Did you do the serpentfolk pictures?
Serpentfolk? Yes.
Pictures? No.I like to think the words helped inspire the pictures, though. ;)
This Hobgoblin "Grenadier" alchemist archetype sounds pretty interesting; I might use a squad of them to subject my party to a Call of Duty 'nade spam.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
There will be pawns.
Aren't there always?
Oh- you mean for the game.
There will be pawns.
Well you just made my day! I can hardly wait to add some diversity to my core monsters. :D
Lizardfolk, monsters? This is clearly a specieist book. Lizardfolk are usually Neutral, not evil!
Slight pet peeve aside, this seems like a promising piece of work. Looking forward to what it has in store.
Lizardfolk, monsters? This is clearly a specieist book. Lizardfolk are usually Neutral, not evil!
Slight pet peeve aside, this seems like a promising piece of work. Looking forward to what it has in store.
Ratfolk are presented as Neutral "monsters" as well. Despite being Neutral, Lizardfolk are commonly encountered enemies that GMs love to use, so it makes sense that they'd appear in the Monster Codex.
Regarding serpentfolk CR, why are spellcasting classes being considered key classes when the serpentfolk do not have any built in spellcasting of their own? I thought a spellcasting class was only considered key if they stack with the innate spellcasting potential of the creature in question. (Bestiary 1 p. 297)
Ratfolk are presented as Neutral "monsters" as well. Despite being Neutral, Lizardfolk are commonly encountered enemies that GMs love to use, so it makes sense that they'd appear in the Monster Codex.Lizardfolk, monsters? This is clearly a specieist book. Lizardfolk are usually Neutral, not evil!
Slight pet peeve aside, this seems like a promising piece of work. Looking forward to what it has in store.
I love to use them as potential allies, not automatic enemies.
Of course, I make exceptions to such when the player characters are evil.
Did you do the serpentfolk pictures?Serpentfolk? Yes.
Pictures? No.I like to think the words helped inspire the pictures, though. ;)
Pretty sure Florian Stitz did the serpentfolk art.
"Monster, noun: Any creature which is not helpful and not a PC." ;)
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Regarding serpentfolk CR, why are spellcasting classes being considered key classes when the serpentfolk do not have any built in spellcasting of their own? I thought a spellcasting class was only considered key if they stack with the innate spellcasting potential of the creature in question. (Bestiary 1 p. 297)
Long Design Explanation:
Sean and I had a discussion about this choice. The serpentfolk are actually listed in Bestiary 2 as having "Any Role" which is defined as not using any special rules when advancing by class level because "they lack racial Hit Dice, and thus advance in level normally." Clearly, however, the serpentfolk do have racial Hit Dice, so that seemed like a bit of errata to me, and that's what led Sean and I to examine the original intent behind the serpentfolk.
To do that, I took at look at what the serpentfolk are meant to do. And, because they come in two flavors (i.e., degenerate and advanced), they could potentially have different roles depending on which kind of serpentfolk you're talking about. So, in the process of statting things up for these serpentfolk who happened to have class levels, I kept comparing their resulting stats (AC, hit points, saves, DCs for special abilities and spells, etc.) to the baseline ranges for creatures of different CRs. After several iterations, it became clear to me that the degenerate serpentfolk should have a "Combat Role" and the advanced serpentfolk should have more of the "Spell Role." The latter is what caught your eye, and the choice to give them the "Spell Role" panned out in pretty much every instance when assessing their final CR. The effect of their many spell-like ability DCs and escalating spell-like abilities based on class levels gained caused them to line up with more of a "Spell Role."
I know that runs contrary to the advice given for the "Spell Role" where it states that "...creatures that only possess spell-like abilities do not fall into this role, and are usually considered combat or special." The chart also states that the "Spell Role" is only key if "...its spellcasting levels stack with those possessed by the creature." But serpentfolk really get into that area of the game where it's more art than science when trying to determine a final CR in this regard. For instance, when you examine the spell-like abilities advanced serpentfolk receive as they go up in class levels (i.e., they gain more and more powerful spell-like abilities as they gain class levels), they're essentially getting a lot of extra spell slots. So, in essence, they kind of are spellcasters from the get-go. And, even more, they're becoming more powerful spellcasters the more class levels you layer on for whatever spellcasting class they're taking. So, for those first 5 racial Hit Dice, it's a tremendous boon to them if you give advanced serpentfolk a two-for-one dip on spellcasting class levels. The resulting creature winds up having a very skewed CR threat range if you do that. Whereas, a one-for-one on spellcasting class levels keeps them in line as an appropriate threat for their CR.
So, after talking it through with Sean, he ultimately agreed (I think), and indicated it would be cleaned up in development if the design team felt otherwise. I know somewhere in there, Stephen inherited the developer duties for my turnover, so I'm not sure if he had a chance to give it any additional thought. Advanced serpentfolk are just one of the more complex monsters out there. And, in my opinion, you have to be really judicious with how much you pump them up by layering on spellcasting classes. Anything other than a spellcasting class shouldn't really be key. But spellcasting class levels turn them into serious threats, because as soon as they get 4th level, they get a free spell slot for dominate person (normally a 5th level sorcerer/wizard spell) and major image (normally a 3rd level spell). Meanwhile, their baseline class levels only give them 2nd level sorcerer/wizard spells. Later, at 9th level, this gets ratcheted up again when they gain mass suggestion (a 6th level spell) and teleport (a 5th level spell). The utility of these extra abilities in tandem with an advanced serpentfolk's really high racial bonus on Charisma (to determine DCs) is what kicks things into a higher gear than a normal monster with simpler spell-like abilities.
Anyway, that's a really long explanation to say we took a look at everything as closely as we could, and we applied a lot more "art" than "science" to the crafting of the class levels of these serpentfolk. All part of the fun and games of RPG design. Did it come out well in the end? Based on the final CRs for each serpentfolk NPC, I think it did.
Hope that helps,
--Neil
I don't recall anything we did differently there in the initial design process. It's been awhile ago, so it's hard to remember now. I do recall the spell role discussion manifesting early on, though, because it was a bit of a mindbender at the time on what we should do about them.
I would have liked to have seen each race get even more details.
Like with a full hardcover covering groupings of say four races.
1. Goblin & Orc Codex (bugbears, goblins, hobgoblins, orcs)
2. Giant Codex (cloud giants, fire giants, frost giants, stone giants)
3. Giant-kin Codex (cyclops, ettins, ogres, trolls)
4. Reptilian Codex (kobolds, lizardfolk, serpentfolk, troglodytes)
5. Undead Codex (ghoul, mummy, lich, vampire)
6. Underfolk Codex (darkfolk, drow, duergar, svirfneblin)
etc.
but I guess five times as much content probably wouldn't be feasible from the marketing side.
I would have liked to have seen each race get even more details.
Like with a full hardcover covering groupings of say four races.1. Goblin & Orc Codex (bugbears, goblins, hobgoblins, orcs)
2. Giant Codex (cloud giants, fire giants, frost giants, stone giants)
3. Giant-kin Codex (cyclops, ettins, ogres, trolls)
4. Reptilian Codex (kobolds, lizardfolk, serpentfolk, troglodytes)
5. Undead Codex (ghoul, mummy, lich, vampire)
6. Underfolk Codex (darkfolk, drow, duergar, svirfneblin)
etc.but I guess five times as much content probably wouldn't be feasible from the marketing side.
Would need more writers, editors, etc, more paizo staffers, have hardcovers come out more often (that could seriously hurt people wallets), etc...
What's the deal with this spell?
It is way better than Barkskin. Who's gonna bother with casting Barkskin on themselves now? (it's only use now is aiding allies)
The main difference is, as you note, the range (Ironskin is self-only, Barkskin works on other people) and Barkskin's 10 minutes/level duration. Barkskin is something you cast before entering the dungeon, Ironskin is something you (hopefully) cast just before going into combat.
Just had a quick look at this going to buy it soon.
However, I had to comment...there is some stunningly good art in this book. Wow!!!
Just posted review, but wanted to pop in here.
Whoever did the gnoll section, I love you. The witch and barbarian archetypes are great. Pack Rager combined with Amplify Rage will help turn my Lamashtu cultists into the terrors they deserve to be. The Bouda is great for creating the classic 'evil eye' witch from folklore, and with a little change can be suited any race or environment.
Can I please get the name of the artist who did the image for the Bouda? Simply excellent.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Ben Wooten did the gnoll art—check out the lineup here.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
My copy arrived on Tuesday. So far, I have only read some of the first page "ecology" sections and all of the chapter openers. That is more than enough for me to know that I love this book and it was worth every penny.
I am relatively new to RPGs. In fact, Pathfinder is my first and the only one I've really played for any extended period of time. As such, I don't have the context a lot of others on this board have in regards to these monsters. I thought a bugbear was a throw-away joke in a "Futurama" movie. I thought ghouls and zombies were the same thing. I had no interest in giants and why going "against the giants" was/is a big deal.
An ogre was Shrek.
I also can't speak too much about mechanics, or how the game is better or worse than others. Pathfinder gets a lot of flack for being too complicated at times, and it can be very complicated at times. But I still love it.
Anyway, the point I am getting to here is that I love this book simply because I think that it shows Pathfinder's/Paizo's real strength as a fantasy RPG/game company:
The flavor.
I thought the word bugbear was silly. Now they terrify me. I understand that there is a difference between a ghoul and a zombie (in this context at least), at it is horrifying. I went from "meh" on the idea of the "Giant Slayer" AP to kinda wanting to play in it now.
As for ogres? The chapter opener did such a good job that I am not sure I am going to read the ecology.
(I guess I'm also kind of saying this was a good book for October, huh?)
So yes, while people may criticize the game itself and maybe some of it is justified, I question anyone who says Paizo can't do good fluff.
Great job, team. Give yourselves a pat on the back.
|
| 11 people marked this as a favorite. |
RPG Publishing Logic:
Paizo puts out a GM-oriented book: unicorns, love, happiness, harmony, pats on the back, oh guys never mind the page 43 typo, it's splendid all around.
Paizo puts out a player-oriented book: MRRRRRUUUUUAGH HOW DARE YOU PUBLISH A HALF-EDITED COMPILATION OF FAIL, R-WORD AND INSULT AGAINST HUMAN INTELLIGENCE! SKR KILLED ROUGES AGAIN! GIVE ME MY MONEY BACK, THERE'S A TYPO ON PAGE 43!!!!!!!!! FRANK TROLLMAN LIVES!
|
RPG Publishing Logic:
Paizo puts out a GM-oriented book: unicorns, love, happiness, harmony, pats on the back, oh guys never mind the page 43 typo, it's splendid all around.
Paizo puts out a player-oriented book: MRRRRRUUUUUAGH HOW DARE YOU PUBLISH A HALF-EDITED COMPILATION OF FAIL, R-WORD AND INSULT AGAINST HUMAN INTELLIGENCE! SKR KILLED ROUGES AGAIN! GIVE ME MY MONEY BACK, THERE'S A TYPO ON PAGE 43!!!!!!!!! FRANK TROLLMAN LIVES!
I believe you mean the Fan Reaction Logic. RPG Publishing Logic would describe the logic behind the decisions of what to publish.
At least that is how I interpret things. Beyond that, I kind of agree with you.
Ben Wooten did the gnoll art—check out the lineup here.
Thank you Liz. You guys did good with this one.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
RPG Publishing Logic:
Paizo puts out a GM-oriented book: unicorns, love, happiness, harmony, pats on the back, oh guys never mind the page 43 typo, it's splendid all around.
Paizo puts out a player-oriented book: MRRRRRUUUUUAGH HOW DARE YOU PUBLISH A HALF-EDITED COMPILATION OF FAIL, R-WORD AND INSULT AGAINST HUMAN INTELLIGENCE! SKR KILLED ROUGES AGAIN! GIVE ME MY MONEY BACK, THERE'S A TYPO ON PAGE 43!!!!!!!!! FRANK TROLLMAN LIVES!
I believe you mean the Fan Reaction Logic. RPG Publishing Logic would describe the logic behind the decisions of what to publish.
At least that is how I interpret things. Beyond that, I kind of agree with you.
I don't know if this was triggered by my post, but it did cause me to go back and re-read it. I now realize my post may not have come off as complimentary as I hoped. :\
So, I just want to re-inter-ate that I find this book awesome mostly due to it's fluff and flavor, but I do enjoy the mechanics that I've looked at too.
I also absolutely love the Advanced Class Guide, typos and all. And the Ultimate Books. And the Advanced Player's Guide...
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
How does the fearmonger archetype work? It has special cruelties but loses touch of corruption. Can it perform touches that deal no damage to inflict the cruelties or does it get a chaser status effect on foes that it uses feed on fear for?
So, apparently the old Grenadier alchemist archetype from the Pathfinder Society Field Guide was reprinted as a hobgoblin archetype, and no one thought to actually change the description that promises stuff the archetype doesn't deliver on? Pretty sure grenadiers don't get the ability to drink potions, elixirs, and mutagens more quickly, as the descriptive text advertises.
RPG Publishing Logic:
Paizo puts out a GM-oriented book: unicorns, love, happiness, harmony, pats on the back, oh guys never mind the page 43 typo, it's splendid all around.
Paizo puts out a player-oriented book: MRRRRRUUUUUAGH HOW DARE YOU PUBLISH A HALF-EDITED COMPILATION OF FAIL, R-WORD AND INSULT AGAINST HUMAN INTELLIGENCE! SKR KILLED ROUGES AGAIN! GIVE ME MY MONEY BACK, THERE'S A TYPO ON PAGE 43!!!!!!!!! FRANK TROLLMAN LIVES!
I am not sure if this mention of Frank is supposed to be a good or a bad thing. Thus, I am not sure what to make of this post.
Do the simple class templates that grant arcane spells suffer from spell failure from armor as normal? What about natural armor?
Do the simple class templates that grant arcane spells suffer from spell failure from armor as normal? What about natural armor?
It doesn't outright say, but since for all of the arcane class templates they say "Can cast a small number of [class] spells with a caster level equal to their HD", it stands to reason. It's basically class levels baked right into a template.
I don't believe natural armor factors into it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The real joy is in the sample creatures. I particularly love the weird butler.Thank you, vampires were alot of fun to write.
Ha, I didn't know those were your handiwork! I just used the halfling butler in Luvick Siervage's court hall during my last session of Carrion Crown, and next time we play I'm pulling out that half-orc vamp to match blows with my wife's elf barbarian (this was a perfect monster build for my game, since I've built up rumors that the Whispering Way are partnering with a faction from Belkzen). Good stuff, man!
I am sorry if this has been asked - I am wondering if the new Feats are NPC only or will they be able to be used for PCs in the game physic's? This is sort of the gauge about whether or not I add this to my library.
Modules Overlord
|
How does the fearmonger archetype work? It has special cruelties but loses touch of corruption. Can it perform touches that deal no damage to inflict the cruelties or does it get a chaser status effect on foes that it uses feed on fear for?
Noting this is not official: It can touch creatures to inflict its cruelties (but not deal damage), all of which are fear-based. Since those are effects that cause fear, it can add its feed on fear effect to those.
I really like the concept of class templates. It allows for easier multiclassing without hampering the characters (I know, I have to account for the different CR adjustments). Are there plans to do the other classes?
I also think combining them with RGG Feats of Multiclassing can make for a very interesting dabbler. I have many ideas running through my head.
Can anyone tell me if there is a reason that the Riding Python (p.128) animal companion gets blindsight?
The Bestiary 1 snakes only get scent, so it doesn't seem to be a simple 'because the animal has it' reason. Being able to have a companion with 60ft blindsight at first level seems a bit too good, to the point players may try to go kobold just for it. Even Dire Bats only get blindsense, and with a shorter range, and seeing the unseen is kind of their thing.
Is there anything on derro?
Mike
Sorry, no derro. Maybe if it sells well enough they can be in the next book, one hopes.
1) When I apply the simple class templates to a monster, does it still need to have a high enough ability score to cast certain spells?
2) Does armor spell failure apply as normal? What about natural armor?
Even then,the inevitable weaknesses that come with old age eventually come to the notice of hobgoblins of lower standing, who take the opportunity to usurp their elders' roles. Such coups are generally not violent, but a hobgoblin removed entirely from the sphere of war generally falls ill within a few years and dies long before his body would otherwise give out.
3) No mention of kalech-mar, i.e how Hobgoblins do the whole klingon promotion thing by challenging their superior to a duel. Has that been retconned?
The few metallic-colored kobolds are an exception to this rule. Though no more good-inclined than their fellows, these metallic kobolds are seen as special or marked by some higher power, and often go on to become great chiefs or shamans.
4) That seems to contradict this feat and this trait.