
Michelle A.J. Contributor |
2 people marked this as a favorite. |

Hmm... Okay soooo I'm a biologist and I am just now reading the pilgrim druid archetype.
They must select plants for their domain.
Fungus are not closely related to plants.
They are more related to animals than to plants.
My apologies for misrepresenting fungus. But I am not a biologist, and most if not all fungal creatures in pathfinder are of the plant type, so that's what I went with.

QuidEst |
12 people marked this as a favorite. |

Hmm... Okay soooo I'm a biologist and I am just now reading the pilgrim druid archetype.
They must select plants for their domain.
Fungus are not closely related to plants.
They are more related to animals than to plants.
It's Pathfinder. Stars are portals to the positive energy plane and just working near dragons can alter your kids' genetics.

![]() |
Verzen wrote:It's Pathfinder. Stars are portals to the positive energy plane and just working near dragons can alter your kids' genetics.Hmm... Okay soooo I'm a biologist and I am just now reading the pilgrim druid archetype.
They must select plants for their domain.
Fungus are not closely related to plants.
They are more related to animals than to plants.
Point made. ;)

![]() |
Verzen wrote:My apologies for misrepresenting fungus. But I am not a biologist, and most if not all fungal creatures in pathfinder are of the plant type, so that's what I went with.Hmm... Okay soooo I'm a biologist and I am just now reading the pilgrim druid archetype.
They must select plants for their domain.
Fungus are not closely related to plants.
They are more related to animals than to plants.
No offense intended. Just pointing something out. =)

Luthorne |
Hmm... Okay soooo I'm a biologist and I am just now reading the pilgrim druid archetype.
They must select plants for their domain.
Fungus are not closely related to plants.
They are more related to animals than to plants.
The way Pathfinder separates things is fairly different from the way that actual science would separate them. Note that most plants are not actually creatures of the plant type, but objects, and fungi and radiation are both considered diseases, generally. Crabs, insects, jellyfish, sea anemones, slugs, spiders, and worms are all lumped in as vermin, and yeah, fungi and plants are all of the plant type, while humans and animals are weirdly separate.
...that's not even getting into the other, more fantastical divisions (I still don't know why dragons aren't magical beasts, for example)...

![]() |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Well, fungi can certainly be a disease and what someone pointed out, blight is certainly caused by fungi.
In fact, my favorite fungi is something called Cordyceps. It's a fungi particular in rain forests in which it infects insects and releases it's hyphae around the neural network, controlling the insect and forcing the insect to reach higher ground before sprouting a fruiting body and spreading spores to other insects. It's quite fascinating.
Why aren't dragons magical beasts? That's odd...

![]() |
Verzen wrote:You sound like a fun guy at parties.Hmm... Okay soooo I'm a biologist and I am just now reading the pilgrim druid archetype.
They must select plants for their domain.
Fungus are not closely related to plants.
They are more related to animals than to plants.
When I get drunk, I talk about science nonstop. ;)
So no. Not really very fun at all lol

Michelle A.J. Contributor |

Michelle A.J. wrote:No offense intended. Just pointing something out. =)Verzen wrote:My apologies for misrepresenting fungus. But I am not a biologist, and most if not all fungal creatures in pathfinder are of the plant type, so that's what I went with.Hmm... Okay soooo I'm a biologist and I am just now reading the pilgrim druid archetype.
They must select plants for their domain.
Fungus are not closely related to plants.
They are more related to animals than to plants.
No offense taken

![]() |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Speaking of cordyceps, do any of the fungal archetypes have that sort of take-over ability (presumably more as a charm or compulsion)? I know the druid can at least do it to their animal companion.
... This would be a fantastic idea for an archetype.
A druid that utilizes fungi in order to charm or control others at level 1 would be pretty awesome.
Allow them to, 1/day, control the actions of another kind of like cordyceps do. They can be used to attack an enemy, unlock a door... jump off a bridge to certain death....
I think it would be a pretty cool and unique ability... For an archetype to be revolved around that concept would be pretty awesome.

Luthorne |
QuidEst wrote:Speaking of cordyceps, do any of the fungal archetypes have that sort of take-over ability (presumably more as a charm or compulsion)? I know the druid can at least do it to their animal companion.... This would be a fantastic idea for an archetype.
A druid that utilizes fungi in order to charm or control others at level 1 would be pretty awesome.
Allow them to, 1/day, control the actions of another kind of like cordyceps do. They can be used to attack an enemy, unlock a door... jump off a bridge to certain death....
I think it would be a pretty cool and unique ability... For an archetype to be revolved around that concept would be pretty awesome.
Amusingly, I pondered a druid villain that already did something like that...using command/control plants on mindslaver mold or similar creatures to control humanoids.

![]() |
I wrote bottled sunlight and was woefully unaware of its prior existence. They even seem to do similar things, comparing my turnover document to the version in the Undead Slayer's Handbook.
That's bound to happen every once in awhile. No worries!

David knott 242 |

I wrote bottled sunlight and was woefully unaware of its prior existence. They even seem to do similar things, comparing my turnover document to the version in the Undead Slayer's Handbook.
Somebody above you should have caught that, assuming that you were not given a checklist that had an item saying, "Confirm that anything you create from scratch does not already exist."

jedi8187 |
jedi8187 wrote:I guess I'll have to get GM permission for my radioactive knight.
What are the Beastskin Berserker and Vermin Tamer like?
Beastskin is a shapeshifting barbarian. They get beast shape.
Vermin tamer get unique mounts.
Another shapeshifting barbarian? Cool, and vermin riding cavalier's, possibly interesting. This book is rising on my list of might buys

dharkus |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |

Rimshot Feat wrote:Verzen wrote:You sound like a fun guy at parties.Hmm... Okay soooo I'm a biologist and I am just now reading the pilgrim druid archetype.
They must select plants for their domain.
Fungus are not closely related to plants.
They are more related to animals than to plants.
When I get drunk, I talk about science nonstop. ;)
So no. Not really very fun at all lol
depends on the company - sounds fun to me - as long as it's proper science like physics

FallenDabus |
2 people marked this as a favorite. |

QuidEst wrote:Point made. ;)Verzen wrote:It's Pathfinder. Stars are portals to the positive energy plane and just working near dragons can alter your kids' genetics.Hmm... Okay soooo I'm a biologist and I am just now reading the pilgrim druid archetype.
They must select plants for their domain.
Fungus are not closely related to plants.
They are more related to animals than to plants.
Also worth pointing out (even though this is pretty much resolved), is that the Plant type is about the closest to a monophyletic group as you are going to find in a Bestiary. Yes, it is polyphyletic to group plants and fungi together, but the grouping is both consistent and thorough, which limits the paraphyletic exceptions. Compare with humanoids, which include lizardfolk and humans, or the animal type, which is paraphyletic up the yin yang. Only Dragons run close to being monophyletic, and even that's a stretch close. Rather, each type is grouped by broad mechanical similarities. While you could make a separate type for fungi, I'm not convinced that there'd be enough differences that mattered at the mechanical level of an RPG to warrant it.

Franz Lunzer |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |

Fourshadow wrote:In one of the equipment sections, we have "Bottled Sunlight"...am I the only one who remembers something like this in Undead Slayer's Handbook? It does something different, but appears to share the same name.What does the new one do? That might get really confusing to keep track of, since I always keep a bunch of Bottled Sunlight on hand. Turns out having natural sunlight in literally your back pocket is handy when your DM throws a curveball vampire.
Yeah, as has been said, they are similar, but different enough.
The newer, cheaper version is a bit better, IMHO. I won't go into too much details until the book is out truly.jedi8187 wrote:...
What are the Beastskin Berserker and Vermin Tamer like?Beastskin is a shapeshifting barbarian. They get beast shape.
Vermin tamer get unique mounts.
Beastkin. No second s.
Cool thing? It can shapeshift into a dinosaur!
![]() |

Alchemaic wrote:Fourshadow wrote:In one of the equipment sections, we have "Bottled Sunlight"...am I the only one who remembers something like this in Undead Slayer's Handbook? It does something different, but appears to share the same name.What does the new one do? That might get really confusing to keep track of, since I always keep a bunch of Bottled Sunlight on hand. Turns out having natural sunlight in literally your back pocket is handy when your DM throws a curveball vampire.Yeah, as has been said, they are similar, but different enough.
The newer, cheaper version is a bit better, IMHO. I won't go into too much details until the book is out truly.Verzen wrote:jedi8187 wrote:...
What are the Beastskin Berserker and Vermin Tamer like?Beastskin is a shapeshifting barbarian. They get beast shape.
Vermin tamer get unique mounts.
Beastkin. No second s.
Cool thing? It can shapeshift into a dinosaur!
Awww, Beastskin Berserker sounds totally badass.

![]() |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |

Robert Brookes wrote:I wrote bottled sunlight and was woefully unaware of its prior existence. They even seem to do similar things, comparing my turnover document to the version in the Undead Slayer's Handbook.Somebody above you should have caught that, assuming that you were not given a checklist that had an item saying, "Confirm that anything you create from scratch does not already exist."
That's just good policy for a freelancer. Double-checking your work to make sure it doesn't already exist. USH might not have been available online when I did searches, but given when it came out I'm less-inclined to believe that.

Michelle A.J. Contributor |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |

I'm curious what mounts the Vermin Tamer gets... As far as I can tell all of the current vermin animal companions are medium size at most so would only serve as mounts for small size creatures. There is still Undersized Mount of course but I feel like the archetype should work without it.
In fact, the archetype gives you Undersized Mount,free of charge.

Plausible Pseudonym |

David knott 242 wrote:That's just good policy for a freelancer. Double-checking your work to make sure it doesn't already exist. USH might not have been available online when I did searches, but given when it came out I'm less-inclined to believe that.Robert Brookes wrote:I wrote bottled sunlight and was woefully unaware of its prior existence. They even seem to do similar things, comparing my turnover document to the version in the Undead Slayer's Handbook.Somebody above you should have caught that, assuming that you were not given a checklist that had an item saying, "Confirm that anything you create from scratch does not already exist."
I'm pretty sure we're in double digits on items, feats, archetypes, class abilities, etc. where Paizo has used the same name twice. Usually the duplicate names are used in different categories, like the evangelist PrC and the evangelist archetype for Clerics, but there are two Pact Wizard archetypes.

QuidEst |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |

Thoughts! Stuff that caught my attention in particular.
Blightburner kineticist is a bad trade on every item. Art is really cool, though!
Love the mechanics on the psychic marauder. Really nice boost to charisma disciplines, especially ones with thematic fits. Also pleasant that the alignment restriction has relatively minor consequences for breaking it.
Beastkin berserker is a really good trade. Gets multiple forms, which is nice. Not something I'm inclined to play, but cool to have around.
Cool spells. Easily my favorite is being able to booby-trap your mind.
Demon-sworn witch is cool for players who want a character that dabbles in diabolism without being half a step away from an evil alignment.
Blightseeker alchemist is very nice. Took me a bit to realize that it could combine its blights with regular bomb modifications, but that makes it a very nice option to have around. Now you can combine effects and force multiple saves!
Much higher count than normal on useful mundane items in this.
No feats I'd take or recommend.
Couple of traits that do something interesting (rather than numeric bonuses, which are handy but well-covered).

jedi8187 |
Verzen wrote:jedi8187 wrote:...
What are the Beastskin Berserker and Vermin Tamer like?Beastskin is a shapeshifting barbarian. They get beast shape.
Vermin tamer get unique mounts.
Beastkin. No second s.
Cool thing? It can shapeshift into a dinosaur!
Well now I'm super excited.

![]() |
3 people marked this as a favorite. |

David knott 242 wrote:That's just good policy for a freelancer. Double-checking your work to make sure it doesn't already exist. USH might not have been available online when I did searches, but given when it came out I'm less-inclined to believe that.Robert Brookes wrote:I wrote bottled sunlight and was woefully unaware of its prior existence. They even seem to do similar things, comparing my turnover document to the version in the Undead Slayer's Handbook.Somebody above you should have caught that, assuming that you were not given a checklist that had an item saying, "Confirm that anything you create from scratch does not already exist."
Yep. As one of the dev leads on this one, I should have caught that. Sorry folks.

![]() |
6 people marked this as a favorite. |

Robert Brookes wrote:Yep. As one of the dev leads on this one, I should have caught that. Sorry folks.David knott 242 wrote:That's just good policy for a freelancer. Double-checking your work to make sure it doesn't already exist. USH might not have been available online when I did searches, but given when it came out I'm less-inclined to believe that.Robert Brookes wrote:I wrote bottled sunlight and was woefully unaware of its prior existence. They even seem to do similar things, comparing my turnover document to the version in the Undead Slayer's Handbook.Somebody above you should have caught that, assuming that you were not given a checklist that had an item saying, "Confirm that anything you create from scratch does not already exist."
Somewhere among the editors, there's a dart board with our faces on it.

Ambrosia Slaad |
3 people marked this as a favorite. |

Feros wrote:I'm impressed that the fight seems to have lasted for two whole books!At this point, I feel like that drow needs to get a proper name and iconic-style writeup of her own.
EDIT: And I see that ErisAcolyte-Chaos jester agrees.
Oooo, that would be an interesting contest idea! (No pressure though, Paizo powers-that-be, especially as busy as you are.)

Chess Pwn |

So I'm curious if people with the PDF can explain how the barbarian archetype is different from our current shifting barb, the Mooncursed?

Arachnofiend |

So I'm curious if people with the PDF can explain how the barbarian archetype is different from our current shifting barb, the Mooncursed?
I don't have the PDF but it's been mentioned that you can shift into different forms, unlike the Mooncursed where you pick one and are stuck with it.
Which is really nice, because the versatility of using non-combat forms for non-combat purposes is one of the reasons wildshape is as good of an ability as it is. Being a wolf barbarian that transforms into a big wolf is pretty cool but being able to choose to turn into a hawk when you need to is cooler still.

![]() |
Chess Pwn wrote:So I'm curious if people with the PDF can explain how the barbarian archetype is different from our current shifting barb, the Mooncursed?I don't have the PDF but it's been mentioned that you can shift into different forms, unlike the Mooncursed where you pick one and are stuck with it.
Which is really nice, because the versatility of using non-combat forms for non-combat purposes is one of the reasons wildshape is as good of an ability as it is. Being a wolf barbarian that transforms into a big wolf is pretty cool but being able to choose to turn into a hawk when you need to is cooler still.
Nope, you pick an animal at level one and you're stuck with it. It has a little more variety than Mooncursed, but just like Mooncursed, you only get to be the one thing.
Considering you lose 3 rage powers and fast movement for gaining it, I don't see why this is in any way better than Mooncursed.
To answer your question Chess: Mooncurse effects Rage and improved uncanny dodge and eventually allows you to wield weapons... While Beastkin costs you 3 rage powers and fast movement, and can't use weapons.

QuidEst |
2 people marked this as a favorite. |

Beastkin- better if you want to turn into animals and at mid levels. You get earlier access to everything but Beast Shape I, no list restriction, multiple animal options, and you trade out rage powers (which you can replace) instead of rage bonuses (which you can't).
Mooncursed- better if you want a particular normally-medium animal, or if you're interested in using weapon attacks. You get to transform from first level, you get a hybrid form so you can use weapons, and you eventually get to transform into larger versions of the animal.