| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
It's in their original Mummy's Mask entry too.They look rather unbalanced... 2 positive attributes, darkvision, a bloat load of outsider immunities, a spell like ability that's pretty potent, and only one significant drawback which may never come into play.
Yeah, the common player races already have 2 positive attributes, and most have a special form of cision as well. Nothing special there.
The outsider immunities are a drawback as well as a benefit. Can't benefit from humanoid-only buffs as well.
Ageing immunity is highly situational at best. Most campaign don't last long enough for that to be a problem.
The spell-like ability is nice, but only 1/day against 1 person, and isn't guaranteed to work. (It also doesn't say which ability the DC is calculated off of).
Most of the benefits are situational at best. If anything, they may be somewhat underpowered.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think I heard a certain Paizo employee(who I won't mention as I don't want to put words in their mouth) usually says just because it's in the Bestiary doesn't mean it's intended as a pc race.
Granted if it's in a AP player's guide then I think it should be considered playable.
If it's Society then you have your answer as there are exact rules for what can be played.
If not Society then the DM makes the call and there is no need to argue beyond that.
Anyways those guys are immortal. :)
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think I heard a certain Paizo employee(who I won't mention as I don't want to put words in their mouth) usually says just because it's in the Bestiary doesn't mean it's intended as a pc race.
Granted if it's in a AP player's guide then I think it should be considered playable.
If it's Society then you have your answer as there are exact rules for what can be played.
If not Society then the DM makes the call and there is no need to argue beyond that.
Anyways those guys are immortal. :)
Description
Here you'll find information on how the monster fits into the world, notes on its ecology and society, and other bits of useful lore and flavor that will help you breathe life into the creature when your PCs encounter it. Some monsters have additional sections that cover variant creatures, notes on using the monsters as PCs, methods of constructing the creature, and so on.
There is no section that says "XX as PCs" in any monster entry. Notes on using the monster as PCs is the "XX Characters" section. That block only appears in creature entries that are suitable as PCs, such as kobolds, goblins, orcs, and hobgoblins (from Bestiary 1) and the shabati.
So yes, it is intended as a PC race. If it wasn't, that section would be missing.
I think I heard a certain Paizo employee(who I won't mention as I don't want to put words in their mouth) usually says just because it's in the Bestiary doesn't mean it's intended as a pc race.
Granted if it's in a AP player's guide then I think it should be considered playable.
If it's Society then you have your answer as there are exact rules for what can be played.
If not Society then the DM makes the call and there is no need to argue beyond that.
Anyways those guys are immortal. :)
Description
Here you'll find information on how the monster fits into the world, notes on its ecology and society, and other bits of useful lore and flavor that will help you breathe life into the creature when your PCs encounter it. Some monsters have additional sections that cover variant creatures, notes on using the monsters as PCs, methods of constructing the creature, and so on.
There is no section that says "XX as PCs" in any monster entry. Notes on using the monster as PCs is the "XX Characters" section. That block only appears in creature entries that are suitable as PCs, such as kobolds, goblins, orcs, and hobgoblins (from Bestiary 1) and the shabati.
So yes, it is intended as a PC race. If it wasn't, that section would be missing.
Hey I would allow them in my game.
I'm saying a certain Paizo employee says this and has said it multiple times. I disagree with it but that's what's being said.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
smh
immortality doesn't grant immortality?
...
smh
immortality doesn't grant immortality?
...
I believe that it is self evident to most people, that it supposed to. However, taking a hard line reading of the rules as written, depending on how the ability structures itself, it does not necessarily do so. Although, that said, the actual immortality discovery only gives a method of agelessness, instead of the concept of avoiding death entirely - i.e. immortality.
Of course, at some point, nothing really grants immortality: everything eventually dies, somehow or another; it's all just a matter of when, how, and chance, in a universe full of things like that.
I'm saying a certain Paizo employee says this and has said it multiple times. I disagree with it but that's what's being said.
And Paizo employees also gave us the original Prone Shooter feat (which removed a penalty that didn't exist in the first place) and NPCs with potions that violate the rules (no personal range spell can be made into a potion).
Just because it comes from Paizo does not make it automatically correct.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm saying a certain Paizo employee says this and has said it multiple times. I disagree with it but that's what's being said.And Paizo employees also gave us the original Prone Shooter feat (which removed a penalty that didn't exist in the first place) and NPCs with potions that violate the rules (no personal range spell can be made into a potion).
Just because it comes from Paizo does not make it automatically correct.
No but it does give some precedence.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Of course, at some point, nothing really grants immortality: everything eventually dies, somehow or another; it's all just a matter of when, how, and chance, in a universe full of things like that.
“That is not dead which can eternal lie,
And with strange aeons even death may die.”- H.P. Lovecraft
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think if Tacticslion favourites million posts he gets immortality.
I also just realised his name is Tactics Lion...
Contributor
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Since we're talking about "what the developers said"... let's have some quotes. ^_^
From this data, we can draw some conclusions:
-Certain races are 0-HD, but not intended for PCs. The examples given by Mr. Daigle are munavri, svirfneblin, and drow noble. That gives us some idea of the power level we're looking at.
-Mr. Jacobs lays it down even more clearly:
Most of them do and should cleave pretty closely to the core race assumption, but sometimes they don't. When they don't we say so in the text (in the case of the Munavri and drow matron, we do so by noting their CR is higher than standard).
Looking at the shabti, we see that it does not have an increased CR. This suggests that they are considered to be adequately within the range of standard game balance by the developers.
It doesn't get much better than that.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Tammy's immoral.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Since we're talking about "what the developers said"... let's have some quotes. ^_^
From this data, we can draw some conclusions:
-Certain races are 0-HD, but not intended for PCs. The examples given by Mr. Daigle are munavri, svirfneblin, and drow noble. That gives us some idea of the power level we're looking at.
-Mr. Jacobs lays it down even more clearly:
Most of them do and should cleave pretty closely to the core race assumption, but sometimes they don't. When they don't we say so in the text (in the case of the Munavri and drow matron, we do so by noting their CR is higher than standard).Looking at the shabti, we see that it does not have an increased CR. This suggests that they are considered to be adequately within the range of standard game balance by the developers.
It doesn't get much better than that.
I said not all. I didn't say the not the Shabati.
Anwyays, that's good enough proof for me.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think if Tacticslion favourites million posts he gets immortality.
I also just realised his name is Tactics Lion...
It's worth trying!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You have another 20 posts by my count. Let's hope you get the good immortality and not the poorly worded one. ;)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You have another 20 posts by my count. Let's hope you get the good immortality and not the poorly worded one. ;)
EDIT: let's hope! I'm kind of bucking for mythic 10, the kind that doesn't go away, +redundant Druid version, but with innate shape shifting (ala change shape or something), myself!
You know, I was going to do a count to pedantically correct you (something like, "Close! But you were off by 952,378!" or whatever) but I got to the end and counted how many favorites per page and I ended up with 37, which confused me enough that I'm leaving this banal comment instead of one that makes me look vaguely intelligent (or at least knowing about myself). Oh well!
I also just realised his name is Tactics Lion...
Happens to everyone, eventually...
XD
Isn't the easiest solution just playing a Gnome within the Golarion setting?
They don't die of old age at all.
Sure, there is this little detail of surviving the Bleaching but that isn't old age. Add to that that Bleachlings don't die of old age (most are already old or venerable when they get there) and Gnomes are solid.
Hmm, according to Gnomes of Golarion they are not immortal:
Of all the civilized races, only elves live longer than gnomes, giving rise to the popular misconception among other races that gnomes are immortal save for the Bleaching. In truth, gnomes age the same way as the other humanoid races do, only more slowly, growing older and weaker until they finally succumb to disease or failing organs.Of course, hundreds of years is better than what humans get. You pay with the need to experience new things all the time - few gnomes survive the transition to bleachling:
The Bleaching is almost always fatal—gnomes eventually become so bored that even breathing and circulating blood seem burdens too great to bear.A gnome trying to avoid the Bleaching ends up pretty much in the same situation as a vampire - which is immortal, but driven and endangered by its needs.
Ah yes. I knew it was too good to be true.
Still, if you manage to survive the Bleaching (I think the required saves also were in Gnomes of Golarion) you do reach a state in which you no longer die of old age and in fact stop growing older entirely.
While the average Gnome rarely survives the Bleaching it's very possible for a PC.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You have another 20 posts by my count. Let's hope you get the good immortality and not the poorly worded one. ;)EDIT: let's hope! I'm kind of bucking for mythic 10, the kind that doesn't go away, +redundant Druid version, but with innate shape shifting (ala change shape or something), myself!
You know, I was going to do a count to pedantically correct you (something like, "Close! But you were off by 952,378!" or whatever) but I got to the end and counted how many favorites per page and I ended up with 37, which confused me enough that I'm leaving this banal comment instead of one that makes me look vaguely intelligent (or at least knowing about myself). Oh well!
The mythic version is SU, and does not prevent ageing. You need the path ability Longevity for that, and it is also SU.
You eventually enter a constant cycle of being reborn as a decrepit corpse until someone has the mercy to hit you with an anti-magic field.
Wizard Immortality is EX and grants eternal youth. It is up to the wizard to protect his physical body. A task requiring only modest investment for a 20th level wizard.
Actually, that's why I had the "redundant" druid version!
(I don't mean timeless body - I mean the many lives ability.)
That said, I suppose monk immortality is a bit better, but I like the idea of growing up, old, dying, and young in a cycle - it's nice, somehow.
Also, I can't grow so old to be a corpse! I max out at "venerable"~! WOOT~! ETERNAL OLD MAN TL~!
(And the a-m field only functions until it's turned off - besides which, based on the wording, it seems that only a mythic antimagic field could prevent such - and even that's arguable -, ala "regardless of the condition of your body"; while I suppose mythic a-m is a thing, it's probably pretty rare. And anyway, arguing by that point just boils down to semantics, again. :D)