Knock of 3 points of DEX (no racial HD). And remember, by RAW one can encounter a multiple-young'd PIT FIEND at about 3rd level or so - and insta-die from its still-at-full-CL blasphemy, let alone the rest of its toys.
That is what Eagle Boy needs to realize will happen. Well, it should if the GM is paying attention.
The GM can do whatever he wants, and players can't play anything from the Bestiaries without permission, so whatever.
Also, I haven't seen the Legendary Animals since 3.0, where they were introduced as a fix for the Animal Companion class feature.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This is Rules as Written so it's legal (which I personally think is the worst part about all of this), but only in Pathfinder (as opposed to 3.5).
What makes him think that?
Anthropomorphic Animal Template is from Savage Species, not 3.5, and Legendary Creatures, that's 3.0 not PF, and not meant to be applied to the Anthropomorphic Animal Template anyhow (one would apply Eagle, but not Legendary Eagle, to the Template).
While Pathfinder is "Backwards Compatible," it is fair for any DM to recognize the design-decisions in PF that exclude certain options, especially breakable/interpreted-the-rules-to-maximum-player-advantage options from 3.5.
Pathfinder is mainly "backwards compatible" when it comes to adventures, (some, with tweeks) monsters, and the like.
It is not axiomatically-backwards-compatible with every outlandish "option" a player might want to bring into the game, especially ones where the player is giving every question the interpretation most advantageous to him and declaring it "RAW."
Now, that said, if the DM, and the campaign as a whole, wants to play with all that stuff and have fun as a group, I certainly wouldn't say "you're doing it wrong." Far from it.
The only thing I'm saying is: if he brings that to the table and plops it down and says "surprise! that's Pathfinder RAW," he is. . .stretching things more than a bit. Savage Species isn't in Pathfinder unless the DM specifically ok's it. Legendary Animals aren't in Pathfinder unless the DM specifically ok's it, and it's not a Savage Species option unless the DM specifically says "yup, that sounds like a good combo for you to play in our campaign!"
The guy may as well just bring Pun-Pun to the table and declare it "Pathfinder legit per RAW."
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So one of my friends is Terrible. Not terrible, but Terrible. When he decides to munchkin, he does it really well. I usually find myself asking him why he would create the game breaking things he does, but he merely shrugged. A friend took me aside later and said, "It's not that he's lacks the ability to stop, he just lacks the morals to do so." As you can expect, this didn't make me feel better. So with that in mind, I present to you one of his latest creations: Eagle Boy.
There's a series of creatures called Legendary Creatures. Among them, there is the Legendary eagle. Legendary Eagle is a large 12HD super-animal with 30 Dex ("among other nice things" as Mr. Terrible puts it). The young template makes it medium sized with 34 dex. The anthropomorphic template makes it small, but any small anthropomorphic creature has 1HD that goes away if you take a class level.
The end result is that you now have a monstrous humanoid race with the racial modifiers +4 Str, +2 Con, +22 Dex, +8 Wis, and +6 Cha, along with 10ft ground speed, 50ft flying (poor maneuverability), Weapon Finesse as a bonus feat, low-light vision, darkvision 60ft, +2 natural armor, and a +12 Perception bonus in daylight.
There is no level adjustment.
This is Rules as Written so it's legal (which I personally think is the worst part about all of this), but only in Pathfinder (as opposed to 3.5).
All that stuff with templates still needs the GM's approval since the games assumes standard characters. He can make all of the super eagles he wants, but it wont matter if the GM just say "no". Any player can make super characters if the GM says "do whatever you want".
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
What everybody else said. This guy is bending the rules over backwards and exploiting things that just should not be.
DM needs to buck up and say "No."
Now I ain't got no problem with some simple rules 'xploitin. Its what gets the Magus it's extra attack for free (arcane mark) or lets a Mnk/drd do 12d8 damage. Fun is fun, and system mastery is system mastery.
Where I draw the line is not playing within the rules, which this guy is blatantly doing. Show me where in Pathfinder you can do any of this stuff?
I mean, I can make stuff up too. Lookit me! I'm a Tarrasque! It totally is a PC okay race right? I mean it doesn't say anywhere in the rules that I can't do that, right?
prototype000
This is Rules as Written so it's legal (which I personally think is the worst part about all of this), but only in Pathfinder (as opposed to 3.5).
"Sorry, no. That's not on the Pathfinder list of playable races. Please see: Core and the Advanced Races Guide."
There's a difference between intellectual thought-problems and actually trying to play something that relies of a half-dozen splatbooks to become broken.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Agreed. As GM, you have an absolute right to require consent on anything that's not in the Pathfinder Core book... none of this "it's in this book, so that means I can do it" crap.
This is worth emphasizing.
It means even PF books beyond core aren't automatically incorporated unless the DM/campaign-as-a-whole, OKs them, much less everything that's ever been published by anyone under the OGL.
I generally support flexibility and letting players have wide options, but it's fair for a DM to say "no" to something even on the simple grounds that they haven't had a chance to read the sourcebook it's from themselves yet.
There is no level adjustment.
Not so. The antropomorphic template provides LA for all the 3.5 Monster Manual animals, with the assumption that the DM will be able to provide a suitable LA if the DM creates antropomorphic versions of any other animal.
And if you use Pathfinder rules instead of 3.5 rules, the "monsters as characters" section suggests using the creature's CR rather than LA. Since the antropomorphic template adds +1 to the base creature's CR for small animals, his young antropomorphic legendary eagle would require a minimum of character level 6 (base 6, -1 young, +1 antropomorphic).
Not to mention that all of that requires permission from the DM to use two pre-3.5 sources of material that were never intended to be used together (antropomorphic tries to say it can only be applied to normal animals, since it says you can't apply the template to dire animals).
I require the GM has to be provided with all the books used by players.
It would probably take me 10 minutes to find that build ill-Eagle!
Also, Were-Bears are involuntary Lawful Good. No penalties. They just cannot break alignment.
You want broken, advanced plus young template. Ill post my thread on it later.
On the off chance that the OP already allowed that mess, raptors like eagle boy have eyes on the sides of their heads. That gives them a blind spot right in front of their beak.