I think a good prestige class would be one that is similar to the dragon disciple, but follows a different monster.
I like the idea of coming up with a variant PrC for Dragon Disciple, but make you different monsters.
I've got an unpolished Dragon Disciple PrC variant written up that uses proteans as the base critter instead of dragons, but I've already decided on what I want to submit for this issue. Decisions, decisions...
Sorry for that, Bardess. I'm a bit behind with the books that come flooding out of Seattle.
Anyways. I'd be interested in doing a Weal or Woe: (half-fiend) urdefhan with class levels vs. a harbinger archon with class levels.
Ruyan.
Is material about playing a type of monster as a PC acceptable?
PaizoCon Founder, Wayfinder Editor-in-Chief
|
This is why I'm going to wait till after it's out. ^^
And familiars can get feats, after the Animal Archive. Anyway, I was thinking more about feats for masters that modify or enhance familiars.
Where are the monsters?
I am seeing a focus on familiars and their abilities, that is a class feature article really, but nothing to me suggests that this has anything to do with the theme of monsters.However, examples of familiars of monster races, new monstrous familiars, etc....THAT is on theme. (Example: What's a sahuagin's choices for an animal companion or familiar?)
|
PaizoCon Founder, Wayfinder Editor-in-Chief
|
Is material about playing a type of monster as a PC acceptable?
Certainly. Back in #10, we had an excellent article that used the ARG to lay out how to play a gnoll as a PC race. Stuff like that (but let's try to come up with some really non-traditional stuff).
|
PaizoCon Founder, Wayfinder Editor-in-Chief
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
As is usually the case with an open-concept theme, the trouble comes from the openness...and how exactly to define the theme, yet not restrict the theme.
The problem, in this case, is the definition of "monster". As we've already seen, many people are defining it as "it's in one of the bestiaries".
For me, this is a fan opportunity to run with the "Classic Monsters Revisited" concept, using a LOT of fun new material that Paizo has trotted out over the years since. In that book, Paizo fleshed out the orcs, ogres, goblins, hobgoblins, trolls, and bugbears...largely humanoid monster types. Since then, they've expanded on monsters with:
Classic Horrors Revisited (mummy, vampire, werewolf, zombie, flesh golems, gargoyles, ghosts, ghouls, hags, and derro)
Dungeon Denizens Revisited (bulettes, cloakers, gelatinous cubes, mimics, otyughs, owlbears, purple worms, ropers, rust monsters, and shambling mounds)
Dragons Revisited
Goblins of Golarion
Kobolds of Golarion
Orcs of Golarion
That may look like Paizo has already covered a lot of monsters, already...but I would disagree, given the sheer number of monsters left to choose from. That's a LOT of monsters that need some lovin'!
So, we fans have an opportunity to do something similar to the Revisited series and the "of Golarion" series, but instead of just picking some monsters and expanding their stat blocks to full articles with society, variants, ecology details, WE get to come up with a whole variety of content: adaptations to make them playable races; new archetypes and PrCs; unique spells, bloodlines, schools, and domains; magic items; SONGS and poetry; fiction pieces; side-trek seeds and adventures...and NEW monsters.
I know the concept of "monsters" is more loose than many of our themes, but I really do think that this one has a LOT of potential to produce some truly spectacular content. I hope this helps everyone understand where my head is with this theme....and I look forward to seeing what YOU think as well.
Dungeon Denizens Revisited (bulettes, cloakers, gelatinous cubes, mimics, otyughs, owlbears, purple worms, ropers, rust monsters, and shambling mounds)
I wonder why illithids aren't on that list... what's that? They aren't owned by paizo? By Torag's Beard, that's a shame! Whelp, I guess I could turn to some fey creatures. After all, what could be seen as more monstrous than. A city of tooth fairies, just waiting for an unsuspecting person to walk by?
I have a niggling idea for a village of tieflings - maybe I'll write it up.
|
As is usually the case with an open-concept theme, the trouble comes from the openness...and how exactly to define the theme, yet not restrict the theme.
The problem, in this case, is the definition of "monster". As we've already seen, many people are defining it as "it's in one of the bestiaries".
For me, this is a fan opportunity to run with the "Classic Monsters Revisited" concept, using a LOT of fun new material that Paizo has trotted out over the years since. In that book, Paizo fleshed out the orcs, ogres, goblins, hobgoblins, trolls, and bugbears...largely humanoid monster types. Since then, they've expanded on monsters with:
Classic Horrors Revisited (mummy, vampire, werewolf, zombie, flesh golems, gargoyles, ghosts, ghouls, hags, and derro)
Dungeon Denizens Revisited (bulettes, cloakers, gelatinous cubes, mimics, otyughs, owlbears, purple worms, ropers, rust monsters, and shambling mounds)
Dragons Revisited
Goblins of Golarion
Kobolds of Golarion
Orcs of GolarionThat may look like Paizo has already covered a lot of monsters, already...but I would disagree, given the sheer number of monsters left to choose from. That's a LOT of monsters that need some lovin'!
So, we fans have an opportunity to do something similar to the Revisited series and the "of Golarion" series, but instead of just picking some monsters and expanding their stat blocks to full articles with society, variants, ecology details, WE get to come up with a whole variety of content: adaptations to make them playable races; new archetypes and PrCs; unique spells, bloodlines, schools, and domains; magic items; SONGS and poetry; fiction pieces; side-trek seeds and adventures...and NEW monsters.
I know the concept of "monsters" is more loose than many of our themes, but I really do think that this one has a LOT of potential to produce some truly spectacular content. I hope this helps everyone understand where my head is with this theme....and I look forward to seeing what YOU think as well.
Does this mean that articles pertaining to creatures such as gnolls and bugbears wouldn't be acceptable for this issue? Or have less of a chance of inclusion?
Would centaurs qualify as monsters, or are they to human(oid)-like?
|
PaizoCon Founder, Wayfinder Editor-in-Chief
|
...
For me, this is a fan opportunity to run with the "Classic Monsters Revisited" concept, using a LOT of fun new material that Paizo has trotted out over the years since. In that book, Paizo fleshed out the orcs, ogres, goblins, hobgoblins, trolls, and bugbears...largely humanoid monster types.as
those creatures are fine to use, so as long as you expand beyond what Paizo has done, while keeping with their content, as it is canon.
As for the legendary format that Purple Duck does, it's fine, but such items that level with their user SHOULD be legendary, and very rare. If you are doing regular old magic items, you should stick with the traditional Paizo format.
|
|
those creatures are fine to use, so as long as you expand beyond what Paizo has done, while keeping with their content, as it is canon.
As for the legendary format that Purple Duck does, it's fine, but such items that level with their user SHOULD be legendary, and very rare. If you are doing regular old magic items, you should stick with the traditional Paizo format.
I was thinking of doing class archetypes as Paizo hasn't done that, from what I'm aware of.
Oh, they'd be legendarily rare. I was thinking of making the very first set of Jarl weapons. If that's acceptable, of course.
|
My first impulse is to write some horror fiction about kidnapping by derro. That might be tricky though, since A) Paizo already featured derro in Classic Horrors Revisited, and B) derro are insane, and a story from the POV of a derro would have to also be insane.
Maybe derro are a bad choice then? I'll look through the Bestiaries some more...
|
|
My first impulse is to write some horror fiction about kidnapping by derro. That might be tricky though, since A) Paizo already featured derro in Classic Horrors Revisited, and B) derro are insane, and a story from the POV of a derro would have to also be insane.
Maybe derro are a bad choice then? I'll look through the Bestiaries some more...
I'd say go for it. While Paizo hasn't expanded on Derro, that doesn't mean others haven't. I'd suggest the Slayer's Guide to Derro by Mongoose Publishing. Take what's said with a grain of salt, but it'd definitely give you some insight.
This is why I'm going to wait till after it's out. ^^
And familiars can get feats, after the Animal Archive. Anyway, I was thinking more about feats for masters that modify or enhance familiars.Where are the monsters?
I am seeing a focus on familiars and their abilities, that is a class feature article really, but nothing to me suggests that this has anything to do with the theme of monsters.However, examples of familiars of monster races, new monstrous familiars, etc....THAT is on theme. (Example: What's a sahuagin's choices for an animal companion or familiar?)
Hmmm... How to transform your familiar in other shapes? How to choose greater monstrous familiars? How to give them class levels? Would this be in theme?
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Hmmm... How to transform your familiar in other shapes? How to choose greater monstrous familiars? How to give them class levels? Would this be in theme?
Scaled-down monster familiars could be fun. Cat-sized griffons or wee dragons (that spits alchemist's fire 1/day) or a little basilisk (with a 'petrifying' gaze that only causes some slowing or numbness or whatever). Tiny to Small versions of other 'classic' beasties, like Chimera, Manticores, Naga, Phoenixes and Trolls could be fun to see as 'monster familiars.'
'What? No, Beaky's not a hawk, she's a miniature Roc, you imbecile! Look at the plumage!'
I was thinking about something along the lines of monster cohorts/Monstrous Mount.
Like: "Do you see that charming bralani dancing on the faces of your friends? That's my familiar".
Or either: "Huh? Yes, it's a carbuncle. It also is a high-level Dark Tapestry oracle. I'm a MYTHIC sorcerer after all, you know!"
|
|
I was thinking about something along the lines of monster cohorts/Monstrous Mount.
Like: "Do you see that charming bralani dancing on the faces of your friends? That's my familiar".
Or either: "Huh? Yes, it's a carbuncle. It also is a high-level Dark Tapestry oracle. I'm a MYTHIC sorcerer after all, you know!"
Some sort of mechanics by which companion creatures could be awakened and / or familiars could have a few class levels, and yet remain balanced for play, would surely be neat.
'Yes, my bear companion has levels in ranger and that wolf is *his* companion...'
'No, my mephit familiar isn't UMD-ing that wand. She has that spell on her sorcerer spell list...'
A feat tax, similar to that of Leadership or Improved Familiar, would seem the logical way to go, taking some resources from the familiar / companion's master to pay for the extra features added to the familiar / companion.
Still seems more class feature-y than 'monster-y,' but Tim's the arbiter of that.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Random thought;
Sorcerer bloodlines, not for humanoids gaining magical abilities evocative of dragons, fey, genies, outsiders, undead, etc. but for actual dragons, fey, genies, outsiders and undead.
A 'draconic' bloodline *for dragons* could kick several types of booty.
Same for a 'celestial' bloodline designed to synergize with the features (like their auras and immunities) of angels, archons, etc. while not saddling them with class features that replicate racial features they already possess (such as non-stacking resistances to things they already have resistances or immunities to), making some thematically perfect bloodlines, like Infernal for an Erinyes or Undead for a Lich, less than ideal mechanically.
So the subject of technologies with monstrous racial flavors is kind of interesting. This has been explored a bit in various Paizo sources. I like how such things can help make monsters seem truly alien.
To name a few specific ones that have been introduced for monsters:
- Derro Fungal Alchemy (Alchemy Manual)
- Drow Flesh Crafting (Second Darkness)
- Mi-go item crafting (Bestiary 4)
I could think of a few similarly themed critters that might make for an interesting topic
- Aboleth Slime-alchemy
- Azer or Salamander Metalworking
- Xorn Rockshaping
...or something along these lines.
Something along those lines. A few spells, some items, some rules for unique application of alchemy or item crafting.
An idea to mull over, at least.
|
|
I could think of a few similarly themed critters that might make for an interesting topic
- Aboleth Slime-alchemy
- Azer or Salamander Metalworking
- Xorn Rockshaping
...or something along these lines.
The Azer and Salamander options particularly intrigue me, as both of those Fire races are, IMO, underused, and ripe for development, compared to the Efreeti/City of Brass.
Monsters with class levels can benefit from favored class bonuses, but there aren't favored class bonuses for monsters. Mmmm... maybe a piece on favored class bonuses for angels/other outsiders could be worth it?
Monsters with class levels can benefit from favored class bonuses, but there aren't favored class bonuses for monsters. Mmmm... maybe a piece on favored class bonuses for angels/other outsiders could be worth it?
Scroll down for some favored class bonuses for boggards. So, not without precedent if you wanted to do it.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Monsters with class levels can benefit from favored class bonuses, but there aren't favored class bonuses for monsters. Mmmm... maybe a piece on favored class bonuses for angels/other outsiders could be worth it?
Ooh, neat!
Favored class bonuses for aberrations, fey, dragons, undead, etc. could be interesting as well, broken out by type(*), rather than by individual critter, to keep it under a bajillion wordcount...
*Or subtype. A FCB for creatures with the Fire subtype that gives bonus damage to fire attacks, or, allows fire damage they cause to ignore 1 pt. of fire resistance / time it's taken, could be nifty.
Hi Tim/Paris
I have an article on designing the ethos or essence of a creature, based on my design for a creature that I would have entered into the urban round of RPG Superstar last year had I qualified.
It runs through the thought process behind the core theme of the design, ending with the creature in it's final form.
It's 40 words over 1,500 right now, so I need to tweak it slightly, but wanted to check if the 1,500 word limit would be okay for such an article?
Thanks in advance
Anthony.
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
If anyone can turn around a race of bishonen qlippoth, it is he!
Not quite a qlippoth, but I do have an angel that should nail that aesthetic that may be appropriate for this one. :)
(they'll definitely be the type that have to lead with "Fear not!" when dealing with most humanoids)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Someone should write a Races of the Vile article, with Player Character versions of Kytons, Qlippoth, etc.
Call it "Un-PC". :D
|
Random thought;
Sorcerer bloodlines, not for humanoids gaining magical abilities evocative of dragons, fey, genies, outsiders, undead, etc. but for actual dragons, fey, genies, outsiders and undead.
A 'draconic' bloodline *for dragons* could kick several types of booty.
Same for a 'celestial' bloodline designed to synergize with the features (like their auras and immunities) of angels, archons, etc. while not saddling them with class features that replicate racial features they already possess (such as non-stacking resistances to things they already have resistances or immunities to), making some thematically perfect bloodlines, like Infernal for an Erinyes or Undead for a Lich, less than ideal mechanically.
Oh, yes indeed.
I've been converting a lot of 3.5 material to PF, and this is a frequent obstacle. You want to give a monstrous sorcerer a bloodline that reflects their nature, and too often, it's worthless to them.Most of the Core Rules are written with the assumption they'll be applied to bipedal, zero-HD humanoids, and fail to synergise with other creatures in an intuitive way.
Good examples;
Multilimbed creatures built to grapple, should be able to direct all their limbs independently, like an octopus can do in real life, but the rules assume a human, who's used up all his available limbs once he's holding one opponent, so they forfeit all movement, Dex bonus and attacks just holding on. The fix is to avoid maintaining any grapples, and perform a bizarre release/fullattack/newgrab shenanigans, which annoy a lot of people on verisimilitude grounds (but Hey, don't blame me, blame the system).
Oozes, many of which are explicitly described as being composed of adhesive slime, have to successfully attack full AC, before they can attempt to attach themselves via the grab ability. Totally non-intuitive, and most times doomed to failure. You can't even redress this via feats, since they aren't eligible for them. I discussed this with SKR a few years ago, who said he saw my point, but nothing came of it, probably because of the dreaded backwards-compatibility, which would mean messing with the essential rules for the creature type, and picking feats for every ooze in the game.
I'm sure we can collectively think of other derpy rules-failures we've encountered, but how much we can fix may be limited, without permission to hack the basic assumptions of the game.
Almost finished a bloodline for shapechanging monsters. All that's left is a little flavor text and then maybe I can send it tomorrow.
It's not only for creatures that are already shapechangers, and surely PCs could take it too... But I think it's along the lines of the Monster Codex's Ghoul bloodline. I can see a devil or even an aberration benefitting from it.
Finished and sent! I tweaked the abilities to make it more appealing to monsters, shapeshifters included, and added a mutated bloodline for wildblooded sorcerers and ten new spells. A bit long, but it's under the 5% limit.
And now for these favored class bonuses... mmm... how many monsters subtypes can I squeeze into an article?
5%? Where? I missed that I think. Ack, so maybe 1,540 words isn't too long?
Edit - found it! I am going blind, I swear I am!
Still, plenty of time to submit, I might find some hidden word fat yet... :)
|
PaizoCon Founder, Wayfinder Editor-in-Chief
|
Hi Tim/Paris
I have an article on designing the ethos or essence of a creature, based on my design for a creature that I would have entered into the urban round of RPG Superstar last year had I qualified.
It runs through the thought process behind the core theme of the design, ending with the creature in it's final form.
It's 40 words over 1,500 right now, so I need to tweak it slightly, but wanted to check if the 1,500 word limit would be okay for such an article?
Thanks in advance
Anthony.
It sounds OK to me....but I will need to see it, of course, to make a judgment on it. As such, we are fully engaged with #13 right now...I'm likely not to even START considering #14 articles until we have #13 articles picked. Plenty of time, folks....
|
PaizoCon Founder, Wayfinder Editor-in-Chief
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Considering the theme of the issue, how would a "Monster Ecology" article be categorized? Flavor?
If there are no rules or "crunch" in it, then yes, it's Flavor, or as I like to call it...."fluff".
Of course, we do get combos quite often....fluffy crunch....crunchy flavor?
Tim
Contributor
|
[monsters and class abilities stuff]Random thought;
[sorcerer bloodline stuff]
This is an interesting line of thought. It's important to remember that each monster is meant to fill a role and, based on that role, certain classes are considered "key" or "not key." When a monster takes a level in a "key" class, its CR increases by 1, but it has to take 2 levels in a "non key" class to get the +1 CR boost.
If you make an archetype or bloodline that increases the usefulness of a class for a specific kind of monster, you need to be aware that you are changing that class from "non key" to "key" and ensure that GMs are adjusting CRs accordingly.
That said, I do like the idea.
|
|
I foolishly neglected to read the bit above about shying away from monster ecology. As such, I actually have other ideas to explore.
Considering the concept behind a Weal and Woe using monsters with monster Hit Dice (such as say... a Dragonne).
What should stat blocks look like? Would we want monsters customized a bit with class levels or some other crunch? It would seem rather a cop out to just post stats for a given non-classed monster, but I don't want to assume and submit something that could be needlessly dense.
I know I say this every time a new Wayfinder is announced, but I'm really going to try and submit something for this one.
Dean
Meh shame on me for missing the Wayfinder 13 open call, I really like the gothic horror genre of Ustalav.
Anyway the monster theme looks pretty interesting too.
I was wondering is an article with variants for a creature in the one of the bestiaries ok? I was thinking about something involving variant Animate Dreams.
I already did Favored class bonuses for 4 monster subtypes.
I'm afraid the maximum I can fit in a 1,500 words article is 8 subtypes.
|
|
Considering the concept behind a Weal and Woe using monsters with monster Hit Dice (such as say... a Dragonne).
What should stat blocks look like? Would we want monsters customized a bit with class levels or some other crunch? It would seem rather a cop out to just post stats for a given non-classed monster, but I don't want to assume and submit something that could be needlessly dense.
The best way to format any article is to look at previous issues, and how they were done. In the case of Weal or Woe, the statblocks should follow the format used for NPCs and non-standard monsters in APs.
That should give you a feel for how long a statblock is too long, as you have to be able to include two creatures, and still have space left over to explain their rivalry, and set up a conflict that the PCs could stumble into.
The two NPCs don't have to be the same level/CR, but if there's a large variance, you need to ask yourself why the stronger hasn't swatted the annoying thorn in their side. It's probably best if the weaker of the two is the 'Weal', as they will possibly be able to count on the protection of the PCs, while the 'Woe' needs to be a credible obstacle, maybe with the addition of some off-the-peg minions, who you don't need to stat up?
E.g.
Since it's the first time I can probably submit something, but it's better to ask first:
I have a couple of ideas about some "simple class template" like the ones found in Monster Codex should this be an appropriate New Rules article?
|
PaizoCon Founder, Wayfinder Editor-in-Chief
|
Meh shame on me for missing the Wayfinder 13 open call, I really like the gothic horror genre of Ustalav.
Anyway the monster theme looks pretty interesting too.
I was wondering is an article with variants for a creature in the one of the bestiaries ok? I was thinking about something involving variant Animate Dreams.
Yes, that sounds reasonable. We've had articles with variants for established creatures before....I think it was bugbears....
Mind the word counts, though....
|
PaizoCon Founder, Wayfinder Editor-in-Chief
|
The best way to format any article is to look at previous issues, and how they were done. In the case of Weal or Woe, the statblocks should follow the format used for NPCs and non-standard monsters in APs.
That should give you a feel for how long a statblock is too long, as you have to be able to include two creatures, and still have space left over to explain their rivalry, and set up a conflict that the PCs could stumble into.
Great advice...and I will add that many, many questions I have received so far have been about formatting, and article styles, etc.
Please download some Wayfinders (well, OK....ALL THE WAYFINDERS!!), and review the article types, checking out the formatting styles. Our past issues, especially the most recent ones, are great examples of how articles should be structured and formatted. It's easier for me to point at Wayfinder #11 or #12 and say "like that", than to explain it in a post.
Would an article about the religion of a monstrous race be horribly off-kilter or would it be a good addition?
And mildly related to that, would it be possible to write about the cult of a qlippoth lord, especially one related to say, morlocks or another monster race?
The best way to format any article is to look at previous issues, and how they were done. In the case of Weal or Woe, the statblocks should follow the format used for NPCs and non-standard monsters in APs.
That should give you a feel for how long a statblock is too long, as you have to be able to include two creatures, and still have space left over to explain their rivalry, and set up a conflict that the PCs could stumble into.
Great advice...and I will add that many, many questions I have received so far have been about formatting, and article styles, etc.
Please download some Wayfinders (well, OK....ALL THE WAYFINDERS!!), and review the article types, checking out the formatting styles. Our past issues, especially the most recent ones, are great examples of how articles should be structured and formatted. It's easier for me to point at Wayfinder #11 or #12 and say "like that", than to explain it in a post.
[shameless plug]
I did a Weal or Woe in Wayfinder #9 involving a mongrelman druid 11 and a serpenfolk necromancer 8 which might help here.Ruyan.
[/shameless plug]
Second one sent! I actually was able to fit 9 subtypes in 1,540 words.
And now for a shapechanging angel...
Yes, that sounds reasonable. We've had articles with variants for established creatures before....I think it was bugbears....
Nekkid bugbears!
Come git a bearhug!