I'm not ashamed to admit that I love me some kobolds. And for a while, I've been trying to conjure up a kobold cleric of Dahak that would be a decent contribution to battles. Essentially, using a whip and Weapon Finesse, he provides support by disarming foes, tripping them and healing where he can. For the most part, I have the mechanics settled (though I'm still debating his domain choices, specifically, Ambush subdomain vs. vanilla Trickery domain).
Male Kobold Cleric 1
CN Small Humanoid (Reptilian)
Deity: Dahak Homeland: ???
Init +3; Perception +5, Darkvision 60'
--------------------
Defense
--------------------
AC 19 Touch 14 (+1 Size, +3 Dex) Flat-footed 16 (+1 Nat Armor, +1 Size, +3 Armor, +1 Shield)
HP 8/8
Fort +1 Ref +3 Will +5
--------------------
Offense
--------------------
Speed 30 ft.
Melee Whip +4 (1d2-1/x2) 15'
Special
Destructive Smite (+1) 6/day
Chameleon Aspect 6/day
Channel Negative Energy DC 14 (1d6) 3/day
Spells
1st (DC 14) - True Strike (domain), Cure Light Wounds, Protection from Evil
0th (DC 13) - Detect Magic, Resistance, Spark
Domains Destruction, Trickery (Ambush)
--------------------
Statistics
--------------------
Str 8, Dex 16, Con 8, Int 13, Wis 16, Cha 10
Base Atk +0; CMB -2; CMD 11
Feats Weapon Finesse
Traits Kobold Faith, Child of the Street
Skills Kn. Religion +5, Sleight of Hand +8, Stealth +11
Languages Draconic, Common
--------------------
Equipment
--------------------
Waterskin
Trail Rations x5
Backpack
Bedroll
Studded Leather
Whip
Buckler
My real problem is the flavor - Dahak is a considered a kobold deity (he was supposed to have created the first dragons, even if he hunted them for sport afterword), but he's chaotic evil. Most campaigns don't like that alignment very much. He's also known for being the first god to start destroying things (see above: making dragons to hunt them for sport) and most kobolds who worship him probably have the same proclivity for such behavior. The friendliest I could make him would be chaotic neutral... which is still not an alignment most campaigns/parties like.
So, I've come up with something of a work-around/reasoning for why a kobold worshiping a god of destruction would not be out to wreck absolutely everything he touches to make him more campaign-friendly. He believes Dahak is about destruction, but also, unofficially, about creation as well. After all, he had to make dragons before he could hunt them down and destroy them. He believes Dahak is not evil: merely... very misunderstood. Dahak was the only divine child of Apsu who chose to focus on destruction, which brought Apsu himself to the material plane to battle him. However, Tiamat intervened, arguing that Dahak was still his son. This piece is critical to his argument: Dahak is not a problem child, but a perfect child. He is the embodiment of both parents, the maker, Apsu, and the destroyer, Tiamat. Thanks to Tiamat, Dahak defeated Apsu, who retreated to Golarion, but for the first and only time, Dahak shed tears at his father's anger and misunderstanding: these tears burst into a rainbow of colors, creating the first kobolds, hence why kobolds should worship him - he made the first dragons, and then made them, so how could they NOT be dragons? This is also why Dahak fought alongside the other gods to defeat Rovagug: yes, he's about destruction, but of his own creations. Apsu is still Dahak's father, and does not wish to see his father's work destroyed. Dahak is not about destruction, but balance: one cannot create infinitely without destroying things to remake them.
Essentially, Epmerk would be about wrecking things, yes, but something must be made to fill the void. He tries to emulate his deity by breaking things, only to make new stuff. For him, Dahak is not about senseless destruction (that's Rovagug's deal), but doing so in careful measures; Dahak's just a child trying to make both his parents proud by emulating them both. And Epmerk would be trying to run a massive PR campaign to try and rectify this poor image.
I'd like to know, would other players, and more importantly, GMs, be okay with letting something like this little guy loose in their games, given the reasoning above?
Contributor
|
You might want to look up the separatist archetype. It's useful for characters with "their own understanding" of a deity's will.
Also, it's not about your character specifically, but early next year, Inner Sea Faiths will have a full-length article on Dahak (including Obediences and such).
I figured you might find that information useful. ^_^
Clerics can be one alignment away from their deity so my solution is be a neutral.
I know he can be chaotic neutral, but I don't think true neutral... unless diagonal steps count (which I don't think they do... unless I missed something). Otherwise, his options are chaotic neutral or neutral evil (or chaotic evil, but that is an obvious issue in itself).
Clerics can be one alignment away from their deity so my solution is be a neutral.I know he can be chaotic neutral, but I don't think true neutral... unless diagonal steps count (which I don't think they do... unless I missed something). Otherwise, his options are chaotic neutral or neutral evil (or chaotic evil, but that is an obvious issue in itself).
you are correct, diagonals are counted as 2 steps because you are one step away on the lawfulness axis and one on the morality axis
You might want to look up the separatist archetype. It's useful for characters with "their own understanding" of a deity's will.
Also, it's not about your character specifically, but early next year, Inner Sea Faiths will have a full-length article on Dahak (including Obediences and such).
I figured you might find that information useful. ^_^
I do, that sounds awesome!
I had considered the separatist archetype, but the problem with that is he would lose proficiency with a whip, which would hurt his ability to support the group (tripping, disarm, delivering channel smites, etc.)
Maybe your GM will allow True Neutral, to be honest, as a GM, I would allow it because you do make a very good argument, and balance between destruction and creation is a very TN concept anyway, I say ask away. Unless tis a PFS, then well, a more party friendly Neutral Evil??
"Hey, I like balance just fine folks, just as long as I am the one checking the scales....and I know such things best, because I HAVE scales..." :)
Maybe your GM will allow True Neutral, to be honest, as a GM, I would allow it because you do make a very good argument, and balance between destruction and creation is a very TN concept anyway, I say ask away. Unless tis a PFS, then well, a more party friendly Neutral Evil??
"Hey, I like balance just fine folks, just as long as I am the one checking the scales....and I know such things best, because I HAVE scales..." :)
I might make that along with letting him keep the whip weapon proficiency.
A TN kobold separatist cleric of Dahak using the Destruction and Artifice (probably with the Trap subdomain, because kobolds) domains to strike balance in his faith would be fun. Just a matter of convincing others that he won't be a pain to work with...
Sounds like a darn fun concept.