I feel bad for any pseudodragons
that do pick a fight with real imps then.
I just don't see it. I haven't received my copy of the Korvosa book yet, but it sounds like there are a lot of pseudodragons living there. Sure, most of them will be as in the SRD, but it's unrealistic to think that of all of them; it's just their base state.
Most humans in Varisia are commoners. A first-level human commoner could not kill an imp. The imp would always win against even a group of first-level human commoners. This does not mean that no human could defeat an imp.
Are there statistics in the rules somewhere for determining how many advanced members of a given population there should be? Even a first-level pseudodragon sorcerer could magic missile an imp, and the text says that there's usually a half dozen pseudodragons attacking the imps.
|
Are there statistics in the rules somewhere for determining how many advanced members of a given population there should be? Even a first-level pseudodragon sorcerer could magic missile an imp, and the text says that there's usually a half dozen pseudodragons attacking the imps.
I dunno about the stats offhand for the 2 creatures since I'm at work, but how much damage does a PDragon do? would acrit kill an imp? with a 1/20 chance each attack and 6+ dragons attacking each imp, crits should be fairly common (at least one per 5 minutes of fighting or so per combatant, thats a crit every 50 seconds or so against the imp)
A base level (ie unadvanced) pseudodragon is incapable of injuring an imp, even with a crit. The sting does 1d3-2 damage and the bite does 1 point of damage.
Yes, actually, I do. I think the function of DR could be better served with a high AC and maybe some fast healing or something. Weapons with the right material would give bonuses to hit and prevent the healing. That way everyone could still participate in a battle.
Then go ahead and do so. This way, it doesn't waste space.
|
Except that that's wrong. Unless it says in the Combat section before special attacks (or, in the modern stat-block, has the "aligned strike" special attack), a creature's natural attacks don't overcome any type of damage reduction except for slashing, piercing and bludgeoning.
Crap, my humble apologies. I skimmed the SRD section and misread "alignment subtype" as just "alignment."
|
I like the image of off-duty pseudodragon familars sneaking off to lead packs of less intelligent, wilder cousins on daring, ninja style raids against isolated imp encampments. All the while, their clueless masters snooze, never learning of the heroic adventures of their absent lackeys.Now that's just hilarious.
No, my friend, that's a campaign! (Okay, maybe a few one-shots, but, still...)
|
You know... the more I think about it, the more I think that the best way to handle this situation is on the imp side. These imps are basically escaped imps who have been dwelling in Korvosa since they first started leaking out of the Academae. I'm starting to think that the way to fix the problem, therefore, is to introduce a new variant of imp called the Korvosan imp. It's got the same stats as a normal imp except that it's got the native subtype instead of extraplanar, and its long exposure (and perhaps even birth) on the Material Plane have robbed it of its damage reduction and fast healing. Which more or less would drop them down to a CR 1 creature, and would make for cool imp on pseudodragon dogfights.
I LOVE this because it gives more flavor and fluff than was already there.
As far as my take on the PDragon vs Imp debate is, if the rules get in the way of a good story, then the rules have to go. Otherwise, just play WOrld of Warcraft and be done with it.
As far as DR is concerned, one must get to the real base purpose of DR. It's fundamental purpose is to provide a way for the GM to deprive PCs expected damage dealing ability. If it's purpose to make the critter tougher to kill, that can easily be done with higher AC due to natural armor, or even higher Hit Points. For the nature of what DR is supposed to be, it makes more sense to drop DR all together and use natural armor instead. DR is just a cheap shot to deprive PCs of killing ability.
At one time DR was overcome by magic items, whether it was DR 5,000/silver, or DR 10,000/bludgeoning a +1 magic sword trumped the DR. Not any more. 3.5 took a simple mechanic and made it unnecessarily difficult.
In my opinion 3.0 was a MUCH better system than 3.5 and cleric spells are the perfect example. At one time I could cast a Bull's Strength ad it would last 12 hours, in essence making my spell's effect a per encounter/at will ability, using 4E speak. Now the spell is a Daily use spell. Cleric runs out of buffs in one major fight the entire game comes to halt so he can rest for a day. So instead of making combat more fluid and making PCs more powerful over time it did the opposite.
DR under 3.5 falls in the same category. What worked well was made complex. What was complex stayed the same or became more complex.
It was for this reason that I was happy for a 4E to come out. But I have the feeling our own party will either go back to 3.0 or True 20 eventually.
This whole thread reminded me how much I dislike DR, and how I usually retcon it in my homes games. Soooooooooo many times I've had fun snatched away by DR (both as a player and DM). Though, when you're playing a barbarian, it IS pretty smacked-up-awesome.
This whole thread reminded me how much I dislike DR, and how I usually retcon it in my homes games. Soooooooooo many times I've had fun snatched away by DR (both as a player and DM). Though, when you're playing a barbarian, it IS pretty smacked-up-awesome.
What do you do instead?
We found that just capping or dropping it made Summon Monster even less useful than it already is; too many of those critters rely on their DR to be functional.
Mary
My own preference would be for un-bypassed DR to halve the damage rather than subtracting from it. This means a creature is never immune, but opponents would still really like to have the correct weapon as half damage is a severe penalty.
However, this gives no way to have greater or lesser amounts of DR (quarter or three-quarters damage is too much of a pain in my opinion, though thirds might just be bearable). And my GM dislikes it because it leaves even very tough creatures vulnerable to massed mundane attacks. He worries that this puts more pressure on "Why don't we recruit a few hundred first-level archers?" which he feels the system doesn't handle well.
For CotCT he is currently planning to treat DR over 5 as follows: cut it to 5 and treat any points above 5 as if they were additional Con bonus. So a previously DR10 creature is now a DR5 with +5 hp per HD. No playtest experience with this yet, though.
A close variant would be to cut the DR in half and use the same approach to the remainder. Alas, even 2 points DR stops a pseudodragon.
(I hadn't expected this, but the pdrag PC's great role in combat seems to be taking out thuggish lookouts--he is *terrific* at this. His mistress gets to say "Your guards are already gone" with an evil grin, which she loves.)
Mary
I am currently playtesting replacing DR with fast healing and a slight boost to the nat AC. A weapon appropriate merely prevents some of the fast healing. For instance a creature with DR5/silver would still be hurt by a steel weapon but would heal very rapidly. Using a silver weapon would halve its healing speed. Thus allowing many small attacks to take it down. Doing the same thing with the imp would allow the P-dragons to use a mob attack and nibble them down without resorting to completely rewriting the imps OR giving the P-dragons class levels. Not that i have a problem with creatures with class levels, its not the only option.
So far the fights have been a bit harder, but not unnecessarily so. They've taken a bit longer in some areas, faster in others but the one problem its avoided is having all the damage come from one party member while the other 3 sit around and pick their nose. When one player is doing all the work and the others are helpless the game becomes less fun and it can be hard to keep their interest.
Honestly, I like the way 3.5 DR works. I really don't see why everyone has a problem with it. (The only thing I change is the game preferring good/evil over law/chaos. If a devil has DR/Good I make it DR/Good or Chaos, for instance.)
On the other hand, the places where DR is messed up, like a mob of NPC citizens against a Golem, or pseudo-dragons vs. imps, or even two Vrocks trying to murder each other, it really messes with how you expect the fight to work.
Now, regeneration...Regeneration does not work like it should. At all.
Creative Director
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, count me in with the Pro-DR club. It's just too much of an important facet of classic monster literature, be they werewolves who can only be hurt by silver or demons that can only be harmed by holy weapons. Regeneration's a similar useful tool as well, but aimed more at energy attacks; this is how to build the alien who can only be killed by fire, for example.
If DR doesn't work for your games, my suggestion isn't to strip it away from the werewolves and demons, but instead just to avoid using those kinds of monsters at all. There's a LOT Of monsters out there you can use to replace them.
AND: I expect there to be a VERY EXCITING discussion about Damage Reduction when Pathfinder 9 comes around, since...
Regeneration's a similar useful tool as well, but aimed more at energy attacks; this is how to build the alien who can only be killed by fire, for example.
My problem with regeration is that it feels way too much like fast healing, except the body is harder to deal with. For instance, a Troll will go down to non-fire damage just as easily. Most fights I've ever run with trolls involve beating it down like any other monster, then repeatedly stabbing it while unconcious to keep it down while someone gets ready to coup-de-grace it with a flask of alchemist's fire or builds a pyre. Larger regenerations rates would help, I guess, but then you still have the problem of trying to come up with 100 points or whever of fire damage to actually kill it.
Yeah, count me in with the Pro-DR club. It's just too much of an important facet of classic monster literature, be they werewolves who can only be hurt by silver or demons that can only be harmed by holy weapons.
But in the classic monster literature, werewolves generally can't be hurt at all except with silver and demons generally can't be hurt at all except with holy weapons. Using the DR rules, a classic werewolf and a classic demon can be beaten to death by a barbarian with a pointy stick.
|
Creative Director
|
But in the classic monster literature, werewolves generally can't be hurt at all except with silver and demons generally can't be hurt at all except with holy weapons. Using the DR rules, a classic werewolf and a classic demon can be beaten to death by a barbarian with a pointy stick.
That's an issue of game balance. Something like DR 1,000/silver isn't good for the game, and that would even further encourage the golf-cart of weapons concept.
DR is a pretty good way to have your cake and eat it too as regards things like werewolves and the like; it's also a way to mix up monsters a bit more, so that you can have a smaller monster be a bigger problem than it should be to create a memorable combat (such as I tried in "Burnt Offerings" with you-know-who). It's also a cool way to have "invulnerable monsters" that the locals can't fight but that the heroes can. It's ALSO a way to enable the plot where you need special weapons to fight a foe.
I understand that,James. I was pointing out that the classical monsters you mentioned were immune to damage without the right weapon, not simply resistant to it.
What about using the swarm/mob rules for the pseudodragon/imp brawls? I don't have whatever book includes the swarm/mob rules, but don't they tend to do a reasonable amount of damage? I know that a swarm of bats does 1d6 damage, and pseudodragons have to be at least as damaging with their stings as bats' bites. Maybe the swarm/mob rules are all we need. One pseudodragon against an imp is completely out of its league, but a mob of those little buggers may be bad news for that same imp. They'd sting and bite and tear at him for a minute or two and leave behind a horned corpse.
This whole thread reminded me how much I dislike DR, and how I usually retcon it in my homes games. Soooooooooo many times I've had fun snatched away by DR (both as a player and DM). Though, when you're playing a barbarian, it IS pretty smacked-up-awesome.What do you do instead?
We found that just capping or dropping it made Summon Monster even less useful than it already is; too many of those critters rely on their DR to be functional.
Mary
I usually give the monster more temporary hit points against foes using weapons that are less effective against it (silver for werewolves for example), but someone with the right weapon type bypasses these hitpoints.
Doing very little to a foe is cool. Doing nothing over and over again sucks. For me it's about the player experience, and how easy it is for a player's sense of their character to be completely negated by DR. Here's a little anecdote:
So I played in an Arcana Evolved game at Gencon one year (and please don't take this story as an AE sucks story, cause I actually really like the game), and I am playing this character who has a really kickass magic pistol that makes him King S+++ of the Poodle Race. My background on the character sheet reads something like this: "You don't remember anything before the gun. It It is all you are now, and you are one with its awesome power...blah, blah, blah, you're gun is the shizzle and so are you when you use it, blah, blah, blah..."
So I'm all pumped to use my gun. In fact, I'm so pumped I decide not to use it right away, but to save it for a particularly cool moment (you can feel where this is going can't you). So we are playing the adventure and investigating the disappearance of this mage in Ptolus, and I'm purposely not using my gun. I'm threatening people instead of attacking them (fun rp!). I rough some guy up with my bare hands (even risking attacks of opportunity to do so).
So finally, we are in the missing mage's estate, and this horrible shadowy spectre-like monster, shrieking and moaning horrifically emerges from a room and sets to eating one of my companion's soul.
I grit my teeth, cast the side of my long leather duster out of the way behind me, to reveal my demon-gun, glinting in the lantern light. I break leather, haul the huge pistol up to take aim and say something like: "Time to fly fiend...straight back to hell."
BLAM BLAM BLAAAAAAAM! I'm such a badass! Only no, actually I'm not, cause this thing has damage reduction that my gun doesn't effect at like 15. So my shots whizz harmlessly through it...and I feel like an a!++!++.
I played the rest of the adventure...but my heart wasn't in it, especially after the next four or five things we encountered also had DR that my gun couldn't get through.
The above is just ONE instance where DR has taken a big dump on fun (many times its when I'm running the game...which is why I ignore MOST of the rules when I run for my home group and we all just end up telling some pretty awesome stories). But yeah, DR and I don't get along...it especially sucks at lower levels where you just CAN'T dish out the necessary amount of damage to break through it at all.
Yeah, count me in with the Pro-DR club. It's just too much of an important facet of classic monster literature, be they werewolves who can only be hurt by silver or demons that can only be harmed by holy weapons. Regeneration's a similar useful tool as well, but aimed more at energy attacks; this is how to build the alien who can only be killed by fire, for example.
If DR doesn't work for your games, my suggestion isn't to strip it away from the werewolves and demons, but instead just to avoid using those kinds of monsters at all. There's a LOT Of monsters out there you can use to replace them.
AND: I expect there to be a VERY EXCITING discussion about Damage Reduction when Pathfinder 9 comes around, since...
** spoiler omitted **
I like regeneration a lot better than DR. I also like to give werewolves temporary hp against people not using silver.
Also, I feel like there are plenty of reasons why locals can't beat up on monsters and most of them have to do with SHEER TERROR! ;-)
But yeah, low DR isn't really a problem, as you pointed out elsewhere James, it's when DR's start to go 10, 15 or even higher that it can really suck for the PCs...especially at low levels. It basically just rewards people for always taking Power Attack, and leaves the other more nuanced battlers in the dust. I'm not a big fan.
But this is certainly a case where if you don't have someone who has (the right weapon to get through DR), it forces the group to use alternate tactics to defeat the monsters... especially if no one's capable of doing big piles of damage. Which, I think, is actually good for the game, to be honest.
I don't think that's good for the game at all. It just means that the warriors and rogues are pooched and the spellcasters will have to save the day again. *yawn*, just like a bunch of other adventures for characters above a certain level.
A relatively simple fix is to treat Damage Reduction as Damage Resistance. That is, instead of reducing the damage of each individual attack, DR would now reduce the total damage taken that round.
This would allow a swashbuckler to inflict 20 points of damage to a werewolf after stabbing it three times for 10 points per attack (DR 10/silver). This would allow the swashbuckler to be as competitive as a barbarian who can slash the werewolf once for 30 points of damage.
I hope I'm remembering resistances correctly in 3.5...
If i understand you correctly, thats basically what i've done, only from a fast healing point of view. I suppose I COULD take that view a bit further and apply the DR to just anything the DR would normally apply to. Further playtesting is obviously required. Ultimately we will likely do whatever my players find most enjoyable.
Like Mr Loque i agree that its a bit of a buzz kill if the players find themselves ineffective time and time again. I don't mind making a monster hard to kill, but impossible seems like a downer. Another way you could take the DR, is that while reducing it to zero hit points will down it, but you can't KILL it without a silver/adamantine/holy/cold iron/whatever weapon. Thus you could render it helpless, but not finish it off. Of course that could raise other issues as well.
This is the advantage of running a game, it becomes YOUR world to mold as you see fit and to meld with your style of play and what your players want. What works for me might not work for you, and what works for you might not work for someone else. It is fun sharing ideas though :)
The more I think about it, the more the fact that two imps can't hurt each other bothers me. I may end up amending my above policy of devils having DR/good or chaos or DR/Good or Chaos or Evil or Law.
Flavor wise, a sword steeped int he darkest evil should be able to hurt a demon anyway. The fact that Holy weapons would be more effective is already covered by the 2d6 bonus damage. This does make Align Weapon more effective, since ANY alignment becomes able to hurt a wider variety of foes, but that's the way the cookie crumbles.
So, the basic summary of straight rules crunch that makes pseudodragons verses imps plausible are:
1 - Mob template (DMG II) or swarm template (MM), in this instance, an imp prefer to tackle a single pseudodragon before the "neighborhood watch" (local mob of pseudodragons) comes over to kill it.
2 - Class levels for pseudodragons (LA +3, MM), in this instance, 'hero' pseudodragons (likely spell casters) lead their smaller brethren. The normal pseudodragons likely distract the imps (grapple or other non direct damage maneuvers) while the 'hero' lays down damaging spells.
I initially though about advancing the pseudodragon, but the 3-4 HD version is still tiny, so doesn't really have improved damage capability (see d20srd.org section on improving monsters)
Personally, I don't see the fuss people put up on how to explain things. If it is important, the DM should just find some rules to explain it (mob or class levels), and if it is not important than just keeping it as flavor is fine.
The pseudodragon PC case plays well into explaining the fluff. Just choose option 2 and say the PC is one of these hero types. I'd probably add that things are going bad for the psuedodragons, thus the PC is allying with non-dragons to get help for his/her brethren.
True, but the Suedeodragons are nice and soft...
True. And not to be confused with the Sussudiodragon...
I didn't read the whole thread, just stumbled on the "golf bag syndrome". If you are having trouble with that, maybe this Monte Cook article can help (apologies if anyone already mentioned it):
http://www.montecook.com/cgi-bin/page.cgi?otherd20_damage_reduction
(Linkifi ed for you...)
I've used this in my 3.5e game from day one. (We started on 3.5 about a year ago.) It works just fine for us.
Greg
Spoiler:Beats the old 'Vulnerability to Blessed Crossbow Bolts' rule. Where'd that come from anyway? It's not from Indian myth.
** spoiler omitted **
** spoiler omitted **** spoiler omitted **
How do your players react when you describe something that flatly makes no sense?They love it... and most of them realize that this is just a game and not "too big an issue"
Okay, just a drastic play style difference, then. We save "no big deal" for video games and movies; gaming is more fun specifically because it can offer so much more.
You could give the pdrags silver weapons, but the imps still win. More hit dice, better to-hit, higher AC, poison, and fast healing. It might work if there are massively more pdrags than there are imps. I do like the silver-spoon image.
Certainly the GM can always house-rule this, but what we found with RotRL is that it's a real pain to house-rule stuff in module 1 and then have it contradicted repeatedly in 2-6. That's why it would be nice to have an "official" fix. I house-ruled what turned out to be a major point in RotRL #2 and had trouble with almost every subsequent module because I'd guessed opposite of Paizo. Rather not do that again.
Mary
Key Adventure Path Rule #1: Don't start running it until you have the whole thing and can see the big picture. It's ok for the players not to know what's coming next. It's another thing for the DM to leap into the deep end of the pool before swimming lessons are over.
Key Adventure Path Rule #1: Don't start running it until you have the whole thing and can see the big picture. It's ok for the players not to know what's coming next. It's another thing for the DM to leap into the deep end of the pool before swimming lessons are over.
Easy to say, but hard to do. It's tough to wait the five months from the time you get the first issue of an AP until the last one is available.
Easy to say, but hard to do. It's tough to wait the five months from the time you get the first issue of an AP until the last one is available.
Key Adventure Path Rule #1: Don't start running it until you have the whole thing and can see the big picture. It's ok for the players not to know what's coming next. It's another thing for the DM to leap into the deep end of the pool before swimming lessons are over.
That's true enough. But at least get half the AP so you have the corners of the puzzle and enough to getter a better idea of the big picture.
That's true enough. But at least get half the AP so you have the corners of the puzzle and enough to getter a better idea of the big picture.Easy to say, but hard to do. It's tough to wait the five months from the time you get the first issue of an AP until the last one is available.
Key Adventure Path Rule #1: Don't start running it until you have the whole thing and can see the big picture. It's ok for the players not to know what's coming next. It's another thing for the DM to leap into the deep end of the pool before swimming lessons are over.
Well, that depends on how important the big picture is to your players. My gaming group is more focused on character development and uses the AP as a framework to build an ensemble cast of PCs and NPCs...which then go out on sidetreks and epic paths of their own. So a month by month chapter isn't that big of a deal for me. Anything that contradicts the following chapter is fodder for sidetrek adventures.
For us, leaping into the deep end is exhilarating, especially when you get splashed indirectly by a loose plotline. It builds character, so to speak.
Whew! After wading through all these posts, I have to add two distinct thoughts:
(1) First, I tend to fall squarely on Mary's side of the debate for the necessity of internal logic present in all aspects of the game. Perhaps it is my background, starting RPGs in the early 80s as experiments in gifted classes where there were numerous focusses on logic puzzles, but I have spent the past quarter-century with an ingrained need to solve seeming disparities. Such inconsistencies in a game really do bug me (and several gamers with whom I have played). I remember many an adventure where noticing something like suddenly the psuedodragons and imps are evenly matched was the impetus to start an adventure (How can this be?!?)
Not every group I for whom I have DMed or with whom I have played has been as focussed on the minutiae of the world and how it works, but many have. For the latter, noticing these inconsistencies demands an explanation, or, like in Mary;s example, the players lose interest. A good DM can usually house-rule a satisfactory explanation, but the inner obsessive player in me worries about the flagship of hte new game line if inconsistencies are acceptable.
Another lesson learned is that not every inconsistency is what it seems. Many times, as player and DM, I have heard/said "I know this seems inconsistent, but you'll either find out in character, or I'll reveal what is going on after this episode concludes". Simply by acknowledging that there is a perceived inconsistency is enough to re-engage player's interest and allow them to resume willin suspension of disbelief.
(2) That said, the second thing that occurred to me is that, boy howdy, pseudodragons have changed. Weren't they capable spellcasters with breath weapons in 1st ed? Now they are, well, a shadow of themselves. I hadn't looked closely at them since the advent of third edition, but they are definitely weaker than they were.
I wonder if that is one of the pitfalls that led to the inconsistency. I remember psuedodragons as being pretty capable (and annoying), and perhaps the designers misremembered as I did, only to discover later that imps would totally pwn pseudodragons. Even factoring in tactics, the two are evenly matched with Int scores of 10.
This brings me to another personal vexation; as a long-time gamer, I have been getting the edition specific rules slightly mixed up in all sorts of situations. Usually once per eight-hour session, I disocver that a spell now works differently or a creature cannot do what it once did or some vestige from a prior edition has evolved into something slightly different. Usually it's not a big deal, but I hate it when I make a mistake, and being that OC-gamer mentioned above, try to be internally consistent in my games. I suppose were I teen again, and had no other demands on my time, I could memorize every book (ha! - I used to be able to quote the 1st ed. DM's guide chapter and verse) and know how the DnD world works, but now I have to accept that I and my fellow gamers will make errors. I would hope that the publishers would minimize their own and not add to ours. All that said, I generally find Paizo's material to be among the best in quality in the industry. I just want ot add there is always room for improvement (and that goes for me, too, in my career).
|
|
http://paizo.com/paizo/v5748eaic9l45&source=rss
Behold! Hot imp-on-pseudodragon action!
I like it.
Especially what it demonstrates about how throwaway fluff can get out of control, and how the system can effect a fix to the problem with just a bit excessive brainpower application.|
Creative Director
|
(2) That said, the second thing that occurred to me is that, boy howdy, pseudodragons have changed. Weren't they capable spellcasters with breath weapons in 1st ed? Now they are, well, a shadow of themselves. I hadn't looked closely at them since the advent of third edition, but they are definitely weaker than they were.
Actually, back in the 1st edition MM, pseudodragons are pretty much the same level of power and have the same abilities they do in the 3rd edition MM. They've never had a breath weapon or spellcasting ability. I suspect you're remembering the faerie dragon, which DID have a lot of powers along those lines.
(2) That said, the second thing that occurred to me is that, boy howdy, pseudodragons have changed. Weren't they capable spellcasters with breath weapons in 1st ed? Now they are, well, a shadow of themselves. I hadn't looked closely at them since the advent of third edition, but they are definitely weaker than they were.
Think it was the fairie dragon from AD&D that had the breath weapon and sprll casting as far as I remember the lil' p-dragon just has his wee bite and poison stinger...that's what I recall, but then I am old and infirm:)
|
** spoiler omitted **** spoiler omitted **
I was pretty sure that the original MM predated Kolchak: The Night Stalker but it appears that the series run from 1974 to 75 so that story may prove true ! The episode where he burns a crossbow bolt into the little old granny always helped to remind me of packing blessed bolts whenever venturing to the abyss in case of accidentally dropping by Kali's realm.
|
If push comes to shove, you could say there a pseudodragons with level of sorcerer.. I like the idea of Burning Hands being used "like" a breath weapon. There can also be Pseudodragon clerics and paladins get get around the whole DR deal. :)
Imps have fire resistance 5, so they have no fear of burning hands' 1d4 fire damage. Better choices include cause fear, color spray, and ray of enfeeblement. If you insist on damage, I suppose it could go with chill touch, magic missile, or shocking grasp, but fast healing works on all damaging spells.
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32, 2010 Top 8
|
If push comes to shove, you could say there a pseudodragons with level of sorcerer.. I like the idea of Burning Hands being used "like" a breath weapon. There can also be Pseudodragon clerics and paladins get get around the whole DR deal. :)Imps have fire resistance 5, so they have no fear of burning hands' 1d4 fire damage. Better choices include cause fear, color spray, and ray of enfeeblement. If you insist on damage, I suppose it could go with chill touch, magic missile, or shocking grasp, but fast healing works on all damaging spells.
That's why you should beware the Pseudodragon psion.
I suspect you're remembering the faerie dragon, which DID have a lot of powers along those lines.
You are absolutely correct. Time to sign up for that Alzheimer's clinical trial.
Hmm, did any curmudgeon ever complain that there were too many Dragons in this game? heh heh heh
|
|
That's why you should beware the Pseudodragon psion.If push comes to shove, you could say there a pseudodragons with level of sorcerer.. I like the idea of Burning Hands being used "like" a breath weapon. There can also be Pseudodragon clerics and paladins get get around the whole DR deal. :)Imps have fire resistance 5, so they have no fear of burning hands' 1d4 fire damage. Better choices include cause fear, color spray, and ray of enfeeblement. If you insist on damage, I suppose it could go with chill touch, magic missile, or shocking grasp, but fast healing works on all damaging spells.
Oddly enough, I considered suggesting a psychic warrior 1 with metaphysical claw, but with 1 level, it's only usable 1/day, since they have Wis 12. However, the +2 Wis is better than their +0 Int bonus, so I don't think psion is the best call. After much thought, I am convinced that the class to splash for Pdragons is ranger. (I'd take 1 level in it either right before or right after taking the 2 HD of Dragon their advancement allows. I think the correct feat to take at the third HD is Wingover, so that imps have a harder time making use of their greater manueverability.) The +2 to weapon damage vs. evil outsiders has unlimited uses per day (and I think it applies because the Pdragon's natural attacks deal normal damage, and are thus "weapons", unlike a stock humanoid Ranger 1's), plus it applies to spot and listen checks, their keen senses already give a bonus to tracking, and the ranger's wild empathy helps them discern vermin from imps using alternate forms.