Also, the bronze age rules in Pathfinder Ultimate Combat aren't really fair to bronze, which was NOT easy to work and which was as good or better than the early iron weapons. Iron was easier to work, good bronze took more effort. The switch to iron was more an economic decision.
Anyway, a skilled smith, by Pathfinder rules, could make magical bronze weapons which would then fix the fragile issues. Fragile is a little bit of a wierd category anyway. Obsidian and stone shatters. Metal frequently bends instead of breaking and can be repaired. Lay it flat and straighten it out.
From wiki: Zulus.
Shaka is often said to have been dissatisfied with the long throwing "assegai", and is credited with introducing a new variant of the weapon: the "iklwa", a short stabbing spear with a long, sword-like spearhead ...
Robert Jordan had the Aiel of the Wheel of Time, modeled on the Zulus. There is a d20 version of the Aiel around somewhere. And "what he said", several martial weapons are just better versions of the spear. The concept of the Aiel was that they were originally complete turn-the-other-cheek pacifists, but this became distorted over time to just having an aversion to using swords.
I guess that means you don't like vegemite. But there is a better example of eating sentients. We have the amazing ghoran of Garund, who produces good berries on his/her body. Nibble your comrade while you travel! But we are straying from the poor unicorn. I can't get past the unicorn in literature and why girls like to ride horses. Naughty girls would be spurned and more likely to cook and eat the unicorn.
I have questions. Why are you calling the poachers "poachers?" Robin Hood was a poacher; he was chaotic good by most conceptions. How do you or anyone know the poacher are/were evil? Maybe the unicorn attacked them?
It's odd but Wikipedia actually shows the daemon as originally benign household gods. Plato, however, had a grudge against the concept and started calling them bad things, and the later Chritian writers went with that flow. I think in AD&D they showed up in Vault of the Drow, since Eclavdra was I believe Neutral Evil instead of chaotic. A bedpost thingy summoned some daemon to a luxurious bedroom, and of course he was expecting a good time not adventurers. Also there was a guardian daemon that had variable powers, generally used to guard big locked treasure chests.
Two points in favor of Iomedae as written.
Philosophical Comment: Sometime after some of the dust has settled, one True Neutral is not surprised at Iomedae's behavior. After all, good is only a stick for beating others. I'm good, you're not. Likewise, lawful means follow my rules or else I will inflict pain. Anyone who pretends to act without self interest is simply dishonest. Evil isn't all bad. Good is disguised self aggrandizement. To expect good behavior out of a good deity is unreasonable. To expect constant bad behavior out of an evil deity is ridiculous.
Practical Comment: These are adventurers with considerable combat related training. Eh? It is a common thing in martial training to receive some pain. Iomedae is a very martial god in a hurry. As seen in the forums many PCs are pompous inflated pricks who need deflating. So what do you expect? What you got. Iomedae is just treating them like she would any martial student who got uppity in sparring.
I really don't want to see Paizo influenced by those who whine the most. The errata are generally appropriate, meaning adjustments according to the already existing guidelines. Nobody is making anybody do anything, and Paizo runs the on-line-play. I mean it's a game where your players can craft things on their own and home-brew any way you want.
The examples in the Core rulebook (203) distracting spellcaster, counterspelling, and brace weapons vs charge do not show any option for taking another action. The readied action and the trigger are, in the examples, glued together. The short answer is surely no, otherwise there is no point to a readied action. I guess the real discussion is what happens when the action-readied-against is no longer a possible action. But most of the discussion seems to focus on poorly worded readied actions, in which case the action should be lost. More complicated ready actions should actually be delay actions. IMHO.
I can't be sure overall. But from what I see of builds on this site, most of the over-powered-ness is due to using 20 and 30 point builds against Adventure Paths that expect 15 point builds. Also, I don't see how a player's build can be a surprise to the GM. There's also an issue, I think, with builds that are strong at particular levels but would be difficult to play at lower or higher levels. Cross-bloodedness has strong drawbacks. Multi-class caster dips that don't stack are weak at higher levels. Let them shine while they can, trouble is always on the horizon for an adventurer.
Good point, Arachnofiend but there's a little more to it. Tolkien's stuff was seriously racist and elitist. True bloodlines were noble, elves were good. But, in a way, the main characters (hobbits) were a counterpoint. Hobbits were nobodies who did what all the high and mighty ones could not. And then there's the ents, "we're not on anybody's side; we're on OUR side." I think some of the treeish Ents (the Huorns) hated everything that walked. And the problem is also that racism is built into the Core rules. Races are not a biological identification. Species are defined in biology as sets of interbreeding populations. So technically, orcs and humans and elves and aasimars and tieflings and angels and demons are all the same species. And you can add most fey and probably other things.
We don't all have to be PC police. Of course, flavor can be mis-used but anything can be mis-used. Something can be technically polite and actually be abusive. So Kobolds refer to human as soft-pink-skins or maybe big uglies. But well kobolds don't care what humans think of them. In reference, to Koujouw's scenarios, just because something was commonly used doesn't mean sensible people used those terms. To consider, would a white male Christian WASP trust somebody (loan money) (lend tools) just because the other person was a white male Christian WASP? Eh, no. You'd trust somebody based on your personal assessment of his/her/its character. So, usage of the slur as a slur, gives you more of an idea about the mentality of the speaker than what he is speaking about. For role-play, you'd expect young people to have been stuck with the preconceptions and vocabulary they were stuck with growing up. They might not even know something is a slur. You'd have to have some serious confidence in your players' maturity to deal with this in an RPG.
There are re-training rules for skills in the Ultimate Campaign. Apply time and money, which comes across as pretty sensible by comparison. I like the hard-coded approach to items that augment intelligence. It is more in keeping with stories -- old and new fiction. Or/and consider the dangers of such an item that had intelligence itself. Or/and you could add a little bit of extraneous memory or personality of the ancient person who used or created the item.
With regard to military forces in armor, they are likely to wear identifying tunics or coats (surcoats or tabards) OVER the armor, so they don't hack at friendlies and can recognize them from a greater distance. Military forces, as opposed to adventurers, have to worry about rank. Also adventurers tend to get away with pretending you can wear armor and carry weapons all day and all night anywhere and everywhere.
And, please note, dream wolves are actually Andoran Furry Knights.
As per way above, what is frequently called Fluff is the point of playing, so I've been mystified by the constant usage of this in the message boards. I would generally have used background, or context, or any number of other words, instead of Fluff. I think this is the difference between people who just play games and people who see the game as a way of participating in a story, of experimenting with ideas and feelings. We come from literature and history, and even from philosophy and science. The Fluff is the sense of the real intruding upon the game. Again, of course, that means it's not really Fluff. The game mechanics are what is totally unreal, except in the game.
I think the inspiration for the Lashunta -- judging by the sexual dimorphism thing and the illustrations I have seen -- is La of Oppar in the Tarzan books. The females there didn't ride dinosaurs though and they didn't have antennae. So there is a combination with some other literary reference or trope -- smart psychic aliens.