Syntax_error's page

YES! YES! YES! I love starfinder so much, despite not playing it much, and the fact that Starfinder 2e is cross compatible with Pathfinder 2e is amazing, it means that when rules rely on something the other already has, we don't need to make a whole new book! Plus, we don't need to reprint the Human, Android, Elf, Orc, Dwarf, Gnome, Halfling, or Yoski for pathfinder 2e!

I liked the drow, so I'm sad to see them go, but I do see why they needed to get the boot, in both a legal and a social (For lack of a better term) way.

I do like most of the changes that I see, though it is sad to see some of the things I liked from the OGL leaving.

It just sort of hit me that I get absolutely nothing from this pseudo-edition war argument about rules Paizo isn't even allowed to feature in their game anyways, so I'm going to disengage and go back to something that brings me joy:

What kinds of new schools would you like to see?

It sure sounds like the floor is now being opened to some proper wizard subclasses! What are you hoping to see, or what might you want to homebrew in yourself?

For me, my favorite ideas:

Mesmerism-themed school: I'd love to see a school for beguiling figments and phantasms, mildly-ethically-dubious enchantments, flattering transmutations and glamors, etc, etc. You know, a sort of "courtly wizard" philosophy that holds that magic is there to make people happy... and to advance your standing among the gentry.

Dark magic-themed school: This school wouldn't necessarily be Evil, but it would be full of those spells that make people look at you funny. Dominate, animate dead, fear, and confusion would all fit right in.

Definately some sort of school focusing around the concept of power words

Spin shadowmancy into it's own unique thing separate from whatever illusion is going to become

Give us a wizard school of whimsy, using all of the sillier spells pf2r will have to offer (Such as Musical Accompaniment, and other goofy spells)

Just make things fun!

I do like this, it's kinda along the lines of the "You probably..." and "Others probably..." Sections on how the ancestries are typically seen. Will this be replacing that too?

Syntax_error wrote:

Jacob Jett wrote:

More on topic: What are folks most hoping the new source book delivers?

Well, I would like a few more golarion-unique animals, more animalistic ancestries (In design atleast), and maybe tools meant to be used to run wilderness-focused games? Also some nature leaning subclasses to add theme to things (Not many, like a nature sorcerer or witch).

Aren't those already overed by bloodlines or entities?

Are they? I'm gonna be honest, I haven't looked at either class in a good while.

More on topic: What are folks most hoping the new source book delivers?

Well, I would like a few more golarion-unique animals, more animalistic ancestries (In design atleast), and maybe tools meant to be used to run wilderness-focused games? Also some nature leaning subclasses to add theme to things (Not many, like a nature sorcerer or witch).

A playable formian ancestry with heritages based on the lower ranks of the formian hierarchy would be really cool imo.

Arcane fits well for monks that gets powers from constant study over magic itself to imbue into itself (I lack of a good example of arcane monks).

Maybe the monk-like sorcerers in the doctor strange movie?

Syntax_error wrote:

Funnily enough, I was going to talk about both Lashunta and kuru, but didn't because lashunta are frankly pretty normal for pathfinder and I just didn't want to touch on the baggage they bring, but I would like both to eventually make an appearance!

I'm not too worried about any baggage - the weird bioessentialist stuff wasn't really in their recent AP mini-appearance much at all, while Starfinder has lore I really like stating that social reforms eventually decoupled the Lashunta subtypes from sex and gender in their society.

The weird focus on gender-adjacent stuff is part of why I like them so much! Though I also just wanna be a Venusian psychic princess; what girl doesn't?

Fair enough. I like them because of psychics being one of my favorite types of magic.

On the point of the Kuru, I would like to see their lore be reworked before they make an appearance as anything.

I'd like to see d'zeriak make it as an ancestry. The way they speak through coded light pulses, and are nominally kind Shadow Plane natives is cool.

Worms that walk are also something I'd like to see, and bang on about ad nauseum, though I feel like they might be an archetype rather than an ancestry.

I'd also like to see the astomoi make a comeback, mostly because I'd love to learn more about them. As of now they're kind of just ... there.

I would like the astomoi to make a return too, I really like their design and what little lore we got of them.

Syntax_error wrote:

I would like a lamia of some sort. Probably not gonna happen, but it would be fun.

Don't we already have this with the nagaji? Or is it something different?

Huh, turns out we do. It's the sacred nagaji for anyone curious.

I would like a lamia of some sort. Probably not gonna happen, but it would be fun.

train ancestry train ancestry train ancestry train ancestry

And also, um, something like the yellow musk creeper or a mostly-free-willed minion of something like it would be cool. A talking animal ancestry, too, if the new book doesn't give us one. Bat people and merfolk probably aren't "weird". Um, archetypes or ancestries for fallen fiends who've lost their powers, maybe? I know nephilim kind of covers that, but it could be cool to play something closer to a hezrou or succubus on a redemption path--or maybe an anti-redemption path, trying to stop caring about people so they can just get home and pretend none of this ever happened, darn it. Oh, and let us play pretty unicorns, please-and-thank-you.

I actually made a construct race for 5e based off of steam trains, funnily enough, so I would like to see something like that.

Paizo has done a remarkably good job of chewing through my list over the last few years. We got Androids back remarkably early, Kholo are getting promoted up to Core 2, Minotaurs and Wyvarans both finally got confirmed… I’m eating good.

I’m still holding out hope for the Castrovelian pair someday, the psychic gender aliens of the Lashunta (my beloved!) and the ant-like Formians they’ve long feuded with. Formians feel like they’ve actually got decent odds; we’ve seen them a few times now in 2e, with options that readily map to potential Heritages.

Sekmin, the infamous Serpentfolk, are also dear to me. I like their place as bitter losers of a war that’s essentially prehistoric now, and telepathic mutant snakes are awesome.

Kuru, the native Ancestry of the Shackles who were pushed into contact with cursed Cyclops ruins by Chelish colonization, desperately need an update to make them something more than “evil indigenous cannibals.” Becoming a PC option would help a lot with that!

An aberrant Versatile Heritage, similar to but distinct from Fleshwarps, would be lovely.

Everyone knows I love Wyrwoods, but a trip to Arcadia feels inevitable - I’m not worried about their chances of getting in.

Funnily enough, I was going to talk about both Lashunta and kuru, but didn't because lashunta are frankly pretty normal for pathfinder and I just didn't want to touch on the baggage they bring, but I would like both to eventually make an appearance!

An eldritch scion versatile heritage could fill the same role as the nephilem. just for the major aberrations at play.

And touching on wyrwoods, yes.

As the title, what are the real oddballs you want to play that you currently cannot?

My selection for ancestries are:

Trox, I just really like the design

Formians, starfinder made me really like them

And any sort of purely natural aberration, like maybe yaddithan or denizen of Ib

I for one just want to know how big a large greatsword is in comparison to a medium sized humanoid.

I personally prefer the more classical kobold look to wyvaran heads, with the dog snout and such. I don't know why, I just like it.

Syntax_error wrote:

A Wyvaran, which is coming soon.

A Numeria setting book.

A Technology guide.

The Inquisitor, Bloodrager (Can be an archetype), and a shifter class.

Edit: Forgot the Wayang and Samsaran ancestries. I want those.

Samsaran and Wayang are confirmed for the Tian Xia books, alongside Tanuki and three unknown Ancestries!

Ooh, I did not know that, thank you.

A Wyvaran, which is coming soon.

A Numeria setting book.

A Technology guide.

The Inquisitor, Bloodrager (Can be an archetype), and a shifter class.

Edit: Forgot the Wayang and Samsaran ancestries. I want those.

Might as well give my two cents on this whole thing.

Alignment is long overdue for it's departure, and I'm tired of trying to make it more nuanced. If I want a system of aligning my character with something, I'll just use a better system than a grid of 9 alignments (Like the MTG color pie for example).

Ability scores: I'm privy to clearing up this, since it's obnoxious in a system that doesn't actively affect them.

Removal of OGL monsters: I will miss some, I'll probably forget others.

Dragons: Nice to see a new take on dragons, but I will miss the classic chromatic/metallic dynamic.

I, for one, hope for either just a formian ancestry, or a wholly unique and encompacing insect-folk ancestry.

I am hoping for drow to just get a redux to be unique from the OGL. Dark Elves are not a unique thing to dnd, and it would be fun to see Paizo come up with their own ideas regarding them.

Side note, this whole thread is kind of a mess, though I guess we will need something to fill the void of alignment threads/j

Ryze Kuja wrote:

Honestly, if a player is asking for custom stuff, it means they're invested and imaginative, and I would do whatever it takes to make that spark never go out.

sometimes this is true, usually however, it's a power gamer.

I think they mean custom stuff in a reflavoring sense.

You can't use that template if your GM is allowing templates. Pathfinder races don't have racial hit die.

I mean, as long as it fits in the same class/race chassis, I don't see any reason not too.

Syntax_error wrote:

Any general tips on how to format feats? I never homebrewed them in 5e, and I'm only doing it now in Pathfinder out of necessity.

I'd just copy the feats you see as close as you can. If you mean fonts and the symbology and stuff I don't think that'll be a big issue, and IIRC there is a font pack you can download if you want to. I want to say it's on Paizo Infinite somewhere?

Thanks, and I just wanted like a general guide so I can limit confusion for my friends.

Any general tips on how to format feats? I never homebrewed them in 5e, and I'm only doing it now in Pathfinder out of necessity.

Alright, so, I've been meaning to swap my homebrew efforts over from 5e to pathfinder to maybe encourage my group of trying it out, and since I used to mainly focus on races/species, I'd figure I give homebrewing an ancestry a shot. Does anyone have any advice regarding making feats and how many feats I should make for an ancestry?

Samsarans and Wayangs as ancestries. I just think they're neat and I feel like you could do a lot for characters with them.

Every time WotC has f+!@ed up within my lifetime, Paizo has been there to strike back and do something for the community. This is honestly great news to my gaming group.