As others have said, APPLAUSE, WHISTLES. The Bestiary is wonderful guys. Thank you.
What has happened to the Nightcrawler and the Nightwalker? They are not in the book. Are they restricted monsters too?
"Ghoul: Special Attacks paralysis." Are half-elves immune to this effect too?
What has happened to the Nightcrawler and the Nightwalker? They are not in the book. Are they restricted monsters too?
They're both on d20srd.org so they are OGL. They must have been left on the cutting room floor and thus saved for PFB2.
Creative Director
|
What has happened to the Nightcrawler and the Nightwalker? They are not in the book. Are they restricted monsters too?
"Ghoul: Special Attacks paralysis." Are half-elves immune to this effect too?
The nightwalker and nightcrawler and nightwing are not restricted. They're just one of many monsters we couldn't fit into the book. They'll be back.
Half-elves are not immune to ghoul paralysis.
|
A whole bunch of b%!@@ing that's been said beforeI thought the cleric/heavy armor gripes were annoying, but people are really getting their panties in a wad over this Bestiary, aren't they? Wah, wah, wah, I bought a book and it's not EXACTLY what I wanted and wah, wah, wah, you ruined my game, Paizo!!! What age range is this game made for again? I feel like I'm in a room full of kids throwing fits because they keep landing on the chute squares instead of the ladder ones. Grow up people. And read the hundred or so other whiners who have already raised these concerns and recieved answers before posting. It just wastes your time and everyone else's.
On that note, thanks James and Jason an Erik and Wes and everyone else who put together this amazing book. Those of us who appreciate you might be drowned out at the moment by all the crybabies, but I know a ton of people on the site are really grateful for all your time, dedication, and sacrifices so that we can have a fun game to play with our friends. I think most of us who are thankful are too busy doing our own conversions of missing monsters and calculating our own LA replacement system to thank you. Maybe those who are spending their time complaining should do the same.
(Wow... Yoda, you would make a good Chelaxian -- are you absolutely sure you wouldn't want to sign this brimstone-smelling contract with your blood and defect into our faction? ;))
But, seriously, I agree with all of this, and I echo your thanks to the Paizonians for the AMAZING work they've done! I've never been this excited about D&D, and I'm so happy that they had faith in this venture and in 3E fans -- not to mention the guts and will to pull through that insane amount of work to see the whole project through (and, I believe, at the cost of their own health and sanity). On top of it all, they let us -- the fans -- also participate in every step of the process.
And I happily paid for the Core Rulebook and Bestiary, knowing there would be "omissions" in the Bestiary and some errors in the first printing of the books -- I still wanted to get them as quickly as I could, because I knew the competence of Paizo's editors is top notch, and it's not like every RPG book I've bought would have been completely error-free (meaning that I'm sure there're less errors in the PF core books than in most of my 3E books -- and we also get a free, updated errata and SRD).
As for the omissions, as others have already said, the IP for Mindflayer, Beholder, Githyanki et al. is held by WoTC; it's not just that, but also the *mechanics* are part of the IP, so even if Paizo introduced a bunch of replacements ('Floating Eyelord', 'Tentacled Brainsucker', 'Limbo Psionic Cutthroat', and so on) with "unique" and "original" names, they would also need to replace the mechanics and the wording of all such MM entries. Otherwise WoTC could, if they wanted to, sue for violating their IP (note: if Paizo had done this, it would be a consistent pattern and easy to prove in court, i.e. "Here's their slightly modified Beholder, here's their slightly modified Mindflayer..."). It would be *very* tricky, and likely to backfire if Paizo tried it.
And, finally, I don't even get these "We didn't get X and Y!" complaints -- I'm fairly sure that MOST of the guys who will buy the Bestiary already own the 3E MM(s), and converting monsters is really a breeze from 3E to Pathfinder. So why do people complain so loudly? If I want to have a Mindflayer or a Githzerai in my adventure, it takes me a minute or so to convert it from MM. If I didn't, I can still look up the stats in D20 SRD and work from there. Where's the problem, I wonder?
What in the world is wrong about complaining about things you don't like? Fine you disagree, but don't insult the people you disagree with by saying they're "whining" or whatever. It's quite offensive.
|
What has happened to the Nightcrawler and the Nightwalker? They are not in the book. Are they restricted monsters too?
"Ghoul: Special Attacks paralysis." Are half-elves immune to this effect too?
The nightwalker and nightcrawler and nightwing are not restricted. They're just one of many monsters we couldn't fit into the book. They'll be back.
Half-elves are not immune to ghoul paralysis.
So... elf-blooded is just a drawback to get targeted by Rangers then?
Elf Blood: Half-elves count as both elves and humans for any effect related to race.
I mean if it comes from you it's official, but I'd have to wonder what the point of Elf-Blood is then if it won't work in this case?
Anyway back on topic:
I downloaded the PDF, love it (especially the monster creation stuff), using it for a Pumpkin Themed Halloween Adventure. Good work.
What in the world is wrong about complaining about things you don't like? Fine you disagree, but don't insult the people you disagree with by saying they're "whining" or whatever. It's quite offensive.
I believe the problem lies not with complaining about what one doesn't like, but rather, with ascribing sinister or derogatory motives to Paizo's staff over the disliked aspects of the game.
When people start to imply that Paizo is "ruining the game," or "being lazy," or even "screwing people out of money" rather than simply stating a disagreement, it tends to rile people up a bit.
Well that's no reason to respond in kind. And in fact people accused us who were arguing against cleric's heavy armor being removed of whining and the like when we we're doing no such thing and it was brought up again here. I'm starting to think the people who are noticing a lack of civility on these boards might not be as wrong as I previously thought.
|
Creative Director
|
Traditionally, only elves have been immune to ghoul paralysis. But it does look like the current wording for "elf blood" would extend to half-elves. And since "elf blood" IS more of a disadvantage than an advantage since very few "elf only" items or effects exist (doesn't the Oathbow do something special for elves? Can't remember...) it's cool if this does give half-elves a benefit.
So yeah, upon further reflection, I'd say that half-elves are fine and immune to ghoul paralysis.
|
Creative Director
|
Paizo (and Paizo's messageboards) is experiencing a HUGE growth spurt. The RPG has brought in a LOT more customers, and a LOT more posters to these boards. I'm pretty proud of how civil these boards are, especially given the fact that over the past few years the industry and Paizo's place in it has taken some pretty significant knocks and changes.
SO! Please DON'T be a jerk to each other, folks! Passions run deep with RPGs, I know, but that doesn't mean we need to be mean to each other!
Well that's no reason to respond in kind. And in fact people accused us who were arguing against cleric's heavy armor being removed of whining and the like when we we're doing no such thing and it was brought up again here. I'm starting to think the people who are noticing a lack of civility on these boards might not be as wrong as I previously thought.
As someone that complained about the cleric armor change, I agree that I didn't like being categorized as a "whiner," but at the same time, once I stated my preference, I kind of moved on from the topic. The more I saw that the Pathfinder cleric couldn't be discussed, no matter what the original topic was, without the thread devolving into arguments about cleric's armor proficiencies, the more I started to regret even chiming in on the topic.
|
Paizo (and Paizo's messageboards) is experiencing a HUGE growth spurt. The RPG has brought in a LOT more customers, and a LOT more posters to these boards. I'm pretty proud of how civil these boards are, especially given the fact that over the past few years the industry and Paizo's place in it has taken some pretty significant knocks and changes.
SO! Please DON'T be a jerk to each other, folks! Passions run deep with RPGs, I know, but that doesn't mean we need to be mean to each other!
James,
Do you ever sleep? :)
No, he doesn't.
I imagine its hard to sleep once a man has seen some of the "director's cut" material that must pass across his desk in the commission of his job. He probably hasn't gotten a good night's sleep since Hook Mountain Massacre.
Ring of Sustenance for the win. Don't need to waste time taking meal breaks and only lose 2 hours a day to sleep xDI know it's not open content, but does he trance instead?No, he doesn't.
That would be an item I personally would pay a arm for. I'd save so much money on food costs... and get in so much more gaming.
Plus... the amount of caffiene I consume cannot be healthy.
As someone that complained about the cleric armor change... I kind of moved on from the topic.
Moved on? I understand these words you speak, but I don't know what you mean when you string them together thusly. Never give up! Never surrender!
As someone that complained about the cleric armor change... I kind of moved on from the topic.Moved on? I understand these words you speak, but I don't know what you mean when you string them together thusly. Never give up! Never surrender!
Ah I see you took the heavy armor feat. Good call if your aiming for hellknight.
|
|
Well that's no reason to respond in kind. And in fact people accused us who were arguing against cleric's heavy armor being removed of whining and the like when we we're doing no such thing and it was brought up again here. I'm starting to think the people who are noticing a lack of civility on these boards might not be as wrong as I previously thought.As someone that complained about the cleric armor change, I agree that I didn't like being categorized as a "whiner," but at the same time, once I stated my preference, I kind of moved on from the topic. The more I saw that the Pathfinder cleric couldn't be discussed, no matter what the original topic was, without the thread devolving into arguments about cleric's armor proficiencies, the more I started to regret even chiming in on the topic.
I'm fairly sure that you never complained about Paizo "ruining your game" on that thread, and I'm also sure that a GM of your experience will houserule the issue with HAP, if it bothers you or your players. :)
What I (and Yoda, I guess) referred to was that some people are crossposting on several threads how Paizo has "ruined" the game, or purposefully and malignantly left feats/monsters/prestige classes out of the books as a heartless "money grab" (some of them even keep going after James/Erik/Joshua offers an explanation). On top of it all, they already either have the books, or could easily convert the "missing" stuff from D20 SRD.
I can understand the complaints about vague wording on some mechanics (feats and spells, namely), though; still, I believe we are going to get a very good FAQ in the near future; it's not as if 3E didn't suffer from the same "problem".
|
|
What in the world is wrong about complaining about things you don't like? Fine you disagree, but don't insult the people you disagree with by saying they're "whining" or whatever. It's quite offensive.
I don't think anyone is against constructive criticism or suggestions; however, if the tone is clearly negative ("OMG! What were they thinking?!?!?" or "I KNEW they would mess this up!" or "Why did you guys leave Beholder out of the book?!? I know I'm being played here!"), then I see it as needless ranting that serves no purpose. Often such posters make it clear that the rule/spell/feat/monster (or even the whole game) is now "useless" or "broken", because it does not match their own ideal image of how it should have been. And, these people keep repeating their opinions on several threads.
I'm especially starting to lose my nerve with threads in which posters first claim that something does not work, or feels "illogical", by their own interpretation, and they just keep arguing, even if someone provides a RAW explanation or points out that rule/spell/feat/whatever X works the way it does for the sake of easy of play.
Traditionally, only elves have been immune to ghoul paralysis. But it does look like the current wording for "elf blood" would extend to half-elves. And since "elf blood" IS more of a disadvantage than an advantage since very few "elf only" items or effects exist (doesn't the Oathbow do something special for elves? Can't remember...) it's cool if this does give half-elves a benefit.
So yeah, upon further reflection, I'd say that half-elves are fine and immune to ghoul paralysis.
hurray :-)
Thanx for a very nice PDF.Isn't the nerf of Regeneration a bit too harsh? I mean wizards/sorcerers now have acid slash at will and you can always poke the troll with a torch.
I fear battling trolls will not be as fun anymore. They used to be a big problem no all you need is a match or acid splash. Heck. Even a wand will do. Just my 2C.
|
Creative Director
|
Isn't the nerf of Regeneration a bit too harsh? I mean wizards/sorcerers now have acid slash at will and you can always poke the troll with a torch.
I fear battling trolls will not be as fun anymore. They used to be a big problem no all you need is a match or acid splash. Heck. Even a wand will do. Just my 2C.
I don't think so... it basically makes regeneration less of a bunch of wasted time in game play. It still requires you to take a precious round of actions out of combat while other monsters that are still up can get to you, and if the combat's over because the monsters are all dead, the only difference between killing a regenerator with one acid splash and dozens over the course of dozens of rounds is that it's faster in real time to resolve, and thus lets the players get on with the game faster.
Plus, if you have one wizard and 10 dead trolls... that's still a tricky situation if all he has is an acid splash cantrip to finish them off...
10 trolls at any time is a tricky situation! XD
Are you Trolling again, TOZ? ~grins~
Isn't the nerf of Regeneration a bit too harsh? I mean wizards/sorcerers now have acid slash at will and you can always poke the troll with a torch.
I fear battling trolls will not be as fun anymore. They used to be a big problem no all you need is a match or acid splash. Heck. Even a wand will do. Just my 2C.I don't think so... it basically makes regeneration less of a bunch of wasted time in game play. It still requires you to take a precious round of actions out of combat while other monsters that are still up can get to you, and if the combat's over because the monsters are all dead, the only difference between killing a regenerator with one acid splash and dozens over the course of dozens of rounds is that it's faster in real time to resolve, and thus lets the players get on with the game faster.
Plus, if you have one wizard and 10 dead trolls... that's still a tricky situation if all he has is an acid splash cantrip to finish them off...
Agree 10 dead trolls and one wizard is a problem.
But the new rules on regeneration is a big nerf. I don't mind it's easier to kill trolls once they are unconscious but now it is much easier to get them unconscious.Also all damage now is leathal. Sure they can regenerat, but all damage is leathal. So if a troll with con 23 and 63 HP get burned with 3 hp and knocked with 85 gp. He is dead and does not regenerat anything.
That is, you do not need to burn any pieces after a fight because the text on regeneration no longer talk about leathal damage v.s nonleathal damage. Even if it did the fact that you now can shut down the regeneration duringh combat just by using a torch or acid splash is indeed a BIG difference from 3.5. It is a big nerf.
This part of the text is odd. It seems to be a remnant from 3.5.
"Those who commonly battle with trolls
know to locate and burn any pieces after a
fight, for even the smallest scrap of f lesh
can regrow a full-size troll given enough
time. Fortunately, only the largest part of
a troll regrows in this way."
Does this mean a troll can come back to life even if he is dead?
In 3.5 a troll with minus 100 hp was unconscious but still alive if the damage had not deriveed from fire or acid, because any damage but fire damage or acid damage was nonleathal and could thus be regenerated.
But if you killed the troll using leathal damage is died and stayed dead.
A dead troll in 3.5 was dead, stayed dead and could not regenerat.
But now a dead troll can regenerat even if it is dead? A dead troll should stay dead, am I wrong?
Someting seem to be wrong.
|
You should boycott and make a big stink about it. Because waiting for the Bestiary 2 isn't an option for an impatient, impertinent little greenie like you.
I see your boycott, and raise you with a buycott (for those who don't follow current events or watch Jon Stuart, nothing to see here... nothing to see...)
|
|
Traditionally, only elves have been immune to ghoul paralysis. But it does look like the current wording for "elf blood" would extend to half-elves. And since "elf blood" IS more of a disadvantage than an advantage since very few "elf only" items or effects exist (doesn't the Oathbow do something special for elves? Can't remember...) it's cool if this does give half-elves a benefit.
So yeah, upon further reflection, I'd say that half-elves are fine and immune to ghoul paralysis.
hurray :-)
Thanx for a very nice PDF.Isn't the nerf of Regeneration a bit too harsh? I mean wizards/sorcerers now have acid slash at will and you can always poke the troll with a torch.
I fear battling trolls will not be as fun anymore. They used to be a big problem no all you need is a match or acid splash. Heck. Even a wand will do. Just my 2C.
Don't worry they're still a pain... they just don't waste gaming time anymore (before, it took almost as much time finishing their remains as it took knocking down the monster in the first place...)
Don't worry they're still a pain... they just don't waste gaming time anymore (before, it took almost as much time finishing their remains as it took knocking down the monster in the first place...)
A) The big problem, The way I see it, isn't new rules when finnishing of an unconscious troll, the problem is it's pehaps too easy knocking the troll down.
B) The rules seems contradictory. If damage that is neither fire nor acid no longer is nonleathal why would you have to burn the remains? Dead is dead, right? It just doesn't make sence. Or have I read the rules wrong?
Had a party once with a goblin, a half-orc and a half-ogre in it whose solution to the troll problem was to eat the troll.
Heh. Never be hungry again!
EDIT: Nevermind. Stomach deals acid damage.
That trio debated catching a troll alive and sticking in the basement of the party's fortified mansion....no lack of rations if they were ever besieged in it. Just carve off what meat you needed at the time and it grows back.
-Weylin
Until the troll starves to death.
Don't worry they're still a pain... they just don't waste gaming time anymore (before, it took almost as much time finishing their remains as it took knocking down the monster in the first place...)A) The big problem, The way I see it, isn't new rules when finnishing of an unconscious troll, the problem is it's pehaps too easy knocking the troll down.
B) The rules seems contradictory. If damage that is neither fire nor acid no longer is nonleathal why would you have to burn the remains? Dead is dead, right? It just doesn't make sence. Or have I read the rules wrong?
Creatures with regeneration heal damage
at a fixed rate, as with fast healing, but they cannot die as
long as their regeneration is still functioning (although
creatures with regeneration still fall unconscious when
their hit points are below 0). Certain attack forms,
typically fire and acid, cause a creature’s regeneration
to stop functioning on the round following the attack.
The rules appear sound to me. Non-fire/acid damage is "lethal" in the sense that you can chop the troll into pieces. If you apply fire to the fleshy bits, then the lethal damage is not healed. Same for a human fighter that takes damage and sleeps in that lethal damage goes away when given the opportunity to recover from it. Lethal damage doesn't always kill you and you can recover from it. In the case of a troll, lethal damage never kills it unless its regeneration turns off while it is too far in the negative.
The rules appear sound to me. Non-fire/acid damage is "lethal" in the sense that you can chop the troll into pieces. If you apply fire to the fleshy bits, then the lethal damage is not healed. Same for a human fighter that takes damage and sleeps in that lethal damage goes away when given the opportunity to recover from it. Lethal damage doesn't always kill you and you can recover from it. In the case of a troll, lethal damage never kills it unless its regeneration turns off while it is too far in the negative.Creatures with regeneration heal damage
at a fixed rate, as with fast healing, but they cannot die as
long as their regeneration is still functioning (although
creatures with regeneration still fall unconscious when
their hit points are below 0). Certain attack forms,
typically fire and acid, cause a creature’s regeneration
to stop functioning on the round following the attack.
That's a bit of fuzzy text that is. If you read it the way it is written, it means that if a Troll is every attacked with fire or acid, it loses it's regeneration forever, since the regeneration stops. I am pretty sure what they meant was...
Certain attack forms, typically fire and acid, cause a creature’s regeneration to stop functioning for the round following the attack.
That would mean if they were negative, they die. But the current wording of ON doesn't specify a time limit. I know, being nitpicky...
The rules appear sound to me. Non-fire/acid damage is "lethal" in the sense that you can chop the troll into pieces. If you apply fire to the fleshy bits, then the lethal damage is not healed. Same for a human fighter that takes damage and sleeps in that lethal damage goes away when given the opportunity to recover from it. Lethal damage doesn't always kill you and you can recover from it. In the case of a troll, lethal damage never kills it unless its regeneration turns off while it is too far in the negative.
amount equal to his Constitution score by leatheal damage.
The rules seems contradictory
Zark: Regeneration no longer dabbles in non-lethal damage. However, what it does do is provide a special rule that such a creature does not die from damage unless the regeneration is surpressed.
A troll at -30 HP is not dead as long as its regeneration is functioning. If it takes any fire or acid damage, however, its regeneration is supressed for a round. It will immediately die. Dead things no longer regenerate, so it stays dead until one of the usual exceptions comes up (Raise Dead, Ressurection, etc.)
The rules appear sound to me. Non-fire/acid damage is "lethal" in the sense that you can chop the troll into pieces. If you apply fire to the fleshy bits, then the lethal damage is not healed. Same for a human fighter that takes damage and sleeps in that lethal damage goes away when given the opportunity to recover from it. Lethal damage doesn't always kill you and you can recover from it. In the case of a troll, lethal damage never kills it unless its regeneration turns off while it is too far in the negative.Creatures with regeneration heal damage
at a fixed rate, as with fast healing, but they cannot die as
long as their regeneration is still functioning (although
creatures with regeneration still fall unconscious when
their hit points are below 0). Certain attack forms,
typically fire and acid, cause a creature’s regeneration
to stop functioning on the round following the attack.That's a bit of fuzzy text that is. If you read it the way it is written, it means that if a Troll is every attacked with fire or acid, it loses it's regeneration forever, since the regeneration stops. I am pretty sure what they meant was...
Certain attack forms, typically fire and acid, cause a creature’s regeneration to stop functioning for the round following the attack.
That would mean if they were negative, they die. But the current wording of ON doesn't specify a time limit. I know, being nitpicky...
I think you are right.
|
Creative Director
|
What Ross said. A regenerating creature at deep negative hit points only dies if its regeneration is stopped for that round through the application of a type of damage that suppresses its regeneration. Usually fire or acid does the trick.
What that DOES mean is that a troll CAN regenerate fire or acid damage. It just doesn't regenerate ANY damage on the round after it takes any fire damage.
We made these changes because the 3.5 method was simply too complex; it essentially meant keeping track of two different hit point totals for each regenerating monster. With the new method, it's a lot easier. You just do damage as normal and every round the monster regenerates the listed amount UNLESS the previous round it took damage that suppressed its regeneration.
Fast healing works better than regeneration while the monster's alive, since it doesn't get suppressed ever. But fast healing immediately stops once a monster's reduced to enough negative hit points that it dies. That's not the case for a creature that regenerates; as long as it's regeneration isn't negated while it's at enough negative hit points to die, it keeps healing until it stands up again once it's out of the negative hit points.