are probably more people in setting who are willing to do that than there are people who would smite Eoxians on sight.

As a point of comparison, I cannot think of any real world nations who have been allies for as long as the Eoxians and the other Pact Worlds planets have been.

The Anglo-Portuguese Alliance between Portugal and England is the oldest alliance in the world that is still in force at a little over 600 years (one date gives 644 years, while a ratified date gives 631 years).

<edit> There was a brief spell (about 60 years) when Portugal was unified under Spain, who was not particularly friendly with England at the time. However, the alliance was reconfirmed after the Restoration War, so all's well. ^^

And now you know!


This looks interesting!

Would it be out of line to request a list of the spirits present in the book? (Perhaps in a spoiler tag?)

OR perhaps a table of contents? (It does not have to be super-detailed, either...)

However, I'll understand if the contributor(s) would rather not...

Please & thank you.


Brinebeast wrote:
...I really hope there is a least a paragraph that talks about about there being a profane coven that includes Gyronna, Alazhra, Mestama, and possibly Haborym (so that lawful evil is included). One Goddess and 3 Demigoddess would be one scary coven!

All four are demigoddesses (Gyronna included).

And there has been mention that Gyronna & Mestama do not get along, so...(Of course, that doesn't mean they can't be grouped together as a divine coven by their worshippers, so...)

For Lawful Evil, have you read up on Mahathallah? She could be a candidate for a demigoddess worshipped by LE hags (although not exclusively).

Nice idea (divine coven) at any rate!


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Glomgold is originally (i.e. the comics) Afrikaner. However, when they came to making the TV series, it was decided to change him to being Scottish due to the politics of the time (the US had sanctions against South Africa at the time of production as SA was still under Apartheid then).

So...

Yeah. Nothing to do with Glomgold's backstory really. Just RW politics, etc.


Of the Empyreal Lords mentioned in Chronicle of the Righteous, almost all are made-up, presumably to keep them as Paizo IP.
(Svarozic and Cernunnos are the main ones that stand out as based on real-world deities, viz. Slavic & Celtic, respectively. There may have been mention of one or three others, but they are rather minor or currently inactive as Empyreal Lords, e.g. the Peacock Angel[?] & Tabris.).
However, it doesn't rule out that some of the Paizo-only Empyreal Lords may have been inspired by real-world counter-parts.

Note 1: Those mentioned in the bestiaries (which are world-neutral), e.g. Hors, Tanit, Atonga, Cernunnos, etc., are based on real-world mythology - for Bestiary 1 at least (although The Forgotten, Free Even From Memory, isn't, it seems).

Note 2: Those mentioned in The Great Beyond are mostly based on real-world angels/archangels, e.g. Uriel, Sandalphon, etc. However, it seems that Paizo has moved away from making them 'official-official'. (The Great Beyond is from the 3.5 era before Pathfinder became its own thing. I'm not sure if Heaven Unleashed makes any reference to them except for those from Chronicle of the Righteous, so that may be worth checking out.)

Note 3: There are other Empyreal Lords scattered about in various products, e.g. Maluzdeh from Distant Shores. Most of these seem to be Paizo-only, although Shemhazai is based on real-world sources (Shemyaza of Jewish & Christian folklore).

TL;DR:
1-Chronicle of the Righteous: most are Paizo-only (invented), with Cernunnos, Svarozic & Tabris being the main exceptions (there may be a couple of others mentioned in passing).
2-Bestiary (Archon & Azata): from real-world mythologies/folklore/religions.
3-Bestiary 2 (Agathion): Paizo-only.
4-Bestiary 4 (Cernunnos, Korada, Vildeis): The first is a real-world Celtic god; the latter two are Paizo-only.
5-Bestiary 6, pending (Arshea, Black Butterfly, Ragathiel): All are Paizo-only.
6-The Great Beyond (Angel &/or Archon): mostly Judeo-Christian folklore. Those not from Heaven (e.g. the Agathion leaders from Nirvana) are mostly Paizo-only. Not all of these have been updated/brought over to Pathfinder from 3.5 officially.
7-various other Pathfinder sources: Mostly Paizo-only.

Hope that helps.


Amusing!

Although it would work even better if

Spoiler:
'hyperbole' rhymed with 'vole'...

'Hyperbole' is 4 syllables: 'high-PER-bo-lee'. Still. Many think it's pronounced 'HIGH-per-bowl' or even 'high-per-BOWL'. Quite a common misconception, so I wouldn't worry too much about it.

<shrug>

And now you know.

Of course, given to the implied irony in your post, you most probably already knew that!


Well... Echidna is part of a class of female serpent/dragons with humanoid features from Greek mythology known as Drakaina.

Or, to put it another way:
Not all Drakaina are Echidna; only one of the Drakaina is Echidna.

Of course, this doesn't mean that Echidna cannot be statted up as a unique/advanced/demigod Drakaina (or even something else, like a Devil? Demon?).

Same for Cerberus being statted up as a unique/advanced/mythic cerberi...

But until then, one could just use Drakaina-stats for her.


Arshea, to my knowledge, is neither counted as an neutral or evil deity, so I doubt a Disciple of Arshea prestige class would appear in any book dealing solely with either neutral or evil deities.

That said, it would be nice to have said prestige class appear somewhere in the future!

Just some expectation management...


Alchemaic wrote:
Mark Seifter wrote:
Alchemaic wrote:
Thomas Seitz wrote:

Alchemiac,

I'm sure they'll figure something to make a Harrow Medium come to life down the road. This is more for Horror than Harrow.

Maybe, although it does already exist and it's just locked up in a cupboard someplace. I'm just pointing out that the description seems to have changed which severely dropped my enthusiasm.
While I'm just as excited as you to see my little Harrow medium show up some day, I can pretty much guarantee it won't be in a Player Companion, simply due to its length compared to the length of a Player Companion.
I'm just saying it could be the *entire* Companion book, maybe add some archetypes for Occultist and Witch and Bard or something. That would be super hype.

Well... I think Mark has mentioned before that the Player Companion line of books do not have enough pages to hold his Harrow Medium.

So, if the Harrow medium itself won't fit, I doubt there would be any room to include some archetypes, too. At least, not in the same book.

Of course, things might've changed since then. OR I am misremembering. :p

It would be AWESOME to see the Harrow Medium sometime in the future...

<sigh>


Diffan wrote:

3.5 but not Pathfinder things....

• Specific settings or jumping between settings. Jumping from Greyhawk to Faerûn to Dragonlance to Sigil/Planescape
...

This aspect was already the case in AD&D 2nd Edition way before D&D 3.5, i.e. it is not really a quintessential thing of one ruleset.

Just so you know.


DragoDorn wrote:
You both forgot "What if.....?"

That's only two words, not four...

Doesn't mean they're not 'dangerous'.

;p


Andre Roy wrote:
Ah ok. Is it safe to assume that The Scalykind or Void Domain has been reprinted somewhere?

The Scalykind and Void domains are from the Inner Sea World Guide.

I don't think that either have been reprinted elsewhere (at least not in their entirety).

But, I could be wrong...


Kodyax wrote:
I am definitely interested in this. I kind of hope it will have something on dark folk and derro but I am sure it will be good none the less.

Thought you might be interested to know that Derro have already been in a revisited book.

Here's the link: Classic Horrors Revisited

(^_')=b


Myth Lord wrote:

Thanks man! That is awesome!

Ovinnik not evil? That is a bummer! I wished the Domovoi was good, the Kikimora was neutral and the Ovinnik was evil, so all alignments are presented on the house spirits.

The Domovoi is CG, according to Luthorne's list.

However, the Dvorovoi is CN...

Carry on.

--C.

1 to 50 of 73 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>