toastwolf's page

Nice one t-wolf. How about Dread Thanatosist? ;)

Ooh what a glorious conglomeration of cooperation we just performed, what ho! (it kinda feels good to dust off my first avatar)

scary harpy wrote:

Evil characters thought of themselves first while Good placed others before themselves

Bardess wrote:

Umm... as a chaotic, I think that individuality is the right path to benefit myself and the others. As good, I will freely sacrifice myself for the good of others. That's how I see it.

This. Being Good and doing the right thing is choosing to benefit others over yourself. Law/Chaos is about the method.

i follow this same idea though i phrase it to new players as, good/evil are the alignments of motivations, law/chaos are the alignments of actions. i basically rendered them down to why and how. i recognize that not everyone agrees with me on this topic, so i am only stating it for sake of sharing with the group. however it should be noted that belief, and therefor alignment, is incredibly abstract as concepts so we all interpret them in different ways. i would ask, as a fellow gamer, to please keep this discussion relatively open minded and not go on attacks against other players personal views. now it hasn't escalated to the really nasty stuff yet, but that doesn't mean it won't. i really am curious how this discussion will develop, and don't want to see a webninja have to lock it down. thank you for your time.

the toast who cried wolf

I actually want to play this over the other monk, but it wouldn't stop me from playing other frontline fighters. As usual dabbler awesome job.

i guess if i were to have a problem with it its this, many prestige classes can be completed well before level 20 so unless your tenth level rested on 19 it could be horribly unbalancing. and if you were to do that i would restrict it to a class whose levels contributed to the prestige itself, lest it reek of cheese.
-the toast who ate wolves.
ps. this is quite a power upgrade for PCs so tread carefully.

i like it, but had a fun thought. what if it were undead made specifically from aberrations and animals? it started off as an innocent prank by a group of necromancers during a certain fall holiday. originally meant to scare people who did not participate in the tradition of giving "treats" to passerby, instead they learned how to produce more of their kind and slaughtered the town they were in instead. since then, to this day that holiday has never been celebrated again, or those knocking at your door aren't friendly passerby, but the deadly skilevak!!!
the story would serve as lesson to others about how a "trick" can go wrong.
just something off the top of my head really

are you dead set on having rage, cause that's a pretty potent combo. honestly i could totally see a vastly diminished rage directly combined with wildshape. it could be called wild fury or something. Its just a thought.

-the wolf who likes toast

toastwolf wrote:

. . . actually it was intended to reimburse for some the cost for large size and became similar in method to the quadruped trait. really its just about language in trait, sometimes its easier to compare two things when you judge what is taken away rather than what one gains over the other (especially when the two subjects are directly related). by the way enlarge person doesn't give a flat bonus to hit and damage, in fact it actually gives a -1 to hit. not sure if you were just counting the weapon damage increase average as the flat bonus, because you then stated it in the next sentence.

edit: by the way i was stating powerful build as the OP uses it, not the original sorry for the misunderstanding.

Sorry. I didn't include all of the changes that enlarge person makes... so we are both right and both wrong. The bonus to strength it grants gives you a +1 to hit which is canceled by the -1 to hit from becoming large... so the main bonus from enlarge person goes back to reach.

which neither form of powerful build granted, so really as i see it powerful build is really the lesser form of a size increase. by the way i cant believe i forgot to to count ability increase bonuses, nice catch.

toastwolf wrote:

had you given any thought about maybe making powerful build have the prerequisite large size and have it simply give back a couple points? it might make the language a little bit easier to swallow for some people. in my

...

actually it was intended to reimburse for some the cost for large size and became similar in method to the quadruped trait. really its just about language in trait, sometimes its easier to compare two things when you judge what is taken away rather than what one gains over the other (especially when the two subjects are directly related). by the way enlarge person doesn't give a flat bonus to hit and damage, in fact it actually gives a -1 to hit. not sure if you were just counting the weapon damage increase average as the flat bonus, because you then stated it in the next sentence.

TeShen wrote:

BeowulfIam wrote:

. . . Honestly, I don't think Powerful Build is HUGE in terms of game power. . . Along with all the combat maneuver stuff. Ignoring a -2 in penalties seems like a lot less of a big deal than being able to wield weapons like an ogre. At least in how it sounds. . .

Powerful build lets you have some of the good benefits of being large and some of the good benefits of being medium.

No -1 to AC or -4 to stealth or -2 to fly. No swallow whole by large creatures. +1 bonus on CMB/CMD. Large size weapons (which is usually on 1 or 2 more points of damage on average than it's medium counterpart, but not always)... there is a lot of little things that go into powerful build. Granted, it's not quite as good as in 3.5 because of the changes to size modifiers, but it's still pretty good.

Large Creatures can't normally swallow medium creatures whole, but I know what you mean. Also, medium creatures can hold large weapons without much of a problem (a -2), and Powerful Build treats you as large, but doesn't make you large for Combat Maneuvers, therefore no +1 to CMB or CMD. I think I also gave the Goliath a -2 to stealth in the game I'm running because logic.

According to the Race Builder, a +2 to a skill is 2 RP, even if it is Sense Motive.

Lastly, I really like those abilities you came up with. Perhaps they could be implemented as alternative traits for them race.

had you given any thought about maybe making powerful build have the prerequisite large size and have it simply give back a couple points? it might make the language a little bit easier to swallow for some people. in my experience the spell enlarge person has been used for more than a simple damage upgrade and powerful build takes many benefits away to balance the lack of penalties.

i definitely like your method better than my own, since it saves time identifying each races options. will look through and post some myself.
so to add to the list
wave warden actually makes even more sense for gillmen than merfolk, as it stands i say it belongs to both.
speaking of gillmen, eldritch raider lacks the right flavor for a race archetype and should be a general one instead.

You mean archetype classes for the less common races.

The other topic is for archetype races such as Midge Pixies and Winged Elves.
Speaking of which, Death from Above could be a class for bow using flyers. It would be like the ranger focus for bowmanship, but with extra flying feats instead of spells, animal companion, and tracking.

ideas like that are gladly welcomed here too. i am definately all about using what already exists as a method to give more more options. By the way winged elves rule.yup

Yup, the whole "spotlight hog" phenomenon again that I have never seen as a DM nor as a player.

well thats good, but not everyone has that luxury of having people that can consistently resist those temptations. keep in mind i don't hate the guy, i just know that he usually gets carried away with character building and powergaming, probably because he is the most experienced player of the group. even he admits (after some time has passed) that he does this, but at the time he gets carried away. so for the good of the group i make sure to provide structure (albeit loose structure, i am really not too strict), and i don't hear complaints. the player in question sees the rules as given and accepts them as is.

toastwolf wrote:

Icyshadow wrote:

Umbral Reaver wrote:

I just remove all racial restrictions except for those explicitly based on biology (i.e. those that build upon racial abilities). And even then, I allow other races to take those same options if they can pick up the requisite abilities somehow (with the warning that if they use a magic item to qualify for a class or feat, they can lose tohse abilities if the item is lost).

I do this while wishing others would, too.

I used to do it, but a munchkin player has convinced me to make a list of thematic combinations.

So you let one munchkin's abuse ruin it for everyone else?

if you can make an argument ill allow the combo... but if i say, hey everything on the table, then i am pressured to allow the broken "i am doing this just to steal the spotlight" behavior because i said it was allowed. to be fair even the munchkin doesn't complain about the restrictions so far, because we have limited people and no else wants to dm. there is no fun being ruined with my group by doing this, but there has been problems with the open access method.

anything half-elf really is pretty open. together we could have this problem licked.

toastwolf wrote:

Flamehawke wrote:

Technically. Wishcrafter on any of the elemental races or one of the genie blooded sorcerer bloodlines.

Otherwise I took the racial archetypes and did the same as Umbral Reaver. Though if there is a serious flavor that is best tied to something I tie it to a region or culture.

Gives the same openness and yet ties it to a campaign flavor. Works very well for me as I run my own homebrew campaign

usually thats what i'd do, but i found a lot of racial archetypes just didn't make sense thematically when you used in open combination and frankly were more prone to encourage unnecessary powergaming. now you can go ahead and do that i wouldn't discourage you, you probably didn't have the strix stonelord and other ridiculous and pointless combos that my players have tried to pass off as "justified" because of that rule.

Yeah. I don't have that problem. My players tell me what they are going to play and if it could destroy the game at any point its an auto veto. I only had two players suggest race/class/archetype combo that were broken. Thankfully I don't tell them I allow the racial archetypes on almost every race. You are correct though that some try to use such a rule against you. I allow within reason of the racial archetypes on any race and that includes giving me a solid reason as to why I should allow it.

On Topic. As well as the Wishcrafter on any elemental race or genie bloodline. You could put Foe Hammer on just about any fighter. I recall looking over and wondering why it was dwarf only when it looks awesome for any fighter who prefers to fight with a hammer.

yeah i had that same thought about the bonded witch, some just seem to be standard archetypes pretending to be racial.

Umbral Reaver wrote:

I just remove all racial restrictions except for those explicitly based on biology (i.e. those that build upon racial abilities). And even then, I allow other races to take those same options if they can pick up the requisite abilities somehow (with the warning that if they use a magic item to qualify for a class or feat, they can lose tohse abilities if the item is lost).

I do this while wishing others would, too.

i used to do it, but a munchkin player has convinced me to make a list of thematic combinations.

Technically. Wishcrafter on any of the elemental races or one of the genie blooded sorcerer bloodlines.

Otherwise I took the racial archetypes and did the same as Umbral Reaver. Though if there is a serious flavor that is best tied to something I tie it to a region or culture.

Gives the same openness and yet ties it to a campaign flavor. Works very well for me as I run my own homebrew campaign

usually thats what i'd do, but i found a lot of racial archetypes just didn't make sense thematically when you used in open combination and frankly were more prone to encourage unnecessary powergaming. now you can go ahead and do that i wouldn't discourage you, you probably didn't have the strix stonelord and other ridiculous and pointless combos that my players have tried to pass off as "justified" because of that rule.

i never want to be one of your players, good lord and my players have been known to call me sadistic.

aw what the hell, here is some more
Prankster bard(gnome) for vanara
Saboteur alchemist(gnome) for kobold
Blood god disciple(half-orc) for goblin...the eat anything trait just about begs for this
Hateful rager barbarian(half-orc) for tiefling, because the only thing most communities hate more than the orc-blooded is...
Community guardian oracle(halfling) for the those tight nit ratfolk
Wanderer monk(human), renamed the reincarnated traveler, for samsaren, because if you've already lived everywhere.

whew gonna take a break

As a committed archetype homebrewer I think this is a great project. I agree some of the "racial" in Racial Archetypes is sometimes missing, some of my RAs aren't always that specifically thematic. I'm all in favour of reskinning these puppies!

oh hey i meant to give a shout out to you but i forgot, love your's and elghin's work keep up the good job!

ok here are two more
fire bomber alchemist(goblin) can be used by ifrits
ironskin monk(hobgoblin) renamed hardscale monk could be used for merfolk.
again asking for community help because i know i won't spot everything.
p.s. why is the bonded witch even a racial archetype? i mean it doesn't seem to have enough fluff to support the idea that only half-elves could figure out how to do it.

for a while now i have been wanting to do this. i definitely think that less common races need some love in the archetype department, and obviously reusing current racial archetypes accomplishes this for many of them. for example, the stonelord paladin for dwarves happens to fit oreads like a glove.

now it might be necessary to further fluff the actual abilities of an archetype to fit certain races. one that comes to mind is the kinslayer dhampir archetype, which can be used for tieflings by changing any references to undead instead to outsiders with the evil subtype. you could even go as far as to say that "detect evil outsider" works as detect undead but for outsiders, if clarification is necessary.

i will be back with more ideas but i would have other people other people give this concept a try from their own perspectives. Together We are Superior

Gerty from Moon.

NG

with Darkness (moon, obviously), Healing (Resurection), Liberation (Freedom), Travel (exploration) and Void (Stars) domains.

second this, kevin spacey for the win.

well i only glanced through it, but what caught my eye was the capstone. i must say i think its awesome. the original capstone was always so bland and dry and yours definitely breathed some much needed life into it. good job

I just looked up the once opon a time. And that vertion is actually most like the old legends of him so I think that version is what we should aim for

yeah he is basically the devil, so again tiefling suggestion.

its pretty good, i would definitely like to try this archetype.

yeah you didn't specify points of damage in your doc but i had a feeling that was the case.

toastwolf wrote:

i am pretty sure its implied when listed with racial archetypes(see human/imperious), what i was concerned about was the very, err..."complicated" relationship sorcerer archetypes have with each other and quite honestly i would love to see a wildblooded adaptation of this. speaking of which, if you did do that, maybe it could have fluff based on sorcerers who live for magical duels instead of anti sorcerers.

How would you wildblood adapt it? Just trying to figure out where you're going here.

with only a slight twist on where the fluff lies, you could change your sorcerer from the "i am the antitheses to magic" to "i am a natural at magic dueling" but i feel the third level power and class skill don't fit this thought. it probably would be spellcraft for the skill but i am not sure of what to use for the trap thing.

Wishcrafter ifrit sorcerer archetype gets the ability to grant wishes to others.

now just reflavor to said gnome idea and voila...unless the OP was going for the once upon a time version, cuz then i would recommend tiefling.

Belazoar wrote:

Aelryinth wrote:

Yes, your Red Dragon DOES have to be a sorceror/19. It's as natural to him as his breath weapon. Hell, sorcery was originally put forward as coming from having the bloodline of dragons.

If you're going to make it a Witch/19, you're creating a Dragon with class levels. There's a Black Dragon Great Wyrm in FR that is a Wizard/20, goes around creating dragon-only gates and portals and stuff, and except for the extra HD from Con, is only pegged a couple CR higher.
==Aelryinth

If we were talking about anything that wasn't a dragon, sure. Take into consideration that sorcerers were originally presented as humanoids with a 'trace' of dragon-blood. That in no way means that an actual dragon need be pidgeon-holed into the humanoid class that stems from humanoids have a trace of draconic heritage. A dragon of a forest, for example, may be rocking druid spells and abilites, instead of sorcerer spells. And let them pull it off just because they are dragons. Doesn't mean the dragon is a wannabe druid either. He's still a dragon. And if sorcerers don't like it, they can take it up with a dragon. :P

One could easily give a dragon the spells of a druid, witch, etc. in place of sorcerer spells and not give it 19 additional levels to pull it off. Just swap sorcerer spells out for witch spells, remove some special abilities for hexes and you are good to go.

Nothing wrong getting creative with the greatest adversary in the fantasy genre.

You are both right. Some dragons cast cleric spells in 2e.

CR 20-something dragons with a single level in a full casting class can do many things.

and with this i will take out the really obvious lazy suggestion and just say dragon summoner. maybe the only reason he lived this long was due to his pact. not too mention eidolons make great backup.

what exactly does backlash do? it seems to not really explain what the percentages precisely do. i am familiar with the wilder version, so assumptions can be made but i am still curious.

20. all senses improve with age till death

I don't have the Dragon Compendium. What's an osteomancer do? Read bones?

Osteomancer is a spellcaster who can control bones, extending his own as as weapons, making them stone/silver/adamantine, paralyzing opponents by not allowing their bones to move, etc. its in dragon magazine #317, page 50. i understand if you feel i am asking too much.

toastwolf wrote:

just a thought but couldn't the forbidden bloodline be a stand alone bloodline like the human imperial one? I don't know if a bloodline by itself deserves a whole archetype.

It could, but it is supposed to be an elven only bloodline. I should have stated that in the description. I could have swapped out a bunch of abilities, but decided to incorporate them into a bloodline instead.

i am pretty sure its implied when listed with racial archetypes(see human/imperious), what i was concerned about was the very, err..."complicated" relationship sorcerer archetypes have with each other and quite honestly i would love to see a wildblooded adaptation of this. speaking of which, if you did do that, maybe it could have fluff based on sorcerers who live for magical duels instead of anti sorcerers.

8. that i can be a savage who can effectively punch a whole through a two foot stone wall with NO MAGICAL SUPPORT!!!

You cannot take Racial Heritage(Aasimar), as Aasimar are not humanoids.

You could take Racial Heritage(Ogre), but none of the Native Outsider races are available for this feat.

was anyone going to suggest he do the reverse with the scion of humanity alt-trait for aasimar?

just a thought but couldn't the forbidden bloodline be a stand alone bloodline like the human imperial one? i dont know if a bloodline by itself deserves a whole archetype.

i still support your idea but..
found it

i think smilodan did the celestial in his base class thread. im pretty sure its the only prestige in there so its worth a glance.

never tried it but my first thought is that it will make many feats more difficult overall to get which, kinda turns me off. power attack and the twf chain will be taxing to take due to their requirements. i worry builds will be difficult to balance.
p.s. partial casters would probably not love you for this.

would you consider on a base class conversion of the osteomancer prc. i believe its in dragon compendium.

couldn't you do a gradual increase or decrease in progression as characters level? if you weren't going to 20 it could help balance casters to martials. just so i'm clear casters start at fast progression and work down to slow and martials start at slow and slowly move to fast.

my group has always rolled ability scores and rerolled anything less than 10. monks haven't been as much of a problem.

I like it, however I would do at least three things different though.

I would reduce the Con score, butterflies are extremely delicate.
I would reduce the maneuverability by a step, since butterflies are clumsy fliers compared to other insects.
I might increase Cha though, they are beautiful and some types form huge groups thus are social on some level.

Several species are toxic, so you could add a poison cloak of some sort.

@ tasty wolf, there wouldn't be anywhere for you to sit, so you would have to be carried. Which would be hilarious.

@ Arcanemuses Moths have the camouflage, butterflies are colorful and intended to be seen so it would be more like a camouflage penalty.

the fact you think i'm tasty makes me nervous

totally thought of butterfly riding gnome cavaliers now.

well my my that's quite an impressive set up you got there. i like it very much and wanted to give you props for including the oh so essential "improve" feats without prerequisite, as that does help the MAD even if oh so slightly.

toastwolf wrote:

there were construct grafts in fiend folio.

Was it a web enhancement? The Graft section skips from Beholder to Fiend.

they were called Maugs, though if i recall the grafts were all stone so some refluff is probably necessary if you want metal.

there were construct grafts in fiend folio.

i actually considered an idea where powerful build required large size as a prerequisite but only cost one point. that being said i do like the way you did this, though maybe maybe an even 6 might be doable. in the end it is up to you but my experience with powerful build is that it is a tremendous martial booster.

Zautos' wrote:

Can any one tell me how the spoilers work?

Yup. At the bottom of the page, where it says "How to format your text," click on that spoiler.

that part at the bottom of the page wrote:

[ spoiler=Movie plot spoiler]This is a spoiler, such as revealing who really did frame Roger Rabbit.[ /spoiler]

Formatted in this way, that would look like this:

** spoiler omitted **

it was