Says reaper is more akin to a force of nature than an individual being. I would assume he would be unique. I always hear "the" grim reaper, as opposed to "a" grim reaper.
Creative Director
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
A lot of the things in the Playtest are things we're testing. Not just rules. The layout of monsters, how they work, what they're named, whether or not some are unique and all that. It's all still subject to change..
AKA: Do not take ANYTHING in the Playtest Bestiary as permanent canon changes to world lore. Instead, look at those changes and then let us know if you think its a good change or a bad one.
AKA: Do not take ANYTHING in the Playtest Bestiary as permanent canon changes to world lore. Instead, look at those changes and then let us know if you think its a good change or a bad one.
Well, I think unique reaper makes sense (as I stated above).
And I think it's weird dragons are not more spellcast-y, and seem more beast-y.
Maybe give them more options like in the blue dragon entry?
Or just more spell-like abilities. I dunno. Just took me off guard.
My input on the Grim Reaper as a single entity: I like a single Grim Reaper with an entire race of lesser servitors Reapers and various Psychopomps to reap and collect souls.
I enjoy the idea that Death sits on the throne, as it were, and the Grim Reaper stands at it's right hand. The Grim Reaper also probably makes frequent visits to Pharasma's court and just creeps everyone out.