Rotrovio

Tuvarkz's page

85 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists.



7 people marked this as a favorite.

10th level spells? Unless you are bumping the broken 7th-8th-9th level spells up there, please stop. This is the one chance we get to see the caster/martial disparity fixed, not broken beyond all recognition. Spellcasters absolutely do not need what was Epic spells in 3.5 given to them to break the game with.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I have the same issue with the Shifter than I do with the Kineticist. The class's main purpose is to be a frontline damage dealer. Therefore, it should have damage comparable to the more standard builds (2hand STR Barbarian or Fighter, whether Greatsword or Falchion) reliably. The problem is, it falls behind noticeably.

Also, I find the consideration towards 'power creep' rather amusing, given that functionally every book adding new spells only increases the versatility of existing casters, effectively bumping their power; or that there are noticeable class power-boosting books (WMH and Unchained Rogue/Monk being the most obvious examples). Well, and that I have the firm belief that there's a potentiall overwhelming (based on player skill) power disparity among the different classes.

Well, I'm deviating from the point I'm trying to make, which is: I've given a look at the numbers, and they look low. This is not comparing to the more damage-intensive builds (Archer-Smiting paladin and Ubercharge, or TWF shenanigans, amongst others), but to the bread-and-butter ones.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
bookrat wrote:

It could also be that CR 20 creatures can't be defeated with a simple sword or gun.

They require other solutions.

Except that at level 20 it isn't just a simple sword or gun, it's the very best sword or gun that mortal minds can conceive and craft, the same way in PF you can't really call a +5 keen impact heartseeker training impervious greatsword just a sword.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Mark Seifter wrote:

It's dangerous to take too strong of an impression from one person's first impression while reading a book (either positive or negative). People are focusing on Mashallah's negative posts here mainly because they are longer and more numerous with multiple follow-up posts, but she posted several positive comments (sometimes strongly positive) as well. You might find that you don't like some of the things she liked as much as she did (perhaps you won't like themes as much as she did, though of course I'll be glad if you do), but that you do like some of the things she didn't like (maybe you'll like the solarian better than she did).

My playtest group had a really interesting and useful comparison (built independently without knowing they were doing so) in that we had a blitz soldier and a photon solarian with very similar builds, close to as equivalent as they could have been while being different classes. They were swing for swing hit for hit rush for rush on par with each other on a normal combat round, with both able to put a pretty serious beating on foes (the solarian did a bit better but we kept track of the rolls and that was because the soldier was consistently rolling badly; equal rolls would have equalized that), plus the solarian had zenith rounds which were stronger and more out of combat abilities (and the option to go gravity, which he did several times when it was advantageous and really screwed over the enemies), while the soldier had some tricky feats that allowed him to keep up pressure on foes.

But even though it's backed up with empirical data, don't take my word for that either. A lot of the way things work together changed enough that it's worth playing the game and seeing for yourself. It won't be too long now!

EDIT: OK I was ninjaed by rooneg, KoA, and Voss while typing this long post. These guys have the right idea. I knew envoy was easy to underestimate before we even played so adjusted my expectations, and to top it off our playtest envoy chose a set of powers that I...

Except that (outside of FE:Heroes, which is a high lethality exception) the Dancer/Heron (not Crane) is a bad unit when you're new to the game and you can't use the rest of the units to the most/aren't good with positioning, solidly good when you have some experience, and not necessary at all when you have good mastery of how the game's mechanics work to its full extent (Just bringing 5-7 units that you overlevel without even grinding is enough to crush most challenges in many cases-or do some game exclusive shenanigans like staff abuse in FE5 or double Galeforce in FE 13)-Sure, you could do a comparison to the Rallybots in Awakening (+10 to allstats AoE effect for two unit's actions that doubles as staffbot when unneeded, which means +120 damage baseline, +48 vs dragonskin in a single round of combat with Brave weapons on both sides of the pairup, plus enabling that x4 attacks and probably surviving an enemy pack of Apotheosis Secret Waves? Hoo boy), but that game was totally broken in terms of balance.

From what I'm getting, a maximized Envoy on a teamworking party is comparatively less flexible than a 3.5 well-built Bard, who buffed everyone to hell and back plus provided a ton of side utility, plus being able to hit hard on its own.

Talking about another topic, can we hear some more about the new Hellknight Orders? (Furnace and Eclipse) Because hoooo boy those names sound rather hype-building. Nice to see that the Pike got promoted (being a consistently LG order, if minor); although it's sad to see the Pyre go (or is the Furnace the Pyre on space-flavor? Given the fire association, it's something I could see having happened).


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Question, why is Damoritosh LE and not LN? Neither his portfolio nor his writing suggests particular evil over neutrality, specially when he seems the lawful counterpart of Gorum rather than a deity more like Moloch. Sure, he does forgo honor and such when necessary for victory, but he says when necessary (and not when pragmatic, because a victory at higher costs remains a victory). And Ragathiel remains as an example of a LG god which doesn't do diplomacy, which means that his undiplomatic attitude shouldn't be a quality to make him evil.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Alexander Augunas wrote:
Human Fighter wrote:
Alexander Augunas wrote:
technarken wrote:

I like most of the book (finally got the pdfs this evening), but the nerfs to a couple PFS mainstays are kinda jarring to me.

** spoiler omitted **

Personally, I think the new lore warden is better. Not only does it no longer have some obviously garrulous trades, but it actually gives you choices in when you get the lore warden's abilities. It's like a built-in archetype-unique advanced armor training option.

So given my name, I am a fan of the fighter, and as you have maybe seen on the paizo forums, there are many who believe the Fighter gets the short end of the stick. The Lore Warden had its ups and downs before, and it's sounding like it got pretty screwed. Many took the archetype so they could get combat expertise, because they hate the feat, and all the awful pre-reqs to do certain combat maneuvers. So all I'm getting is it got nerfed, and I find this to be upsetting, but you think it's better. Can you give me some details on why you think this, especially since I don't have access to the reprint.

Also, I've been excited over this book for awhile, and I have been a subscriber of companions in the past, but I have been disappointed. Hearing a hardcover has reprints, and especially a Lore Warden nerf as one of the archetypes really upsets me. Alone that I was excited for some fighter love and instead am hearing that it's kinda the opposite saddens me deeply.

I'd be happy to answer this for you, but I feel like I also need to talk about what made the old LW problematic from a design standpoint.

1) It was not future-proofed well. The old archetype gave all INT skills as class skills shortly before we started seeing a bunch of X to INT traits (like the ones in Ultimate Campaign). As written, LW would let you take traits like that and instantly give you more class skills.

2) It broke a lot of design conventions. For example, it replaced armor training, a relatively weak utility ability, for a...

Yes, and how much is the Fighter getting out of it? a +3 to either Diplomacy or Bluff (Clever Wordplay)(This also means not taking Perception as class skill) and maybe UMD (Which has a fixed DC for most uses)? Around an archetype that still had very limited ranks per level?

Design conventions don't matter when Fighter was horrendously underpowered, and plenty of archetypes did the same thing (Mutation Warrior being the biggest example for Armor Training), and with AMH the feature's now about worth it for the trade.

Oh, the combat maneuver bonus was unbalanced? Do I need to bring up the issues with CMD on enemies snowballing out of control, which means that the Lore Warden's CMB bonus was NECESSARY to make combat maneuver builds VIABLE on the late game? (Not even mentioning the increasing amount of enemies that become immune to certain combat maneuvers for all practical purposes as the levels go higher, hello flying and many-legged, or huge+ enemies)

Ah, yes, a bonus to Combat Expertise's scaling. You mean making the feat what it should have been in the first place to make it worth taking on its own rather than the biggest feat tax in the game? And given that offense>>defense, it might still remain unused?

And even with the newer books, the Fighter isn't at the top of his tier, nor does Lore Warden push him over it. These words do look angry from me, but this is because I don't see this nerf as reasonable.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Alexander Augunas wrote:
Tuvarkz wrote:
If the intent is to make the paladin get locked into fear, it's far better to just rebuild a lower level dragon into an intimidate build and at least 3 antipaladin levels and either the Damnation Feats or Signature Skill

I'm not 100% sure, but "locked into fear," sounds like, "Make the paladin always fail its saves against fear."

Why would I design a spell like that? That's not fun for the player; it does a 180 degree spin on their defenses. A spell that removes an immunity, however, makes the player feel uneasy. "Just HOW far away do I have to stay from this dragon to avoid the madness?" THAT'S fun for everyone!

The thing is, the spell will not really screw a paladin unless they roll a 1 or a 2 and don't have Called or an equivalent abilities because their saves against fear effects are still pretty high, and it remains a tool only for the DM to use; and against paladins only, as no other player class I recall has a baked in full immunity to fear effects.

Quick math: A CR 14 Adult Red Dragon has a Frightening Aura with a DC of 21. A level 14 paladin will have a base Will save of +9, plus another +4 from Charisma, another +4 from his Cloak of Resistance, another +4 from his Aura of Courage, which even when deprived of the fear immunity, still grants a hefty morale bonus; and this sums to +21; +19 if he has -2 to Wis. This means he only fails the save on a Nat 1. A level 12 paladin may fail the save on a 2; or a 3 or 4 if he's a level 10 paladin(And this is before any other bonuses that may apply), but it remains clear that even with his immunity deprived, he will reliably make the save against the effect.
Unless the paladin already traded away his aura of courage on an archetype (and in which case he then no longer has fear immunity, making using the spell against him pointless) he doesn't really risk failing the check. (EDIT-there's also 4 archetypes that do trade out Divine Grace; but I've rarely seen builds of any but the Stonelord, which likely still has a decent Will from being a dwarf and being able to dump Charisma)

A spell that allowed the caster to bypass the fear immunity of enemies regardless of their type (And as such also allowing intimidate builds to work against undead, constructs; which outside of specific campaigns tend to be more common than plants, vermin (against which a trait can already allow for intimidation) and oozes-the latter being already a pain for melee to directly attack though) would enable players to play around with intimidate builds without risking making half their build useless (Given that an intimidate build generally involves getting Cornugon Smash, Dazzling Display and Shatter Defenses plus prereqs at minimum) against fairly common enemy types; which is my criticism of the spell-It'd be fun for everyone if the spell's fear immunity-piercing applied to everything so that the spell is a good choice for players too.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
jedi8187 wrote:

Level 13 for medium to ride, only 9 for small.

But yeah they were really afraid of flying mounts here. I might try a small cavalier, but giving up banner and tactician seems kind of a steep cost.

That is as a ground mount. For Flying, you need to get all Glide, Flight, Mount, and either Improved Mount or Improved Flight, as Mount in of itself will cause the drake to lose it's highest drake power related to flying while carrying a rider, and gliding is most certainly not flying.

EDIT: And in the meantime, Draconic Malice allows for non-antipaladins to finally have a way to pierce fear immunity, that is, against living creatures (And not undead or constructs, which are likely more common enemies with immunity to it)


1 person marked this as a favorite.

It seems like drakes make for absolutely terrible flying mounts, particularly for medium characters. Not only they need to invest about everything into making it a decent flier, the archetypes are pretty costly in trades as well. Makes for a better investment to just spend two feats into Monstrous Mount and MM Mastery for a flying mount, which can also be obtained much earlier. Endgame wise (Levels 17+) it seems like the Drake will outdamage the Griffon offensively as a mount and be much sturdier; but having to wait until level 15 to get the Drake to work as a flying mount (And with a disastrously terrible -10 to Fly from it being Clumsy maneuverability and Large size) is just ridiculous.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Kalindlara wrote:
In addition, the quick runner's shirt ends your turn - you can't pounce with it.

Because apparently martials can't have nice things at all.

Allie, same here on a couple builds T-T


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Mrakvampire wrote:
CBDunkerson wrote:

Repeating a false statement over and over again does not make it true. The Unhindering Shield feat does provide benefits to 'sword and shield' builds. I have listed them.

No it does not provide any considerable benefit for a o'good fighter with longsword and heavy steel shield.

But it provide huge benefit to those that previously fought withou a shield. Now they can take it and start getting huge sweet bonuses to AC.

Sorry for 'broken sentense structure', not all of us are native English speakers.

Actually, it does now. You get to add half your strength and 50% bonus to power attack since you can 2-hand that longsword. At levels 14-15 that can easily amount for an extra 4 damage from STR, and an extra +4 damage from power attack. +8 damage per swing isn't bad at all.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Mrakvampire wrote:
Lemmy wrote:

Hah! If this feat breaks the game, then just using a shield already did it.

The only reason this is "broken" compared to Dodge is because Dodge is a crappy feat. Investing 2 feats and a bunch of gold to eventually have +6 AC seems fair.

A whole feat for non-scaling +1 to AC is overpriced and underpowered.

Besides, it's already possible (and more effective) to simply use a heavy shield as a 2-handed weapon.

It is 1 feat. One. Feat. One. Feat. And you can skip gold entirely, you just need Magic Vestment from your cleric, if you worry about money.

Quote:
Besides, it's already possible (and more effective) to simply use a heavy shield as a crappy 2-handed weapon.
It seems that you forgot one word. I added it to your statement.

Magic Vestment? Oh, which at level 12 is a +3 bonus to the shield? (Take into account that pearls of power replenish a third level slot for 9k gp, which means that it's the exact same value)

You only get to save 7k gp on the shield at level 16, and 16k at level 20.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Lemmy wrote:
Powercreep isn't a bad thing when the original power levell is too low.

This as well. Regardless of how much of a help WMH has been to Fighters, them alongside all the other noncasters and 4/9 casters are still below the 6/9 casters and even further behind fullcasters in terms of capabilities. It's pointless to balance a feat around what another martial class can do because then you stagnate them in the point they are in. A good point of balance is the Inquisitor or the Warpriest, which while partial progression casters, are pretty weapon combat oriented.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Mrakvampire wrote:
Jack of Dust wrote:
The feat is more powerful compared to the baseline, yes. That baseline is flawed though and frankly, I hope we see more options for martials of a similar power level to this feat in future Player Companions. It's a good feat but I would never go as far as to say it would break the game. Certainly not something to be an alarmist over at any rate.

More powerful feat compared to baseline (in my book) is something like +3 to Will saves, when previously feat granted +2 (50% increase is HUGE, but still).

Potential +6 AC and item slot for enchantment vs +1 AC you previously got for one feat?... If this is not broken, then I don't know what should be considered broken at all.

This feat not only gives huge bonus, it actually breaks the game, as it breaks monster math (that previously wasn't created to accomodate this, consider checking CR of monsters, their stats and now compare it with AC/damage output of fighter both with shield and two-handed weapon), also it breaks sword and shield combat niche, it completely erases it.

It is like someday we will have a feat that will grant complete immunity to... let's say evocation school of magic, so evokers will be no longer viable choice to play.

Want some monster math? Here: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1E2-s8weiulPoBQjdI05LBzOUToyoZIdSsLK xHAvf8F8/edit#gid=3

The attack bonus of what more than likely is the melee dedicated enemy leaps from +31 to +34 at CR 15-16, and from 36 to 41 at CR 18-19. At the highest levels, it becomes increasingly hard to keep up with the Attack bonus of enemy monsters in terms of AC, you keep putting cash onto it so that some of the secondary/iteratives get a chance of missing. And heck, it's not melee or ranged attacks that make high CR enemies dangerous. Their dangerous stuff goes against saving throws or touch AC. What makes the Pit Fiend truly dangerous is not his full attack, but his trap the soul and mass hold monster.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Mrakvampire wrote:
Tuvarkz wrote:
Because as I've stated a couple posts before, Fighter is better off with Shield Brace

Ok you compare one similary broken feat with another to provide argument that this feat is actually balanced? How nice.

Usually something NEW is compared with something OLD, but who am I after all to tell you this.

No, I brought up Shield Brace because you asked why Kensai Magus and not Fighter McFighterson. Want a fair comparison? Well then, again as I mentioned a few posts ago. Skill Focus: Knowledge (Any)+Eldritch Heritage (Arcana), or Iron Will+Familiar, or Extra Arcana>Familiar if you're a Magus. You grab a Hawk with Protector archetype, retrain that useless Weapon Finesse because Familiars get Dex to attack rolls from being familiars into Additional Traits, pick something to boost the hawk's saves and then Helpful trait, which boosts the Aid Another bonus to +3. Now, Mister familiar is providing you with a) Against 4 attacks per round, 95% chance to increase your AC by 3; b) 50% additional health pool at later levels from splitting damage, c) take the full brunt of an attack (plus any rider effects) as an immediate action . How much additional gold does this cost? 0 gold, or 200 gold x level (which caps at a very affordable 4k gold at 20th) if you lose your familiar. See level 12, 25k vs 2400 gp if you get your familiar gibbed or fireballed.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Fallyrion Dunegrién wrote:

I'm having troubles to trigger the Breakout event.

My PCs are sometimes too kind and release people after only hours of imprisonment or too "efficient" and kill 'em all.

The barkeeper Caggans was captured, but was released after one day. He reopened his tavern and was captured again, but this time he turned a Wereboar middle fight (trying to save a patron of his tavern which was taken hostage by one PC) and was killed.

Kels, the bard, was released as soon as the PC finished his interrogation

So I set up a new event. The Junior Deputy created a parallel melitia to patrols the streets after the curfew. The PCs approached them, and there was a fight. But this time the PCs killed 'em all without a second thought.

So, I have no prisoner to be rescued by Alamar brothers.

Any suggestion?

Maybe someone tried to sneak into Fex's home and got caught by the archbaron's guards. Annoyed, he orders the PCs to keep him imprisoned for it, for at least a couple weeks.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

In addition to these arguments, let's assume what happens if the Glorious Reclamation somehow wins without Thrune pulling a ragequit button or something. You have a whole bureaucratic system that will collapse because most of the people involved have made deals with devils, are in alliance with them, or probably ping evil hard enough for the paladins not to incarcerate.
Granted, there's a couple well-standing Chelish noblemen that are good aligned, but otherwise Cheliax will collapse, because not only the bureaucracy (and likely communications) will fall, but the resistance pockets will actively make things worse.
You have noblemen that have gotten in so deep with devils that they won't be able to bluff their way out, Hellknights that will be likely angry at the fact that their orders will either suffer a strong decline in influence, slowly pushed out of society if not outright sieged.
And then all the Asmodean demon hunters need to go into hiding because they no longer have a powerful country behind their backs to cover for them from overtly zealous members on the other end of the alignment spectrum. The couple Hellknight orders outside of Cheliax will aim their weapons at the Glorious Reclamation because even if they do not necessarily have a brotherhood pact with other orders, without the main strongholds in Cheliax they will lose influence as well. Stuff happens in Nidal because they can very well figure out that if Cheliax falls, so can Nidal.
To boot, you'll have hundreds of Asmodean priesthood-sponsored orphanages that will either fail or heavily drop in quality of service provided because apparently they are the only orphanages that work effectively.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
Therrux wrote:


Also to add to that, the question was for a living and breathing swordmaster, and Aroden as we all know is dead.

That pretty much applies to the mega wizards as well, the bulk of the ones above 12th level are either disappeared or dead. The idea is that in a given campaign the mega characters should eventually be your PCs.

If we talk specifically wizards, yes indeed. But fullcasters in general? (In the same way the swordmaster could be any full or 3/4 BAB class)

Off the top of my head, Baba Yaga, Elvanna, Abrogail Thrune, Razmir, Geb and Arazni (Last two technically undead but w/e), three of which are reasonably active these days.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

You need to remember that the paladin is LAWFUL good. Just because someone detects evil is not a reason enough to smite them, even if they don't want to change. Should the paladin smite the heartbreaker man that simply dedicates himself to making others fall in love with him for the sole purpose of breaking their hearts, even if the guy refuses to change his ways?
Also, what about a would-be Paladin of Erastil that finds that the only local knight order is a Hellknight one, which is helping protect his community?


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Quandary wrote:
Lord Twitchiopolis wrote:
I feel like it falls into a category similar to Psychic magic; it's different, but balanced.

Not feeling the similarity. You either use Psychic magic or you don't, it has different pros/cons to other casting (or mundane abilities), but you're stuck with the boat you chose. With a language, anybody who has a bonus INT language slot or skill rank can pick it up, and use it whenever advantageous to them to do so, and use another language when advantageous to do so. No balance involved.

Never mind that people are talking about opening up functions of spells etc. Well, actually alot of "language based" spells are de facto assuming auditory components, do Sign Language folk get to bypass that now? Does mute creatures who know sign language now get to activate wands? In a home game I would probably welcome this, but in PFS, it just has too much min/max exploitation potential. Of course, some folk love their min/max and will advocate for that, but AFAIK standing PFS policy is to minimize and prevent that.

Except PFS still doesn't pick on true minmax? Synthesist is only powerful in low-Op games, as anyone that actually goes on full optimization will tell you that the archetype is weaker than the main Summoner on the basis that it only has half the action economy of the standard Summoner+Eidolon, even if it ends up making the Summoner somewhat sturdier. PFS 'balances' around what most people complain about, not what is actually imbalanced.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Stabby Bob? I was most truly convinced his name was Thean Tagonist, but I don't think I would've failed that sense motive check.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Baval wrote:
Sundakan wrote:
Baval wrote:

For me, its simple: i dont care about the power, but PoW characters are more fun. They have more options and can fulfill more fantasies.

On a related note, it annoys me when people play Warders as not tanks.

Warders make good "not tanks" too though.

Hawkguard especially makes a a great "disruptor". Using Counters at range to protect your own allies? Mmmmmm...

Toss in some Solar Wind goodness pinning enemies to walls and whatnot and you get a Warder who is interesting and effective, but not tanky. Well, not any more tanky than a d12 HD class with pseudo-Armor Training is at a base level.

I should clarify: When i say tank i dont mean beefy guy who can take a hit. I mean guy who can defend his allies from damage and prioritizes that.

To me, the two handed archtype is the worst thing. I see too many of my players picking that and playing the warder as a damage dealer who uses his stances to become hard to hit. I hate that, it just feels power gamey and doesnt feel right. At the same time though, I try not to limit people from playing what they want to play.

But it still bugs me seeing people try to make warders into offensive classes who dont care about....warding.....

Imho, it does fit the archetypal "One man army", however, if he's standing alone in a battlefield to defend a town against a raging horde of enemies, it makes sense for him to be able to defeat enemies fast enough for them not to get past him and tanky enough that he won't be overwhelmed.

And this is one of the key points of it-Each class can be easily reinterpreted into a variety of roles. A full warder party could have a dedicated protector, a healing focused character via Silver Crane, a strong debuffing Fiendbound Marauder via Black Seraph and Cursed Razor, and a sneaky Dervish Defender/Hawkguard that also dishes a lot of damage. ((Of course then, a 4-man warder party can pretty much deal with most encounters due to all of them mutually protecting each other in a steel-tight defensive formation.))


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Cole Deschain wrote:
Tuvarkz wrote:
Mengkare's subjects are volunteer subjects, however.
Volunteering to enter a cage is still entering a cage.

What Deadmanwalking just said, basically.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Mengkare's subjects are volunteer subjects, however.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Ross Byers wrote:
Why do you need an Official one? Making an LE paladin by taking an Antipaladin and writing 'LE' on the character sheet seems almost stupidly straightforward. It won't fly in PFS, sure, but neither will Evil characters.

I believe it's more of an issue of what the Antipaladin stands for, in base of his CoC (even if we take out the chaos part)-The baseline antipaladin is fundamentally the champion of all things evil, and a lawful one would just happen to have some degree of self-restraint on his methods. And the Insinuator is mainly motivated by self-interest, only adhering to an outsider's morals due to a pact, and just for the duration of said pact.

The main appeal about Asmodeus is that he's more Lawful than Evil, and an (Anti)Paladin archetype specifically dedicated to that purpose would be the merciless enforcer of justice and law (And of tyranny), but not overall a champion of evil nor someone who's in just for the benefits.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
CorvusMask wrote:
Zhangar wrote:
My own hunch is that Mengkare is actually LG (though a dragon's LG can be kind of alien to a human's LG)

Isn't that impossible because in Pathfinder Good and Evil are objective cosmic forces, so LG is same for everyone even though it has nuances?

...Also, I'm disturbed at how many people think eugenics and elitism is Good aligned :D

Anyway, Dragon Revisited has tons of things that aren't canon: Sin & Virtue dragons, Abomination dragons(metallic & chromatic dragon crossbreeds), humour dragons, mineral dragons, Thaumaturgic dragons, Tiamat... Thats at least what I found from pathfinder wiki :D

Remember that eugenics in this situation isn't 1) forced upon the unwilling (People aren't abducted to Hermea, and can choose not to follow with it; in which case they are allowed to leave. There's the rumors of the burnt boats on the shores, but that might be Mengkare being overprotective of his project against external forces that would try and infiltrate/destroy it), 2) isn't chosen from subjectively chosen traits but what approaches as much as possible for objectivity in what is best.

Additionally, this is not much elitism, but rather a strongly meritocratic system-the "elite" is not a static group. The best get rewarded according to their own merits, which is pretty much what fairness is all about.

By themselves, these are Neutral concepts, which if Mengkare is applying for good purposes, result in good actions.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
The Raven Black wrote:
If the LG deities themselves did not decide to go Mengkare's way, then who is he to believe he knows better ? How can that be LG ?

Because LG can have quite the wide spectrum of philosophies, going from the "Find good in every person" that can be found in Redeemer Paladins, to the "Smite and purge all evil" that is amongst those that follow Ragathiel, to the more grim "Do not offer pity to the truly wicked, but don't kill lightly" of those that would agree with Damerrich.

Every alignment has its own nuances and shades.