|
Why? Doesn't it increase their utility in a campaign? Don't we have enough salt-water breathers? The oceans of fantasy RPGs are loaded, but the rivers are almost empty.
A little bit. If you gave them something like the Sahuagin 'Water Dependent', I'd be less bothered. I'd be VERY bothered if you made them Fresh and Marine water-breathers, though.
I don't have a problem with Locathah being fresh-water. Just not fresh-water AND salt-water. Even ignoring the scientific problems that are the basis of *my* objections, the literary/thematic issues that arise from trying to make a monster comfortable in both an ocean story and a river story are problematic.
Locathah need some serious work done. The pulp/Black Lagoon is the way to go, and I think they need to be thought of as "river folk" who travel deep into the landscape of the campaign. They might live in a remote mountain lake and patrol the waterways between it and the sea. Taught to avoid human contact, a few brave or foolish locathah might instead choose to befriend a stranger from the "land country," and so on.
Maybe they can breathe fresh and salt water.
They might be kind of fun PC characters, though the aquatic subtype presents a problem there, since they can't breathe air.
Would anyone be bothered if we gave them the amphibious quality?
I think that giving them the amphibious special quality is a good idea, but that is because it would make them a more effective and versatile monster. However we distinguish between monster and race, it sounds to me like you are leaning more to the race side, while I lean more to the monster side, as my attraction to them is they look more like my ideal of a 'fishy monster man' than do the sahuagin. (Perhaps you are giving their neutrality its due.)
Fresh water/salt water would be one way to differentiate the two creatures, but so would making one of them cold aquatic, instead of keeping them both warm (since colder sea water supports more life, which would be good for a race of fish folk.)
Aside from thinking of the single monster of the Black Lagoon, when I think of an aquatic race, I think of the Shanks from the Dray Prescott books. (Vicious raiders, advanced naval secrets, definitely are not restricted to the water.) So whether they were raiding coastal communities or riverfronts, both of these influences make me think "raiders" first when I think of such creatures.
But I agree the Locathah need serious work: they currently have no natural weapons and are cast as fraidy fish. So besides the competition for a niche, their look (heretofore) and their antecedents do not match their stats.
I don't have a problem with Locathah being fresh-water. Just not fresh-water AND salt-water. Even ignoring the scientific problems that are the basis of *my* objections, the literary/thematic issues that arise from trying to make a monster comfortable in both an ocean story and a river story are problematic.Why? Doesn't it increase their utility in a campaign? Don't we have enough salt-water breathers? The oceans of fantasy RPGs are loaded, but the rivers are almost empty.
A little bit. If you gave them something like the Sahuagin 'Water Dependent', I'd be less bothered. I'd be VERY bothered if you made them Fresh and Marine water-breathers, though.
Aren't there fish that live in brackish water that go back and forth between the sea and fresh water?
And for some reason, I thought I remembered some creature that had adapted to the sea but had to come up with some way of expelling lots of excess salt from its system. (I just mention this in the hope you know more about this sort of thing than I do.) That could be a nice disgusting touch.
"Water dependent" is a good catch...sorry, I pun'd.
Salmon can pull it off for a little while, at least.I'd be VERY bothered if you made them Fresh and Marine water-breathers, though.I have to agree here. Only a few sea creatures are capable of surviving in both environments for long periods of time. The bull shark being one that comes to mind.
Eric,
They could be freash water/brackish water dwelling. This would set them in the river and estuary region, but not the actual ocean. More so, they now become another possible "swamp race" that would live in deep river basins and costal swamps.|
|
Aren't there fish that live in brackish water that go back and forth between the sea and fresh water?
Estuaries are pretty specific environments; yes, there are animals adapted to them, and they can go back and forth because they straddle that midpoint. Fascinating, but irrelevant unless you want a monster that lives only in harbors and harbor-like environments.
And for some reason, I thought I remembered some creature that had adapted to the sea but had to come up with some way of expelling lots of excess salt from its system.
Aquatic Iguanas sneeze (a LOT) to expel excess salt.
Sea Turtles have a special gland behind their eyes. In fact, this is pretty common to most marine reptiles, and semi-marine reptiles like crocodiles. Mammals have hyper-efficient kidneys, and do their best to avoid ingesting sea water.
All marine animals have a very narrow band of salinity that they can thrive in.
|
In a world where dragonsd fly in anti-magic shells, I have no issue with mythic monsters living in fresh and salt water.
But I don't see any reason they couldn't just come in salt water versions and fresh water versions, like dolphins. That way you can use them in any water you like for a gvien adventure.
For many creatures, marine and freashwater versions are possible. We have both marine and freashwater sharks in real life and in 2nd edition there were both marine and freashwater scrags.
In the case of humanoid creaturs, like merfolk and aquatic elves, I favor a fixed enviornment to define their place in the world. There are a lot of intelligent marine races, but few freashwater races.
Edit: I am not above letting aberations survive in both environments. They break the rules regarding biology as it is.
On a slightly different form of monster discussion, I stumbled across this about the Purple Worm (and its aquatic cousin) the other day.
"Other kinds of Dragons can be introduced into games, if a little imagination is used. White Dragons live in cold climates and breathe frost. Black Dragons are tropical and spit caustic acid. The Blue variety discharges a bolt of electricity. Green Dragons waft poisonous vapors -- chlorine -- at their opponents. Finally, the Purple, or Mottled, Dragon is a rare, flightless worm with a venomous sting in its tail. (Chainmail, 3rd edition, p. 35.)"
I know this might be putting the ankylosaur before the cart, but could we possibly try and close up some logistic holes in certain monsters with the Pathfinder monster book?
For the most part, animal armor classes don't scale very well compared to animal to hit rolls, which is okay when the animal isn't an armored creature... but not so much with creatures whose defense /is/ in their tough shell or hide. Case in point... the Tyrannosaurus in the SRD has a +20 to hit with his bite. The ankylosaurus I saw in the Savage Tide Adventure Path had an AC of somewhere between 20 and 25, I think. What's the point of adapting to weigh yourself down with all of that heavy armor if your major predator can bite through it on a roll of 2-5 or higher? Animals whose defensive tactic relies on turtling defence need some kind of damage reduction, higher ACs, harm-you-when-you-attack-them ability, or some combo of the above, (kind of like the stegosaur's hunkering down fin-flex manauver in that same issue.)
Animals whose defensive tactic relies on turtling defence need some kind of damage reduction, higher ACs, harm-you-when-you-attack-them ability, or some combo of the above.
Agreed on this point. Perhaps an ability similar to Combat Expertise. Take a penalty to attack (or may sacrifice movement) for a bonus to AC.
Agreed on this point. Perhaps an ability similar to Combat Expertise. Take a penalty to attack (or may sacrifice movement) for a bonus to AC.For every five feet of movement you sacrifice, you add a +2 dodge bonus to your AC? Call it Rampart Defense.
Okay, this is good, this I like. I favor sacrificing movement for these beasties, as opposed to to-hit, since, at least for ankylosaurus and stegosaurus, the point is staying well defended long enough to disuade the carnosaur with the business end of the tail.
Of course, a lot of defense-based critters are slow, so this might not work so well for monstrous turtles and dire snails. But they could get some sort of upward scaling of their Rampart Defense (+4 per -5 movement,) to compensate.
EDIT: Is it just me, or do the words "Dire Snail" just roll off the tongue? :)
Good point, I'd go for a combination of damage reduction and "harms opponents who attacks it with natural weapons" defense. Giving Ankylosaurs an AC of 35+ so a Tyrannosaurus has difficulty hitting it feels wrong to me. An Ankylosaurus should be easy enough for a Tyrannosaurus to hit with its bite, its just that they'd regret it!However this logistic hole is an unavoidable consequence of Base Attack scaling with Hit Dice, which usually go up with size. If a Tyrannosaurus had the same attack skill as a Tiger we wouldn't have this problem. It's been that way since the dawn of D&D and changing the HD rules would wreck Pathfinder's backwards-compatibility.
Which is why it's a logistics hole that needs a specific non-hit-die related fix for it.
Honestly, I do like the Rampart Defense idea, but I'm also a fan of the idea of doing damage back to attackers. Maybe it would work to roll the two into one, where the creature gains a +N to armor class and for every 5 feet it sacrifices, and causes damage to creatures attacking with natural weapons (and perhaps damage to manufactured weapons too, {affected by hardness of course,} as I like the idea of someone's weapon-haft snapping when they hit the thing.)
As for an AC 35 Ankylosaur feeling wrong... well, I don't know why. It evolved armor in the face (literally) of big biters like the T-Rex. Why should it be easy to hit with the bite if the point of evolving into a turtle/tank is to keep from being chewed? (Relatively) small amounts of damage to the attacker is good, but it can't be the whole equation.
Well, I believe, current evidence suggest that a tyrannosaur did not have the bite force to penetrate the shell of an adult ankylosaur. As such, DR of somekind may be needed for some dinosaurs.
Of course, if we add the human element to the arguement, we need to make sure that whatever method is use, players are still able to overcome these creatures.
Perhaps, in the case of ankylosaurs "Rampart Defense" provides a bigger AC bonus/DR bonus against creatures of Huge size or larger than against Large and smaller creatures.
As for Stegosaurus, the plates may have served both as a defense and for intimidation/mating purposes.
On a slightly different form of monster discussion, I stumbled across this about the Purple Worm (and its aquatic cousin) the other day.
"Other kinds of Dragons can be introduced into games, if a little imagination is used. White Dragons live in cold climates and breathe frost. Black Dragons are tropical and spit caustic acid. The Blue variety discharges a bolt of electricity. Green Dragons waft poisonous vapors -- chlorine -- at their opponents. Finally, the Purple, or Mottled, Dragon is a rare, flightless worm with a venomous sting in its tail. (Chainmail, 3rd edition, p. 35.)"
Awesome find! The Purple Worm is a type of Dragon?! Yeah that gives some much needed bite (pardon the pun) to this beast.
|
|
A higher AC is probably not the way to go for static defenders. That's the role of DR. Give an Ankylosaur some good DR/underbelly strikes, and you now have something defended from T-Rex bites coming from above, but still vulnerable to crafty time-traveling cavemen.
If Pathfinder weren't required to be backwards compatible with 3.x, I'd make all armor give DR, and make AC an Agility Class or some such. High AC is hard to hit, high DR is hard to damage and it now reflects more realistically different strategies for avoiding death in the face of sharp, pointy things.
The following creatures from d20 Modern are open game. They would not be hard to convert to 3.5 and could be used to fill out some monster roles or for a future monster book. Some of the templates, like the ghoul and replacement templates would provide some new creature ideas. The roach thrall is a particularly nasty urban monster, while the fiends could fill a role of general evil outsider not aligned to devils, daemons, or demons.
D20 MODERN
Fiends
- Festergog (Vomit Fiend)
- Rotlord (Carrion Fiend)
- Skinhusker (Blade Fiend)
Monstrous Flytrap
Templates
- Replacement
URBAN ARCANA
Ash Wraith
Breathsnatcher
Gremlin
Grendalspawn
Leechwalker
Roach Thrall
Skunk Ape
Templates
- Changeling
- Zombie, Liquefied
MENACE MANUAL
Acid Rainer
Cat Folk
Charred One
Crawling Claw
Demonic Machine
Doom Hag
Drop Bear
Fiend
- Fleshraker (Knife Fiend)
- Harriken (Headsnatcher Fiend)
- Jumping Jack (Blood Fiend)
- Kwevencha (Spider Fiend)
- Murdergaunt (Whistling Fiend)
- Stygilor (Tumor Fiend)
Infester
Jynx
Kinori
Mapinguari
Mongolian Death Worm
Mothfolk
Night Terror
Satanic Ichor
Skin Feaster
Thunderbird
Templates
- Bogeyman
- Ghoul
- Malleable Creature
- Revenant
D20 FUTURE
Templates
- Extraterrestrial
D20 MODERN
I like the cut of your jib, Mr. Minotaur.
Just wanted to quickley chime in and say I love all draconic themed monstrosities as they are the pinnicle of awsomeness for the game. That being said, these have my vote!
All of the Linnorm Dragons (with age categories except Midgard and Corpse Tearer, or if they are to be single beast, as long as they are the high powered primevil powerhouses they should be)
The true neutrals, being the Amber, Jade, Jacinith, Moonstone and Pearl dragons
I would like to see the Cloud and Electrum dragons (the Storm Drake from Draconomicon didn't cut it for me).
Also, the Hellfire Wyrm would be a nice one to redo. To my knowledge it's the only planar dragon without it's age progression and I would like to see that.
Also I'd rather not see any creature dropped but if it's for the better good, I'm all for it. Thank all of your guys, loving the Pathfinder stuff so far!
NemesisDragon
The true neutrals, being the Amber, Jade, Jacinith, Moonstone and Pearl dragons
I would like to see the Cloud and Electrum dragons (the Storm Drake from Draconomicon didn't cut it for me).
NemesisDragon
Where are the above from?
Well I suppose that may be the only problem, I'm not knowledgeable on what creatures can be used etc. because of the copyright stuff.
The true neutrals (Pearl, Jade, Jacinith, Moonstone and Amber) were originally in the 2nd edition Monstrous Compendium Annuals I believe. I don't know if any 3rd edition versions were done at all (I know some if not all were converted at Enworld though and them guys do excellent work!)
As far as the Cloud goes, I forget the origin but I do believe it was used in the 3rd edition Tome of Horrors. WotC made it the Storm Drake in the Draconomicon and I was not impressed at all. Tome of Horrors version is nice though.
The Electrum is a Faerun based dragon that originally appeared in early Dragon Magazines and in 2nd edition Ruins of Myth Drannor. He's the one I was most wary about because of copyrighting etc. And I didn't mention the Faerun Yellow because it's gotten me into much trouble the past year or two lol :P.
Hope that Helps Monkeygod, also I did forget three more that I don't think would be a problem. I will cast a vote for the Yellow, Orange and Purple from the Dragon Compendium Annual, they are so rad!
Thanks again,
Great idea Thraxus! I'd forgotten there are lots of nice OGL monsters in d20 Modern.
Very few of them assume a high-tech/science-fiction environment, like Gremlins, Kinori or Demonic Machines, so the DM shouldn't need to change their background flavour or shoe-horn in Blackmooresque Cities of the Ancients / crashed aliens / clockwork magic if they feel they have to justify where they came from.
Which is why I suggested it for Pathfinder. Golarion has that old school fantasy/science fiction roots, so a few of the more tech-based creatures can fit into the world.
Edit: Plus the fiends are pretty cool. They are typically low to mid Hit Dice and advance by character class.
|
The following creatures from d20 Modern are open game.
The Mongolian Death Worm owns all! I'm throwing the old Purple Worm out and replacing it immediately!
Creative Director
|
The following creatures from d20 Modern are open game.The Mongolian Death Worm owns all! I'm throwing the old Purple Worm out and replacing it immediately!
I was considering doing up this critter in Pathfinder #19, but then realized that the Tome of Horrors beat me to it! It's just called a "death worm" there though, since most D&D campaigns don't have a Mongolia in them.
I was considering doing up this critter in Pathfinder #19, but then realized that the Tome of Horrors beat me to it! It's just called a "death worm" there though, since most D&D campaigns don't have a Mongolia in them.
I forgot about that version. I was trying to leave out critters that I knew were in the Tome of Horrors. Generally I like the TOH versions better.
The only problem I have with the TOH death worm is the size. I would make the base size medium, with larger versions from there.
The d20Modern monsters would be interesting but the space is already limited and we'll hopefully see at least some of them later (catfolk get my vote) but the first monster book could be problematic.
More megafauna, such as arctodus, smilodon, north american lion, mammoth and giant ground sloth, would be interesting in place of and/or in addition to the traditional dire animals. And a prehistoric monsters bestiary later going into more detail on dinosaurs and megafauna as well as pterosaurs, aquatic reptile contemporaries of dinosaurs and pre dinosaur creatures (dimetrodon all the way back to the cambrian creatures like anomalocaris and opabinia) would have a very large customer base, I think.
Oh and I'll repeat earlier comments: for the raptor art, make sure they have feathers rather than scales as per recent reconstructions.
A higher AC is probably not the way to go for static defenders. That's the role of DR. Give an Ankylosaur some good DR/underbelly strikes, and you now have something defended from T-Rex bites coming from above, but still vulnerable to crafty time-traveling cavemen.
If Pathfinder weren't required to be backwards compatible with 3.x, I'd make all armor give DR, and make AC an Agility Class or some such. High AC is hard to hit, high DR is hard to damage and it now reflects more realistically different strategies for avoiding death in the face of sharp, pointy things.
The DR idea works better because if a T-rex attacked from the side or the front an ankylosaurs tail could not hit it. Another possibility is a creature version of the sectional AC we had with some vehicles in 3.5.
As a side note I actually don't mind the stats of the tojanida-my group actually fought a tojanida once. We also fought an athach a few sessions earlier so I have no complaints about either of those in contrast to many around here apparently. The tojanida ART could definitely use a rework.
While I won't get into the pros and cons of specific monsters or which are considered OGL (mostly because I haven't paid that close attention to such things in the past), I would like to see smaller, less-expensive Monster Books that are specifically aimed at a particular kind of monster. I really liked Hordes of the Abyss and Legions of the Nine Hells, and would like to see what Paizo did with a whole book of Fey, Undead, good / neutral Outsiders, or really freaky Far Realm / Cthulhu stuff.
I thought the later WoTC offerings like Libris Mortis were a little off-base, but something that is specific to a type of monster would be nice. It could be a smaller, less-expensive to produce (and buy) version, more adapted to Paizo.
Just my two cents,
Coledar
Fair enough, but it should be noted that the monster types books went in this order: Draconomicon (Dragons), Libris Mortis (Undead), Lords of Madness(Aberrations), then the Fiendish Codexes(Demons, Devils).
As a side note I actually don't mind the stats of the tojanida-my group actually fought a tojanida once. We also fought an athach a few sessions earlier so I have no complaints about either of those in contrast to many around here apparently. The tojanida ART could definitely use a rework.
I actually like the athach, but think it should be a giant or monstrous humanoid, instead of an aberration.
Crazy ideas for saving page count:Some crazier than others! :)
3. Remove a few grouped creatures entirely from the base book. Give Dragons their own Pathfinder Draconomicon! If that's too iconic, pull the celestial and infernal denizens and put them in the Big Fun Coloring Book of the Outer Planes.Dragons MUST be in the book. That's guarenteed. And I'm not gonna give up the demons, which means devils and daemons are in there too. Again, though... formians might be getting the boot. Mephits too... at least SOME of them...
Goodness, I came to this thread so late and I don't have time to slog though all the posts. So, to add my voice for more dragons (and homebrew ones if Paizo is open to them), I've got aquatic true dragons, now archived at Gleemax and still very much available at EN World's Homebrew Monsters forum, available. Yes, water-breathing dragons with the aquatic subtype with fins like manta rays instead of wings but with flippers as well. Subcategories of the metallic and chromatic dragons (mercury dragons and sepia dragons for example, the former completely unrelated to Faerûn's mercury dragon). I'm willing to make them available to Paizo since Wizards won't use them anymore I bet.
Just wanted to quickley chime in and say I love all draconic themed monstrosities as they are the pinnicle of awsomeness for the game. That being said, these have my vote!
The true neutrals (Pearl, Jade, Jacinith, Moonstone and Amber) were originally in the 2nd edition Monstrous Compendium Annuals I believe. I don't know if any 3rd edition versions were done at all (I know some if not all were converted at Enworld though and them guys do excellent work!)
[SHAMELESS PLUG]I'm part of the conversion team, and yes, we've done jacinth and moonstone already at this Creature Catalog true dragon conversions thread.[/SHAMELESS PLUG]
That being said, there is one monster that has always seemed a little off to me. OgreMagi, this race/monster seems like a sore thumb that needs healing. Badly. Cure serious wounds even. It just doesn't fit in anyway shape or form. Especially now with the adjustment of the Ogres that have been given by the Illustrious Nick Logue and his twisted little experiment of giant concoctions. OK, so that didn't make much sense, but my point is valid lets hammer this nail down and make it "fit" better into the game and to echo earlier thoughts lets kill of dumb creatures that are unneeded and unwanted, and forget their existence, unless a logical in game, compelling reason for their being exists. Tojandas I am looking at you.The ogre magi could probably stand to get cut and replaced by one of two things: An ogre with sorcerer levels, or an actual oni. At the VERY LEAST, the ogre magi needs to be rebalanced, though; that's for sure.
I realize I'm pretty late getting to this party, but this is something I've been using for Ogre Mages in my games:
Ogre Mage Fan VariantIt ties them more to their Oni roots, gives 'em some neat tricks, and makes them more CR appropriate. I've been using the Wu Jen style ones as a major villainous race in my campaign recently, and they're pretty cool, though I do sometimes have to get creative with the Prestige Classing if I want them to have some other class's abilities as well. I realize that Wu Jen and Warlocks aren't exactly OGL, but I'm sure something similar could be done with sorcerer/wizard...
I would not mind seeing a couple of ogre variants, such as the ogre mage. The ogre mage could serve as a sort of missing link between oni and ogres.
Having said that, the 3.5 ogre mage is really a bit of in terms of CR and abilities. Perhapes the orge writeup could just include a text line saying that oger mages exist and have the same stats as an ogre, with the ability to fly, shapechange, and turn invisible. Give them a Charisma score of 17, a CR of 5, and Sorcerer as favored class.
While not holding true to the 3.5 ogre mage, the adjustments are easy to make to the standard ogre and still comes close to capturing the flavor.
|
|
Awesome find! The Purple Worm is a type of Dragon?! Yeah that gives some much needed bite (pardon the pun) to this beast.On a slightly different form of monster discussion, I stumbled across this about the Purple Worm (and its aquatic cousin) the other day.
"Other kinds of Dragons can be introduced into games, if a little imagination is used. White Dragons live in cold climates and breathe frost. Black Dragons are tropical and spit caustic acid. The Blue variety discharges a bolt of electricity. Green Dragons waft poisonous vapors -- chlorine -- at their opponents. Finally, the Purple, or Mottled, Dragon is a rare, flightless worm with a venomous sting in its tail. (Chainmail, 3rd edition, p. 35.)"
The purple dragon from Chainmail is a dragon, and not related to the modern "Tremors" purple worm. Worm, wurm, wyrm, all mean the same thing, dragon. "Worm" is old english. I'm sure an english major can bore you with the details. "Wyrm" would have been more succinct in the chainmail context. I suspect they where trying to be cute. Also it seems to be a forerunner to the wyvern, given it's sting. The distant bastard cousin of draconic kin.
As for monsters, I've seen some good suggestions. I'm down with mud, tar, lava men/monsters.
There needs to be some nasty plant monsters. Assassin vines, venus fly trap and pitcher plant variants are cool. Ravenloft had fantastic plant monsters.
Malevolent intelligent horses are great so the Nightmare should be in. I'm not to worried about their inclusion as they're a classic.
Oh and while I love dragons, don't water them down by having a variant under every rock. It lessens the impact. It's equivalent to the old half dragon template joke. When I see yellow, brown, sand, fang, or battle dragons I want to hurl. }; )
The purple dragon from Chainmail is a dragon, and not related to the modern "Tremors" purple worm. Worm, wurm, wyrm, all mean the same thing, dragon. "Worm" is old english. I'm sure an english major can bore you with the details. "Wyrm" would have been more succinct in the chainmail context. I suspect they where trying to be cute. Also it seems to be a forerunner to the wyvern, given it's sting. The distant bastard cousin of draconic kin.
Agreed. I just found it interesting that the "Purple Worm" was originally envisioned as a land crawling dragon with no breath weapon instead of the worm we know and love.
I also agree with the number of true dragons. I actually don't mind lesser dragons, such as drakes and dragonets, though.
Stuff on unifying dragons.
This is actually the method that D20 Modern did for Urban Arcana. Personally, I would to three standardized dragon stat groupings. One for the smaller true dragons (black, brass, copper, and white), one for the medium true dragons (blue, bronze, green, and silver), and one for the large true dragons (red and gold). That alone would cut seven stat boxes and still alow for some size variation in true dragons.
I base my size groupings on the similar size charts in the SRD. These groupings could probably even be reduced to two (lesser true dragons and greater true dragons, or some such).
|
|
I don't mind lots and lots of dragon variants - but do they really each need to have their own unique physical stats?
I snipped the rest, but I totally agree with this.
It makes no difference at all to me that a Red Dragon has 4 more Strength and 2 more Charisma than a Blue Dragon. Give them all the same stats based on size category and, as you say, make a few exceptions (White Dragons, dumb). Different immunities and spell-likes and breath weapons, and then the rest is flavor text, really.
I tend to only have a half-dozen dragons total known to be active in my own games, and all of them are legendary creatures, some overseeing vast territories that nobody messes with (with the Red having his own nation on the map, a state consisting of Fire Giants, Kobolds and the Hobgoblin mameluke-slave-soldiers that make up Old Pyre's armies). Even with each of my dragons being a unique creature, I'd still rather have a more streamlined set of rules for dragons in general. The charts, repeated over and over, except for an ability score here or a natural armor difference there, are a bit numbing.
I do believe that there are too many of some races, such as Elven subraces, but at least I can say, 'well, this particular clan of elves grew up in the taiga, so it makes sense they've have more cold-weather-related weapons and stuff.'
I have trouble wrapping my head around the idea of a dozen different entire *species* of dragon sharing the same planet. I don't even use the Metallics, let along the gemstone dragons or the song, fang, battle, shadow, steel, etc. dragons!
Ok, I admit that this post is largely to bump the topic. Still, since a number of people think it might be a good idea to unify the base dragon ability scores, I wonder if there are any other creatures that people feel can be unified. For that matter, are there any that need to be expanded upon.
For example, I would love to see a sidebar with modifications that could be done to the fiendish and half-fiend templates to create a more demonic or devilish ancestory. The same could apply to the celestial and half-celestial templates.
|
|
Ok, I admit that this post is largely to bump the topic. Still, since a number of people think it might be a good idea to unify the base dragon ability scores, I wonder if there are any other creatures that people feel can be unified. For that matter, are there any that need to be expanded upon.
For example, I would love to see a sidebar with modifications that could be done to the fiendish and half-fiend templates to create a more demonic or devilish ancestory. The same could apply to the celestial and half-celestial templates.
Given the differences in resistances and other 'general' features, I definitely would prefer to see seperate 'half-demon' and 'half-devil' and possibly 'half-daemon' templates, rather than one general 'half-fiend.'
Giants might also be a group of races that could be streamlined. All giants have the base stats, to make this a Fire Giant, add the Fire subtype, to make it a Frost Giant, add the Cold subtype, to make it a Stone Giant, add the Earth subtype and double Natural Armor (or add DR/adamantine), to make it a Storm Giant, add the Air, Water and amphibious Types/traits and the following SLAs, etc. There would be more room for other details, like frost giants tend to wear hide or chain and use greataxes, while fire giants tend to wear chain or plate and use greatswords, but the basic 'giant' would range in various sizes from Large to Huge to Fee-Fi-Fo-Fum.
|
Creative Director
|
Question for James Jacobs:
I was reading the Crown of the World entry in the Campaign Setting, and came across the word 'remorhazes', which I took to be a plural form for remorhaz. Do you actually want the plural form to be remorhazes for Golarion, since I'm not sure if that final 'es' ought, by the regular rules for English (such as they are), to alter the pronunciation of the 'a'? (Although this is also a question about how you pronounce Remorhaz in the first place, I guess.)Edit:
Checked the 3.5 Monster Manual, and the plural form used there is remorhazes; still, this could be an opportunity to change it. :D
If only one thing changes about the remorhaz in the PF RPG monster book... it's that it'll be getting a lot more hit dice. The pluralizing of its name is unlikely to change; remorhazes is probably gonna stick the same.
I pronounce it: REM-or-oz
Plural: REM-or-oz-ez
Which may or may not be right.