# Special Conversion Thread: Moldvay's Undead



## Shade (Nov 19, 2009)

Part Two. 

Original thread closed due to exceeding 1,000 post count.


----------



## Shade (Nov 19, 2009)

*Skotos*
CLIMATE/TERRAIN: Any usually subterranean
FREQUENCY: Very rare
ORGANIZATION: Roving bands
ACTIVITY CYCLE: Night or darkness
DIET: Living beings
INTELLIGENCE: Average (8-10)
TREASURE: 5% E
ALIGNMENT: Any evil
NO. APPEARING: 3-30 in wilderness; 1-10 in dungeons
ARMOR CLASS: 4
MOVEMENT: 12
HIT DICE: 5
THAC0: 15
NO. OF ATTACKS: 1
DAMAGE/ATTACK: 1-10
SPECIAL ATTACKS: None
SPECIAL DEFENSES: Hit points increase
MAGIC RESISTANCE: Special
SIZE: M (5-6’ tall)
MORALE: Fearless (20)
XP VALUE: 420

Skotos are spirits that have broken free of the netherworld and now roam the world of the living as undead. They form hunting packs to better swarm over their prey. Skotos look like pale, shadowy versions of normal beings. They can be of any intelligent race and any evil alignment, for only evil creatures would voluntarily leave the afterlife to prey upon the living. 

Combat: A skotos is drawn by fresh blood, which it consumes. As it absorbs the blood, it grows stronger (it absorbs blood even from the wounds it inflicts in combat against living creatures). The skotos gains a number of hit points equal to the damage it inflicts in combat; thus, a skotos that hits for 8 hp damage gains 8 hp, up to its maximum hit-point total (40). Note that the hit points are not permanently lost by the victim, who still heals normally.

In a normal encounter, skotos as a group have a 75% chance to hide in shadows successfully and thus surprise their  prey.

Skotos encountered during or immediately after a bloody conflict will be so frenzied by the sight of blood that they will make no attempt at concealment, immediately attacking any living creature in sight. Intelligent prey is, however, preferred. As with many types of undead, skotos are not affected by sleep, charm, hold, or cold-based spells, nor by poison or paralyzation. Holy water causes 2-8 hp damage to them per vial, and a raise dead or resurrection spell will destroy a skotos. Any skotos reduced to zero hit points or less is forced back into the netherworld. A cleric .s chance to turn a skotos is the same as for a ghast. Normal weapons will harm a skotos.

Habitat/Society: Skotos usually roam in bands composed of similar races and alignments, though different beings may band together in their common goal of feeding upon the living. Though they have escaped the netherworld, skotos generally inhabit places that remind them of it. Subterranean caverns and tunnels are preferred, although skotos bands will sometimes roam wilderness wastelands at night. While skotos are not harmed by sunlight, they dislike it intensely and will flee sunlight if at all possible. 

Originally appeared in Dragon Magazine #162 (1990).


----------



## freyar (Nov 20, 2009)

> A cleric .s chance to turn a skotos is the same as for a ghast.




Speaking of ghasts, these kind of sound like variant ghasts.

Should we make the hit point gain be temporary hp or negative levels that can eventually become permanent (or some combination of those)?


----------



## Shade (Nov 20, 2009)

Oddly, these are supposed to be variant shadows!

I think the temporary hp should suffice in this case.

Ghast: Str 17, Dex 17, Con —, Int 13, Wis 14, Cha 16
Shadow: Str —, Dex 14, Con —, Int 6, Wis 12, Cha 13
Greater Shadow: Str —, Dex 15, Con —, Int 6, Wis 12, Cha 14

Use the ghast physical scores, set Int in the 8-10 range, and use the greater shadow's Wis and Cha?


----------



## freyar (Nov 20, 2009)

Really?  They don't seem incorporeal to me!

Your suggested ability scores seem fine to me, though.

Well, maybe on a generous second reading, I could see them as incorporeal.  Hmmph.


----------



## Shade (Nov 20, 2009)

This...



> Normal weapons will harm a skotos.




...is enough for me to call 'em "corporeal".  

Added to Homebrews.

Since they don't actually drain blood, how does this look?

Blood Feast (Ex): A skotos absorbs blood from its attacks. On each successful attack, the skots gains temporary hit points equal to the damage dealt.


----------



## Cleon (Nov 20, 2009)

Shade said:


> This...
> 
> 
> 
> ...




The flavour text would indicate they have the Extraplanar subtype (escapees from the Lower planes, to which they return when destroyed). Apart from that, the stats look good so far.



Shade said:


> Since they don't actually drain blood, how does this look?
> 
> Blood Feast (Ex): A skotos absorbs blood from its attacks. On each successful attack, the skots gains temporary hit points equal to the damage dealt.




I'd be tempted to have the damage act as healing up to their original hit points, then as temporary HP for any excess, plus a max hit point cap. I'm also a bit dubious about it being an Extraordinary attack, Supernatural seems more appropriate. Something like:*Blood Feast (Su):* A skotos absorbs life-force through the blood it sheds. On each successful attack, the skotos gains hit points equal to the damage dealt. If its hit points exceed its original hit points, the excess become temporary hit points. the skotos can not use Blood Feast to increase its total hit points by more than 5 temporary hit points per Hit Dice - e.g. a skotos with 20 hp and 5 HD can gain a maximum of 45 hit points (20 plus 5 times 5) using Blood Feast.
​


----------



## freyar (Nov 20, 2009)

Hmm, even vampires only get temporary hp.  And that's the precedent for Ex, too, though I agree that this case is more iffy.


----------



## Shade (Nov 20, 2009)

Good suggestions!

Updated.



> In a normal encounter, skotos as a group have a 75% chance to hide in shadows successfully and thus surprise their prey.




Borrow this?

Skills: Shadows have a +2 racial bonus on Listen and Spot checks and a +4 racial bonus on Search checks. *A shadow gains a +4 racial bonus on Hide checks in areas of shadowy illumination. In brightly lit areas, it takes a –4 penalty on Hide checks.


----------



## freyar (Nov 20, 2009)

That works.  Or, if we want to be fancy, we could go with shadow blend, though I think that's probably a little over the top for these.  Edit: I don't think they should have a particular penalty in brightly lit areas, though.


----------



## Shade (Nov 20, 2009)

I could be persuaded to shadow blend. Anyone else?

Any other abilities?  Some form of pack tactics/swarmfighting, keen scent for blood in the air, etc.?


----------



## freyar (Nov 21, 2009)

Keen scent yes.  But I think the pack fighting is probably best left for flavor/tactics text.


----------



## Cleon (Nov 21, 2009)

Shade said:


> I could be persuaded to shadow blend. Anyone else?
> 
> Any other abilities?  Some form of pack tactics/swarmfighting, keen scent for blood in the air, etc.?




I prefer the racial bonus to Hide when in shadows approach over a "shadow blend lite".

Can't think of any SA/SQs to add, they don't need any vulnerability to exorcism since it's already covered by their Extraplanar subtype.

So, shall we move on to skills and feats?

The SRD ghoul/ghast skill picks look a good start -

Balance, Climb, Hide, Jump, Move Silently, Spot.

Maybe drop Balance, since it's got fewer skill points to play with, and add Search, since it's got a racial bonus in it, then put 2 points in Search and 6 in each of the other skills?

Climb *6*, Hide *6*, Jump *6*, Move Silently *6*, Search *2*, Spot *6*.

As for feats, maybe Weapon Focus (bite) and Lightning Reflexes?


----------



## freyar (Nov 22, 2009)

Skills and feats are fine as suggesetd.

I think I'm agreed with Cleon on the lack of SA/SQ to add.  These are pretty simple, and there's no real need for shadow blend; the Hide bonus is ok.


----------



## Shade (Nov 23, 2009)

Updated.

Environment: Any evil-aligned plane?

Organization: Solitary, roving band (2-10), or hunting pack (3-30)?

Challenge Rating: 3?  They are on par with wights.

Treasure: Standard?  (Type E is a good mix of coins, goods, and items)

Advancement: 6-15 HD (Medium)?

Skotos stand 5 to 6 feet tall and weigh 75 pounds?  (I figure they are semi-shadow, so lightweight)

Skotos speak Common and either Abyssal or Infernal (depending upon home plane)?


----------



## freyar (Nov 23, 2009)

That all looks fine to me.  These were pretty easy.


----------



## Shade (Nov 23, 2009)

Updated.

They sure were.


----------



## demiurge1138 (Nov 25, 2009)

If it's not too late...

I prefer Shade's original Blood Feast text (more streamlined) and want them to have shadow blend.


----------



## freyar (Nov 25, 2009)

Well, I did prefer temporary hp only, but I'm not worried about it.  As for shadow blend, I'd only go for it just to spice them up.  No big deal for me either way.


----------



## Shade (Nov 25, 2009)

It's never too late.  

Rolling back to temp hp only, but keeping the rider about not exceeding 5x normal max hp.

Would shadow blend affect CR?


----------



## demiurge1138 (Nov 25, 2009)

Shadow blend might bump them up to CR 4. Also, the bite should do +4 damage, not +3, as it's the only attack it has.


----------



## Shade (Nov 25, 2009)

Updated.

Finished?


----------



## Cleon (Nov 25, 2009)

Shade said:


> Updated.
> 
> Finished?




But, but, I liked the healing or temp hit point model for Blood Drain. 

Also don't much care for the Blood Feast going up to five times their base hp - that's 160 hp! My proposal was an maximum additional 5 temp hit points per HD, which doesn't even put them at twice their average HP.

If the non temp hp really bothers you so much I guess I'll forgive you cutting it, but I think you'd better bring the maximum down a bit!


----------



## freyar (Nov 26, 2009)

I feel your pain, Cleon.  But I have a hard time with these getting real hp when a vampire only gets temporary hp.

I do agree about the maximum.  Limit it to, say, 20 temporary hp.  Otherwise, it's hardly worth bothering with such a high limit!


----------



## Shade (Nov 30, 2009)

freyar said:


> I feel your pain, Cleon.  But I have a hard time with these getting real hp when a vampire only gets temporary hp.




Agreed.



freyar said:


> I do agree about the maximum.  Limit it to, say, 20 temporary hp.  Otherwise, it's hardly worth bothering with such a high limit!




Let's say double max hp?  Or we can stick to the undead standard of no limit, but they only last for an hour.


----------



## freyar (Nov 30, 2009)

Let's just with the standard 1 hour limit.  Makes the most sense to me.


----------



## demiurge1138 (Dec 1, 2009)

Agreed to the time limit.


----------



## Shade (Dec 1, 2009)

Updated.

Ready to move on?


----------



## Cleon (Dec 1, 2009)

Shade said:


> Updated.
> 
> Ready to move on?




Suppose so, unless you want to argue some more about whether they should be CR3?

Only joking, I think they're OK at CR4.


----------



## Shade (Dec 1, 2009)

Next!

*Bloody Bones*
FREQUENCY: Very rare
NO. APPEARING: 1 (30% chance of 2-12)
ARMOR CLASS: 7
MOVE: 12.
HIT DICE: 3
% IN LAIR: 50%
TREASURE TYPE: 40% chance each of J-N
(B in lair if more than 1)
NO. OF ATTACKS: 1
DAMAGE/ATTACK: 1-10
SPECIAL ATTACKS: Fear
SPECIAL DEFENSES: Nil
MAGIC RESISTANCE: Standard
lNTELLIGENCE: Low
ALIGNMENT: Neutral evil
SIZE: M
PSIONIC ABILITY: Nil

Bloody bones are the undead, animated corpses of evil criminals cursed to continue their horrid trade long after they should have died. They look like bloody skeletons with a few shreds of flesh hanging on the bones. In fact, they resemble corpses left hanging on gibbets (a traditional punishment for criminals). 

Bloody bones lair in hidden caves or deep concealed pits. They venture forth only to kill and rob victims. At the sight of a bloody bones, a character must make a saving throw vs. spells or else suffer the effects of a fear spell. For the effects of damage vs. a bloody bones, treat the creature as if it were a skeleton (i.e., one-half damage from sharp weapons, etc.). The chance of a cleric turning a bloody bones is the same as the cleric’s chance to turn a shadow.

Originally appeared in Dragon Magazine #138 (1988).


----------



## freyar (Dec 2, 2009)

We have to do better than this, these are just skeletons with a bit of turn resistance.  I guess they can have some Int, too.  Frankly, the Pathfinder bloody skeleton is much nicer so far.

Maybe we can tack on stench from the bits of flesh?


----------



## Shade (Dec 2, 2009)

They've also got frightful presence, but yeah, they need a bit more.


----------



## freyar (Dec 2, 2009)

Ok, the original text has Int, +2 turn resistance, frightful presence (or other fear aura).  Stench is a possibility.  Unnatural aura also appeals to me a little.  Maybe just give them decent weapons and reasonable feats and leave them fairly simple?


----------



## Cleon (Dec 2, 2009)

freyar said:


> Ok, the original text has Int, +2 turn resistance, frightful presence (or other fear aura).  Stench is a possibility.  Unnatural aura also appeals to me a little.  Maybe just give them decent weapons and reasonable feats and leave them fairly simple?




I'd rather drop the stench and make them stealthy killers, as they "kill and rob victims". Maybe give them a thief's Sneak Attack and related traits?


----------



## Shade (Dec 2, 2009)

That could work!  The next variant skeleton also has a bit of a character class "theme", with skleros being fighters.  So these guys being rogueish makes sense.

Both seem to be "lite", monster versions of the skeleton warrior template.


----------



## freyar (Dec 2, 2009)

I like the sneak attack idea.  So drop stench and unnatural aura and make them roguish with a frightful presence.  Maybe triggered if they get a surprise round?


----------



## Shade (Dec 2, 2009)

Sounds good.

Pretending it was a 3rd-level rogue with the following elite array assignment...

Str 13, Dex 15, Con 10, Int 14, Wis 8, Cha 12

...and applying the usual +2 Dex for the skelton template, give us:

Str 13, Dex 17, Con 10, Int 14, Wis 8, Cha 12
Evasion
Sneak attack +2d6

Seem reasonable?


----------



## Cleon (Dec 3, 2009)

Shade said:


> Sounds good.
> 
> Pretending it was a 3rd-level rogue with the following elite array assignment...
> 
> ...




The physical stats and thief special abilities look good, but the original has Low Intelligence (5-7), so swap around the Wisdom and Int? 

No, belay that. They've got a Fear attack, so I'd put the 14 in Charisma, the 12 in Wisdom and the 8 in Intelligence:

Str 13, Dex 17, Con 10, Int 8, Wis 12, Cha 14
Evasion
Sneak attack +2d6


----------



## Shade (Dec 3, 2009)

Added to Homebrews.

I retained all the usual traits of the skeleton template (claw attacks, immunity to cold, DR, etc.)


----------



## freyar (Dec 3, 2009)

Looks pretty good.  Do we need to spell out evasion at the bottom?

Let's give them a light crossbow and something finessable, like a rapier or short sword.


----------



## Shade (Dec 3, 2009)

I don't think it's necessary.  As the edition progressed, it's one of those abilities that moved into the "unspoken universal rules".  

Sneak attack generally doesn't need to be described either, but I wanted to give it the ability to scale as they improved.

Rapier and light crossbow appeal.

Updated.

Skills: 18 ranks
Hide and Move Silently, of course.  Maybe Bluff and Sleight of Hand?  We might consider some racial bonuses as well.

Feats: Improved Initiative (B), Weapon Finesse, 1 more


----------



## freyar (Dec 3, 2009)

Stealthy for the feat, probably.

Bluff, Hide, Intimidate, Move Silently, Sleight of Hand.  Either Appraise or Tumble for the last one, probably.


----------



## Shade (Dec 3, 2009)

I like Tumble.  Let's wait for the others to chime in on these.


----------



## demiurge1138 (Dec 4, 2009)

We've already done a bloody bones--that version was based on Rawhead and Bloody Bones, and had powers like sneak attack and squeezing through tight places.

This is clearly a different take... but we might want to give it a new name.

As for the mechanics, I like Tumble. And let's make Dodge or Stealthy its last feat.


----------



## Shade (Dec 4, 2009)

Well I'll be damned...I thought these guys sounded familiar!  

Bloody Bones

These are from the exact same source, so I'd say we're done here, unless we want to treat it as an overhaul of our other one.  About all we've added beyond what's already there is evasion, immunity to cold, and a slightly better sneak attack.


----------



## freyar (Dec 4, 2009)

Did the same source have two bloody boneses?  Because I would have sworn that the other original monster talked about squeezing and that we didn't just pull that in ourselves.  Or did we?  If it's the same, I'm willing to drop these and move on.  These haven't been super inspiring.


----------



## Shade (Dec 4, 2009)

That's the only one I can find.  I think we pulled in the squeezing from real-world folklore.


----------



## Shade (Dec 4, 2009)

Moving on, here's one I'm pretty sure hasn't been converted by us yet.  

In films such as Jason and the Argonauts and the various Sinbad movies, modelanimator Ray Harryhausen created some spectacular special effects. One such special effect was that of skeletal warriors wielding swords and carrying shields. Ray Harryhausen’s skeletons are fast and nimble, appearing to be more formidable opponents than the skeletons in the AD&D game. This has inspired a variant monster: the skleros. Skleros is Greek for dry and hard, and is a root for the word “skeleton”. 

*Skleros*
FREQUENCY: Rare
NO. APPEARING: 3-24
ARMOR CLASS: 5 (6 without shield)
MOVE: 12.
HIT DICE: 1 + 1
% IN LAIR: Nil
TREASURE TYPE: Nil
NO OF ATTACKS: 1
DAMAGE/ATTACK: 1-8
SPECIAL ATTACKS: See below
SPECIAL DEFENSES: Nil
MAGIC RESISTANCE: Standard
INTELLIGENCE: Non-
ALIGNMENT: Neutral
SIZE: M
PSIONIC ABILITY: Nil

Skleros are skeletons made from the corpses of highly trained warriors (fighters of 4th level or better) that still magically retain some of their past fighting skills. Their better armor class is due not only to the shields they carry but to their heightened dexterity (equal to 15). They usually fight with long swords. Because they “remember” any of their old fighting habits, skleros attack as if they had 2 hit dice; they would thus have a THAC0 (score to hit AC 0) of 16. Clerics have the same chances to turn skleros as they would zombies. While skleros have no treasure of their own, they often act as treasure guards.

Originally appeared in Dragon Magazine #138 (1988).

Upthread, we discussed making them a "lite", monster version of skeletal warrior template.


----------



## freyar (Dec 4, 2009)

You mean this skeletal warrior?

First off, how many HD?  They fight like they have 2HD, so should we just bump them to 2HD and give them martial training (or whatever we call it)?


----------



## Shade (Dec 4, 2009)

Yes, yes, and yes.


----------



## freyar (Dec 5, 2009)

Works for me.  2HD it is.

We know Dex is 15.  Skeletal warriors get +4 Str, so maybe Str 14 (or compromise to 12).  Going for skeletal warrior lite, I'll give +2 to Wis but not Cha.

Str 14, Dex 15, Con -, Int -, Wis 12, Cha 10?


----------



## Cleon (Dec 5, 2009)

Shade said:


> These are from the exact same source, so I'd say we're done here, unless we want to treat it as an overhaul of our other one.  About all we've added beyond what's already there is evasion, immunity to cold, and a slightly better sneak attack.




Hmm, I think I prefer this version to the current Creature Catalogue take. I don't much care for how it has a slam attack doing 1d10 damage - why bother with a scimitar? - and it seems far too strong.

So, my preference is for finishing off the "alternative version" we've started. It only needed a few skills and a feat, so it was a simple matter to finish it off like so (I fixed a couple of minor stat errors and added a SQ to explain its good Ref save and an off-hand claw attack to the rapier when it full attacks):

*Bloody Bones*
Medium Undead
*Hit Dice:* 3d12 (19 hp)
*Initiative:* +7
*Speed:* 30 ft. (6 squares)
*Armor Class:* 15 (+3 Dex, +2 natural), touch 13, flat-footed 12
*Base Attack/Grapple:* +1/+2
*Attack:* Claw +4 melee (1d4+1) or rapier +4 melee (1d6+1/18-20) or shortbow +4 ranged (1d8/×3)
*Full Attack:* 2 claws +4 melee (1d4+1); or rapier +4 melee (1d6+1/18-20) and claw –1 melee (1d4); or shortbow +4 ranged (1d8/×3)
*Space/Reach:* 5 ft./5 ft.
*Special Attacks:* Frightful presence, sneak attack +2d6
*Special Qualities:* Damage reduction 5/bludgeoning, darkvision 60 ft., evasion, immunity to cold, nimbleness, +2 turn resistance, undead traits
*Saves:* Fort +1, Ref +6, Will +5
*Abilities:* Str 13, Dex 17, Con —, Int 8, Wis 12, Cha 14
*Skills:* Bluff +6, Hide +8, Move Silently +8, Spot +5, Tumble +7
*Feats:* Improved Initiative (B), Weapon Finesse, Stealthy
*Environment:* Any land
*Organization:* Solitary or gang (2-12)
*Challenge Rating:* 3
*Treasure:* 100% coins, 50% goods and 25% items
*Alignment:* Always neutral evil
*Advancement:* 4-9 HD (Medium)
*Level Adjustment:* —

_A bloody humanoid skeleton with a few shreds of flesh hanging from its bones. It moves with a terrifying nimbleness._

Bloody bones are the undead, animated corpses of evil criminals cursed to continue their horrid trade long after they should have died. They lair in hidden caves or deep concealed pits, venturing forth only to kill and rob victims.

Bloody bones stand 5 to 6 feet tall and weigh 60 pounds.

Bloody bones speak any languages they knew in life (usually Common) and are proficient in the same weapons and armour as rogues.

*Combat*
Bloody bones prefer ambushes, feints and back-stabbing to face-to-face combat. Gangs of these monsters will try to flank opponents in order to sneak-attack them.

*Frightful Presence (Su):* Any living creature that sees a bloody bones within 60 feet must succeed on a DC 13 Will save or become shaken for 5d6 rounds. An opponent that succeeds on the saving throw is immune to that bloody bones's frightful presence for 24 hours. This is a mind-affecting fear effect. The save DC is Charisma-based.

*Nimbleness (Ex):* A bloody bones has a good Reflex save.

*Sneak Attack (Ex):* A bloody bones' sneak attack ability is equivalent to that of a rogue of a level equal to the creature's Hit Dice.

Originally appeared in _Dragon Magazine #138_ (1988).


----------



## Cleon (Dec 5, 2009)

freyar said:


> Works for me.  2HD it is.
> 
> We know Dex is 15.  Skeletal warriors get +4 Str, so maybe Str 14 (or compromise to 12).  Going for skeletal warrior lite, I'll give +2 to Wis but not Cha.
> 
> Str 14, Dex 15, Con -, Int -, Wis 12, Cha 10?




I'd be OK with giving them a higher Strength than that. How about basing them on a typical human fighter with the elite ability array?

Elite Array: 15 14 13 12 10 8

Typical fighter: Str 15, Dex 13, Con 14, Int 10, Wis 12, Cha 8

Let's say they have a skeleton's +2 Dex racial bonus, plus a +2 Str racial bonus (half the skeleton warrior's), that would make them:

Skelos: Str 17, Dex 15, Con --,  Int --, Wis 12, Cha 8

Furthermore, since the were fighters of at least 4th level, they could get an ability increase from their HD. If they put that in their Strength it would increase to 18, but I think I prefer Str 17 for them, since they've evidently lost some of their hit dice as they have 2 Hit Dice, not 4+.


----------



## freyar (Dec 6, 2009)

If we want to boost Str, that's fine by me, too!


----------



## demiurge1138 (Dec 6, 2009)

I like cleon's ability scores and Martial Training for these guys.


----------



## Shade (Dec 7, 2009)

Cleon - I'll revise the bloody bones with the next CC update.

Added skleros to Homebrews.


----------



## freyar (Dec 7, 2009)

Let's leave the squeezing in the bloody bones, though.

Do the skleros need much of anything else?  If not, I'd probably go with something simple like Power Attack and Weapon Focus for the feats.


----------



## Shade (Dec 7, 2009)

Agreed on both counts.  We need to keep the bloody bones tied to its Rawhead and Bloody Bones roots, but add the little tweaks we came up with to improve upon the one currently in the CC.

Beyond the feats, here's what's left for skleros...

Environment: Any?

Organization: Solitary or x (3-24)

Challenge Rating: x

Treasure: Combat gear only?

Advancement: x (We should allow advancement to Large at the very least, to account for ogres and giants raised as skleros)

Skleros stand 5 to 6 feet tall and weigh x pounds.


----------



## freyar (Dec 8, 2009)

Environment: Any
Organization: Solitary or troop (3-24)

I was going to suggest CR 1 or 2 but then noticed they only have 1HD.  Didn't we agree upthread to bump them to 2HD?


----------



## Shade (Dec 8, 2009)

You are correct.  Updated.

Challenge Rating: 1?

Advancement: 3-10 HD (Medium); 11-20 HD (Large)?

Skleros stand 5 to 6 feet tall and weigh x pounds.


----------



## freyar (Dec 8, 2009)

They're a good CR 1 or possibly a weakish CR 2.

Advancement is good.  Let's say 75-150 lb.  They should be light.


----------



## Cleon (Dec 8, 2009)

Shade said:


> You are correct.  Updated.




Isn't the second sentence of the martial training description unnecessarily wordy? Saying "Skleros possess the base attack bonus and feats of a fighter with a level equal to their Hit Dice" has the same meaning and is a lot more pithy than "Skleros possess the base attack bonus of a fighter of their level, and qualify for feats as if they were fighters of a level equal to their Hit Dice."

Also, should we give them a ranged weapon. Perhaps javelins?



Shade said:


> Challenge Rating: 1?




Challenge Rating 1 seems OK, they're only a little tougher than a 2nd level warrior.



Shade said:


> Advancement: 3-10 HD (Medium); 11-20 HD (Large)?




I was thinking they'd remain the same size, but just become more skilled fighters, so would prefer 3-10 (Medium) and add a note that larger varieties exist (e.g. a Large-size Ogre Skelos with 4-12 HD and a Huge size Giant Skelos with 8-16 HD.)



Shade said:


> Skleros stand 5 to 6 feet tall and weigh x pounds.




Well they ought to be lightweight, being naught but bone - 50 pounds?


----------



## freyar (Dec 8, 2009)

Javelins are a good idea.


----------



## Shade (Dec 8, 2009)

Cleon said:


> Isn't the second sentence of the martial training description unnecessarily wordy? Saying "Skleros possess the base attack bonus and feats of a fighter with a level equal to their Hit Dice" has the same meaning and is a lot more pithy than "Skleros possess the base attack bonus of a fighter of their level, and qualify for feats as if they were fighters of a level equal to their Hit Dice."




The problem I have with the second approach is that it isn't crystal clear that it should gain the normal feats for a non-mindless creature, in addition to the fighter bonus feats.  I could see someone thinking it just gets the fighter bonus feats, since mindless creatures don't normally qualify for standard feats.   Anyone else have an opinion?



Cleon said:


> Also, should we give them a ranged weapon. Perhaps javelins?




Sure.  I'll add 'em.



Cleon said:


> Challenge Rating 1 seems OK, they're only a little tougher than a 2nd level warrior.




Yep.  And if played correctly, they shouldn't be as versatile.



Cleon said:


> I was thinking they'd remain the same size, but just become more skilled fighters, so would prefer 3-10 (Medium) and add a note that larger varieties exist (e.g. a Large-size Ogre Skelos with 4-12 HD and a Huge size Giant Skelos with 8-16 HD.)




I think you're taking "Advancement" to literally, as in "if this individual creature were to advance" rather than as "if you, as a DM, want to build a better version of this creature".



Cleon said:


> Well they ought to be lightweight, being naught but bone - 50 pounds?




That works for me.


----------



## demiurge1138 (Dec 9, 2009)

If they get feats despite being mindless and fighter feats, then it's missing one. Might I suggest Quick Draw? That way, they can switch with ease between swords and javelins.


----------



## Shade (Dec 9, 2009)

Sounds good.  Updated.

Finished?


----------



## freyar (Dec 9, 2009)

They look pretty good, though one could quibble that ogres don't have 11HD.  I'm happy with the advancement, but I wouldn't object to changing it to something like 3-6HD (Medium), 7-12HD (Large), 13-20HD (Huge) if Cleon really wants that.


----------



## Cleon (Dec 9, 2009)

Shade said:


> Sounds good.  Updated.
> 
> Finished?




Looks good, although shouldn't they be "Always Neutral Evil" to match the SRD skeleton's alignment?

The only other addition I can think of is that although they fight "much like living fighters" they presumably have no grasp of strategy as they're mindless automata. How about expand the tactics entry to something like:Skleros fight much like living fighters, wielding their weapons with great skill. They only use tactics if a master instructs them to do so, being mindless undead unable to comprehend strategy.​


----------



## Cleon (Dec 9, 2009)

freyar said:


> They look pretty good, though one could quibble that ogres don't have 11HD.  I'm happy with the advancement, but I wouldn't object to changing it to something like 3-6HD (Medium), 7-12HD (Large), 13-20HD (Huge) if Cleon really wants that.




I'm OK with them going Large.


----------



## Shade (Dec 9, 2009)

Sounds good.

Updated.

Here's the next one...

Zombies are unnatural creatures to begin with. One simple variation of the listing is a zombie that must be literally chopped apart before it stops attacking. Even then, it can be a nuisance. Dismembered hands will grab victims; severed heads will bite. Such zombies might be termed “walking dead”. Walking dead are superzombies, more difficult to stop than normal ones because they are both stronger and hardier.

*Walking Dead*
FREQUENCY: Very rare
NO. APPEARING: 2-12
ARMOR CLASS: 8
MOVE: 6.
HIT DICE: 6
% IN LAIR: Nil
TREASURE TYPE: Nil
NO OF ATTACKS. 1
DAMAGE/ATTACK: 1-12
SPECIAL ATTACKS: Nil
SPECIAL DEFENSES: Nil
MAGIC RESISTANCE: See below
INTELLIGENCE: Non-
ALIGNMENT: Neutral evil
SIZE: M
PSIONIC ABILITY: Nil

Walking dead are undead animated corpses that keep attacking until completely destroyed. Like zombies, they are immune to sleep, charm, hold, and coldbased spells. Their six hit dice represent their extreme tenacity. As the walking dead take damage, however, they become less effective (as they start losing vital parts of their bodies). For every 9 hp damage a walking dead takes (9 hp being the equivalent of losing 2 HD), it gains a -2 to hit and does -2 hp damage (minimum damage is zero hit points). Clerics have the same chances to turn walking dead as they do wights.

Originally appeared in Dragon Magazine #138 (1988).


----------



## freyar (Dec 10, 2009)

Take a 6HD human zombie, drop single actions only, add turn resistance and some kind of "losing limbs" ability?  Can't say I'm fond of counting lost hp, so we might want to think of a cleaner mechanic.


----------



## Shade (Dec 10, 2009)

Agreed.  How about each time it is reduced to 0 or fewer hit points, rather than being destroyed, it is restored to full health but takes a bunch of penalties similar to negative levels?

Then, after reaching 0 hp for the xth time, it is permanently destroyed.


----------



## freyar (Dec 11, 2009)

Why not just give it a positive level each time?  Then it's destroyed when positive levels equals HD?  We might want to reduce the HD in that case, then, since that mechanic is like squaring the original # of HD.


----------



## demiurge1138 (Dec 11, 2009)

Hm. These guys are peculiar. I'd prefer every ten damage they take to give them a positive level.


----------



## Shade (Dec 11, 2009)

That might work better.

Boost Str by +5 to offset the losses?   It is supposedly "stronger and hardier".


----------



## freyar (Dec 11, 2009)

The Str boost is a good idea.  I'm still not sure I like the mechanic of tracking how many hp are lost.


----------



## Cleon (Dec 11, 2009)

demiurge1138 said:


> Hm. These guys are peculiar. I'd prefer every ten damage they take to give them a positive level.




But then you'd have to rework their saves at each power-drop.

I'd rather do something like -2 penalty on attack & damage when reduced to two-thirds hit points (or down to 4 hit points per HD?), -4 at one third hp (or 2hp/HD?) then fiddling with level losses.

Shall we talk about stats?

As freyar said, they're basically human zombies with more HD and a "Tenacity" Special Quality. I wouldn't give them extra turning because they've got 6HD, so are already harder to turn under 3E than an SRD wight.

What ability scores do you fancy? I'm thinking Dexterity 10-11 since they're not slow like standard zombies, and Strength 16-17 to give their zombie-slam (1d6 for a standard Medium zombie) the same average damage as 1-12.

Str 17, Dex 10, Con -, Int -, Wis 10, Cha 1?


----------



## Cleon (Dec 11, 2009)

Cleon said:


> But then you'd have to rework their saves at each power-drop.
> 
> I'd rather do something like -2 penalty on attack & damage when reduced to two-thirds hit points (or down to 4 hit points per HD?), -4 at one third hp (or 2hp/HD?) then fiddling with level losses.




Okay, to try to formalize my idea, I'm thinking something like:*Deterioration:* If a walking dead's hit points are reduced to 4 or less per Hit Dice  (24 hp or less for a standard walking dead), it takes a -2 penalty to attack and damage rolls. This penalty increases to -4 if it falls to 2 hit points per Hit Dice (12 hp for a standard walking dead).
​


----------



## Shade (Dec 14, 2009)

I don't care for the "x hit points per HD" mechanic.  Too much math.   The 2/3 and 1/3 mechanic might work, though.

The -2 cumulative penalty is fine.


----------



## freyar (Dec 14, 2009)

Anyone else notice how they wanted to make superzombies but just added HD and anti-abilities?  It would be much cooler just to have a few HD and have them be tough.  Oh well.

Back to the task at hand.  I could go with 1/3 or 2/3 hp.  As an alternative, each hit could add a penalty with a certain % chance.  It's more "swingy" and less "grindy" but might be easier.  Maybe 30% of hits?


----------



## Shade (Dec 14, 2009)

freyar said:


> Anyone else notice how they wanted to make superzombies but just added HD and anti-abilities?  It would be much cooler just to have a few HD and have them be tough.  Oh well.




I think they were trying to simulate the "falls apart, but keeps on attacking" schtick.  You know, the ol' one-armed torso still crawling after the protaganist cliche in horror and sci-fi flicks?  



freyar said:


> Back to the task at hand. I could go with 1/3 or 2/3 hp. As an alternative, each hit could add a penalty with a certain % chance. It's more "swingy" and less "grindy" but might be easier. Maybe 30% of hits?




That might make 'em too tough, though.  This is one of those unfortunate monster concepts that doesn't really fit well within the ruleset.

Another options just came to mind:  multiple stat blocks.   We could start with the 6 HD "super zombie" with two slams and a bite attack, then after it is "destroyed", switch to the "damaged" stat block, which has lesser HD, Str, and maybe loses a slam attack.  Finally, we'd have the "heavily damaged" zombie, with only a bite left and only half its movement rate.  It's a bit more work for us, but would make things easier on DMs.


----------



## freyar (Dec 14, 2009)

I'm happy with the -2 penalties to, say, attack and damage.  I'm just not sure how to trigger that.  Let's say at 2/3 and 1/3 hp, I guess, like Cleon suggests.


----------



## Shade (Dec 15, 2009)

If they are taking two -2 penalties to attack or damage rolls, I'd recommend we start them with Str 8 higher than a standard zombie to offset the penalties, and thus make them the equivalent of a standard zombie at the worst incarnation.


----------



## Cleon (Dec 15, 2009)

Shade said:


> Another options just came to mind:  multiple stat blocks.   We could start with the 6 HD "super zombie" with two slams and a bite attack, then after it is "destroyed", switch to the "damaged" stat block, which has lesser HD, Str, and maybe loses a slam attack.  Finally, we'd have the "heavily damaged" zombie, with only a bite left and only half its movement rate.  It's a bit more work for us, but would make things easier on DMs.




Well there are all kinds of options - multiple stat-blocks, losing attacks or combat penalties if it takes a critical, et cetera - but I feel we'd better keep them simple. Are we agreed on 1/3 and 2/3 hit points as the best compromise?

*Deterioration:* If a walking dead is reduced to 2/3 of its original hit points (26 hp for a standard walking dead), it takes a -2 penalty to its attack and damage rolls. This penalty increases to -4 if it falls to 1/3 its original hit points (13 hp for a standard walking dead).



Shade said:


> If they are taking two -2 penalties to attack or damage rolls, I'd recommend we start them with Str 8 higher than a standard zombie to offset the penalties, and thus make them the equivalent of a standard zombie at the worst incarnation.




Strength 20? I'd have no objection to that.


----------



## demiurge1138 (Dec 15, 2009)

I like Shade's multiple stat block idea, actually.


----------



## freyar (Dec 15, 2009)

What exactly does the multiple stat block get us?  I think we've already decided not to destroy it and have it come back, so don't we just want to layer penalties?


----------



## Shade (Dec 16, 2009)

The more I think about it, the more I like the multiple stat block approach as well.

I like the visual of beating the thing down, then it gets back up, albeit weaker from damage.   This is an iconic image in horror movies.

Secondly, it makes it much easier for the DM to adjudicate.   Once it reaches 0 hp or less, just switch to the next stat block and move on.  It also allows for removing some of the attacks (rather than just making them less likely to hit), to allow for limb loss, etc.

There's precedent for this, in a way, with the deadborn vulture in MMV.


----------



## freyar (Dec 16, 2009)

Ok, that's fine with me.  But then let's start them with fewer HD, because this is an effective HD boost.  Maybe 3HD for the first version, 2HD for the second, 1 for the third.  That totals the original 6 even.


----------



## Shade (Dec 16, 2009)

Fair enough!


----------



## Cleon (Dec 16, 2009)

freyar said:


> Ok, that's fine with me.  But then let's start them with fewer HD, because this is an effective HD boost.  Maybe 3HD for the first version, 2HD for the second, 1 for the third.  That totals the original 6 even.




Well it's not the way I'd have gone, but I'm game.

I'd rather have it have more Hit Dice than that though, say 4HD/3HD/2HD.

Something like:

Full Strength - 4HD, speed 30 ft, Strength 18, 2 1d6+4 slams and 1d4+2 bite.
Half-Dead - 3HD, speed 30 ft, Strength 16, 1d6+3 slam and 1d4+1 bite.
Quarter-Dead - 2HD, speed 30 ft. (cannot Run), Strength 14, 1d6+3 slam.


----------



## demiurge1138 (Dec 17, 2009)

I'd rather keep the bite attack for the last stat-block. I'm seeing it as being just a head and torso at that point, maybe with one arm that it drags itself along with.


----------



## freyar (Dec 17, 2009)

Well, at least this way, they'll end up being amusing!  

The only thing I have against Cleon's progression is that they effectively have 9HD.  Maybe that's ok since they don't get a Con bonus, but it seems like more than what these were intended to have.


----------



## Shade (Dec 17, 2009)

I have no real preference for the HD "regression", but definitely want to keep the bite attack for the last bit!


----------



## freyar (Dec 17, 2009)

Eh, we can go with the 9HD total.  They won't be too strong probably.  Should we introduce the "single action" SQ at some stage?

Also, I'd like to request that the last statblock be called "mostly dead."


----------



## Shade (Dec 17, 2009)

freyar said:


> Eh, we can go with the 9HD total.  They won't be too strong probably.  Should we introduce the "single action" SQ at some stage?




I'd rather not.



freyar said:


> Also, I'd like to request that the last statblock be called "mostly dead."




Sure!

So take standard zombie, strip off the slow bits, add a second slam and a bite attack, and boost Str a bit for the undamaged version?


----------



## freyar (Dec 17, 2009)

Sounds like a plan.


----------



## demiurge1138 (Dec 18, 2009)

Agreed.


----------



## Cleon (Dec 18, 2009)

Suits me, the main reason I made the final stage's attack a slam was so it did the same damage as a regular zombie (1d6+3). If we're making it a bite, maybe boost it to the same damage?

"Mostly Dead" works for me. As for the single actions, I quite like the idea of giving it to them at the end. I suppose we could add Cannot Run to the "Half Dead" and single action SQ to the "Mostly Dead".

Putting all that together would make the progression:

*Full Strength* - 4HD, speed 30 ft, Strength 18, 2 1d6+4 slams and 1d6+2 bite.
* Half Dead* - 3HD, speed 30 ft (cannot Run), Strength 16, 1d6+3 slam and 1d6+1 bite.
* Mostly Dead* - 2HD, speed 30 ft. (cannot Run), Strength 14, 1d6+3 bite, single actions only.


----------



## freyar (Dec 18, 2009)

I like Cleon's suggestion pretty well, though I don't like taking the bite from + 1/2 Str to + 1-1/2 Str at the end.  It just seems, I don't know, counterproductive to the downgrading.  

Also, if the rest of you don't like the single actions at "mostly dead" and cannot run at half dead, we could just do cannot run at mostly dead.  That would fit with dragging themselves along with an arm.


----------



## Cleon (Dec 18, 2009)

freyar said:


> I like Cleon's suggestion pretty well, though I don't like taking the bite from + 1/2 Str to + 1-1/2 Str at the end.  It just seems, I don't know, counterproductive to the downgrading.




Yes, it looks a bit odd to me too, I was just following the "monsters with a single attack get 1.5 Strength bonus on its damage" rule-of-thumb.

If y'all want to cut it to straight Strength (1d6+2) I would have no objection.


----------



## freyar (Dec 18, 2009)

What if we just make the bite primary?  Slams can be primary or secondary either way.  Also, can someone link where in the SRD it says how much Str to add to which kind of natural weapon?  I'm not finding it at the moment.


----------



## Cleon (Dec 19, 2009)

freyar said:


> What if we just make the bite primary?




That'd work. I make Slam the primary since that's what standard zombies use, but there's no reason we can't make them "bitey" zombies. Maybe they're been watching George Romero movies.

So, change it to:

*Full Strength* - 4HD, speed 30 ft, Strength 18, Bite  1d6+4 and 2 slams 1d6+2.
* Half Dead* - 3HD, speed 30 ft (cannot Run), Strength 16, Bite 1d6+3 and slam 1d6+1.
* Mostly Dead* - 2HD, speed 30 ft. (cannot Run), Strength 14, Bite 1d6+3, single actions only.     


freyar said:


> Slams can be primary or secondary either way.  Also, can someone link where in the SRD it says how much Str to add to which kind of natural weapon?  I'm not finding it at the moment.




Actually the SRD *Natural Weapons* rules don't set any natural attack as being primary or secondary, it just says you follow the individual monster's entry, and the default Str adds for primary & secondary claws are just the same as they are for artificial weapons as described in "*Reading The Monster Entries*" under Full Attack.

There are exceptions though. For example, *True Dragons* have a secondary attack and a 1.5 Str bonus on their tail attacks, some creatures only add 0.5 their Str on their primary attacks (e.g. the SRD *Light Horse* and *Heavy Horse*). There isn't a rule that says "all hooves only do secondary damage" or anything like that, though. It's basically artibrary, which allows us to be arbitrary about what multiple of Str to apply on a particular monster's attack too, if we like.


> *Full Attack*
> 
> This line shows all the physical attacks the creature makes when it uses a full-round action to make a full attack. It gives the number of attacks along with the weapon, attack bonus, and form of attack (melee or ranged). The first entry is for the creature’s primary weapon, with an attack bonus including modifications for size and Strength (for melee attacks) or Dexterity (for ranged attacks). A creature with the Weapon Finesse feat can use its Dexterity modifier on melee attacks. The remaining weapons are secondary, and attacks with them are made with a -5 penalty to the attack roll, no matter how many there are. Creatures with the Multiattack feat take only a -2 penalty on secondary attacks. The damage that each attack deals is noted parenthetically. Damage from an attack is always at least 1 point, even if a subtraction from a die roll reduces the result to 0 or lower.
> 
> A creature’s primary attack damage includes its full Strength modifier (1½ times its Strength bonus if the attack is with the creature’s sole natural weapon) and is given first. Secondary attacks add only ½ the creature’s Strength bonus and are given second in the parentheses.


----------



## freyar (Dec 19, 2009)

Well, I think you went from adding +Str to +Str-and-a-half when you went from half-dead to mostly-dead.  Let's be consistent.

As for the rest, I could have sworn there was a sort-of standard.  I guess I'm just getting confused with Pathfinder, which does have "standard" rules for natural attack Str bonuses.


----------



## Cleon (Dec 21, 2009)

freyar said:


> Well, I think you went from adding +Str to +Str-and-a-half when you went from half-dead to mostly-dead.  Let's be consistent.




Well I went from 1 to 1.5 Str because it was consistent with the 3E rules for creatures with a single attack, but I don't mind changing it if t'others have no objection.



freyar said:


> As for the rest, I could have sworn there was a sort-of standard.  I guess I'm just getting confused with Pathfinder, which does have "standard" rules for natural attack Str bonuses.




I was half-suspecting you were getting it mixed up with Pathfinder's natural attack rules. (Which I don't really agree with, but that's neither here nor there.)

There doesn't seem to be that much consistency in the 3/3.5 natural attack DB though. Claws seem to be primary more often than bites in a claw/claw/bite routine, and tails are usually secondary, but there doesn't seem to be backed by an official rule.

I wonder what the distribution of Primary/Secondary natural attacks is? It might be worth going through the SRD and counting them...


----------



## Shade (Dec 21, 2009)

freyar said:


> Also, if the rest of you don't like the single actions at "mostly dead" and cannot run at half dead, we could just do cannot run at mostly dead.  That would fit with dragging themselves along with an arm.




Yeah, let's do that.  I don't fancy the single actions only for this variant zombie.



Cleon said:


> Well I went from 1 to 1.5 Str because it was consistent with the 3E rules for creatures with a single attack, but I don't mind changing it if t'others have no objection.




We could get around the problem by giving them the one of the powerful bite abilities given to a few later-era creatures...

Powerful Bite (Ex): A froghemoth's jaws are extraordinarily powerful. Even though its bite is a seconary attack, it applies 1-1/2 times its Strength modifier to damage done with its bite. Its bite threatens a critical hit on a natural roll of 18-20.

We can drop the expanded crit range from this example if you'd prefer.


----------



## freyar (Dec 21, 2009)

Starting with +1-1/2 Str is fine with me.  I just don't want the bite getting more powerful as the zombie falls apart!


----------



## Shade (Dec 21, 2009)

Added to Homebrews.


----------



## demiurge1138 (Dec 22, 2009)

Powerful bite sounds like a good idea, and I agree that it shouldn't get an expanded crit range.


----------



## Shade (Dec 22, 2009)

These are rolling along easily now.  We probably need a writeup for the ability that transitions between stat blocks.

How's this?

Relentless (Su?):  When a walking dead is reduced to 0 hit points, it isn't destroyed.  Rather, it is quite damaged, as reflected by the half-dead stat block.   When a half-dead walking dead is reduced to 0 hit points, it is badly damaged, essentially just a crawling torso, as reflected by the mostly dead stat block.  A mostly dead walking dead reduced to 0 hit points is permanently destroyed.

I thought about adding the following underbar, just for fun...

*More Fun with the Walking Dead*
DMs might consider adding a bit of variety to their walking dead hordes.   For example, some of the half-dead and mostly dead might have lost their heads, rather than an arm or two, retaining slam attacks and losing the bite attack instead.

Truly enterprising DMs might take the walking dead a step further, adding an additional stat block after mostly dead to represent a crawling arm or rolling head that keeps attacking.   Such walking dead would best be represented by 1/2 Hit Dice, Tiny or Diminutive size, and only a single attack.   A single walking dead might break into two or more such "walking dead bits".


----------



## Cleon (Dec 22, 2009)

demiurge1138 said:


> Powerful bite sounds like a good idea, and I agree that it shouldn't get an expanded crit range.




I have no objections, and am of the same mind about it not needing the extra-wide critical.


----------



## freyar (Dec 22, 2009)

Maybe relentless should be Ex, but either way I like it.

The underbar is nice.  We can point DMs with Monsters of Faerun to the crawling claw for the hands.


----------



## Cleon (Dec 22, 2009)

Shade said:


> Added to Homebrews.




Why have you given the first Walking Dead a +6 Reflex save?

I  make it a +0 Ref (poor save for Undead, +1 for 4HD, -1 for Dex 8).

The +2 Fort is one too much as well (poor save, +1 for 4HD, no ability adj.).

I'm thinking the Challenge Rating may prove a little tricky since a Walking Dead's CR should presumably incorporate the challenge level of both its deteriorating stages.


----------



## Shade (Dec 22, 2009)

freyar said:


> Maybe relentless should be Ex, but either way I like it.




Yeah, that's a tough one to pinpoint.



freyar said:


> The underbar is nice.  We can point DMs with Monsters of Faerun to the crawling claw for the hands.




Great idea!



Cleon said:


> Why have you given the first Walking Dead a +6 Reflex save?
> 
> I  make it a +0 Ref (poor save for Undead, +1 for 4HD, -1 for Dex 8).
> 
> The +2 Fort is one too much as well (poor save, +1 for 4HD, no ability adj.).




Oops.  The Will save is off, too.  That's probably a holdover from the undead from which I cut n' pasted.  



Cleon said:


> I'm thinking the Challenge Rating may prove a little tricky since a Walking Dead's CR should presumably incorporate the challenge level of both its deteriorating stages.




Not really.  Think of the lesser versions as "summoned creatures".  It's probably safe to just base it on the full strength version, and possibly adjust upward by a CR for the additional 38 hp.  Of course, many creatures have abilities that allow them to fight beyond 0 hp (like ferocity or the Diehard feat), so it's probably not a huge issue.   The half-dead and mostly dead versions will be less of a threat to parties of the appropriate level, due to the lower HD (and thus, lower attack modifiers).

Updated.

We should probably list creation rules for these guys as well.


----------



## freyar (Dec 22, 2009)

With Relentless, maybe they're worth CR 4 at most.  I can't see any more than that, though.

Maybe create undead, CL around 12-14 like a ghast?


----------



## demiurge1138 (Dec 22, 2009)

CL 14th for a create undead spell seems appropriate.


----------



## Shade (Dec 22, 2009)

Updated.

All done?


----------



## demiurge1138 (Dec 22, 2009)

They look pretty solid to me. I would consider, however, making the mostly dead Small, rather than Medium.


----------



## Shade (Dec 23, 2009)

That makes sense, assuming a crawling torso.

I don't see any need to lower the Str based on the sized change, either, as the remaining part of the upper body hasn't changed size.  Its bite is as big as it always was.  

Updated.   I added some additional flavor text to explain the various stages (and the size change).


----------



## Cleon (Dec 23, 2009)

Shade said:


> That makes sense, assuming a crawling torso.
> 
> I don't see any need to lower the Str based on the sized change, either, as the remaining part of the upper body hasn't changed size.  Its bite is as big as it always was.
> 
> Updated.   I added some additional flavor text to explain the various stages (and the size change).




Looks good, except it shouldn't have "Even though its bite is a seconary [sic] attack," in the Powerful Bite.

Is it worth adding "walking dead cannot speak" to the description?


----------



## Shade (Dec 23, 2009)

Cleon said:


> Looks good, except it shouldn't have "Even though its bite is a seconary [sic] attack," in the Powerful Bite.




I'll fix it.  Nice catch.



Cleon said:


> Is it worth adding "walking dead cannot speak" to the description?




Nope.  It goes without saying (pun intended) that mindless creatures cannot speak.


----------



## freyar (Dec 25, 2009)

All done now, I think!


----------



## Shade (Dec 28, 2009)

*Spike Skeleton*
CLIMATE/TERRAIN: Any
FREQUENCY: Very rare
ORGANIZATION: Band
ACTIVITY CYCLES: Any
DIET: Nil
INTELLIGENCE: Non- (0)
TREASURE: Nil
ALIGNMENT: Neutral
NO. APPEARING: 2-20 (2d10)
ARMOR CLASS: 6
MOVEMENT: 12
HIT DICE: 3
THACO: 18
NO. OF ATTACKS: 1
DAMAGE/ATTACK: 1-6
SPECIAL ATTACKS: thorns, bonespray, blood bum
SPECIAL DEFENSES: As skeleton
MAGIC RESISTANCE: As skeleton
SIZE: M (5’-6’)
MORALE: As skeleton
XP VALUE: 650

From a distance, spike skeletons look perfectly normal, except that they are unarmed. Closer inspection reveals that they are covered with bony thorns up to an inch long. Somewhat tougher than regular skeletons, these creatures are often used to demoralize enemy troops with their horrific and agonizing special abilities.

Combat: The bony thorns of these skeletons allow them to cause as much damage as a normal skeleton wielding a weapon. Furthermore, 1-3 (1d3) spikes explode each time the creature hits or is hit, inflicting 1-4 hp damage per spike in a 5’ radius (save vs. breath weapon for half damage). The skeleton itself suffers 1 hp damage for each spike it loses this way. The purpose of the bonespray is to draw blood. Once this is done, the nearest creature to the skeleton is then subjected to a version of the 4th-level wizard spell Beltyn’s burning blood (from the FORGOTTEN REALMS Adventures book).  The victim must save vs. spell at -3 or suffer 3d4 hp damage as all the blood from open wounds catches fire. A save must be made each round for three rounds. The moment a successful save is made, the damage stops. Each skeleton can cast this spell only once, and must be “re-charged” to cast it a. second time.

Special ingredients: The thorns must be specially carved from bones taken from the same type of creature that is to be animated (i. e. human bones for a human skeleton). A glyph is carved into each thorn before it is attached to the skeleton with a resin made with fresh bone marrow. During animation, a shatter spell is cast in conjunction with animate dead. After animation, the 6th-level necromancy spell imbue undead with spell ability is cast, along with Beltyn’s burning blood.

Originally appeared in Dragon Magazine #234 (1996).


----------



## Shade (Dec 28, 2009)

Beltyn’s burning blood appears in 3e in Spell Compendium, Unapproachable East, and Complete Arcane.   Here's the relevant bits...



> You taint a living creature's blood with a hot, corrosive infusion, dealing 1d8 points of acid damage and 1d8 points of fire damage per round. The subject can attempt a Fortitude save each round to negate the damage, but a successful save does not prevent damage in future rounds. Searing pain limits the subject to a single move action in any round when it fails its Fortitude save.
> 
> Burning blood does not affect creatures of the construct, elemental, ooze, plant, or undead types.


----------



## demiurge1138 (Dec 28, 2009)

So... they're covered in thorns, which burst as area-of-effect spells whenever it takes a hit. The "closest" to the skeleton takes the burning blood effect. Let's drop that bit in favor of whoever actually triggered the spine burst.


----------



## freyar (Dec 29, 2009)

Sounds like it happens whenever the skeleton hits someone too.

Also: do we want to keep the "recharging" bit?  Seems like they only get one shot at the spell as written.


----------



## Cleon (Dec 29, 2009)

demiurge1138 said:


> So... they're covered in thorns, which burst as area-of-effect spells whenever it takes a hit. The "closest" to the skeleton takes the burning blood effect. Let's drop that bit in favor of whoever actually triggered the spine burst.




I'd keep it closest. It would seem a bit funny to me if an attacker suffers the burning blood effect by shooting the spike skeleton from outside its spike distance.



freyar said:


> Sounds like it happens whenever the skeleton hits someone too.




Yes, since they can wound opponents in melee with their spikes.



freyar said:


> Also: do we want to keep the "recharging" bit?  Seems like they only get one shot at the spell as written.




Well we could, but I'm leaning more towards making it 1/day.


----------



## Cleon (Dec 29, 2009)

Let's start on the stats.

They're basically a SRD skeleton with 3 Hit Dice.

Do we want to give them two claw attacks like an SRD skeleton or one spike attack like the stats?

Oh, I know - lets say they have the equivalent of *Armour Spikes*, and can make two 1d4 claws or one 1d6 spike attack (which triggers a spike-burst and possibly a burning blood attack).

I'd prefer to simplify the spike-burst a bit from the original version. Something like 1d10 damage in a 5-foot burst, halved with a Reflex save, with the skeleton taking 1d3 damage? 

(The average damage of the original is 5, with a range of 1 to 12. 1d10 seems a pretty reasonable approximation)


----------



## Shade (Dec 29, 2009)

I like the idea of treating the spikes as armor spikes for attack purposes.

Rather than dealing with the messy recharge vs. 1/day bit, why don't we just simplify the burning blood to death throes?


----------



## Cleon (Dec 30, 2009)

Shade said:


> I like the idea of treating the spikes as armor spikes for attack purposes.
> 
> Rather than dealing with the messy recharge vs. 1/day bit, why don't we just simplify the burning blood to death throes?




That's a bit of a shift away from the original, I'd rather stick to "on first spike-wounding" rather than "upon spike skeleton's destruction".


----------



## demiurge1138 (Dec 31, 2009)

The "closest" thing is still really stupid--what if there are two people in melee with him, one with a reach weapon? Or if two people are adjacent to the skeleton? I like Shade's death throes suggestion.


----------



## freyar (Dec 31, 2009)

I think I like a 5 ft burst.  But I'd rather go with 1/hour or 1/day than death throes.  We've got plenty of precedent (like 1 poison bite per day for kreen, right?).


----------



## Cleon (Dec 31, 2009)

freyar said:


> I think I like a 5 ft burst.  But I'd rather go with 1/hour or 1/day than death throes.  We've got plenty of precedent (like 1 poison bite per day for kreen, right?).




I'd be happy with a 1/day 5 foot burst that only affects creatures wounded by the spikes.

Shall we keep the 3d4 fire damage per round over three rounds, with a save each round to negate? I'm tempted to make the damage reduce each round (3d4/2d4/1d4) so we have a primary/secondary duration like with flaming oil attacks.

What saves shall we use? There are arguments for Reflex (to avoid the initial spray or snuff the resulting fire) or Fort to shake off the "fiery blood infection". I'm thinking Reflex to avoid the initial effects, then Fort for subsequent rounds.

Something like:*Burning Blood (Su):* Once per day a spike skeleton can add a spray of burning blood to a spike burst special attack. In addition to the spike burst's normal effects, all creatures within the 5 ft. burst area of effect that is damaged by a spike skeleton's spikes must make a DC Reflex save or their wounds will burst into flames. Creatures wounded by earlier spike burst or spike melee attacks are also affected, as are creatures wounded by the spikes of another spike skeleton. Any creature without blood or a blood-like fluid such as ichor is unaffected by the burning blood.

A creature affected by burning blood takes 3d4 fire damage in the first round. It must then succeed at a DC X Fort save or take an additional 2d4 fire damage in the second round, if it fails it must then succeed at a second DC X Fort save or take an additional 1d4 fire damage in the third round.

The save DCs are Charisma-based.​


----------



## Shade (Dec 31, 2009)

I'm not a fan of the lessening damage, as the original spell doesn't do that, and it just adds additional bookkeeping for the DM.

I definitely vote Fort save like the original spell.  I don't think an initial Ref save is necessary, as victims presumably already get one vs. the spike burst attack.


----------



## Cleon (Dec 31, 2009)

Shade said:


> I'm not a fan of the lessening damage, as the original spell doesn't do that, and it just adds additional bookkeeping for the DM.
> 
> I definitely vote Fort save like the original spell.  I don't think an initial Ref save is necessary, as victims presumably already get one vs. the spike burst attack.




That's OK, I was just throwing out ideas to see what stuck. So we're talking something like:
*Burning Blood (Su):* Once per day a spike skeleton can add a spray of burning blood to a spike burst special attack. In addition to the spike burst's normal effects, all creatures within the 5 ft. burst area of effect that is damaged by a spike skeleton's spikes must make a DC X Fort save or their wounds will burst into flames. Creatures wounded by earlier spike burst or spike melee attacks are also affected, as are creatures wounded by the spikes of another spike skeleton. Any creature without blood or a blood-like fluid such as ichor is unaffected by the burning blood.

A creature affected by burning blood takes 3d4 fire damage per round for up to three rounds. They may make a DC Fort save at the end of each round of damage, a successful save prevents any further damage from that instance of burning blood.

The save DC is Charisma-based.​


----------



## demiurge1138 (Jan 1, 2010)

Cleon's phrasing makes it seem as if when a skeleton uses blood burst, anyone wounded by previous spike attacks, even if they're not in the radius of the burst, is affected. If that is the intention, I really don't like it. If it isn't, it needs to be rephrased.


----------



## freyar (Jan 3, 2010)

I think I agree with demiurge.  Also, when did the burning blood get separated from the spike burst?  Aren't they part of the same special attack?  Hmm, I guess, going back and looking at the original text, we could take it either way.


----------



## Cleon (Jan 3, 2010)

demiurge1138 said:


> Cleon's phrasing makes it seem as if when a skeleton uses blood burst, anyone wounded by previous spike attacks, even if they're not in the radius of the burst, is affected. If that is the intention, I really don't like it. If it isn't, it needs to be rephrased.




I'd have thought the "all creatures within the 5 ft. burst" bit was reasonably clear that only creatures within the spike burst would be affected, but I'd be happy to rephrase it.



freyar said:


> I think I agree with demiurge.  Also, when did the burning blood get separated from the spike burst?  Aren't they part of the same special attack?  Hmm, I guess, going back and looking at the original text, we could take it either way.




The original description is quite clear that the spike skeleton can only 'cast' burning blood once per day, but can use spike burst multiple times. It makes sense to make them separate special attacks.

So, how would you like to rephrase the burning blood special attack?

Something like:Burning Blood: Once per day, a spike skeleton can add a spray of burning blood when making a spike burst special attack. The burning blood ca n affect all opponents within the area affected by the spike burst, a 5 foot burst centered on the skeleton. Any opponent within this area that has unhealed wounds from a spike skeleton's spike burst or spike melee attacks must must make a DC X Reflex save or their wounds will burst into flames, taking 3d4 fire damage per round over the next three rounds. They can make an additional DC X Reflex save after each round of fire damage to extinguish the flames and stop any further damage from that instance of burning blood.

Creature without blood or a blood-like fluid such as ichor are unaffected by the burning blood. The save DCs are Charisma-based.​Is that better?


----------



## freyar (Jan 3, 2010)

Well, I do think the phrasing of the original text ties the two abilities together, but it probably makes more sense to separate them.

Yes, the new wording is more clear.


----------



## Shade (Jan 4, 2010)

Added to Homebrews.

A few issues:

If we retain the skeleton's Cha score, and make the burning blood Cha-based, it will suffer a -5 penalty.  Should we raise the Cha to 10, or make the ability Dex-based?

Should the spikes offer something akin to barbed defense, but only vs. grapples since they are short?

I'd like to retain the original's name of "bonespray" for the shattering spike burst.


----------



## freyar (Jan 4, 2010)

Let's raise Cha to 10.

I could see grapple-only barbed defense, sure.


----------



## demiurge1138 (Jan 5, 2010)

Agreed to grapple-only barbed defense and a Cha of 10-12.


----------



## Cleon (Jan 5, 2010)

Shade said:


> Added to Homebrews.
> 
> A few issues:
> 
> If we retain the skeleton's Cha score, and make the burning blood Cha-based, it will suffer a -5 penalty.  Should we raise the Cha to 10, or make the ability Dex-based?




My instinctive response was to raise the Charisma. Dexterity seems wrong for a supernatural effect that infects an opponent's blood. We could make it Strength-based I suppose, just to be different.



Shade said:


> Should the spikes offer something akin to barbed defense, but only vs. grapples since they are short?




If we give them the equivalent or armour-spikes like I suggested, isn't that already included? Armour spikes "allow you to deal extra piercing damage (see Table: Weapons) on a successful grapple attack."

Something like:*Spikes (Ex):* A spike skeleton is covered in bony protrusions that allow the skeleton to make grapple and melee attacks as if it is wearing armour spikes. A hit with a spike attack triggers the spike skeleton's bonespray special attack.​


Shade said:


> I'd like to retain the original's name of "bonespray" for the shattering spike burst.




That's fine by me, I like the name "bonespray" too. All that leaves is the details.

I'm presuming we'll keep this a 5-foot radius like the original, triggered whenever the skeleton is struck or strikes an opponent, but we're left with a couple of questions:

How much damage does it do? 1-3 spikes each doing 1-3 damage averages 6 damage, so I'm thinking 1d10 or so.

Are we allowing a reflex save to reduce damage? (Dexterity or Strength-based?)

Do we want the skeleton to take damage when it makes a bonespray attack, like it does in the original version?

I'm thinking something like:*Bonespray (Ex):* A spike skeleton emits a spray of razor-sharp bone shards whenever ithits an opponent with a spike attack. It also emits a bonespray whenever the skeleton is struck for hit points of damage. Each bonespray does *X*[*1d10?*] piercing damage to all creatures within a 5 foot burst centered on the skeleton (except for other spike skeletons). A successful DC *Y* Reflex save halves this damage. Every time a spike skeleton emits a bonespray attack it takes *Z* hit points of damage. The save DC is [Strength/Dexterity]-based.
​The red bits are where I think it needs work.

I thought it a good idea to make other spike skeleton's immune to bonespray, otherwise they'd be constantly setting each other off. While this could do a lot of damage, it could also be a bugger to keep track of in play.


----------



## Shade (Jan 5, 2010)

That's an elegant solution to the grappling issue.

For the bonespray, since the original did potentially 3d3 damage, how about boosting to 3d4?  That makes the save for half a bit more interesting on the low end.

We have enough in favor of a Cha-boost that we can make both abilities Cha-based.

I'm not sure if they need to be immune, since the DR 5/bludgeoning will eat much of the damage, preventing a burst in many cases (combined with a successful save).  That leaves the element of danger when several are in an area.


----------



## freyar (Jan 6, 2010)

For the red text, 3d4 is good for damage, and a Cha based DC is fine.  

hp damage done to the spike skeleton, maybe 1d3?  Let's also give it a minimum hp loss to trigger the bonespray.  Maybe 2?  That will also help prevent chain explosions.


----------



## Shade (Jan 6, 2010)

Updated.

You know, since "the purpose of the bonespray is to draw blood", I think we should give 'em bleeding wounds with the bonespray attack.

Bleeding Wounds (Ex): A wound from a spike skeleton's bonespray attack continues to bleed after the injury was inflicted. Each wound bleeds for 1 point of damage per round thereafter. Multiple bonespray wounds result in cumulative bleeding loss (two wounds deal 2 points of damage per round, and so on). The bleeding can be stopped only by a successful DC 15 Heal check or the application of any cure spell or other healing spell (heal, mass heal, and so on).


----------



## freyar (Jan 7, 2010)

Ahh, so then the burning blood only affects people who are currently bleeding due to the bleeding wounds?  These are getting nicer and nicer.


----------



## Shade (Jan 7, 2010)

Updated.

CR 2?



> Special ingredients: The thorns must be specially carved from bones taken from the same type of creature that is to be animated (i. e. human bones for a human skeleton). A glyph is carved into each thorn before it is attached to the skeleton with a resin made with fresh bone marrow. During animation, a shatter spell is cast in conjunction with animate dead. After animation, the 6th-level necromancy spell imbue undead with spell ability is cast, along with Beltyn’sburning blood.




Go with the complicated creation process, or simplify to the usual "Spike skeletons can be created with a create undead spell cast by a xth-level spellcaster"?


----------



## freyar (Jan 8, 2010)

A tough CR 2, I guess.  I'd say create undead, maybe with carved bone thorns as a special ingredient.


----------



## demiurge1138 (Jan 8, 2010)

I'm on the fence between CR 2 and 3. 

A few notes: their spike attack doesn't have an attack bonus, and they have too many hit points--without Toughness or something similar, they should have 19 hp. Also, their claw attacks should be at +2 (+1 BAB, +1 Str).


----------



## Shade (Jan 11, 2010)

I fixed the attack lines and hit points.  Updated.

Hmm...although tough for CR 2, I don't think they're even close to a wight at CR 3.  So stick with strong CR 2?


----------



## Cleon (Jan 11, 2010)

These are looking pretty good. I like the Bleeding Wounds SA and how it ties into Burning Blood.

Speaking of Burning Blood, DC11 is pretty weak, especially as it only gets one shot at it. Shall we give it a racial bonus of +2 or +4?

I agree with them looking like a CR2, albeit a nasty one.

As for creation, I'm thinking _create undead_ from a 12th level caster. We could add a Craft check if we wanted to mirror the "The thorns must be specially carved from bones taken from the same type of creature that is to be animated" - DC10 Craft (sculpting) or Craft (engraving)?

There's a couple of minor problems with the current writeup. In the combat tactics there's an "except the never wield" which looks like it should have a "they".

Oh, and their melee spike attack should have bleeding wounds *and* spike burst for damage, not just bleeding wounds.

Finally, I think their spikes should be a bit longer than an inch, since they can do 1d6 damage with a punch. I'd think 3-6 inches would be more credible.


----------



## Shade (Jan 12, 2010)

Sounds good.  Let's leave off the Craft checks, as they feel tacked on at such a high caster level.

Updated.

What's left?


----------



## demiurge1138 (Jan 12, 2010)

The name of the "spike burst" ability is actually "bonespray". So it should be changed in the attack line.


----------



## Shade (Jan 12, 2010)

Fixed.


----------



## Cleon (Jan 12, 2010)

Shade said:


> Fixed.




They look done, unless you fancy giving them a height and weight (5-6 feet, ~60 pounds?).


----------



## Shade (Jan 12, 2010)

Here's the next variant...

*Dust skeleton*
CLIMATE/TERRAIN: Any
FREQUENCY: Very rare
ORGANIZATION: Band
ACTIVITY CYCLES: Any
DIET: Nil
INTELLIGENCE: Non- (0)
TREASURE: Nil
ALIGNMENT: Neutral
NO. APPEARING: 2-20 (2d10)
ARMOR CLASS: 10
MOVEMENT: 9
HIT DICE: 1-1
THACO: 20
NO. OF ATTACKS: 1
DAMAGE/ATTACK: 1 point
SPECIAL ATTACKS: Choking cloud
SPECIAL DEFENSES: See below
MAGIC RESISTANCE: As skeleton
SIZE: M (5’-6’)
MORALE: Special
XP VALUE: 65

Although they look like normal skeletons, dust skeletons weigh about one-fifth as much, as their bones are dried almost to the point of disintegration. Wherever they walk, they leave a trail of blue-gray dust hanging in the air. This dust is poisonous, and anyone approaching within 10’ feels mildly nauseous. Dust skeletons are used to break enemy formations by disabling large numbers of troops.

Combat: Since they were created specifically to be destroyed, dust skeletons never carry weapons and cause very little damage in melee. Unlike regular skeletons, dust skeletons take full damage from edged and piercing weapons. When they are reduced to 0 hp, the skeletons shatter, spreading a cloud of dust in a 10’ radius. Anyone breathing in the dust must make a save vs. poison or be paralyzed for 2-12 rounds. Those who make their saves spend one round coughing and choking, and are unable to attack or cast spells but are otherwise unaffected.

Special ingredients: Bones used to create dust skeletons must be specially dried to the point where they are ready to crumble. A special resin containing a paralyzing venom is then used to coat the bones. Transmute water to dust is used in conjunction with animate dead to dry the bones further.

Originally appeared in Dragon Magazine #234 (1996).


----------



## demiurge1138 (Jan 13, 2010)

OK, so they leave behind a trail for Fort save or sickened? Death throes for the dust burst, but we might want to reduce paralyzed to dazed or stunned.


----------



## freyar (Jan 13, 2010)

Death throes is right, and I can see reducing to dazed or stunned.

Since 3.5 doesn't have facing, what if we switch the trail to an aura like stench?


----------



## Shade (Jan 13, 2010)

What effect would facing have upon a trail?   I picture it just linger in the last x spaces the skeleton traveled through.   I can live with an aura, though, if that seems too complex to adjudicate.


----------



## Cleon (Jan 13, 2010)

demiurge1138 said:


> OK, so they leave behind a trail for Fort save or sickened? Death throes for the dust burst, but we might want to reduce paralyzed to dazed or stunned.




Since mild exposure to the dust causes mild sickness, I'd prefer the stronger exposure of its death throes to make its victims sickened/nauseated/dazed depending on their save.

So, how about a 10-foot radius dazzling aura for its regular dust-cloud, and its dust burst causes 2d6 rounds of nausea plus 1 round of dazed on a failed save, and a successful save just results in 1 round of nauseated?

I'm wondering what to do about them being easier to destroy than regular skeletons. We could either give them a 1/2 HD or vulnerability to all weapons. They shouldn't have a regular SRD skeleton's Damage Resistance, in either case.


----------



## demiurge1138 (Jan 14, 2010)

I think just dropping the DR would suffice for "easier to destroy".


----------



## freyar (Jan 14, 2010)

Agreed to just dropping DR.

I guess facing only matters in how I visualize the trail forming.  So we can do with a trail or aura, either way.


----------



## Shade (Jan 15, 2010)

So, should we write this up as a variant of the existing skeleton template, with a sample skeleton?


----------



## demiurge1138 (Jan 16, 2010)

Yeah, this looks like one of the mini-templates, like in Libris Mortis or the Pathfinder Bestiary.


----------



## Cleon (Jan 16, 2010)

demiurge1138 said:


> Yeah, this looks like one of the mini-templates, like in Libris Mortis or the Pathfinder Bestiary.




I was just going to do it as an ordinary monster, but I'd be game for a template.

So, take the SRD skeleton template and do something like the following:

Reduce Hit Dice of base creature or leave it the same?

Remove DR?

Reduce skeleton-template's natural armour by 2?
(+1 for Huge, +4 for Gargantuan, +10 for Colossal)

Reduce claw damage by 2 steps?
(1 point for Diminutive to Small, 1d2 for Medium, 1d3 for Large, 1d4 for Huge, 1d6 for Gargantuan and 1d8 for Colossal).

That's less than the 1 point the original does, but it's still less than a standard humanoid's Unarmed Strike, so its hardly devastating.

Add the "Dust Aura" and "Death Throes" special attacks, whatever we decide those will be.

If we're making it a template I suggest making the area of effect of the SAs be proportional to the size of the creature rather than some fixed quantity - say, two or three times its space, (e.g. 20 or 30 feet for a Large Dust Skeleton).


----------



## freyar (Jan 17, 2010)

I like the variant as in the Pathfinder bestiary.  Nice.

Let's do HD the same as regular skeleton template, remove DR, reduce natural armor and claw damage as suggested.  Agreed to that.  I can also see increasing the aura/trail and death throes areas by size or HD.


----------



## Cleon (Jan 17, 2010)

freyar said:


> I like the variant as in the Pathfinder bestiary.  Nice.
> 
> Let's do HD the same as regular skeleton template, remove DR, reduce natural armor and claw damage as suggested.  Agreed to that.  I can also see increasing the aura/trail and death throes areas by size or HD.




Well I'd cut the Hit Dice to roughly half or three-quarters the original, but if no one else fancies that additional complexity we can just use the regular HD.

I'd rather key the aura/trail dimensions to size and leave the HD to just affect the DC. Here's a rough draft:

*Aura of Dust (Ex):* A dust skeleton constantly emits a cloud of irritating dust, which spreads out to a distance equal to twice its Space (e.g. a Small or Medium sized dust skeleton has a 10 foot radius Aura of Dust). All living creatures which enter this cloud of dust must make a DC X (Fort? Reflex?) save or be dazzled for Y rounds. The save DC is (Strength?)-based.

*Death Throes (Ex):* If a dust skeleton is slain its body explodes into a burst of toxic dust, affecting all living creatures within a radius equal to twice the skeleton's Space (e.g. a Small of Medium sized dust skeleton's Death Throes affects a 10 foot radius burst). Creatures within the area must make a DC X Fort save or be nauseated for Y rounds and then sickened for Z rounds, creatures that make their save are sickened for A rounds and then dazzled for B rounds. The save DC is (Strength?)-based.

*Trail of Dust (Ex):* A dust skeleton leaves a trail of dust wherever it goes. Any creature attempting to track a dust skeleton by sight receive a +X circumstance bonus on their Survival checks to track the skeleton. This dust trail is a strong irritant, so creatures attempting to track its trail by scent are affected as if they were exposed to the skeleton's Aura of Dust (see above).

The bits in red are where I think it needs work. If we make it Strength-based it would have a rather low DC, so it may require a racial bonus on Death Throes.

I'm not sure about the effects of the Death Throes. Nauseated for 2d6 rounds on a failed save or just 1 round on a successful save would be closer to the original description, but I don't like the 1 round of nausea even on a failed save. Maybe nauseated 1d6 rounds and sickened 1d6 rounds on a failed save, sickened 1d3 round on a successful save? That's nasty, but not automatically incapacitating.


----------



## demiurge1138 (Jan 18, 2010)

I would rather not cut down on the HD of the dust skeletons--like I said earlier, removing the DR will make them much easier to destroy on its own. 

I would prefer nauseated 2d6 rounds on a failed save, sickened 1 round on a passed save. Makes it somewhat akin to the level of "passing still hurts" as a fear spell.


----------



## freyar (Jan 18, 2010)

These suggestions are all pretty good. 

The game-world logic for Str-based DCs escapes me, but I do agree that those numbers work better.  I don't actually see much of a problem with the DCs being too low if we take Str-based.  Given how low CR skeletons are, they might actually be high enough to justify a CR boost over regular skeletons!


----------



## Shade (Jan 19, 2010)

Added to Homebrews.


----------



## freyar (Jan 19, 2010)

Make dazzling 1d2 rounds for the aura of dust and the tracking bonus +12.  Maybe CR +1 vs normal skeletons?


----------



## Shade (Jan 20, 2010)

Updated.


----------



## Cleon (Jan 21, 2010)

Shade said:


> Updated.




That looks good to me, and I can't see any errors.

Shall we add a couple of sample Dust Skeletons - say a Human Commoner (for the standard disposable humanoid) and a Light Horse (for a faster, Large-sized shock weapon)?


----------



## Shade (Jan 21, 2010)

Let's stick with a Human warrior for consistency with the original template (and to do less work).  

Here's how it looks...

*Dust Skeleton, Human Warrior*
Medium Undead  
Hit Dice: 1d12 (6 hp)  
Initiative: +5 
Speed: 30 ft. (6 squares)  
Armor Class: 13 (+1 Dex, +2 heavy steel shield), touch 11, flat-footed 12
Base Attack/Grapple +0/+1 
Attack: Scimitar +1 melee (1d6+1/18–20) or claw +1 melee (1d2+1) 
Full Attack: Scimitar +1 melee (1d6+1/18–20) or 2 claws +1 melee (1d2+1) 
Space/Reach: 5 ft./5 ft. 
Special Attacks: Aura of dust, death throes
Special Qualities: Darkvision 60 ft., immunity to cold, trail of dust, undead traits 
Saves: Fort +0, Ref +1, Will +2 
Abilities: Str 13, Dex 13, Con —, Int —, Wis 10, Cha 1
Skills: —
Feats: Improved Initiative (B)
Environment: Temperate plains  
Organization: Any 
Challenge Rating: 2 
Treasure: None 
Alignment: Always neutral evil 
Advancement: —
Level Adjustment: —

Aura of Dust (Ex): A dust skeleton constantly emits a cloud of irritating dustin a 10-foot-radius. All living creatures which enter this cloud of dust must make a DC 11 Fortitude save or be dazzled for 1d2 rounds. The save DC is Strength-based.

Death Throes (Ex): If a dust skeleton is slain its body explodes into a burst of toxic dust, affecting all living creatures within a 10-foot-radius burst. Creatures within the area must make a DC 11 Fortitude save or be nauseated for 2d6 rounds. Creatures that succeed on their saves are instead sickened for 1 round. The save DC is Strength-based.

Trail of Dust (Ex): A dust skeleton leaves a trail of dust wherever it goes. Any creature attempting to track a dust skeleton by sight receives a +12 circumstance bonus on their Survival checks to track the skeleton. This dust trail is a strong irritant, so creatures attempting to track its trail by scent are affected as if they were exposed to the skeleton's aura of dust (see above).


We can add a horse as well if you'd like.


----------



## Shade (Jan 21, 2010)

*Dust Skeleton Light Horse*
Large Undead
Hit Dice: 3d12 (19 hp)
Initiative: +6
Speed: 60 ft. (12 squares)
Armor Class: 11 (–1 size, +2 Dex), touch 12, flat-footed 9
Base Attack/Grapple: +1/+7
Attack: Hoof –2 melee (1d4+1*)
Full Attack: 2 hooves –2 melee (1d4+1*)
Space/Reach: 10 ft./5 ft.
Special Attacks: —
Special Qualities: Darkvision 60 ft., immunity to cold, trail of dust, undead traits 
Saves: Fort +1, Ref +3, Will +3
Abilities: Str 14, Dex 15, Con —, Int —, Wis 10, Cha 1
Skills: —
Feats: Improved Initiative (B)
Environment: Temperate plains
Organization: Any
Challenge Rating: 2 
Treasure: None 
Alignment: Always neutral evil 
Advancement: —
Level Adjustment: —

Aura of Dust (Ex): A dust skeleton constantly emits a cloud of irritating dustin a 20-foot-radius. All living creatures which enter this cloud of dust must make a DC 13 Fortitude save or be dazzled for 1d2 rounds. The save DC is Strength-based.

Death Throes (Ex): If a dust skeleton is slain its body explodes into a burst of toxic dust, affecting all living creatures within a 20-foot-radius burst. Creatures within the area must make a DC 13 Fortitude save or be nauseated for 2d6 rounds. Creatures that succeed on their saves are instead sickened for 1 round. The save DC is Strength-based.

Trail of Dust (Ex): A dust skeleton leaves a trail of dust wherever it goes. Any creature attempting to track a dust skeleton by sight receives a +12 circumstance bonus on their Survival checks to track the skeleton. This dust trail is a strong irritant, so creatures attempting to track its trail by scent are affected as if they were exposed to the skeleton's aura of dust (see above).


----------



## freyar (Jan 22, 2010)

Those look ok, but isn't CR of 1/3 +1 a CR of 1 for the human warrior.  Or CR 1/2?  It looks awfully weak for CR 2.


----------



## Shade (Jan 22, 2010)

Good question.  I assumed it was a "round up" equation, but I'm unsure.

Perhaps it might be easier to just treat a dusk skeleton as one step higher on the skeleton CR chart?


----------



## demiurge1138 (Jan 23, 2010)

I agree on the CR.


----------



## freyar (Jan 24, 2010)

Going one step higher works for me, too.


----------



## Cleon (Jan 24, 2010)

Shade said:


> Perhaps it might be easier to just treat a dusk skeleton as one step higher on the skeleton CR chart?




Going one step higher for the Challenge Rating is a good idea.

Looking at those samples the Death Throes DCs look a bit low.

Should we add a +2 racial bonus on Death Throes DC to the template?

This is their signature attack, after all.


----------



## Cleon (Jan 24, 2010)

Looking at those stats, a couple of things occur to me.

Firstly, does it feel right to have the dust skeleton have the same strength as a regular SRD skeleton? They're supposedly very frangible, so maybe the template should include a racial penalty to Strength?

Secondly, I'm wondering whether the template's claw damage description needs a bit more work. At the moment if you applied the template to a gargoyle (1d4 claws), you'd get a Gargoyle Skeleton with the same 1d2 claw damage as a Human Skeleton. That doesn't seem right.

Maybe change the template with something like:

Attacks: A dust skeleton's claw attacks deal damage as if the skeleton were two size categories smaller than normal (to a minimum of 1 point of damage for dust skeletons of up to Small size). If the base creature already has natural attacks, these do damage as if the base creature was one size smaller. If the base creature's natural attacks include claw attacks, use the dust skeleton claw damage if it’s better.

That way a dust skeleton tiger would do 1d6 with its claws, 1d8 with its bite; a dust skeleton ogre would have two 1d3 damage claws; a dust skeleton gargoyle would have two 1d3 claws plus a 1d4 bite and 1d4 gore, _et cetera_.


----------



## Shade (Jan 25, 2010)

Cleon said:


> Firstly, does it feel right to have the dust skeleton have the same strength as a regular SRD skeleton? They're supposedly very frangible, so maybe the template should include a racial penalty to Strength?




It feels right to me, as fragile does not necessarily equal weak.  I'd rather not lower the Str.  However...



Cleon said:


> Secondly, I'm wondering whether the template's claw damage description needs a bit more work. At the moment if you applied the template to a gargoyle (1d4 claws), you'd get a Gargoyle Skeleton with the same 1d2 claw damage as a Human Skeleton. That doesn't seem right.
> 
> Maybe change the template with something like:
> 
> Attacks: A dust skeleton's claw attacks deal damage as if the skeleton were two size categories smaller than normal (to a minimum of 1 point of damage for dust skeletons of up to Small size). If the base creature already has natural attacks, these do damage as if the base creature was one size smaller. If the base creature's natural attacks include claw attacks, use the dust skeleton claw damage if it’s better.




I'll agree with that.



Cleon said:


> Looking at those samples the Death Throes DCs look a bit low.
> 
> Should we add a +2 racial bonus on Death Throes DC to the template?




I'd be OK with that as well.

Any objections?


----------



## freyar (Jan 25, 2010)

Keep the Str (fragile means lower Con! ), but I'll also agree to the rest.


----------



## demiurge1138 (Jan 26, 2010)

Agreed to keeping Str, and I'd rather not drop the dice on the natural attacks.


----------



## Shade (Jan 26, 2010)

Updated.

Do we need to offer any variations on the creation rules?   The Libris Mortis variants don't have additional requirements.


----------



## Cleon (Jan 26, 2010)

demiurge1138 said:


> Agreed to keeping Str, and I'd rather not drop the dice on the natural attacks.




Upon reflection I'm fine with keeping the Strength unchanged. (Mainly because it would sap the save DCs if we cut it).


----------



## Cleon (Jan 26, 2010)

Shade said:


> Updated.
> 
> Do we need to offer any variations on the creation rules?   The Libris Mortis variants don't have additional requirements.




Don't think it's necessary. I'd be fine with just setting a minimum caster level.


----------



## Shade (Jan 27, 2010)

The Libris Mortis rules also don't change the caster level requirements, despite some adjusting the CR by +1.   Is it necessary here?


----------



## freyar (Jan 28, 2010)

It's probably ok just to leave it alone.  DMs can always change it if they wish, and I always thought the undead creation rules were a little strict anyway.


----------



## Cleon (Jan 28, 2010)

Shade said:


> The Libris Mortis rules also don't change the caster level requirements, despite some adjusting the CR by +1.   Is it necessary here?




I guess we'll just skip it then.


----------



## Shade (Jan 28, 2010)

*SHOCK BONES*
FREQUENCY: Very rare
NO APPEARING: 3-18
ARMOR CLASS: 7
MOVE: 12"
HIT DICE:1
% IN LAIR: Nil
TREASURE TYPE: Nil
NO OF ATTACKS: 1
DAMAGE/ATTACK: 2-12
SPECIAL ATTACKS: Electricity
SPECIAL DEFENSES: Electricity
MAGIC RESISTANCE: Standard
INTELLIGENCE: Non-
ALIGNMENT: Neutral evil
SIZE: M
PSIONIC ABILITY: Nil

Shock bones are skeletons animated by both magic and electricity. Their attacks do damage from electrical shock. Anyone hitting a shock bones with a metallic weapon that conducts electricity automatically takes 2-12 hp damage. Clerics have the same chances to turn shock bones as they do zombies. While shock bones have no treasure themselves, they often act as treasure guards.

A shock bones might also be created by an alchemist or sage in a sort of Dr. Frankenstein-type experiment. Such a monster would not truly be undead, and though it would conform to the above statistics, it could not be turned by clerics.

Originally appeared in Dragon Magazine #138 (1988).


----------



## Rappy (Jan 28, 2010)

This seems like another fairly lightly altered skeleton variant. Although 2d12 damage for a 1 HD creatures makes it admittedly rather menacing...sure we want to keep that high a dosage?


----------



## freyar (Jan 28, 2010)

Well, it's actually 2d6=2-12, not 2d12.  I think it's ok.   I could agree to doing these in a similar mini-template for a normal skeleton like the last one.


----------



## Rappy (Jan 29, 2010)

freyar said:


> Well, it's actually 2d6=2-12, not 2d12.  I think it's ok.   I could agree to doing these in a similar mini-template for a normal skeleton like the last one.



This is why I shouldn't read things when I'm just waking up. If that's the case, I agree with you fully.


----------



## Cleon (Jan 29, 2010)

Rappy said:


> This is why I shouldn't read things when I'm just waking up. If that's the case, I agree with you fully.




These look pretty straightforward. We can give them the equivalent of a caster level 2 _shocking grasp_ as their electrical attack/defence:



> Your successful melee touch attackhttp://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/combatStatistics.htm#touchAttacks deals 1d6 points of electricity damage per caster level (maximum 5d6). When delivering the jolt, you gain a +3 bonus on attack rolls if the opponent is wearing metal armor (or made out of metal, carrying a lot of metal, or the like).




Hmm, are we going for regular monster or template?

If we decide on template, a Mini-Template applied to the SRD skeleton would meet all its powers. We could give it a Shocking Touch whose damage scales with size, something like:

Diminutive or Fine = 1d4 electricity
Tiny = 1d6 electricity
Small = 1d8 electricity
Medium = 2d6 electricity
Large = 3d6 electricity
Huge = 4d6 electricity
Gargantuan = 6d6 electricity
Colossal = 8d6 electricity

I'd also give it immunity to electricity, for obvious reasons.

Do we want to have these things keep a regular undead skeleton's weapon use and claws? I suppose we might as well, although the Shocking Touch would be their preferred attack.


----------



## freyar (Jan 29, 2010)

I think this is easiest to do as a mini-template added to the SRD skeleton, like the last one.  I'd say that the shocking is attached to the skeleton's claws, not a separate attack.  Also, they have an electric aura kind of defense that does damage to anyone hitting them with a metallic melee weapon.


----------



## Cleon (Jan 30, 2010)

freyar said:


> I think this is easiest to do as a mini-template added to the SRD skeleton, like the last one.  I'd say that the shocking is attached to the skeleton's claws, not a separate attack.  Also, they have an electric aura kind of defense that does damage to anyone hitting them with a metallic melee weapon.




I prefer template too.

At the moment I prefer making it a single "Shocking Touch" attack, with claws as a back-up option for electrical-resistant targets.

If we give them "Shocking Claws" then they'll probably have more attacks than the original monster - e.g. a "Warrior Shocking Skeleton" has two 1d4 claw attacks.

Also, if each claw attack adds 2d6 electricity damage they'll do a lot more damage - two claws for 1d4+1 plus 2d6 electricity average three times the damage of a single 2d6 shock or two 1d4+1 claws.

I guess we could reduce the electricity damage to something like the following:

Diminutive or Fine = 1d2 electricity
 Tiny = 1d3 electricity
 Small = 1d4 electricity
 Medium = 1d6 electricity
 Large = 1d8 electricity
 Huge = 2d6 electricity
 Gargantuan = 3d6 electricity
 Colossal = 4d6 electricity

The basic claw damage can remain at the SRD Skeleton template's default level, which would combine with the above electricity proposal to make:

Diminutive or Fine = 1 claw plus 1d2 electricity
 Tiny = 1d2 claw plus 1d3 electricity
 Small = 1d3 claw plus 1d4 electricity
 Medium = 1d4 claw plus 1d6 electricity
 Large = 1d6 claw plus 1d8 electricity
 Huge = 1d8 claw plus 2d6 electricity
 Gargantuan = 2d6 claw plus 3d6 electricity
 Colossal = 3d6 claw plus 4d6 electricity

Overall I prefer the shocking touch _*or*_ claws approach.


----------



## Shade (Feb 1, 2010)

I'd like the shock to transmit through the metallic weapons they wield, similar to a salamander's heat ability...

Heat (Ex): A salamander generates so much heat that its mere touch deals additional fire damage. Salamanders’ metallic weapons also conduct this heat.


----------



## demiurge1138 (Feb 1, 2010)

Agreed to the shock transfer, and I'd rather have claws that did bonus electricity damage than give it an electrical touch attack. Considering that it's turned as a zombie, giving it a wee bit of turn resistance would also be appropriate.


----------



## Shade (Feb 1, 2010)

Yes, that sounds best to me as well.


----------



## freyar (Feb 1, 2010)

Agreed to those suggestions.


----------



## Shade (Feb 2, 2010)

For the creatures striking the shock bones, we have a few precedents...

Electricity (Su): A thunderspiker's body carries a constant and powerful electrical charge. Any creature that strikes a thunderspiker with a natural weapon automatically takes 1d6 points of electricity damage.

Shocking Discharge (Ex): If touched with bare flesh (including being struck in combat with a fist or claw) or a metallic weapon, the shocker delivers 1d8 points of damage to the attacker. This is true whether or not the attack is capable of affecting the shocker. The damage it inflicts is subtracted from the shocker's hit point total as well.

(The last sentence is a weird effect of the shocker's physiology...not something I'm suggesting we borrow)


----------



## Cleon (Feb 2, 2010)

Shade said:


> Yes, that sounds best to me as well.




OK, I give in, looks like I'm the only one that preferred to separate the claws and shock. Something like:*Shock Attack (Ex):* A shock skeleton carries a constant and powerful electrical charge. Whenever the skeleton hits with a melee attack using a natural or metallic weapon, it automatically adds electricity damage to the attack according to the following table.

Diminutive or Fine = 1d2 electricity
 Tiny = 1d3 electricity
 Small = 1d4 electricity
 Medium = 1d6 electricity
 Large = 1d8 electricity
 Huge = 2d6 electricity
 Gargantuan = 3d6 electricity
 Colossal = 4d6 electricity ​


Shade said:


> For the creatures striking the shock bones, we have a few precedents...




The Shocker's looks the closest to me, we just need to cut out the last sentence and fiddle with the damage. Something like:*Shocking Discharge (Ex):* If touched with bare flesh (including being struck in combat with a fist or claw) or a metallic weapon, a shock skeleton delivers electrical damage to the attacker equal to its Shock Attack ability. This is true whether or not the attack is capable of affecting the shock skeleton.​


----------



## freyar (Feb 3, 2010)

Seems fine to me!


----------



## Shade (Feb 3, 2010)

Added to Homebrews.

Does "treated as one step higher on the skeleton CR chart" work here as well?


----------



## freyar (Feb 3, 2010)

I think that's fair.  And I'll say it's done.


----------



## Shade (Feb 3, 2010)

Updated with a sample creature.


----------



## freyar (Feb 4, 2010)

Troll, nice!  I forgot we were doing samples even for these mini-templates.


----------



## Cleon (Feb 4, 2010)

Shade said:


> Updated
> 
> Does "treated as one step higher on the skeleton CR chart" work here as well?




Yes, that makes sense, and the template looks finished now...



freyar said:


> Troll, nice!  I forgot we were doing samples even for these mini-templates.




...although there's something screwy with the saves of the sample creature. As a 6 HD Undead with Dex 17 and Wis 10, the Troll Shock Skeleton should have Fort +2, Ref +5, Will +5.


----------



## Shade (Feb 4, 2010)

Good catch.  I must've copied the wrong line from the SRD.

Fixed.

*Defiling Skeleton*
CLIMATE/TERRAIN: Any
FREQUENCY: Very rare
ORGANIZATION: Band
ACTIVITY CYCLES: Any
DIET: Nil
INTELLIGENCE: Non- (0)
TREASURE; Nil
ALIGNMENT: Neutral
NO. APPEARING: 2-20 (2d10)
ARMOR CLASS: 6
MOVEMENT: 12
HIT DICE: 4+4
THACO: 17
NO. OF ATTACKS: 2
DAMAGE/ATTACK: 1d6/1d6 or by Weapon
SPECIAL ATTACKS: None
SPECIAL DEFENSES: Defiling regeneration
MAGIC RESISTANCE: As skeleton
SIZE: M (5’-6’)
MORALE: Special
XP VALUE: 975

Defiling skeletons are found only in the DARK SUN® campaign, where they are among the most feared and reviled of undead soldiers. An obsidian jewel is imbedded in each skeleton’s forehead. Many of them have blackened bones, as though they’ve been burned. All carry weapons, usually swords or clubs.

Combat: Defiling skeletons absorb life energy in order to regenerate. When a defiling skeleton is reduced to 0 hp, it collapses and becomes inert for one round. The next round, it defiles an area equal to the casting of a 3rd-level spell.  While this defiling takes place, the obsidian jewel in the skeleton’s forehead glows brightly. The next round it rises up, restored to full hit points. Striking the skeleton while it is inert or regenerating has no effect, nor does it delay the regeneration. Only the destruction of the jewel embedded in its forehead or a successful dispel magic can stop the regeneration.

The jewel is AC 4 and has 6 hp (which do not regenerate). During melee, it can be struck with a called shot. Dispel magic prevents regeneration for one round per level of the caster and causes the skeleton to collapse. During this time the jewel must be destroyed, or the regeneration starts again.

Special Ingredients: An obsidianjewel must be implanted in the skeleton’s forehead. The jewel is inscribed with a special glyph. A second animate dead spell must be cast in conjunction with the first, along with vampiric touch.

Originally appeared in Dragon Magazine #234 (1996).


----------



## freyar (Feb 4, 2010)

Another mini-template, or do we think this is distinct enough for a separate monster?  The peculiarity of it as well as the HD suggest separate monster to me.

Did Dark Sun ever get defiling rules in 3.X?


----------



## Shade (Feb 4, 2010)

Separate monster sounds right.

Defiling rules are found in Dragon Magazine #315.


----------



## freyar (Feb 5, 2010)

Care to share those?


----------



## Cleon (Feb 5, 2010)

freyar said:


> Another mini-template, or do we think this is distinct enough for a separate monster?  The peculiarity of it as well as the HD suggest separate monster to me.
> 
> Did Dark Sun ever get defiling rules in 3.X?




Definitely a new monster.

There are 3E defiling rules in both Dragon magazine and on athas.org, both of which have WotC's blessing (at least to some extent).

We might as well settle on the basics of the monster first, though.

Medium Undead, obviously.

Their 4+4 HD suggests 4 Hit Dice plus Unholy Toughness to give it its Cha bonus as a per-HD hp bonus.

Ability-wise, I was thinking a Ghoul or Ghast would make a good foundation.*Ghast* - Str 17, Dex 17, Con -, Int 13, Wis 14, Cha 16
*Ghoul* - Str 13, Dex 15, Com -, Int 13, Wis 14, Cha 12
​Keep the physical scores and drop the mental ones, these are mindless so are Int 0. Drop the other two mental abilities by 2 apiece?

That would make it:*Ghastly **Defiler* - Str 17, Dex 17, Con -, Int -, Wis 12, Cha 14
*Ghoulish** Defiler* - Str 13, Dex 15, Con -, Int -, Wis 12, Cha 10
​Averaging the two would work out to something like:*Defiling Skeleton* - Str 15, Dex 16, Con -, Int -, Wis 12, Cha 12
​I bumped the Charisma up a point so it has 2 odd abilities and 2 even ones. It doesn't make any difference to it bonus-wise.

If we give them a standard Medium Skeleton's +2 natural armour they'd have AC15 with that Dex. I think I'll cut a point off its Dexterity so (a) they're AC isn't a point higher than a direct conversion of the original's AC6 and (b) most of their stats are +2 higher than a standard human Skeleton.*Defiling Skeleton* - Str 15, Dex 15, Con -, Int -, Wis 12, Cha 12​Since these are "Undead Soldiers", should they be proficient in armour? Slapping leather armour on top of their current defences would give them AC 16, which I think is reasonable for a creature of their probably CR.

What weapons do you fancy for them - I was thinking of 2-handed weapons like Spears or Morningstars. As "Soldiers" they might be proficient in martial weapons, so we could give them Greatswords, Scythes or Heavy Flails. I don't fancy Falchions, since we've been using that weapon quite a bit recently.

EDIT: Upon reflection, I would like masterwork greatswords for their main weapon.

I'm presuming they'll have two 1d6+2 claw attacks, so a Greatsword at +1 to hit and 2d6+3/19-20 damage will be a near-equivalent. There's little point in them carrying a weaker weapon than their claws, except for ranged attacks.

Hmm... ranged attacks.

Should we give them a missile weapon too?


----------



## freyar (Feb 6, 2010)

I'd prefer to drop Wis since they're mindless -- usually mindless critters are Wis, Cha 10, 11.  I can see keeping Cha 12, but then I'd like Wis to be 9 or 10.

Leather armor should be fine.  Greatsword could be good.  Let's use a halberd sometime soon, too.


----------



## demiurge1138 (Feb 7, 2010)

Wait, if you dropped the Dexterity to keep the AC in line with the original, why did you add back leather armor? Keep Dex at 16 and give them the armor. With their regenerative abilities, these guys are already in a higher CR bracket than the ghast.


----------



## freyar (Feb 8, 2010)

Good point.  Let's stick to Dex 16 plus the armor.


----------



## Shade (Feb 11, 2010)

freyar said:


> Care to share those?




Essentially, defiled land is utterly destroyed, turned to a fine white ash. The land is sterile and won't sustain life for decades or centuries afterward.

The radius of this defilement varies based on the amount of vegetation around and the number of defiler points earned by the spellcaster.

We'd probably be best off genericizing this to something akin to blight, and can probably simplify it to a radius of 30 feet.


----------



## Cleon (Feb 11, 2010)

freyar said:


> Good point.  Let's stick to Dex 16 plus the armor.




I can live with that.

What about a ranged weapon? I was thinking a composite bow of some kind, but am open to suggestions.


----------



## freyar (Feb 12, 2010)

Crossbows seem to fit better for mindless monsters, but I guess I can go with a composite bow.  Their CR will probably be reasonable to go with that.

As for defiling, yes, I agree with killing or damaging all plants within 30 ft (plant creatures get a save).


----------



## Cleon (Feb 12, 2010)

freyar said:


> Crossbows seem to fit better for mindless monsters, but I guess I can go with a composite bow.  Their CR will probably be reasonable to go with that.




Crossbows or Javelins would be my next choice(s).

I'm having difficulty imagining them as mindless creatures, I'd like them better as dumb-but-malign minions of evil.



freyar said:


> As for defiling, yes, I agree with killing or damaging all plants within 30 ft (plant creatures get a save).




We can just treat it like a 30 foot radius area-of-effect version of the *blight* spell - all Plant creatures take Xd6 damage (Fort save half), while "A plant that isn’t a creature doesn’t receive a save and immediately withers and dies."


----------



## demiurge1138 (Feb 13, 2010)

Crossbows have moving, complicated parts. Bows you pull back and fire. Javelins you just throw. So I'd prefer bows or javelins to crossbows.


----------



## freyar (Feb 13, 2010)

Aren't crossbows simple weapons and bows martial weapons?  I could go with javelins, though.

I think we're converging well on the defiling.


----------



## Cleon (Feb 15, 2010)

So if I'm understanding this aright we've got one vote for crossbows and two votes for bows, but all three have javelins as a back-up choice.

Shall we compromise on javelins then?

Might as well start on some text for the defiling.

It'll need a name - how about "Defiling Rejuvenation" since it bears some resemblance to a Ghost's rejuvenation SQ.

How's this for a rough outline:

* Defiling Rejuvenation:* When a defiling skeleton is reduced to 0 hp, it collapses and becomes inert for one round. The next round, it draws life-force from all vegetation within a 30-foot radius, killing all normal plants within the area and doing *W* [6d6?] damage to Plant creatures (DC *X* Fort save for half). The obsidian jewel in the skeleton’s forehead glows brightly while this defiling of nearby plant life takes place. The save DC is [Charisma?]-based.

The next round the defiling skeleton rises up, restored to full hit points. Striking the skeleton while it is inert has no effect, nor does it delay the rejuvenating. Only the destruction of the jewel embedded in its forehead (AC *Y*, hp *Z*)[AC 13, hp 6?] or the successful application of a dispelling effect such as _dispel magic_ or _break enchantment_ can stop the rejuvenation. Defiling rejuvenation is considered an A [4th?] level spell with a Caster Level of B [8th?].


----------



## freyar (Feb 15, 2010)

Javelins are fine.

Defiling Rejuvenation seems good, though 6d6 seems like a lot of damage for a 4HD monster.  I guess most PCs won't be plants, so it's kind of a corner case, but I'd go for a lower value.


----------



## Shade (Feb 16, 2010)

My vote's for javelins.


----------



## Cleon (Feb 16, 2010)

freyar said:


> Javelins are fine.
> 
> Defiling Rejuvenation seems good, though 6d6 seems like a lot of damage for a 4HD monster.  I guess most PCs won't be plants, so it's kind of a corner case, but I'd go for a lower value.




Yes, it's only a placeholder.

My first thought was to make it 1d6 per Hit Dice, or 4d6, but then I thought the caster level should be higher than 4th so tweaked the damage up.

Upon reflection, 1d6/HD would be enough.

Charisma-based seems most appropriate, so I'll pencil that in.

Apart from that, it's just the toughness of the gem and the CL to figure out. 

Should the gem have any hardness?

Caster level 4+HD would seem to fit - I'm thinking it's a strong ability. Although 2+HD would be decent too.

That reminds me - what happens when a defiling skeleton is turned? Does it have turn resistance? Does it reform if the cleric gets a "destroy" result? I'd prefer it if turning could destroy or prevent their Rejuvenation. We'd better add something in about turning, but I'm not quite sure what.

Anyhow, so far we've got:

*Defiling Rejuvenation:* When a defiling skeleton is reduced to 0 hp, it collapses and becomes inert for one round. The next round, it draws life-force from all vegetation within a 30-foot radius, killing all normal plants within the area. Plant creatures take 1d6 damage per hit dice the defiling skeleton possesses (DC *X* Fort save for half damage). The obsidian jewel in the skeleton’s forehead glows brightly while this defiling of nearby plant life takes place. The save DC is Charisma-based.

The next round the defiling skeleton rises up, restored to full hit points. Striking the skeleton while it is inert has no effect, nor does it delay the rejuvenating. Only the destruction of the jewel embedded in its forehead (AC *Y*, hp *Z*)[AC 13, hp 6?] or the successful application of a dispelling effect such as _dispel magic_ or _break enchantment_ can stop the rejuvenation. Defiling rejuvenation is considered an 4th? level spell with a Caster Level equal to 4 plus the skeleton's Hit Dice.


----------



## Cleon (Feb 16, 2010)

I've been thinking a bit more about the Turning question.

How about we make the caster level of its Defiling Rejuvenation equal to its HD+turn resistance?

I'm also thinking we should add something to the effect "A defiling skeleton can not use defiling rejuvenation if its body is completely destroyed by a cleric's turn attempt, _disintegrate_ spell or other means."

Plus, could we add that a successful turn attempt can prevent the defiling skeleton reviving?

Adding that in would produce something like:

*Defiling Rejuvenation:* When a defiling skeleton is reduced to 0 hp, it collapses and becomes inert for one round. The next round, it draws life-force from all vegetation within a 30-foot radius, killing all normal plants within the area. Plant creatures take 1d6 damage per hit dice the defiling skeleton possesses (DC *X* Fort save for half damage). The obsidian jewel in the skeleton’s forehead glows brightly while this defiling of nearby plant life takes place. The next round the defiling skeleton rises up, restored to full hit points. Striking the skeleton while it is inert has no effect, nor does it delay the rejuvenating. The save DC is Charisma-based. 

A defiling skeleton can not use defiling rejuvenation if its body is completely destroyed by a cleric's turn attempt, _disintegrate_ spell or the like. Such effects will cause its immediate and permanent destruction.

The destruction of the jewel embedded in the defiling skeleton's forehead (AC 13, hp 6) stops the rejuvenation, as does a successful application of turn undead or a dispelling effect such as _dispel magic_ or _break enchantment_. Defiling rejuvenation is considered an 4th level spell with a Caster Level equal to the skeleton's Hit Dice plus its turn resistance (CL 8th for a standard defiling skeleton).


----------



## freyar (Feb 18, 2010)

I think this is getting a bit complicated.  For the middle paragraph, make it clear that the important point is destroying the gem.  Let's merge it with the last paragraph:

"The destruction of the jewel embedded in the defiling skeleton's forehead (AC 13, hp 6) stops the rejuvenation. Similarly, the defiling skeleton cannot rejuvenate if it is destroyed by a cleric's turn attempt, disintegrate spell, or similar effect which destroys the gem. Such effects will cause its immediate and permanent destruction."

I think this should be Su, not Sp, so no CL, actually.


----------



## Cleon (Feb 19, 2010)

freyar said:


> I think this is getting a bit complicated.  For the middle paragraph, make it clear that the important point is destroying the gem.  Let's merge it with the last paragraph:
> 
> "The destruction of the jewel embedded in the defiling skeleton's forehead (AC 13, hp 6) stops the rejuvenation. Similarly, the defiling skeleton cannot rejuvenate if it is destroyed by a cleric's turn attempt, disintegrate spell, or similar effect which destroys the gem. Such effects will cause its immediate and permanent destruction."
> 
> I think this should be Su, not Sp, so no CL, actually.




The original version has dispel magic stop its defiling power so I would leave it in.

I agree it could do with simplifying the wording.

Just making any countermagic work automatically prevent rejuvenation makes it a lot simpler, and the original has _dispel_ magic always work, or at least it doesn't mention a casting level.

How about:

*Defiling Rejuvenation:* When a defiling skeleton is reduced to 0 hp, it collapses and becomes inert for one round. The next round, it draws life-force from all vegetation within a 30-foot radius, killing all normal plants within the area. Plant creatures take 1d6 damage per hit dice the defiling skeleton possesses (DC *X* Fort save for half damage). The obsidian jewel in the skeleton’s forehead glows brightly while this defiling of nearby plant life takes place. The next round the defiling skeleton rises up, restored to full hit points. Striking the skeleton while it is inert has no effect, nor does it delay the rejuvenating. The save DC is Charisma-based. 

The destruction of the jewel embedded in the defiling skeleton's forehead (AC 13, hp 6) stops the rejuvenation. The defiling skeleton cannot rejuvenate if its body is entirely destroyed by a cleric's turn attempt,  _disintegrate_ spell or similar effect, or if the jewel's magic is disrupted by a _dispel magic_ spell or similar power while it is rejuvenating (no save or level-check required). Such effects will cause its immediate and permanent destruction.


----------



## Shade (Feb 19, 2010)

Added to Homebrews.


----------



## Cleon (Feb 20, 2010)

Shade said:


> Added to Homebrews.




Looks like it's almost finished. We've only got, what, CR, Advancement, Tactics, Flavour and possibly Creation left.

*Challenge Rating* - 3 or 4? As a straight-up combatant they read like a CR 2-3, but their Defiling Rejuvenation is worth another CR.

Let's say CR3.

*Advancement* - to increase in size or not increase in size, that is the question!

I'll say they do increase in size, allowing for Large Defiling Skeletons made from Ogres and the like.

Advancement: 5-8 HD (Medium), 9-12 HD (Large)

Tactics - Maybe something like:

Defiling skeletons are relentless foes, hurling missiles as they march up to their opponents then charging in with their greatswords. Those that fall to battle-damage use defiling rejuvenation to repair themselves and rejoin the fight. They never retreat from combat unless specifically ordered to.

The flavour text can just rework some of the original version's description.

Do we want to lay down some creation rules, or leave them unsaid?

If we go for a "yes" I'm thinking a _create undead_ from a 12th or 14th level caster with a gem (100 gp per HD?) for a material component should about cover it.


----------



## freyar (Feb 22, 2010)

That all looks about right to me.

It always seems ridiculous to me that you have to cast a 6th level spell at 12+ CL to create a CR 3 undead.


----------



## Shade (Feb 22, 2010)

freyar said:


> That all looks about right to me.




Agreed.  Updated.



freyar said:


> It always seems ridiculous to me that you have to cast a 6th level spell at 12+ CL to create a CR 3 undead.




Ditto here.  I always felt they needed a transition spell between animate dead and create undead.   Oh well.

Finished?


----------



## freyar (Feb 23, 2010)

They're good.


----------



## Shade (Feb 23, 2010)

*Crystal Skeleton*
CLIMATE/TERRAIN: Any arctic or subarctic region
FREQUENCY: Very rare
ORGANIZATION: Band
ACTIVITY CYCLES: Any
DIET: Nil
INTELLIGENCE: Semi- (2-4)
TREASURE; Nil
ALIGNMENT: Chaotic evil
NO. APPEARING: 1-8
ARMOR CLASS: 8
MOVEMENT: 12
HIT DICE: 1
THACO: 18
NO. OF ATTACKS: 2
DAMAGE/ATTACK: 1-4
SPECIAL ATTACKS: See below
SPECIAL DEFENSES: See below
MAGIC RESISTANCE: Nil
SIZE: M (5’-7’)
MORALE: Special
XP VALUE: 175

Crystal skeletons are human or demi-human skeletons that have been transformed by a series of spells into pale blue ice.  Little is known about the creation of these fell creatures, through most sages agree that animate dead, a specialized delayed shatter (see below), and protective magics are involved.  It is argued that create water and control temperature 10’ radius are also needed for the creation, suggesting that not only are there dark arts at play, but unholy prayers as well.

Unlike normal skeletons, crystal skeletons are semi-intelligent and have been known to track their victims endlessly, plotting the best routes and ambushes.  Crystal skeletons understand the language of their creator as well as the native tongue they spoke when they were alive.  They communicate with their creator with nods or shakes of their head and share a telepathic bond with others of their kind.  There is no record of crystal skeletons communicating with others, though it is thought possible.

Combat: Crystal skeletons do not use weapons.  Instead, they attack twice per round with their dagger sharp fingers.  As with other skeletons, they suffer half damage from edged or piercing weapons and are immune to sleep, charm, hold, fear, and any other mind-affecting spells.  Blunt weapons inflict normal damage.  Holy water causes 2-8 hp damage per vial

However, crystal skeletons are not created for their destructive powers.  Crystal skeletons head unerringly for the most densely occupied area of a group to fight.  With so few hit points and poor THAC0, they are easily dispatched.  Once destroyed, however, they explode into razor-sharp shards of ice.  Each explosion covers a 10’ radius and inflicts 3d4+2 hp damage.  Victims of a blast receive a saving throw vs. paralyzation.  If the save is made, only half damage is suffered.  Spells or psionics that cause non-living matter to shatter make the skeletons explode with double the force, increasing range to 20’ radius and damage to 6d4+2.  One round after the blast, the shards vaporize into steam.  Shards embedded in flesh at the moment of vaporization cause additional damage.  If the previous save was successful, only 1-3 hp damage is taken; if failed, the victim suffers 1-6 hp damage.

Organized and cunning, crystal skeletons realize their greatest threat is their exploding bodies and wait for the best opportunity to damage the largest number of foes, attacking with maddening glee.  They are immune to cold-based attacks and are turned by priests as 2-HD creatures.  Crystal skeletons fight to the death and never need to check morale.

Habitat/Society:  Crystal skeletons are only found in cold regions where snow and ice are common.  They have no society and exist purely at the whim of their evil creators.    Though they are compelled to follow orders of their creator, they are not beyond independent thought.  They are not passive undead, waiting motionless in a crypt or graveyard, but a restless guard, stalking an area in frustrated anger.  Sages believe that crystal skeletons exist in an agitated state because they are good-aligned souls trapped in an evil union of magics.  This would account for their suicidal attacks, as once destroyed, their souls are free to rest in peace once again.

Ecology:  Because crystal skeletons are undead an unnatural creations, they play no role in ecology or nature.

New Spell – Delayed Shatter

This spell is similar to the second-level Wizard shatter spell in the Player’s Handbook.  The differences for delayed shatter are as follows:  it is a third-level spell and has a casting time of 3, the spell can be cast only on a single object, and the duration lasts until the object on which the spell is cast is destroyed.  All other statistics are the same as shatter.  Since this spell cannot be cast on magical items, it is assumed that this is the first spell cast to create a crystal skeleton.

Originally appeared in Dragon Annual #2 (1997).


----------



## Shade (Feb 23, 2010)

I wonder if we shouldn't expand the "supercharging" of the death throes to include force effects as well?


----------



## Cleon (Feb 23, 2010)

Shade said:


> Agreed.  Updated.
> 
> Ditto here.  I always felt they needed a transition spell between animate dead and create undead.   Oh well.




Wouldn't it be easier to expand _animate_ dead to a "Create Lesser Undead" and allow higher level casters to use it to create other low-grade undead than zombies and skeletons?

I also prefer to have a separate research requirement for each type of undead, so a caster doesn't automatically know how to create them all, just as I don't care for how caster's learn _monster summon N_ and learn to whistle up everything on the N, N+1 & N+2 lists. I like personalized lists.



Shade said:


> Finished?




Looks great to me!


----------



## Cleon (Feb 23, 2010)

Shade said:


> I wonder if we shouldn't expand the "supercharging" of the death throes to include force effects as well?




How about a blanket "when destroyed by a sonic or force spell"?


----------



## Cleon (Feb 24, 2010)

Shade said:


> *Crystal Skeleton*
> CLIMATE/TERRAIN: Any arctic or subarctic region
> FREQUENCY: Very rare
> ORGANIZATION: Band
> ...




Shall we talk about its stats?

These things are basically SRD Skeleton Human Warriors with an Int of 2-4.

Apart from the whole exploding thing, they've got a point worse AC and a point better THAC0 than a standard AD&D skellie.

There's no point giving them the Cold subtype if they have a standard skeleton's immunity to cold. Besides, there's no mention of them being vulnerable to fire despite being made of ice.

So, take a Skeleton Human Warrior, add Int 4 and subtract a point of NA for brittleness?

Its Intelligence will allow it a feat. I propose Weapon Focus (claws), since the original has a 1-point better than normal THAC0.

Apart from that, it's just the death thoes SA and flavour.

These should be a snap to finish off (albeit a snap followed by a shower of razor-ice).


----------



## freyar (Mar 1, 2010)

I agree that these are going to be pretty easy.    Mini-template again?


----------



## Shade (Mar 2, 2010)

Agreed.

As Cleon pointed out, they aren't mindless.

Make Weapon Focus (claws) a bonus feat rather than Improved Initiative?


----------



## Cleon (Mar 2, 2010)

Shade said:


> Agreed.
> 
> As Cleon pointed out, they aren't mindless.
> 
> Make Weapon Focus (claws) a bonus feat rather than Improved Initiative?




I was thinking give them WF (claws) as their default "standard feat" as well as Improved Initiative as a bonus feat.

We could lay out a suggested feat progression for them, something like:

up to 2 HD - Weapon Focus (claws) and Improved Initiative (B) ?
3-5 HD + Lightning Reflexes ?
6-8 HD + Alertness ?
9-11 HD + Improved Natural Attack (claws) ?
12-14 HD + Stealthy ?
15-17 HD + Ability Focus (death throes) ?
18-20 HD + Improved Critical (claws) ?


----------



## Shade (Mar 4, 2010)

Let's avoid a suggested feat progression.

I'm fine with either replacing Improved Init w/ WF as the bonus feat, or simply giving WF to the sample creatures as one of the available feats.


----------



## freyar (Mar 4, 2010)

Well, let's just assign feats to the samples.  I can agree with that.

As for which is a bonus, I don't really mind either way.


----------



## Cleon (Mar 5, 2010)

freyar said:


> Well, let's just assign feats to the samples.  I can agree with that.
> 
> As for which is a bonus, I don't really mind either way.




Sounds like we can keep the Skellie Template's Imp. Initiative bonus feat and give the sample creatures WF (claws) and whatever else we fancy as normal feats.

That's fine by me.


----------



## Shade (Mar 5, 2010)

Added to Homebrews.

Skills?


----------



## freyar (Mar 5, 2010)

Max out Tumble, help it get into the midst of foes to explode better.


----------



## Cleon (Mar 6, 2010)

freyar said:


> Max out Tumble, help it get into the midst of foes to explode better.




We should leave assigning skill points to the sample monsters, but we can decide on class skills.

The original text implies they have a taste for ambush, which suggests Hide and Move Silently to me. Might as well give them Listen and Spot as class skills while we're at it.

*Class Skills:* Hide, Listen, Move Silently, Spot and Tumble ?

Since they look like pale ice I would suspect they'd also have a racial bonus to Hide checks in ice and snow. 

*+8 racial bonus on Hide checks when amongst ice or snow ?


----------



## Cleon (Mar 6, 2010)

Shade said:


> Added to Homebrews.
> 
> Skills?




Looking at the template I can see one problem:

1) Shouldn't the death throes scale with size?

As it is, cryomancers would be taking Fine-sized flying creatures and turning them into 3d4+3 damage homing ice-missiles!

Maybe something like:

Tiny or smaller 2d3
Small 2d4+1
Medium 3d4+2
Large 4d4+3
Huge 6d4+4
Gargantuan 8d4+6
Colossal 10d4+8

Oh, and I think we owe it to ourselves to include a Frost Giant Crystal Skeleton among the sample creatures!


----------



## freyar (Mar 7, 2010)

That scaling seems reasonable to me, though I wonder why we wouln't follow usual progressions for improvement of damage dice.


----------



## Shade (Mar 8, 2010)

Good point that scaling is necessary, and I agree with Freyar that we should stick with a standard damage progression.  The original 3d4+2 is an unusual choice.  How about we simplify it to 2d6 for Medium, and progress normally from there?  If we want to keep a "+", let's use Str or Cha modifier.

The bonus on Hide skills makes sense, and the suggested class skills as well.

Oh, a sample frost giant sounds fun!


----------



## freyar (Mar 8, 2010)

Starting with 2d6+Cha at Medium makes sense.  If we want the "+s" to scale, though, I guess we should go with +Str.  No bother with me either way.  And agreed to the frost giant!


----------



## Cleon (Mar 9, 2010)

freyar said:


> Starting with 2d6+Cha at Medium makes sense.  If we want the "+s" to scale, though, I guess we should go with +Str.  No bother with me either way.  And agreed to the frost giant!




Well I quite liked the idea of using d4s just for the sake of variety, but I'd be OK with 2d6 as the base for a Medium sized Crystal Skeleton with Strength as the bonus stat. That would make the progression:

Tiny or smaller 1d6
Small 1d8
Medium 2d6
Large 3d6
Huge 4d6
Gargantuan 6d6
Colossal 8d6

Which is pretty close to the d4 version.

Glad you liked the idea of using a Frost Giant as a sample creature. Most of its stats will fall out simply by applying the template to the SRD Frost Giant, we just need to select some skills and feats.

The Frost Giant's feats of Cleave, Great Cleave, Improved Overrun, Improved Sunder and Power Attack are a decent selection. We could leave it unchanged, or swap out Great Cleave for Weapon Focus (claws) and Improved Sunder for Lightning Reflexes.

As for skills, its lower Intelligence means it will have only 17 skill points. Of the SRD giant's skills, Craft seems rather unlikely and Intimidate won't be very effective with a Charisma of 1, so how about putting them in the remaining skills of Climb, Jump and Spot.

The SRD Frostie has Climb 4, Jump 4, Spot 10 for 18 SP, so we can just knock a rank off Spot and call it a day. That would make the sample monster:

*Crystal Skeleton, Frost Giant*
Large Undead (Cold)
Hit Dice: 14d12 (91 hp) 
Initiative: +4
Speed: 40 ft. (8 squares) 
Armor Class: 11 (-1 size, +2 natural), touch 9, flat-footed 11
Base Attack/Grapple +7/+20 
Attack: Claw +15 melee (1d6+9) 
Full Attack: 2 claws +15 melee (1d6+9) 
Space/Reach: 10 ft./10 ft. 
Special Attacks: Death throes *3d6+9*
Special Qualities: Damage reduction 5/bludgeoning, darkvision 60 ft., immunity to cold, undead traits, vulnerability to fire
Saves: Fort +4, Ref +4, Will +9 
Abilities: Str 29, Dex 11, Con —, Int 4, Wis 10, Cha 1
Skills: 17 [_*Climb +13, Jump +17, Spot +9?*_]
Feats: Improved Initiative (B) plus 5
Environment: Any cold
Organization: Any 
Challenge Rating: 7
Treasure: None 
Alignment: Always neutral evil 
Advancement: —
Level Adjustment: —


----------



## Shade (Mar 10, 2010)

Updated.

For the frost giant sample, let's stick with your suggested class skllls above (Hide, Listen, Move Silently, Spot, and Tumble).  Climb and Jump should go.


----------



## Cleon (Mar 10, 2010)

Shade said:


> Updated.
> 
> For the frost giant sample, let's stick with your suggested class skllls above (Hide, Listen, Move Silently, Spot, and Tumble).  Climb and Jump should go.




You didn't have the class skills in the template when I was doing the Frost Giant, so I used the giant's original skills as a default.

8 in Hide, 9 in Spot for Hide +4* (+12 in snow), Spot +9 ?

I'm still wondering about changing the feat selection, but I guess it's easier to leave them the same as the base creature.

Having it Improved Sundering stuff with its claws bugs me a bit though, I wouldn't mind changing that feat to something else, maybe WF (claws) to compensate a bit for its low Undead BAB.


----------



## freyar (Mar 11, 2010)

The new suggested skills sound good, and I also like WF (claw).


----------



## Shade (Mar 11, 2010)

Sounds good.  Updated.

All that's left is to determine what's needed to create them.  



> Little is known about the creation of these fell creatures, through most sages agree that animate dead, a specialized delayed shatter (see below), and protective magics are involved.  It is argued that create water and control temperature 10’ radius are also needed for the creation, suggesting that not only are there dark arts at play, but unholy prayers as well.






> New Spell – Delayed Shatter
> 
> This spell is similar to the second-level Wizard shatter spell in the Player’s Handbook.  The differences for delayed shatter are as follows:  it is a third-level spell and has a casting time of 3, the spell can be cast only on a single object, and the duration lasts until the object on which the spell is cast is destroyed.  All other statistics are the same as shatter.  Since this spell cannot be cast on magical items, it is assumed that this is the first spell cast to create a crystal skeleton.




I'm not convinced we need to convert delayed shatter, but I could see requiring regular shatter and some low-level cold spell in conjunction with animate dead.


----------



## freyar (Mar 11, 2010)

Well, sometimes it's fun to convert a spell, but this is probably something covered by a metamagic feat somewhere.  And I agree that it's not necessary for the creation guidelines.


----------



## Cleon (Mar 12, 2010)

Shade said:


> I'm not convinced we need to convert delayed shatter, but I could see requiring regular shatter and some low-level cold spell in conjunction with animate dead.




What about _chill touch_? It may not actually be a Cold spell, but it's chill-themed and appropriately necromantic.


----------



## Shade (Mar 12, 2010)

That seems quite appropriate.  Updated.



> Crystal skeletons understand the language of their creator as well as the native tongue they spoke when they were alive.  They communicate with their creator with nods or shakes of their head and share a telepathic bond with others of their kind.  There is no record of crystal skeletons communicating with others, though it is thought possible.




So...

"Crystal skeletons cannot speak, but understand the languages of their creator and any languages they spoke in life.  Additionally, crystal skeletons may communicate telepathically with any other crystal skeletons with x feet."


----------



## Cleon (Mar 13, 2010)

Shade said:


> "Crystal skeletons cannot speak, but understand the languages of their creator and any languages they spoke in life.  Additionally, crystal skeletons may communicate telepathically with any other crystal skeletons with x feet."




Fine by me.

100 ft. range for the telepathy?

Oh, and I've just remembered that the original text implies they can only be made from humanoid skeletons: "Crystal skeletons are _*human or demi-human skeletons*_ that have been transformed by a series of spells into pale blue ice."

Do we want to allow for non-humanoid skeletons as per the standard Skeleton template or restrict it to anthropomorphic Types (e.g. Humanoid, Monstrous Humanoid and Giant)?

I think we'd better restrict the Types, since these are intelligent undead it'd look funny to turn an Animal or Vermin in an Int 4 creature with this template.


----------



## freyar (Mar 14, 2010)

100 ft telepathy and restricted types sound right.


----------



## Shade (Mar 15, 2010)

Updated.

We're done with the skeletons.  On to the zombies!

*Absorbing Zombie*
CLIMATE/TERRAIN: Any
FREQUENCY: Very Rare
ORGANIZATION: Band
ACTIVITY CYCLES: Any
DIET: Nil
INTELLIGENCE: Non- (0)
TREASURE: Nil
ALIGNMENT: Neutral
NO. APPEARING: 2-20 (2d10)
ARMOR CLASS: 8
MOVEMENT: 6
HIT DICE: 3
THACO: 18
NO. OF ATTACKS: 1
DAMAGE/ATTACK: 1-8 + special
SPECIAL ATTACKS: Shocking grasp
SPECIAL DEFENSES: Absorb magical damage
MAGIC RESISTANCE: Special
SIZE: M (5’-6’)
MORALE: Special
XP VALUE: 650

Absorbing zombies are the bane of wizards, as they are immune to spells that cause damage, actually absorbing their power. They appear to be regular zombies, except for their eyes, which glow with an unnatural silvery light. When charged with magical energy, small sparks are constantly emitted from their flesh.

Combat: These zombies suffer no damage from spells that would normally cause direct damage. Every 2 hp  damage is converted into 1 hp electrical energy. This energy is stored up to a maximum of 24 hp total, then discharged the next time the zombie makes contact with a creature.

Special Ingredients: A protection from magic scroll must be burned and the ashes inserted into the mouth of the body before animation. Shocking grasp must be cast during animation.

Originally appeared in Dragon Magazine #234 (1996).


----------



## freyar (Mar 15, 2010)

Interesting.  Mini-variant again?  Treat them something like rods of absorption?


----------



## Cleon (Mar 16, 2010)

freyar said:


> Interesting.  Mini-variant again?  Treat them something like rods of absorption?




Yes, using a _rod of absorption_ as a basis was what I was thinking.

Apart from that the only difference is they're a bit tougher, with 3 HD instead of 2 HD, and may be faster too, since there is no mention of them always losing initiative like regular AD&D zombies.

I'm tempted to make these straight monsters, like the *Lesser Netherese Zombie* we converted, just to avoid the argument over whether we give them triple HD or a size-based HD boost.

Then again I _like_ arguing over monster stats.


----------



## Shade (Mar 16, 2010)

I'd be OK with making them a straight monster, like the tyrantfog zombie, or writing them up as a separate template, rather than a modification of the zombie template.  Either way is fine with me.


----------



## Cleon (Mar 16, 2010)

Shade said:


> I'd be OK with making them a straight monster, like the tyrantfog zombie, or writing them up as a separate template, rather than a modification of the zombie template.  Either way is fine with me.




Shall we do a straight monster to start with based on a human then see whether we can be bothered to reverse-engineer it into a template?

If we take a Human Warrior Zombie add an extra Hit Dice and remove the "single action only" special quality we're practically there statwise, we only really need to work out the absorption power.

Here's the stats:

*Absorbing Zombie**, Human Warrior*
Medium Undead 
Hit Dice: 3d12+3 (22 hp) 
Initiative: -1
Speed: 30 ft. (6 squares; can't run) 
Armor Class: 11 (-1 Dex, +2 natural), touch 9, flat-footed 11
Base Attack/Grapple +1/+3 
Attack: Slam +3 melee (1d6+3)  or club +3 melee (1d6+3)
Full Attack: Slam +3 melee (1d6+3) or club +3 melee (1d6+3)
Space/Reach: 5 ft./5 ft. 
Special Attacks: Electric shock
Special Qualities: Absorption, damage reduction 5/slashing, darkvision 60 ft., undead traits
Saves: Fort +1, Ref +0, Will +3 
Abilities: Str 15, Dex 9, Con —, Int —, Wis 10, Cha 1
Skills: —
Feats: Toughness (B)
Environment: Any 
Organization: Any 
Challenge Rating: *?*
Treasure: None 
Alignment: Always neutral evil 
Advancement: —
Level Adjustment: —

As for the Absorption, I don't much care for the original's 1 point of damage per spell level. How about making it like a shocking grasp for 1d6 damage/level?

How about this for a start:
*
Absorb Spells (Su):* If an absorbing zombie is struck by a single-target spell or spell-like ability (including ray attacks), it draws the magic into itself, nullifying the spell's effect and storing its potential to power its electric shock attack (see below). A running total of absorbed spell levels should be kept. An absorbing zombie can absorb up to X spell levels, if a spell would exceed this limit the zombie [suffers the spell's normal effects? is destroyed?].

*Electric Shock (Su):* An absorbing zombie can discharge all of its absorbed spell levels as an arc of electricity. This is a melee touch attack that does 1d6 electrical damage per absorbed spell level (maximum 5d6). If the touch attack misses, the zombie does not lose its absorbed "charge" and may try again with subsequent attacks.

Needs a bit of tidying up, but I think the basis is sound.


----------



## Shade (Mar 17, 2010)

I'd rather fancy having 'em explode when over the limit, with an electrical death throes.


----------



## Cleon (Mar 17, 2010)

Shade said:


> I'd rather fancy having 'em explode when over the limit, with an electrical death throes.




My mind was working along similar malicious lines...

10 foot radius burst doing 6d6 electrical damage, Ref save for half?


----------



## Shade (Mar 17, 2010)

Added to Homebrews.

I think we should allow for HD advancement to account for creating larger or more powerful versions.  The tyrantfog zombie, for example, allows for up to double its HD while remaining Medium size.  If we want to account for absorbing zombies created from ogres and hill giants, we could go to triple HD and Large.

Since we dropped single actions only, I think we should also drop "cannot run" from the movement line.  Heck, it might be fun to have their movement increase by 5 ft. per spell level stored.


----------



## Cleon (Mar 17, 2010)

Shade said:


> Added to Homebrews.
> 
> I think we should allow for HD advancement to account for creating larger or more powerful versions.  The tyrantfog zombie, for example, allows for up to double its HD while remaining Medium size.  If we want to account for absorbing zombies created from ogres and hill giants, we could go to triple HD and Large.
> 
> Since we dropped single actions only, I think we should also drop "cannot run" from the movement line.  Heck, it might be fun to have their movement increase by 5 ft. per spell level stored.




Heck, why not go up to Huge and quintuple Hit Dice!

4-5 HD (Medium); 6-9 HD (Large); 10-15 HD (Huge).

It's a non-standard progression, but I like a bit of variety.


----------



## Shade (Mar 18, 2010)

Sounds good.  Any thought on the speed boost from absorbing spells?


----------



## freyar (Mar 19, 2010)

I like this!  Making it a normal monster works!

I like the speed boost, but maybe not so fast.  How about 5ft/2 spell levels?


----------



## Cleon (Mar 19, 2010)

freyar said:


> I like this!  Making it a normal monster works!
> 
> I like the speed boost, but maybe not so fast.  How about 5ft/2 spell levels?




Using 5 foot increments it a bit fiddly, I'd rather have the speed go up in 10 foot steps. Maybe 30 ft. at 1 or 2 stored spell levels, 40 ft. at X levels and 50 ft. at 2X levels, with 2X being some sizeable faction of their "fully charged" capacity?

Of course, we'd have to decide what "fully charged" means. Maybe four-five times its Hit Dice for 12-15 spell levels? The original's max capacity of 24 spell levels seems too high to me.

How about aiming for 30 ft. speed at 2 spell levels, 40 ft. at 5 spell levels, 50 ft. at 10 spell levels and max charge at 15 spell levels?

If we scale the spell capacity on HD we could make the steps as follows:

1+1/2 HD for 30 ft.
2+ HD for 40 ft.
4+ 2*HD for 50 ft.
6+3*HD = max charge

What thinks thee?


----------



## freyar (Mar 19, 2010)

This seems a lot more fiddly than usual for a straight monster; aren't DMs supposed to scale things themselves when advancing monsters?


----------



## Cleon (Mar 20, 2010)

freyar said:


> This seems a lot more fiddly than usual for a straight monster; aren't DMs supposed to scale things themselves when advancing monsters?




Well I think the thresholds should get higher for tougher Absorption Zombies, but I'm flexible about the numbers. That said, I would prefer to set them out. When you're advancing a monster and don't know how (or if) a number should increase I find it a bit irksome.

We could just have a little size-table instead, that'd be simpler than a HD formula.


----------



## Shade (Mar 22, 2010)

I assumed we were capping the stored spell levels at 5 for our base zombie.

How about we just add 5 to the threshold at each size increase (thus 10 for Large and 15 for huge)?  That would make the death throes 6d6, 11d6, and 16d6, respectively.

For the speed boost, how about a flat 10 ft. boost when fully charged?   Alternatively, we could just state that it is treated as hasted when carrying a full charge (and will of course blow up on the next spell unless it discharges the levels).


----------



## freyar (Mar 23, 2010)

That's a good compromise on the spell level cap.  And I like the hasted when fully charged idea, too.


----------



## Cleon (Mar 23, 2010)

Shade said:


> I assumed we were capping the stored spell levels at 5 for our base zombie.
> 
> How about we just add 5 to the threshold at each size increase (thus 10 for Large and 15 for huge)?  That would make the death throes 6d6, 11d6, and 16d6, respectively.
> 
> For the speed boost, how about a flat 10 ft. boost when fully charged?   Alternatively, we could just state that it is treated as hasted when carrying a full charge (and will of course blow up on the next spell unless it discharges the levels).




5/10/15 at Medium/Large/Huge is fine by me, as is the improved death throes.

I would prefer to have the speed-up happen somewhere midway in the process. If they're only one level away from exploding they are unlikely to demonstrate the ability very much.

What if they had the 10-foot speed-up whenever they held any stored levels, and were _hasted_ when they reached "max capacity"?


----------



## freyar (Mar 24, 2010)

10 ft seems like a lot just to have one stored spell, but I could do 5 ft.  If they're hasted when full, I think they'll get some chances to discharge some spell levels anyway.


----------



## Shade (Mar 24, 2010)

Cleon said:


> 5/10/15 at Medium/Large/Huge is fine by me, as is the improved death throes.
> 
> I would prefer to have the speed-up happen somewhere midway in the process. If they're only one level away from exploding they are unlikely to demonstrate the ability very much.




I was picturing the videogame trope where the boss monster tends to increase speed as it nears death to increase the challenge.  



freyar said:


> 10 ft seems like a lot just to have one stored spell, but I could do 5 ft.  If they're hasted when full, I think they'll get some chances to discharge some spell levels anyway.




That works for me.


----------



## Cleon (Mar 26, 2010)

Shade said:


> I was picturing the videogame trope where the boss monster tends to increase speed as it nears death to increase the challenge.
> 
> 
> That works for me.




5 feet still seems too fiddly to me.

Another idea I was thinking about was it goes into a hasted death throes if its spell capacity is exceeded instead of just exploding...

Something like "if an absorbing zombie's spell capacity is exceeded the creature attacks in a burst of frenzied speed as its animating energies overload and burn its body out. The zombie acts as if _hasted_ for *X* rounds , adding *Y* electrical damage to all its natural attacks, before being destroyed."


----------



## Shade (Mar 26, 2010)

It sort of works that way now, with less fiddly bits.   Since it is mindless, it essentially stores spell levels and releases them whenever it can.  If at any time it gets fully charged, it would go hasted.   Then it would either release spell levels again (and cease being hasted), or explode.

Honestly, the speed bit was just an extra idea I was exploring.  It has nothing to do with the original writeup, so if it's too problematic, we can just drop it.


----------



## Cleon (Mar 27, 2010)

Shade said:


> It sort of works that way now, with less fiddly bits.   Since it is mindless, it essentially stores spell levels and releases them whenever it can.  If at any time it gets fully charged, it would go hasted.   Then it would either release spell levels again (and cease being hasted), or explode.
> 
> Honestly, the speed bit was just an extra idea I was exploring.  It has nothing to do with the original writeup, so if it's too problematic, we can just drop it.




Just dropping it would certainly be easier and closer to the original.

Suppose I could give up all the beautiful arguments we'd have about the "hasty" version.


----------



## freyar (Mar 29, 2010)

Yes, it's probably easier to drop the hasting!


----------



## Shade (Mar 29, 2010)

OK, then.

Updated.

Organization: x

Challenge Rating: x

An absorbing zombie can be created with a create undead spell from a xth-level caster, but also requires x.


----------



## freyar (Mar 29, 2010)

Org: any, like a normal zombie?  
They can really dish out damage, but they're not too durable.  CR 3 if the wizards get going?
11th or lower.  I want to say spell turning, but that's even higher level.  I don't think these are tough enough to justify that.  If we bumped the HD or something, it could work, but not right now.


----------



## Shade (Mar 30, 2010)

> Special Ingredients: A protection from magic scroll must be burned and the ashes inserted into the mouth of the body before animation. Shocking grasp must be cast during animation.




Just stick with shocking grasp?   Or perhaps add spell immunity?


----------



## Cleon (Mar 30, 2010)

freyar said:


> Org: any, like a normal zombie?
> They can really dish out damage, but they're not too durable.  CR 3 if the wizards get going?
> 11th or lower.  I want to say spell turning, but that's even higher level.  I don't think these are tough enough to justify that.  If we bumped the HD or something, it could work, but not right now.




Yes, while a _wand rod of absorption_ does have _spell turning_ as a prereq it does seem too high level a spell.

Guess we could use a lower level abjuration that counters magic, such as _anti-magic shell_ or _lesser globe of invulnerability_.

As for organization, why not base it on the original's 1-8 No. Appearing?

*Organization:* Solitary or gang (2-8)

Challenge Rating 3 may be a little high considering their lousy AC and mediocre damage. If their opponents just hold the spellcasting and hack them up they won't last long,.

They may be more of a CR 2.


----------



## Shade (Mar 31, 2010)

CR 2 and the organization appeal.



Shade said:


> Just stick with shocking grasp?   Or perhaps add spell immunity?






Cleon said:


> Guess we could use a lower level abjuration that counters magic, such as _anti-magic shell_ or _lesser globe of invulnerability_.




Any other votes/opinions?


----------



## freyar (Apr 1, 2010)

Shocking grasp makes sense.  I think I like lesser globe of invulnerablity better than spell immunity just because it's also Sor/Wiz.


----------



## Cleon (Apr 4, 2010)

freyar said:


> Shocking grasp makes sense.  I think I like lesser globe of invulnerablity better than spell immunity just because it's also Sor/Wiz.




Fine by me, let's go for _shocking grasp_ and _lesser globe of invulnerability_ as spell prereqs.


----------



## Shade (Apr 5, 2010)

Updated.  Finished?


----------



## freyar (Apr 5, 2010)

Done!


----------



## Shade (Apr 5, 2010)

*Acid Zombie*
CLIMATE/TERRAIN: Any
FREQUENCY: Very rare
ORGANIZATION: Band
ACTIVITY CYCLES: Any
DIET: Nil
INTELLIGENCE: Non- (0)
TREASURE: Nil
ALIGNMENT: Neutral
NO. APPEARING: 2-20 (2d10)
ARMOR CLASS: 8
MOVEMENT: 6
Hit Dice: 4
THACO: 17
NO. OF ATTACKS: 2
DAMAGE/ATTACK: 1-8/1-8 + special
SPECIAL ATTACKS: Bear hug, acid touch
SPECIAL DEFENSES: As zombie
MAGIC RESISTANCE: As zombie, plus immunity to acid
SIZE: M (6’)
MORALE: Special
XP VALUE: 975

Acid zombies are almost pure white, all color having been bleached from their flesh by the acid oozing from their pores. Their skin glistens, as though sweating. When not fighting, the zombies moan softly, as though they are in constant pain. During combat, the moan becomes louder. Acid zombies tend to be created from taller creatures to take advantage of their longer reach. They are generally used against individual fighters, rather than as massed troops.

Combat: As their name implies, acid zombies exude a powerful acid from their skin. In melee combat, this acid causes 1-4 hp damage in addition to any normal damage caused by the zombie’s fists. Unlike regular zombies, acid zombies have two attacks per melee round. Both occur at the end of the round, but if both hit, the zombie is able to bear hug its victim, doing an additional 3-12 hp damage. A victim of this hug must make a Strength check to escape. Those who fail automatically suffer an additional 3-12 hp damage the next round. Anyone touching an acid zombie with bare flesh suffers 1-4 hp damage. No acid of any kind can harm an acid zombie.

Special ingredients: Before animation, each body must be coated in oil of acid resistance. The spell Melf’s acid arrow must be cast in conjunction with animate dead. A mixture of bear’s blood and snake scales must be poured into the body’s mouth before animation to “teach” the creature how to bear hug.

Originally appeared in Dragon Magazine #234 (1996).


----------



## freyar (Apr 6, 2010)

Sounds like a new monster to me, but I suppose we could graft a number of abilities onto a standard zombie.


----------



## Shade (Apr 6, 2010)

Since they have quite a bit more HD than a typical zombie, I'd be fine with going the "new creature" route.   Besides, it's fairly easy for a DM to just throw acid damage on a standard zombie, right?  

It sounds like it should get improved grab if both slams hit (and thus not be limited to single actions only), and possibly constrict.


----------



## Cleon (Apr 6, 2010)

freyar said:


> Sounds like a new monster to me, but I suppose we could graft a number of abilities onto a standard zombie.




Yes, I guess making them a new monster is the way to go. 

Since they have two attacks we'll need to drop a standard zombie's Single Actions Only SQ. 

The two 1-8 damage slam attacks suggests to me these fellows are a lot stronger than regular zombies. That's not much less than the damage a Flesh Golem would do if it was downscaled to Medium. 

Up the Strength to 16? 

Here's a first stab at them: 

*Zombie, Acid* 
Medium Undead
Hit Dice: 4d12+3 (29 hp)
Initiative: -1
Speed: 30 ft. (6 squares) 
Armor Class: 12 (-1 Dex, +3 natural), touch 9, flat-footed 12
Base Attack/Grapple: +2/+5
Attack: Slam +5 melee (1d8+3 plus 1d4 acid)
Full Attack: 2 slams +5 melee (1d8+3 plus 1d4 acid)
Space/Reach: 5 ft./5 ft.
Special Attacks: Acid, corrosive embrace
Special Qualities: Damage reduction 5/slashing, darkvision 60 ft., immunity to acid, undead traits
Saves: Fort +2, Ref +1, Will +4
Abilities: Str 16, Dex 9, Con —, Int —, Wis 10, Cha 1
Skills: —
Feats: Toughness (B)
Environment: Any
Organization: Solitary, gang (2-12) or mob (10-20)
Challenge Rating: *3?*
Treasure: None
Alignment: Always neutral evil
Advancement: *?* HD (Medium); *?* HD (Large); *?* HD (Huge)
Level Adjustment: —

*Corrosive Embrace (Ex):*  An acid zombie that hits an opponent with both its slam attacks automatically deals an extra 3d4 acid damage. It can then attempt to start a grapple as a free action without provoking an attack of opportunity. If it wins the grapple check, it establishes a hold and automatically deals 2d8+6 crushing damage plus 5d4 acid damage to the grappled opponent on each subsequent round, as long as it maintains the grapple.

Hmm, that seems rather a lot of damage, but there are a lot of other monsters that do horrible damage in a clinch. Since its attack and grapple bonuses are not that great it won't get to do it that often.


----------



## Shade (Apr 6, 2010)

Cleon said:


> *Corrosive Embrace (Ex):*[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT]  An acid zombie that hits an opponent with both its slam attacks automatically deals an extra 3d4 acid damage. It can then attempt to start a grapple as a free action without provoking an attack of opportunity. If it wins the grapple check, it establishes a hold and automatically deals 2d8+6 crushing damage plus 5d4 acid damage to the grappled opponent on each subsequent round, as long as it maintains the grapple.





You like creating new abilities, don't you?  

Let's stick with improved grab and constrict here (with an acid rider on constrict).

I'm always in favor of sticking with common abilities, where possible, as many feat prereqs and other "add-ons" often use such things.   Plus, it makes for simpler bookkeeping for the DM.


----------



## freyar (Apr 6, 2010)

Constrict with extra acid damage sounds like the way to go to me, also.


----------



## Shade (Apr 7, 2010)

Added to Homebrews.


----------



## Cleon (Apr 7, 2010)

Shade said:


> You like creating new abilities, don't you?
> 
> Let's stick with improved grab and constrict here (with an acid rider on constrict).
> 
> I'm always in favor of sticking with common abilities, where possible, as many feat prereqs and other "add-ons" often use such things.   Plus, it makes for simpler bookkeeping for the DM.




Why yes I do!

The Corrosive Embrace proposal was based on an Improved Grab and Rend combo rather than Improved Grab and Constrict.

The original Acid Zombie needed to hit with both fists to do extra acid damage, which is kinda-sorta similar to a Dire Ape's Rend attack.

Either way, I'd increase the Acid damage from the Constrict/Rend to 2d4 or 3d4. Preferably 3d4 acid.


----------



## freyar (Apr 7, 2010)

On the other hand, the extra acid damage comes from a "bear hug," really a constrict.  I think what we have is ok, though I agree increasing the acid damage would be good (since it's more like full-body full-round exposure).  3d4 would work.


----------



## Shade (Apr 7, 2010)

Sounds good.  

Updated.  This thing is flying along!

Look at the acid and constrict entries, and decide upon the greater damage for Large and Huge versions.

CR?

An acid zombie can be created with a create undead spell from a xth-level caster, but also requires acid arrow and x.


----------



## freyar (Apr 8, 2010)

I'd be ok with just stepping up the dice size like usual, with the first step turning d4->d6.  But what you have is fine, too.

Great damage potential, low AC, low hp.  How about we boost natural armor to +4 or +5 and get it to CR 3?  Maybe throw in unholy toughness or whatever it's called to improve the hp if needed?

Probably 12th level caster like a ghast.


----------



## Shade (Apr 8, 2010)

Sure, I can go along with the improved NA and unholy toughness.


----------



## freyar (Apr 9, 2010)

Are these done if we do that?


----------



## Shade (Apr 9, 2010)

On second thought, unholy toughness does it no good, as it has a Cha penalty.   I can't really see justifying it above Cha 10, so perhaps we should just settle upon CR 2.


----------



## Cleon (Apr 10, 2010)

freyar said:


> I'd be ok with just stepping up the dice size like usual, with the first step turning d4->d6.  But what you have is fine, too.
> 
> Great damage potential, low AC, low hp.  How about we boost natural armor to +4 or +5 and get it to CR 3?  Maybe throw in unholy toughness or whatever it's called to improve the hp if needed?
> 
> Probably 12th level caster like a ghast.




Yes, I prefer increasing the acid damage as per the size increase rules - 1d6 acid for Large, 1d8 acid for Huge, with triple damage for a Hug.

They seem like squishy, low level threats to me so I'd keep their NA at +3 and make them Challenge Rating 2.


----------



## freyar (Apr 11, 2010)

Missed out on the Cha penalty, must not have been paying much attention!  I agree, CR 2 makes the most sense.

Cleon's suggested acid damage progression is fine, too.


----------



## Shade (Apr 12, 2010)

Updated.

Completed?


----------



## Cleon (Apr 12, 2010)

Shade said:


> Updated.
> 
> Completed?




Shouldn't its Fort save be +1?

"An acid zombie can be created with a create undead spell from a  12th-level caster, but also requires _acid arrow_." reads a bit clumsily.

Perhaps "An acid zombie can be created with the spells _create undead_ and _acid arrow_, the caster level must be at least 12th." would be better?


----------



## freyar (Apr 12, 2010)

It should be Fort +1 Ref +0, I think.

Other than the runaway sentence, Cleon's suggestion sounds better.   Let's try "An acid zombie can be created with the spells create undead and acid arrow.  The caster level must be at least 12th."


----------



## Shade (Apr 12, 2010)

Fixed.

Here's the next one...

*Quick Zombie*
CLIMATE/TERRAIN: Any
FREQUENCY: Very rare
ORGANIZATION: Band
ACTIVITY CYCLES: Any
DIET: Nil
INTELLIGENCE: Non- (0)
TREASURE; Nil
ALIGNMENT: Neutral
NO. APPEARING: 2-20 (2d10)
ARMOR CLASS: 4
MOVEMENT: 24
HIT DICE: 2
THACO: 19
NO. OF ATTACKS: 2
DAMAGE/ATTACK: 1-8
SPECIAL ATTACKS: Enhanced speed, first strike
SPECIAL DEFENSES: As zombie
MAGIC RESISTANCE: As zombie
SIZE: M (5’-6’)
MORALE: Special
XP VALUE: 175

Quick zombies are thinner than regular zombies, and they constantly twitch and jerk, even when ordered to stand still. In combat, they run as swiftly as horses and are used as shock troops. Quick zombies decay very rapidly, lasting no more than a few months before crumbling into dust.

Combat: Quick zombies have two attacks per round and always strike first (as a sword of quickness).

Special Ingredients: A paste made from a potion of speed must be smeared on the bodies before animation. During animation, a haste spell must be cast.

Originally appeared in Dragon Magazine #234 (1996).


----------



## freyar (Apr 13, 2010)

These seem very similar to Pathfinder's Fast Zombies with a few minor differences.  Do we want to convert them?


----------



## Shade (Apr 13, 2010)

Yeah, I think so, since Pathfinder is technically a different game.


----------



## Cleon (Apr 13, 2010)

freyar said:


> These seem very similar to Pathfinder's Fast Zombies with a few minor differences.  Do we want to convert them?




Sure, why not.

They look pretty straighforward. Take a standard zombie and either give it the SRD Choker's Quickness power or permanent haste instead of "single actions only". I think I prefer permanent _haste_ myself.

Boost its Dex and speed a bit and add _haste_ to the creation prereqs.

How does this look:

*Zombie, Quick*
Medium Undead
Hit Dice: 2d12+3 (16 hp)
Initiative: +2
Speed: 60 ft. (12 squares)  
Armor Class: 16 (+2 Dex, +1 dodge, +3 natural), touch 13, flat-footed 12
Base Attack/Grapple: +1/+2
Attack: Slam +3 melee (1d8+1)
Full Attack: 2 slams +3 melee (1d8+1)
Space/Reach: 5 ft./5 ft.
Special Attacks: Haste
Special Qualities: Damage reduction 5/slashing, darkvision 60 ft.,  immunity to acid, undead traits
Saves: Fort +0, Ref +3, Will +3
Abilities: Str 12, Dex 15, Con —, Int —, Wis 10, Cha 1
Skills: —
Feats: Toughness (B)
Environment: Any
Organization: Solitary, gang (2-12), or mob (10-20)
Challenge Rating: 2
Treasure: None
Alignment: Always neutral evil
Advancement: 3-4 HD (Medium);
Level Adjustment: —

_This animated corpse constantly twitches and jerks, __as if it can barely contain its movement._

Quick zombies are specialized undead that move and attack with supernatural speed. In combat, they run as swiftly as horses and are used as shock troops.  Quick zombies decay very rapidly, lasting no more than a few months  before crumbling into dust.

A quick zombie can be created with the spells create undead and haste. The caster level must be at least 12th.

COMBAT

Quick zombies charge toward whatever foes their master designates, then deliver a shower of lightning-fast blows until they or their opponents are destroyed.

Haste (Su): A quick zombie is continuously accelerated as if it was under a _haste_ spell (caster level 12th). This effect is unaffected by _dispel magic_, _break enchantment_ or similar spells, but it can be temporarily neutralized by an _anti-magic field_ or a _slow _spell. A quick zombie that is unable to use its haste power has the following changes to its stats:

Speed: 30 ft. (6 squares)  
 Armor Class: 15 (+2 Dex, +3 natural), touch 12, flat-footed 12
 Base Attack/Grapple: +1/+2
 Attack: Slam +2 melee (1d8+1)
 Full Attack: Slam +2 melee (1d8+1)
Saves: Fort +0, Ref +2, Will +3


----------



## freyar (Apr 14, 2010)

That looks pretty good, but isn't the bit about dispel magic, etc, vs anti-magic field the definition of Su vs Sp?


----------



## Shade (Apr 14, 2010)

Yeah, we can probably omit that part.

Shouldn't this one be a template/template modification?


----------



## Cleon (Apr 14, 2010)

Shade said:


> Yeah, we can probably omit that part.




So change it to:

*Haste (Su):* A quick zombie is continuously accelerated as if it was  under a _haste_ spell (caster level 12th). This effect can be temporarily neutralized by a _slow _spell. A quick zombie that is unable to use its haste  power has the following changes to its stats:

Speed: 30 ft. (6 squares)  
 Armor Class: 15 (+2 Dex, +3 natural), touch 12, flat-footed 12
 Base Attack/Grapple: +1/+2
 Attack: Slam +2 melee (1d8+1)
 Full Attack: Slam +2 melee (1d8+1)
Saves: Fort +0, Ref +2, Will +3



Shade said:


> Shouldn't this one be a template/template  modification?




Hmm, I like that idea. We could do a Quick Zombie Wyvern as a sample creature. Just the thing for the bad-guy-of-the-week to dash around on.

How about doing both. We can work out the standard "Human Commoner" and use that to figure out the template.

I'm wondering whether we shouldn't reduce the NA to +2 like a standard zombie and double the bonus from the Haste effect to +2 on attack, Reflex saves and dodge. A +1 just doesn't have much "oomph", and it means a _slow_ spell would have a significant effect on its stats, e.g.:

*Hasty Quick Zombie*
Speed: 60 ft. (12 squares)  
 Armor Class: 16 (+2 Dex, +2 dodge, +2 natural), touch 14, flat-footed 12
 Base Attack/Grapple: +1/+2
 Attack: Slam +4 melee (1d8+1)
 Full Attack: Slam +4 melee (1d8+1)
Saves: Fort +0, Ref +4, Will +3

*Slow Quick Zombie*
Speed: 30 ft. (6 squares)  
 Armor Class: 15 (+2 Dex, +2 natural), touch 12, flat-footed 12
 Base Attack/Grapple: +1/+2
 Attack: Slam +2 melee (1d8+1)
 Full Attack: Slam +2 melee (1d8+1)
Saves: Fort +0, Ref +2, Will +3

What think you?


----------



## Shade (Apr 14, 2010)

Let's stick to the +1 bonus, since haste is a standardized effect.

For added "oomph", I'd rather give 'em an additional slam attack (and thus 3 slam attacks with a full attack).


----------



## Cleon (Apr 14, 2010)

Shade said:


> Let's stick to the +1 bonus, since haste is a standardized effect.
> 
> For added "oomph", I'd rather give 'em an additional slam attack (and thus 3 slam attacks with a full attack).




I prefer them with 2 attacks, since that matches the original.


----------



## Shade (Apr 15, 2010)

Is that "two attacks standard, three with haste", or "one standard, two with haste"?

I'd prefer two attacks, since most creatures with two arms have two slam attacks.  Of course, most undead have only one slam attack, so I can see that approach as well, even if it makes no sense to me.   (Are they slamming with both hands at once?)


----------



## freyar (Apr 15, 2010)

Maybe they're chest-bumping? 

I like the 2/3 slam attack routine, I think.  

A template or a modification of the standard zombie would be ok (though I think a normal template works better here).


----------



## Shade (Apr 15, 2010)

I agree.  A full template is probably necessary, since they differ so much.


----------



## Shade (Apr 15, 2010)

Added to Homebrews.

+2 or +4 Dex.

Original speed was 60 feet.


----------



## Cleon (Apr 16, 2010)

Shade said:


> Is that "two attacks standard, three with haste", or "one standard, two with haste"?
> 
> I'd prefer two attacks, since most creatures with two arms have two slam attacks.  Of course, most undead have only one slam attack, so I can see that approach as well, even if it makes no sense to me.   (Are they slamming with both hands at once?)




I meant "one attack standard, two with haste". These are basically hasted zombies, and a standard Zombie only has 1 slam attack.


----------



## Cleon (Apr 16, 2010)

Shade said:


> Added to Homebrews.
> 
> +2 or +4 Dex.
> 
> Original speed was 60 feet.




I went for +4 Dex.

I don't much care for the wording of the slam attack. I would prefer it if it has its regular natural weapons OR a high-damage slam attack (1d8 for medium size), with an extra primary attack when full-attacking.

I'd also like to explicitly mention all the adjustments for its _haste_, just so we don't forget them.

e.g.:

*Speed:* due to the quick zombie's haste ability (see  below), all of the base creature's modes of movement increase by 30 ft., to a maximum of twice the subject’s normal speed using that form of  movement.

*Armor Class:* A quick zombie gains a +1 dodge bonus due to its haste ability (see below). Its natural armor bonus increases by a number based on the  quick zombie's size:

Tiny or smaller +0 
Small +1 
Medium +2 
Large +3 
Huge +4 
Gargantuan +7 
Colossal +11 

*Attacks:* A quick zombie gains a +1 attack bonus due to its haste ability (see  below). It retains all the natural weapons, manufactured weapon attacks, and weapon  proficiencies of the base creature. A quick zombie gains a single slam attack it can use instead of the base creature's attacks.

Due to its haste ability, a quick zombie can make an additional attack when making a full attack. It always makes this additional attack with its primary weapon.

*Damage:* Natural and manufactured weapons deal damage normally. A slam attack  deals damage depending on the quick zombie's size. (Use the base  creature’s slam damage if it's better.)

Fine 1d2
Diminutive 1d3 
Tiny 1d4
Small 1d6
Medium 1d8 
Large 2d6 
Huge 3d6 
Gargantuan 4d6
Colossal 6d6 

Saves: Base save bonuses are Fort +1/3 HD, Ref +1/3 HD, and Will +1/2 HD  + 2. A quick zombie gains a +1 bonus on its Reflex saves due to its haste ability (see above).


----------



## Shade (Apr 16, 2010)

I'll go for the +4 Dex and explicitly listing the haste attacks, but you're currently outvoted on the number of slam attacks.  

Updated.


----------



## freyar (Apr 17, 2010)

Are the slam attacks supposed to be in addition to other attacks (natural?) of the base creature or to replace them?

I think we may end up needing to bump the CR of these slightly.


----------



## Cleon (Apr 17, 2010)

freyar said:


> Are the slam attacks supposed to be in addition to other attacks (natural?) of the base creature or to replace them?
> 
> I think we may end up needing to bump the CR of these slightly.




The slam (singular ) should be instead of the regular natural attacks, but that's already in the template which says the quick zombie has slam attacks "_it can use instead of_ _the base  creature's attacks_".


----------



## freyar (Apr 17, 2010)

Why not make it "in addition to" like a normal zombie?  Or most other undead, for that matter?


----------



## Cleon (Apr 18, 2010)

freyar said:


> Why not make it "in addition to" like a normal zombie?  Or most other undead, for that matter?




Well in the case of regular zombies it isn't in addition, 'cause they can only make 1 attack per round. That "Single Action Only" ability makes them an awkward comparison though.


----------



## freyar (Apr 18, 2010)

Well, right, but they have a choice of what attack to make.  Maybe the skeleton, which also retains all natural attacks and weapon proficiencies (except which require flesh) and gain claw attacks, is a better comparison.


----------



## Cleon (Apr 19, 2010)

freyar said:


> Well, right, but they have a choice of what attack to make.  Maybe the skeleton, which also retains all natural attacks and weapon proficiencies (except which require flesh) and gain claw attacks, is a better comparison.




Well I fear I won't be able to sway you all. If we are giving it three slams full attacking I would want to drop it to 1d6 damage for a Medium Zombie as per the SRD template (which is what Shade had originally).

Three 1d6s is only one sixth more average damage than two 1d8s. (10.5/9), but three 1d8s is half more damage. The damage adjustment more or less balances out too, since the "single attack version" would have got 1.5 times Str - i.e. a Str 14-15 zombie would have three 1d6+2 (paired slams) vs two 1d8+3 (single slam), for 10% more damage (16.5/15).

Attacks: A quick zombie gains a +1 attack bonus due to its haste ability  (see below). It retains all the natural weapons, manufactured weapon  attacks, and weapon proficiencies of the base creature. A quick zombie  gains two slam attacks it can use instead of the base creature's  attacks.

Full Attacks: Due to its haste ability, a quick zombie can make an additional attack  when making a full attack. It always makes this additional attack with  its primary weapon.

Damage: Natural and manufactured weapons deal damage normally. A slam  attack deals damage depending on the quick zombie's size. (Use the base  creature’s slam damage if it's better.)

Fine 1
Diminutive 1d2
Tiny 1d3
Small 1d4
Medium 1d6 
Large 1d8 
Huge 2d6 
Gargantuan 3d6
Colossal 4d6 

_I changed the Gargantuan damage from the SRD's 2d8 since it broke standard progression._


----------



## Cleon (Apr 19, 2010)

About the only other thing I think needs amending is the Challenge Rating. The substitution of Haste for Single Action Only is worth a CR boost. A single step upwards would probably be enough:

HD CR
1/2 1/4 
1 1/2 
2–3 1
4–5 2 
6–7 3 
8–10 4 
12–14 5 
15–17 6 
18–20 7 

Our sample Quick Zombie is now:

*Human Commoner Quick Zombie*
Medium Undead
Hit Dice: 2d12+3 (16 hp)
Initiative: +2
Speed: 60 ft. (12 squares)  
Armor Class: 15 (+2 Dex, +1 dodge, +2 natural), touch 13, flat-footed 12
Base Attack/Grapple: +1/+2
Attack: Slam +3 melee (1d6+1)
Full Attack: 3 slams +3 melee (1d6+1)
Space/Reach: 5 ft./5 ft.
Special Attacks: Haste
Special Qualities: Damage reduction 5/slashing, darkvision 60 ft., undead traits
Saves: Fort +0, Ref +3, Will +3
Abilities: Str 12, Dex 15, Con —, Int —, Wis 10, Cha 1
Skills: —
Feats: Toughness (B)
Environment: Any
Organization: Solitary, gang (2-12), or mob (10-20)
Challenge Rating: 1
Treasure: None
Alignment: Always neutral evil
Advancement: —
Level Adjustment: —

I also fancied doing a Wyvern as an additional sample:

*Wyvern **Quick Zombie*
 Large Undead
 Hit Dice: 14d12+3 (94 hp)
 Initiative: +2
 Speed: 40 ft. (8 squares), fly 90 ft.  (poor)
 Armor Class: 24 (-1 size, +2 Dex, +1 dodge, +12 natural), touch 12, flat-footed 22
 Base Attack/Grapple: +7/+16
 Attack: Sting +12 melee (1d6+5) or talon +12 melee (2d6+5) or bite +12 melee (2d8+5) or slam +12 melee (2d6+5)
 Full Attack: 2 stings +12 melee (1d6+5) and bite +7 melee  (2d8+5) and 2 wings +7 melee (1d8+5) and 2 talons +7 melee (2d6+5); or 3 slams +12 melee (2d6+5)
 Space/Reach: 10 ft./5 ft.
 Special Attacks: Haste
 Special Qualities: Damage reduction 5/slashing, darkvision 60 ft., undead traits
 Saves: Fort +4, Ref +7, Will +9
 Abilities: Str 21, Dex 14, Con —, Int —, Wis 10, Cha 1
 Skills: —
 Feats: Toughness (B)
 Environment: Any
 Organization: Solitary, gang (2-12), or mob (10-20)
 Challenge Rating: 5
 Treasure: None
 Alignment: Always neutral evil
 Advancement: —
 Level Adjustment: —


----------



## Shade (Apr 19, 2010)

Lookin' good.

Updated.  Finished?


----------



## freyar (Apr 19, 2010)

Well, I'm not sure if the CR table is quite right.  The samples look better than their CR, I think.  I think I'd push the CRs in the table up a step each to be a little more comfortable with it.


----------



## Cleon (Apr 19, 2010)

freyar said:


> Well, I'm not sure if the CR table is quite right.  The samples look better than their CR, I think.  I think I'd push the CRs in the table up a step each to be a little more comfortable with it.




Yes, you're on to something there. I eyeballed them as CR2 with my first rough draft. Part of the problem is that HD alone are not a good basis for judging zombie nastiness, since AC and attacks are also important.

The Wyvern is probably not a good basis for comparison, since it has lots of attacks. Consider a Dire Wolf Quick Zombie:

*Dire Wolf Quick Zombie*
Large Undead
Hit Dice: 12d12+3 (81 hp)
Initiative: +4
Speed: 80 ft. (16 squares)  
Armor Class: 20 (-1 size, +4 Dex, +1 dodge, +6 natural), touch 14, flat-footed 15
Base Attack/Grapple: +6/+18
Attack: Bite +13 melee (1d8+12) or slam +13 melee (1d8+8)
Full Attack: 2 bites +13 melee (1d8+12) or 3 slams +13 melee (1d8+8)
Space/Reach: 10 ft./5 ft.
Special Attacks: Haste
Special Qualities: Damage reduction 5/slashing, darkvision 60 ft.,  undead traits
Saves: Fort +4, Ref +9, Will +4
Abilities: Str 27, Dex 19, Con —, Int —, Wis 10, Cha 1
Skills: —
Feats: Toughness (B)
Environment: Any
Organization: Solitary, gang (2-12), or mob (10-20)
Challenge Rating: 5

That's not as tough as the Wyvern but is still more like a CR6 than a 5.

Perhaps we should use the skeleton's CR progression instead, with the CR tweaked up by one?

 'HD ' ' CR
1/2 '' 1/3
'1' ' ' 1
2-3 ' ' 2
4-5 ' ' 3
6-7 ' ' 4
8-9 ' ' 5
10-11 ' 6
12-14 ' 7
15-17 ' 8
18-20 ' 9

What thinks thee?


----------



## Shade (Apr 20, 2010)

That makes good sense to me.  Freyar?


----------



## Cleon (Apr 20, 2010)

Shall we use the Dire Wolf sample instead of the Wyvern, since it seems to work better, or stick in both?


----------



## Shade (Apr 20, 2010)

Let's use 'em all.

Updated.

Finished?


----------



## freyar (Apr 21, 2010)

CR now looks pretty good.

I noticed that the attacks section still says it can use slams "instead" of other natural attacks when it should say "in addition to."


----------



## Shade (Apr 21, 2010)

Fixed.

Here's the next one...

*Prikolic*
CLIMATE/TERRAIN: Any
FREQUENCY: Very rare
ORGANIZATION: Nil
ACTIVITY CYCLE: Night
DIET: Nil
INTELLIGENCE: Non-
TREASURE: Nil
ALIGNMENT: Neutral
NO. APPEARING: 1-6
ARMOR CLASS: 7
MOVEMENT: 6 (9 in werewolf form)
HIT DICE: 4
THAC0: 17
NO. OF ATTACKS: 1 weapon (1 bite in werewolf form)
DAMAGE/ATTACK: 1-8 (3-8 in werewolf form)
SPECIAL ATTACKS: Nil
SPECIAL DEFENSES: See below
MAGIC RESISTANCE: Nil
SIZE: M
MORALE: Special
XP VALUE: 270

The prikolics are dead werewolves that have been animated as zombies. Prikolics initially appear to be normal zombies, but there is a 25% chance each time one takes damage that it will change into an undead “wolf-man” form, dropping its weapons and biting savagely. In werewolf form, only + 1 or better or silver weapons will hit them. Cold-based, sleep, hold, charm, and all mind-affecting and death-magic spells have no effect on the prikolics, although they may be turned by a cleric as shadows. Holy water does 2-8 hp damage to these creatures.

Originally appeared in Dragon Magazine #158 (1990).


While this one theoretically *could* be a template, I think that will be an absolute nightmare and strongly suggest we just make it a monster.

_Shade sends out psionic signals reminding others of his hatred of the 3e lycanthrope templates..._


----------



## freyar (Apr 21, 2010)

Heh.  I think we can justify restricting to strict were-_wolves_ and not all lycanthropes.  This doesn't seem much more than a zombie template (minus the single action only SQ I think) applied to a werewolf with a few changes to the alternate form.  What do you think?


----------



## Cleon (Apr 22, 2010)

freyar said:


> CR now looks pretty good.
> 
> I noticed that the attacks section still says it can use slams "instead" of other natural attacks when it should say "in addition to."




That's because it should be "instead". That's why there's an "OR" between a full attacking Dire Wolf Quick Zombie's bite and slam attacks.


----------



## Cleon (Apr 22, 2010)

freyar said:


> Heh.  I think we can justify restricting to strict were-_wolves_ and not all lycanthropes.  This doesn't seem much more than a zombie template (minus the single action only SQ I think) applied to a werewolf with a few changes to the alternate form.  What do you think?




I agree. We can restrict it to human and hybrid forms, since it says "wolf-man" and not "wolf".


----------



## GrayLinnorm (Apr 22, 2010)

I'd make this a straight monster. It won't have any class abilities and there aren't that many other creatures a template could apply to.

Edit: forgot giants could be lycanthropes.


----------



## freyar (Apr 22, 2010)

Cleon said:


> That's because it should be "instead". That's why there's an "OR" between a full attacking Dire Wolf Quick Zombie's bite and slam attacks.




Doesn't "instead" imply that it loses the natural attacks of the base creature?



Cleon said:


> I agree. We can restrict it to human and hybrid forms, since it says "wolf-man" and not "wolf".




Yup.  And agreed with GrayLinnorm also.


----------



## Shade (Apr 22, 2010)

GrayLinnorm said:


> I'd make this a straight monster. It won't have any class abilities and there aren't that many other creatures a template could apply to.
> 
> Edit: forgot giants could be lycanthropes.






			
				Cleon said:
			
		

> I agree. We can restrict it to human and hybrid forms, since it says "wolf-man" and not "wolf".




Essentially, we've got a "monster entry" modified zombie with a hybrid "wolfman" form, than can advance to Large and probably Huge to account for giants that become prikolics?



freyar said:


> Doesn't "instead" imply that it loses the natural attacks of the base creature?




Yep.


----------



## freyar (Apr 22, 2010)

Your summary of the prikolics sounds spot on! 

Abilities next?
Normal human werewolf (human form) has Str 13, Dex 11, Con 12, Int 10, Wis 11, Cha 8 and hybrid form has Str 15, Dex 15, Con 16, Int 10, Wis 11, Cha 8.  Zombies get Str +2, Dex -2, Con -, Int -, Wis 10, Cha 1.  So maybe
Str 15, Dex 9, Con -, Int -, Wis 10, Cha - (base form)
Str 17, Dex 13, Con -, Int -, Wis 10, Cha - (hybrid form)
?


----------



## Shade (Apr 22, 2010)

Added to Homebrews.

Simply add "and silver" to the DR 5/slashing while in hybrid form?   Or give it both 5/slashing and 10/silver?  I think I favor the former.

Boost natural armor in hybrid form (as common for werewolf), or since the Dex improves let it slide?

Give it the usual bonus feats of werewolves (Iron Will and Track)?

Retain curse of lycanthropy?  I'm voting yes.

Drop wolf empathy since they are mindless?


----------



## freyar (Apr 22, 2010)

DR 5/slashing and silver.

I think we can go with a flat +4 natural in all forms; it's ok to rule that only part of the natural armor stacks. 

Yes to bonus feats, I think, although it's maybe a little weird for a mindless creature to be able to track.  They're also immune to many things that require Will saves, right?

Yes to the curse and yes to dropping wolf empathy.


----------



## Shade (Apr 23, 2010)

Giant ants are mindless and have Track as a bonus feat, so precedent is on our side.  



			
				freyar said:
			
		

> They're also immune to many things that require Will saves, right?




Do you mean because they are mindless, or is that part of the lycanthrope template?


----------



## freyar (Apr 23, 2010)

Because they're mindless.  


			
				SRD said:
			
		

> Intelligence: Any creature that can think, learn, or remember has at least 1 point of Intelligence. A creature with no Intelligence score is mindless, an automaton operating on simple instincts or programmed instructions. It has immunity to mind-affecting effects (charms, compulsions, phantasms, patterns, and morale effects) and automatically fails Intelligence checks.
> 
> Mindless creatures do not gain feats or skills, although they may have bonus feats or racial skill bonuses.




But maybe Iron Will could help in some other special cases?


----------



## Shade (Apr 23, 2010)

Gotcha.  There are quite a few non-mind-affecting spells and abilities that require a Will save, so it is somewhat benefical.


----------



## freyar (Apr 23, 2010)

Ok, it's not going to hurt anything to keep it (ie, it's not taking up a feat slot), so it's worthwhile, then!


----------



## Shade (Apr 23, 2010)

Updated.


----------



## Cleon (Apr 23, 2010)

freyar said:


> Doesn't "instead" imply that it loses the natural attacks of the base creature?




Hopefully the "It retains all the natural weapons, manufactured weapon attacks, and  weapon proficiencies of the base creature" bit would stop most people thinking it loses the natural attacks.

I'm more concerned that a reader could think that "in addition to" implies it can use the slams and the base creatures natural attacks in a full attack.

A little reworking should clear it up, such as:

*Attack:* A quick zombie retains the natural attacks manufactured weapon attacks, and weapon proficiencies of the base  creature. In addition, it gains two slam attacks it can use instead of the base creature's natural weapons. A quick zombie gains a +1 attack bonus due to its haste ability (see  below).

Is that better?

I hope we don't get too worked up about this.

Besides, the sample creatures should make it pretty clear what is intended.


----------



## Cleon (Apr 23, 2010)

So we seem to be agreed on having this thing spread lycanthropy, but does it only affect the living?

What happens if a victim of "Prikolic Lycanthropy" dies? Do they rise again as  a zombie-werewolf.

If it kills a humanoid does it turn them into a zombie-werewolf à la Create Spawn?

If it bites a zombie, does it turn it into a zombie werewolf?!


----------



## freyar (Apr 24, 2010)

All good questions.  How about yes, no, yes, no?


----------



## Cleon (Apr 24, 2010)

freyar said:


> All good questions.  How about yes, no, yes, no?




That's my preference as well - exposure to Lycanthropy (werewolf) if a living victim survives an attack, Create Spawn if it kills a victim.

So:

Curse of Lycanthropy (Su): Any humanoid or giant hit by a prykolic's bite attack in hybrid form must succeed  on a DC 15 Fortitude save or contract lycanthropy.

*Create Spawn (Su):* Any humanoid of giant slain by a prykolic in hybrid form becomes a prykolic in 1d4 rounds. [_The Question of Control_] They do not possess any of the abilities they had in life.

Do you like "The spawn is not under the control of its killer" or "Spawn are under the command of the prykolic that created them and remain  enslaved until its destruction"? I prefer free-willed spawn that form into roaming packs out of some brutish instinct.


----------



## GrayLinnorm (Apr 25, 2010)

Since they're mindless, I would go with not being under the control  of the creator.


----------



## Cleon (Apr 25, 2010)

GrayLinnorm said:


> Since they're mindless, I would go with not being under the control  of the creator.




That makes sense.

How's this for a revised version:

*Curse of Lycanthropy (Su):* Any humanoid or giant hit by a prykolic's  bite attack in hybrid form must succeed  on a DC 15 Fortitude save or  contract lycanthropy.

*Create Spawn (Su):* The corpse of any humanoid of  giant slain by a prykolic in hybrid form becomes a prykolic in 1d4  rounds. Such spawn are not under the control of their killer, but will instinctively join other prykolic in hunting the living. They  do not possess any of the abilities they had in life.


----------



## Shade (Apr 26, 2010)

Looks good.  Updated.

Environment: Temperate forests?

Organization: Solitary, pair, pack (6–10), or troupe (2–5 plus 5–8 wolves)?

Challenge Rating: 2?

Advancement: 5 HD (Medium); 6-9 HD (Large); 10-15 HD (Huge)?

Should we include a method for creation (via create undead, etc.), or leave them purely as created by others of their kind?


----------



## freyar (Apr 26, 2010)

I think I'll vote for CR 3, but the rest looks fine.

I'd be happy enough leaving them "naturally" created (we could put in flavor about their accidental creation by animating a werewolf, though).


----------



## Cleon (Apr 27, 2010)

Shade said:


> Looks good.  Updated.




Why have we given them two claws as their primary attack and a bite as secondary again? The original only had a single bite in wereform, same as a werewolf.

I don't mind giving them claws, but I'd make them secondary and the bite primary.

Maybe throw in Multiattack as a bonus feat too...



Shade said:


> Environment: Temperate forests?




Yes, same as werewolves.



Shade said:


> Organization: Solitary, pair, pack (6–10), or troupe (2–5 plus 5–8 wolves)?




I don't think natural animals would have anything to do with these things, but I'd be happy to have the run with *were*wolves.

Organization: Solitary, pair, pack (3–6), or troupe (3–6 plus 1–4  werewolves)?



Shade said:


> Challenge Rating: 2?




I think they're tipped over into a CR 3 by their DR and Undead Immunities.



Shade said:


> Advancement: 5 HD (Medium); 6-9 HD (Large); 10-15 HD (Huge)?




Hmm, I'd expand that HD a bit. A Zombie Ogre is 8 Hit Dice, and I reckon a Werewolf Ogre would be 8HD too (An SRD Large Wolf is 4HD as is a basic Ogre), so I'd quess a Large Zombie Werewolf should have at least 8HD, I'll say 9+ HD for the sake of argument:

Advancement: 5-8 HD (Medium); 9-16 HD (Large); 17-24 HD (Huge)



Shade said:


> Should we include a method for creation (via create undead, etc.), or leave them purely as created by others of their kind?




Might as well leave it out.


----------



## Shade (Apr 27, 2010)

Cleon said:


> Why have we given them two claws as their primary attack and a bite as secondary again? The original only had a single bite in wereform, same as a werewolf.
> 
> I don't mind giving them claws, but I'd make them secondary and the bite primary.




Borrowed straight from the werewolf's hybrid form...2 claws (primary) and bite (secondary).



Cleon said:


> Maybe throw in Multiattack as a bonus feat too...




I'm on-board with that.  It'll help cement CR 3.



Cleon said:


> I don't think natural animals would have anything to do with these things, but I'd be happy to have the run with *were*wolves.
> 
> Organization: Solitary, pair, pack (3–6), or troupe (3–6 plus 1–4  werewolves)?




Sounds good.



Cleon said:


> I think they're tipped over into a CR 3 by their DR and Undead Immunities.




Fair enough.



Cleon said:


> Hmm, I'd expand that HD a bit. A Zombie Ogre is 8 Hit Dice, and I reckon a Werewolf Ogre would be 8HD too (An SRD Large Wolf is 4HD as is a basic Ogre), so I'd quess a Large Zombie Werewolf should have at least 8HD, I'll say 9+ HD for the sake of argument:
> 
> Advancement: 5-8 HD (Medium); 9-16 HD (Large); 17-24 HD (Huge)




That works for me!

Updated.


----------



## freyar (Apr 27, 2010)

I'm pretty happy with that.  Done?


----------



## Shade (Apr 28, 2010)

I think so!

I'm not sure this next one warrants conversion, as it seems a precursor to the ghul.  What do you think?

*GHULA*
FREQUENCY: Rare
NO. APPEARING: 2-20
ARMOR CLASS: 5
MOVE: 12.
HIT DICE: 5
% IN LAIR: 25%
TREASURE TYPE: E
NO. OF ATTACKS: 1
DAMAGE/ATTACK: 1-12
SPECIAL ATTACKS: Spells
SPECIAL DEFENSES: Nil
MAGIC RESISTANCE: Standard
INTELLIGENCE: Very
ALIGNMENT: Chaotic evil
SIZE: M
PSIONIC ABILITY: Nil

Ghulah are Oriental ghouls (especially of Arabic-Persian tradition). They usually appear as either beautiful women or hideous half-woman, half-monster creatures. Ghulah are evil kinfolk to djinn. They cannot be affected by sleep, charm, or hold spells. They have the power to cast the magical spells of invisibility and polymorph self. Clerics have the same chances to turn ghulah as they would ghasts.

Originally appeared in Dragon Magazine #138 (1988).


----------



## freyar (Apr 28, 2010)

I'm inclined to agree that these are just ghuls.  The only difference I see is HD.


----------



## Cleon (Apr 30, 2010)

freyar said:


> I'm pretty happy with that.  Done?




The hybrid form should have a +6 Will save 'cause of its Iron Will.

Apart from that they look grrreat to me!


----------



## Cleon (Apr 30, 2010)

freyar said:


> I'm inclined to agree that these are just ghuls.  The only difference I see is HD.




Well there are a fair few difference from the Enworld conversion of the *Lesser Ghul*.

A lower AC and Intelligence, more Hit Dice, a single attack instead of a claw/claw/bite, no DR and full _polymorph self _instead of diminished change shape into humanoids.

I'd like to riff on the "evil kinfolk to djinn" flavour and convert them as a Tomb-Tainted Native Outsider.

Any takers?


----------



## freyar (Apr 30, 2010)

These are basically the greater ghuls, though.  You are right about the differences, but they're mostly cosmetic, and the flavor is basically the same.  Let's see if you can convince Shade, though.


----------



## Shade (Apr 30, 2010)

I just don't think there's enough there, but you might be able to sell me on it with some more ideas.


----------



## Cleon (May 1, 2010)

Shade said:


> I just don't think there's enough there, but you might be able to sell me on it with some more ideas.




Well if we're going the Native Outsider route we could try to make them closer to the original version.

I'm having trouble finding sources, but I've found one claim that there's no Arabic tale in which _ghuls_ *dug up graves and devoured the corpses* and that this habit is a Western invention due to their habit of lurking around graveyards.

Contrary to this, I've got tales like _*The Story of Sidi-Nouman*_ from The Arabian Nights which describe a ghul eating a body stolen from a grave. While _*The Fourth Voyage of Sindbad the Sailor*_ has a tribe of cannibals led by a ghul king who liked to drug their victims out of their wits, fatten them up, cover them in coconut oil and then devour them - the king ate his humans roasted, his subjects devoured them raw. However the ghul(s?) in the latter story seems quite different from the "desert ghul" that we seem to be talking about.

So, how to reconcile this? Putting together what I've found so far...



Arabian Ghuls are maneaters, but from what I can tell they like fresh meat. They might steal a recently dead corpse, but would have no more liking for an old decaying cadaver than a lion would.
Ghuls like treasure, so I'm supposing they'd break into tombs for the grave goods, not the corpse.
They like to lead men astray in the desert and would injure or even kill them
A ghul possesses free will like any other genie, so could be converted to Islam and proper behavior as in the story _*The History of Gherib and his Brother Agib*_. (Although in that story the ghouls appear to be cannibalistic giants rather than shapechanging desert spirits, it presumably applies to all forms of _ghul_.)
They can change their form to human or animal shape, and seem to favour the shape of hyenas.
According to some sources, the only way to kill a ghul is to strike it dead with a single blow - maybe a lot of Fast Healing?
Finally, I'm wondering whether our Ghula should create illusion. Most genies have that power. A _ghul_ is the basest kind of genie, so presumably its illusions would be weak - phantom fires and whispers to lure travellers astray, basically.


----------



## freyar (May 3, 2010)

Genies that like to eat sentients?  Maybe we're getting there.


----------



## Shade (May 3, 2010)

Alright, that's probably enough.  Have at it.


----------



## Cleon (May 4, 2010)

Shade said:


> Alright, that's probably enough.  Have at it.




Okay then.

Let's take a Janni as our base creature, since that's a genie of the size and type we want.

I'm tempted to add the Evil subtype, but I guess the Efreet doesn't have it so the Ghula probably shouldn't either. Furthermore, they can be converted to benevolent faiths so presumably aren't intrinsically evil as an Evil subtype would indicate. I'm thinking "Usually Chaotic Evil". We should probably give them the Shapechanger subtype though.

Attacks should be slams, like a downsized Efreet.

Intelligence 12 like an Efreet seems right, since they're Very (11-12) intelligent.

So how about this for a start:

*Ghula*
Medium Outsider (Native, Shapechanger)
Hit Dice: 6d8+6 (33 hp)
Initiative: +2
Speed: 30 ft. (6 squares)  
Armor Class: 15 (+2 Dex, +3 natural), touch 12, flat-footed 13
Base Attack/Grapple: +6/+9
Attack: Slam +4 melee (1d6+3)
Full Attack: 2 slams +4 melee (1d6+3)
Space/Reach: 5 ft./5 ft.
Special Attacks: —
Special Qualities: Darkvision 60 ft., immunity to enchantments, _invisibility_, _polymorph_, scent
Saves: Fort +6, Ref +7, Will +7
Abilities: Str 16, Dex 15, Con 12, Int 12, Wis 15, Cha 13
Feats: *3*
Skills: *9 skills at 9*
Environment: Warm deserts
Organization: Solitary, company (2-4), or band (5-20)
Challenge Rating: *?*
Treasure: None
Alignment: Usually chaotic evil
Advancement: 6-9 HD (Medium); 10-15 HD (Huge)
Level Adjustment: —

*Immunity to Enchantments (Ex):* A ghula is immune to all spells and spell-like abilities with the Enchantment descriptor.

_*Invisibility (Su):*_ A ghula can become invisible as a quick action, as per the spell _invisibility_ (caster level 15th) with an unlimited duration. The invisibility ends if the ghula attacks. A ghula can become visible as a free action.

_*Polymorph (Su):*_ A ghula can change its shape as per the spell _polymorph_ (caster level equal to its Hit Dice), except the transformation has an unlimited duration and it does not regain lost hit points as if it had rested for a night.


----------



## freyar (May 9, 2010)

You have a couple "ghuna"s where you want "ghula"s in Invisibility.

Why polymorph and not alternate form or change shape?

What illusions are you thinking about?  Any SQs related to carrion-eating, like disease?  Something related to undead ghouls, like paralysis?  Scent is a nice touch, btw.


----------



## Shade (May 10, 2010)

Good point.  I'd definitely replace polymorph with one of the other abilities.


----------



## Cleon (May 11, 2010)

freyar said:


> You have a couple "ghuna"s where you want "ghula"s in Invisibility.




Yes, I kept on getting the spelling mixed up with the overgrown gnoll werehyena beast from _Dragon #89_. I'll edit in some corrections.



freyar said:


> Why polymorph and not alternate form or change shape?




I was just aiming for the closest equivalent to the original's spell-like ability.

I'd be fine making it Alternate Form, something like:

*Alternate Form (Su):* A ghula can assume the form of any aberration, animal, dragon, fey, giant, humanoid, magical beast, monstrous humanoid, ooze, plant or vermin between the size of Tiny to Huge. It can not assume an incorporeal or gaseous form. A ghula can assume the form of a creature of up to the ghula's Hit Dice, or 15 Hit Dice if this is lower.

That's pretty much the same as _polymorph_ at-will.

Maybe add "a ghula's favourite alternate form is a giant hyena" with a mini stat block?



freyar said:


> What illusions are you thinking about?  Any SQs related to carrion-eating, like disease?  Something related to undead ghouls, like paralysis?  Scent is a nice touch, btw.




I was going to go for pretty minor illusions - _ghost sound_ and _minor image_ at-will would be enough to produce voices, figures and fires to lure travellers into the desert.

Haven't come across any references to them spreading disease or paralysing so I wouldn't go for those.

However, I think there's some justification in giving them the ability to cause cause fear by their ghoulish appearance. Maybe modify a Krenshar's Scare power?

*Scare (Su):* As a move-equivalent action, a ghula can become a horrible, misshapen apparition for a fraction of a second. This alone is usually  sufficient to terrify foes into cooperation or flight (treat as a Bluff or Intimidate check with a  +3 bonus).  

As a standard action, it can intensify this ability to produce an unsettling  effect which works like a _scare_ spell from a 9th-level caster (Will DC 14 partial). A creature that successfully  saves cannot be affected again by the same ghula's scare ability for  24 hours. Ghula are not affected by the scare attacks of other ghula. This is a supernatural, sight-based, mind-affecting fear effect. The save DC is Charisma-based.


----------



## Shade (May 12, 2010)

I can't really see a need for a ghula to take the form of a dragon, ooze, plant, etc.

Personally, I'd recommend limiting the alternate form simply to animal and humanoid forms.

The scare power looks good!


----------



## Cleon (May 13, 2010)

Shade said:


> I can't really see a need for a ghula to take the form of a dragon, ooze, plant, etc.
> 
> Personally, I'd recommend limiting the alternate form simply to animal and humanoid forms.
> 
> The scare power looks good!




I'd rather keep a wide range of forms, based on a vague recollection of desert ghouls taking on all kinds of monstrous forms. However I think there was also an intimation that most of the change was illusory or semi-illusory (like _disguise self_).

Maybe something like:
*Shadow Guise (Su):* A ghula can take on the form of any living, corporeal creature from two sizes smaller than itself to two sizes larger. Thus a Medium-sized ghula can take on a form between Tiny and Huge in size. Although this guise looks, sounds and smells real the changes to its body are mostly quasi-real illusion, similar to creatures created by a _shadow conjuration_ spell. The ghula's stats do not change except as follows: It gains the Aquatic subtype or the Amphibious special quality if it  takes the form of a creature with those traits; It gains the natural movement rates of its new form; It applies the size adjustments of its new form to its grapple checks, AC, attacks and skill checks; The damage caused by its attacks is reduced if it diminishes in size, but does not increase it it enlarges itself. Shadow guise gives a ghula a +10 bonus on its Disguise checks.​That way we don't have to worry about refiguring its stats or it  exploiting all those nasty MM Extraordinary Abilities.

I am somewhat tempted to add an Alternate Form of a hyena on top of that though, since they are strongly connected with that shape.

What are the 3E stats for a hyena again?


----------



## Shade (May 13, 2010)

That's more reasonable.  I'm definitely for a true hyena alternate form.

Here are the stats:
Hyena :: d20srd.org


----------



## Cleon (May 14, 2010)

Shade said:


> That's more reasonable.  I'm definitely for a true hyena alternate form.
> 
> Here are the stats:
> Hyena :: d20srd.org




Ah yes, somehow I forgot it was in the SRD.

I think I'd make its Alternate Form a Large Hyena, just for giggles.

A hyena has low-light vision and I fancy giving the ghula that trait as well, it seems appropriate for a nocturnal monster.

Putting that together with the other proposed alterations we've now got:

*Ghula*
Medium Outsider (Native, Shapechanger)
Hit Dice: 6d8+6 (33 hp)
Initiative: +2
Speed: 30 ft. (6 squares)  
Armor Class: 15 (+2 Dex, +3 natural), touch 12, flat-footed 13
Base Attack/Grapple: +6/+9
Attack: Slam +9 melee (1d6+3)
Full Attack: 2 slams +9 melee (1d6+3)
Space/Reach: 5 ft./5 ft.
Special Attacks: Scare, spell-like abilities
Special Qualities: Alternate form, darkvision 60 ft., immunity to enchantments, low-light  vision, _invisibility_, scent, shadow guise
Saves: Fort +6, Ref +7, Will +7
Abilities: Str 16, Dex 15, Con 12, Int 12, Wis 15, Cha 13
Feats: *3*
Skills: *9 skills at 9*
Environment: Warm deserts
Organization: Solitary, company (2-4), or band (5-20)
Challenge Rating: *?*
Treasure: *?*
Alignment: Usually chaotic evil
Advancement: 7-9 HD (Medium); 10-15 HD (Huge)
Level Adjustment: —

*Combat*

*Alternate Form (Su):* A ghula can assume the form of a Large hyena with the following changes to its attributes:

*Hyena Form*
Initiative: +1
Speed: 50 ft. (10 squares)  
Armor Class: 14 (-1 size, +1 Dex, +4 natural), touch 10, flat-footed 13
Base Attack/Grapple: +6/+16
Attack: Bite +11 melee (1d8+9)
Full Attack: Bite +11 melee (1d8+9)
Space/Reach: 10 ft./5 ft.
Special Attacks: Scare, trip
Special Qualities: Alternate form, darkvision 60 ft., immunity to enchantments, low-light vision, _invisibility_, scent, shadow guise
Saves: Fort +9, Ref +6, Will +7
Abilities: Str 22, Dex 13, Con 18, Int 12, Wis 15, Cha 13
Skills: ?

*Trip (Ex):* If a ghula in hyena form hits with its bite attack it can attempt to trip  the opponent (+10 check modifier) as a free action without making a touch attack or provoking an attack of opportunity. If the attempt fails, the opponent cannot react to trip the ghula. 

*Immunity to Enchantments (Ex):* A  ghula is immune to all spells and spell-like abilities with the  Enchantment descriptor.

_*Invisibility (Su):*_ A  ghula can become invisible as a quick action, as per the spell _invisibility_  (caster level 15th) with an unlimited duration. The invisibility ends  if the ghula attacks. A ghula can become visible as a free action.

*Scare (Su):* As a move-equivalent action, a ghula can become a  horrible, misshapen apparition for a fraction of a second. This alone  is usually  sufficient to terrify foes into cooperation or flight (treat  as a Bluff or Intimidate check with a  +3 bonus).  

As a standard action, it can intensify this ability to produce an  unsettling  effect which works like a _scare_ spell from a  9th-level caster (Will DC 14 partial). A creature that successfully   saves cannot be affected again by the same ghula's scare ability for  24  hours. Ghula are not affected by the scare attacks of other ghula. This  is a supernatural, sight-based, mind-affecting fear effect. The save DC  is Charisma-based.     

*Shadow Guise (Su):* A ghula can take on the form of  any living, corporeal creature from two sizes smaller than itself to two  sizes larger. Thus a Medium-sized ghula can take on a form between Tiny  and Huge in size. Although this guise looks, sounds and smells real the  changes to its body are mostly quasi-real illusion, similar to  creatures created by a _shadow conjuration_ spell. The ghula's  stats do not change except as follows: It gains the Aquatic subtype or  the Amphibious special quality if it  takes the form of a creature with  those traits; It gains the natural movement rates of its new form; It  applies the size adjustments of its new form to its grapple checks, AC,  attacks and skill checks; The damage caused by its attacks is reduced if  it diminishes in size, but does not increase it it enlarges itself.  Shadow guise gives a ghula a +10 bonus on its Disguise checks.

_*Spell-Like Abilities (Sp):*_ A ghula can use _ghost sound_ and _minor image_ at-will (caster level 6th).


----------



## freyar (May 15, 2010)

That's all fine with me (and the reduced alternate form sounds right), though I think I prefer the Medium hyena unless there's a particular reason to go Large.  Or do these take the barghest role for gnolls?


----------



## GrayLinnorm (May 16, 2010)

freyar said:


> That's all fine with me (and the reduced alternate form sounds right), though I think I prefer the Medium hyena unless there's a particular reason to go Large. Or do these take the barghest role for gnolls?




If we're trying to distinguish these from great ghuls, that's not a bad idea.

Also, why no treasure? It originally had tresure type E.


----------



## Cleon (May 16, 2010)

freyar said:


> That's all fine with me (and the reduced alternate form sounds right), though I think I prefer the Medium hyena unless there's a particular reason to go Large.  Or do these take the barghest role for gnolls?




I mainly went Large so they could fight as effectively in hyena form as their regular shape. It also helps distinguish them a bit more from the other kind of ghul.

I don't think it has much justification in Arabic folklore.

Besides, with their Shadow Guise power they can transform into a Large Hyena and appear to be a regular sized Hyena (or even a Tiny or Gargantuan one), or almost anything else.

Making them "gnoll barghests" could be fun. I keep on getting the spelling mixed up with the Ghuuna, so I'm halfway there already.



GrayLinnorm said:


> If we're trying to distinguish these from  great ghuls, that's not a bad idea.
> 
> Also, why no treasure? It originally had tresure type E.




It's just a carry-over from when I copy-and-pasted the Prikolic Werewolf to spare me typing out a stat block. I'm going to change it.

Since they rob graves of their valuables I'm thinking we should give them the same as the SRD's Efreet:

*Treasure:* Standard coins; double goods; standard items

Incidentally, all the genies in the 2nd edition AD&D Monstrous Manual have no treasure listed. What's up with that? I'm guessing they left their wealth back on the Elemental Planes. Dao in particular are supposed to value treasure.


----------



## Shade (May 17, 2010)

Added to Homebrews.

It's looking pretty good, but I'm not fond of the immunity to enchantments ability.   I'd recommend replacing with "immunity to charm and compulsion effects" or simply "immunity to mind-affecting spells and abilities" on the SQ line.

Like freyar, I'd rather stick with the standard hyena for the alternate form.  If you want to allow a Large version, how about adding "or hyaenadon" to the ability?  Then we don't need to include an additional stat block.


----------



## Cleon (May 17, 2010)

Shade said:


> It's looking pretty good, but I'm not fond of the immunity to  enchantments ability.   I'd recommend replacing with "immunity to charm  and compulsion effects" or simply "immunity to mind-affecting spells and  abilities" on the SQ line.




Of the two I prefer "immunity to charm  and compulsion effects". I think they should still be vulnerable to fear as well as mind-trickery such as illusions.



Shade said:


> Like freyar, I'd rather stick with the standard hyena for the alternate form.  If you want to allow a Large version, how about adding "or hyaenadon" to the ability?  Then we don't need to include an additional stat block.




I'd be happy with adding a hyaenodon.

*Alternate Form (Su):* A ghula can assume the form of a hyena or a hyaenodon.


----------



## Shade (May 17, 2010)

Updated.

Skills: 9 at 9 ranks

Feats: 3


----------



## Cleon (May 18, 2010)

Cleon said:


> Since they rob graves of their valuables I'm thinking we should give them the same as the SRD's Efreet:
> 
> *Treasure:* Standard coins; double goods; standard items




What Treasure Type was in Type E again, I'm not 100% sure the above's a good match to it. I just was going by a vague memory that it was good on the mid-range coins and jewelery and had a few magic items.

EDIT: Belay the question, the AD&D Treasure types are in the Enworld Monster Conversion Notes.

Type E is:
1-10 1,000s of copper pieces: 5% 
1-12 1,000s of silver pieces: 25% 
1-6 1,000s of electrum pieces: 25%
1-8 1,000s of gold pieces: 25%
1-12 gems: 15%
1-8 jewelry: 10%
Maps or Magic Items: Any 3 plus 1 scroll: 25%

That looks pretty close to how I remember it, although it's got a bit more magic and less gems than I remember.

I'm happy sticking with the current Treasure line of Standard.


----------



## Cleon (May 18, 2010)

Shade said:


> Updated.
> 
> Skills: 9 at 9 ranks
> 
> Feats: 3




Okay, here's some SRD critters that seem relevant comparisons:

*Ghoul*
Skills: Balance +6, Climb +5, Hide +6, Jump +5, Move Silently +6, Spot +7
Feats: Multiattack

*Efreet*
Skills: Bluff +15, Craft (any one) +14, Concentration +15, Diplomacy +6, Disguise +2 (+4 acting), Intimidate +17, Listen +15, Move Silently +16, Sense Motive +15, Spellcraft +14, Spot +15
Feats: Combat Casting, Combat Reflexes, Dodge, Improved Initiative (B), Quicken Spell-Like Ability (scorching ray)

*Jann*
Skills: Appraise +11, Concentration +10, Craft (any two) +11, Diplomacy +3, Escape Artist +6, Listen +11, Move Silently +6, Ride +11, Sense Motive +11, Spot +11, Use Rope +2 (+4 with bindings)
Feats: Combat Reflexes, Dodge, Improved Initiative (B), Mobility

*Hyena*
Skills: Hide +3*, Listen +6, Spot +4
Feats: Alertness

The Ghoul seems a good start skill-wise. I don't see them having Balance, but I'd give them the all the other skills:

Climb, Hide, Jump, Move Silently, Spot

That leaves them another 4 from the Genie's skills. Appraise seems suitable, from their love of treasure. Bluff would reflect their fondness for deceiving travellers. Intimidate would go with their Scare power. That leaves one more. I'm thinking Listen. They don't seem very social, civilized creatures (so no Craft or Diplomacy), and since they don't have any combat-worthy spells or SLAs there seem no point in giving them Concentration.

They do like to pretend to be other creatures though, so they'd need Disguise. I think I'll distribute two "maxed out" skill allotments between Appraise, Bluff and Disguise. There are stories about folks spotting a Ghula's really a monster from their odd behaviour or the sight of a cloven hoof beneath the "lady's" robes, so they don't seem to be _that_ good at pretending.

*Skills:* Appraise *6*, Bluff *6*, Climb *9*, Disguise *6*, Hide *9*, Intimidate *9*, Jump *9*, Listen *9*, Move Silently *9*, Spot *9*

Feat wise I'm thinking we could just give them the same selection as a Jann.

*Feats:* Combat Reflexes, Dodge, Improved Initiative (B), Mobility


----------



## Shade (May 18, 2010)

Looks good.  Updated.

Challenge Rating: 4?  They are essentially just variant jann.

A ghula stands about x feet tall and weighs about x pounds.  (Similar to a human?)

Ghula speak x.

Jann speak Common, one elemental language (Aquan, Auran, Ignan, or Terran) and one alignment language (Abyssal, Celestial, or Infernal).

So how about Common, Abyssal, and one elemental language?

Cleon, care to write up the flavor text since you suggested their direction?


----------



## Cleon (May 18, 2010)

Shade said:


> Looks good.  Updated.
> 
> Challenge Rating: 4?  They are essentially just variant jann.
> 
> A ghula stands about x feet tall and weighs about x pounds.  (Similar to a human?)




Challenge rating 4 seems fair. I think they're probably a little bigger than an average human.A ghula stands between 6 and 7 feet tall and weighs about 250 pounds.​


Shade said:


> Ghula speak x.
> 
> Jann speak Common, one elemental language (Aquan, Auran, Ignan, or Terran) and one alignment language (Abyssal, Celestial, or Infernal).
> 
> So how about Common, Abyssal, and one elemental language?




That suits me.Ghula speak Common and Abyssal, plus one elemental language (Aquan, Auran, Ignan, or Terran).​


Shade said:


> Cleon, care to write up the flavor text since you suggested their direction?




Before I start on that, there's one other thing I'd like to sort out.

Should we have clerics be able to turn these things like in Moldvay's version? I think there is some justification for it, since I remember one Sinbad tale where he wrote out passages from the Koran to keep away evil spirits, but I don't like the idea of clerics destroying them with turn attempts.

Instead, I fancy having them be repelled by holy items or prayer, similar to how a holy symbol affects a vampire. Something like the following:*Fear of Sanctity:* Ghula have a pathological terror of holy objects, places and phrases. These things don't harm the ghula — they merely keep it at bay. Ghula will refuse to enter sanctified ground, and recoil from any creature that is reciting prayers (requires a DC15 Knowledge (religion) check) or strongly presenting a holy symbol. Holding a ghula at bay in this fashion takes a standard action each  round. A recoiling ghula must stay at least 5 feet away from the praying or symbol-holding creature, and cannot touch or make melee attacks against the creature. 

The recoiling ghula can attempt a DC20 Will save to overcome its terror, but can only make one attempt per encounter. If it succeeds at the Will save, the ghula can enter the sanctified ground or attack the creature holding it at bay, but is shaken for the remainder of the encounter. If it fails the Will save it becomes frightened and flees for X minutes.​Getting back to the description and flavour text, how about this:

_A horribly ugly creature built like a lean and sinewy human, with massive spade-like hands and thick, dirt encrusted nails. Some of its features are disturbingly animalistic - __large yellow eyes like a lion, __hooflike feet, __and a hyena's __ears and fangs. Its skin is __the color of red desert sand, brown soil and gray ash, __mixed together in splotches and spots._

Ghula are man-eating genies that have been exiled to the Prime Material Plane. They are mostly found in desert wildernesses and lurking around  graveyards. Some efreet and dao keep ghula as slaves or servants, but the majority of other genies regard ghula as despised outcasts.

The name "ghula" is feminine; not because ghula are all female but  because both male and female often disguise themselves as women. They  find this is an excellent way to deceive their victims.

Ghula are adept shapeshifters, able to take on the appearance of almost any living creature. Their favorite form is a hyena - either regular sized or giant. Ghula can also turn invisible in an instant and have minor power of illusion. Ghula can not plane shift like most other genies. 

These genies  love the taste of humanoid flesh and spend most of their time plotting how to acquire it. A few "civilized" ghula like finely cooked humanoid meat, but the  majority eat it raw. Their commonest tactic is to disguise themselves as a friendly stranger and try to tempt a  victim to a lonely spot with the promise of fine dining, pleasure or  treasure. Another favorite ploy is to lure lost travelers deep into the desert using illusory fires and sounds. 

Ghula often dig up graves to eat the recently interned and steal the gravegoods. They also break into tombs, but only in search for treasure. They have no more interest in eating an old, decaying corpse than a lion would.

In its natural form, a typical ghula stands between 6 and 7 feet tall and weighs about 250 pounds.

Ghula speak Common and Abyssal, plus one elemental language (Aquan,  Auran, Ignan, or Terran).


----------



## Shade (May 19, 2010)

Looks good.  I re-arranged a bit, and moved some to tactics.

Updated.

Finished?


----------



## Cleon (May 19, 2010)

Shade said:


> Looks good.  I re-arranged a bit, and moved some to tactics.




What about the proposed Fear of Sanctity. Didn't you like it?



Shade said:


> Finished?




Not quite, I'd like to add some more social info:Ghula are not irredeemably wicked, a significant minority are not evil and have conquered their lust for humanoid flesh. Many reformed ghula have taken up a Good- or Neutral-aligned religion. Most non-evil ghula are Chaotic Neutral pranksters who delight in tricks and petty theft, although their jokes can turn very dangerous if they are angered. A few ghula are even benevolent creatures who help lost pilgrims, only terrorizing wicked or impious folk. Good-aligned ghula (and some neutral ghula) have a Fear of Sacrilege instead of an evil ghula’s Fear of Sanctity; they recoil from unholy symbols or blasphemous prayers and blasphemies, and refuse to step upon ground that has been desecrated.

Even evil ghula are not invariably hostile. They will associate with humanoids who share their malevolent nature, usually bandits or malevolent spellcasters. They expect their friends and allies to share their taste for humanoid flesh, anyone who refuses to join in their feast will become a meal rather than a guest. A few powerful ghula rule over entire tribes of humanoid cannibals in small, hidden kingdoms. Such “civilized” evil ghula often use id moss to drug strangers and slaves into idiocy, the witless captives are then fattened up with rich foods before being roasted and eaten.​If you don't like Fear of Sanctity you'll need to cut out the bit in red.


----------



## Shade (May 19, 2010)

Sorry, I forgot about that.   Looking back, I like it, and would like to limit the fleeing to 1 minute.

As for this part...



			
				Cleon said:
			
		

> Good-aligned ghula (and some neutral ghula) have a Fear of Sacrilege instead of an evil ghula’s Fear of Sanctity; they recoil from unholy symbols or blasphemous prayers and blasphemies, and refuse to step upon ground that has been desecrated.




I'd rather change their alignment to "always chaotic evil" or "always evil, usually chaotic".   They are cruel and anthropophagus, so I can't begin to imagine a good-aligned ghula (shudder).   Since ghouls are "always chaotic evil", I think that works fine.


----------



## Cleon (May 20, 2010)

Shade said:


> Sorry, I forgot about that.   Looking back, I like it, and would like to limit the fleeing to 1 minute.



Good!



Shade said:


> I'd rather change their alignment to "always chaotic evil" or "always evil, usually chaotic".   They are cruel and anthropophagus, so I can't begin to imagine a good-aligned ghula (shudder).   Since ghouls are "always chaotic evil", I think that works fine.




I beg to disagree. According to Islamic theology, all genies have souls and are capable of becoming Muslims. There is at least one story about a hero being attacked by a band of murderous ghuls who defeats them, and the ghuls later convert to Islam.

Also, in some tales ghuls are more mischievous (or malicious) tricksters than cannibal murderers, such ghuls may like to get folk lost in the desert but they do so to laugh at them running around in circles rather than because they want to eat them.

So I'd really like to keep the "Often chaotic evil" and the potential for neutral or even good ghuls.

They've got free will and don't have the Evil subtype, so shouldn't be stuck in an alignment straightjacket.


----------



## freyar (May 20, 2010)

Fleeing for 1 minute is good.  I guess I can see non-CE ghula, but only if we loosen up the flavor text a bit.

Then I think it's done, unless you want to put in a throwaway line or something in the org about taking over gnoll tribes.


----------



## Shade (May 20, 2010)

Per the RAW, even the "always" restrictor still allows for the rare exception.  

I still don't like the idea of good-aligned ones, but will agree in the interests of moving on.

Updated.

Here's the next one...

*Ghost-Stone*
CLIMATE/TERRAIN: Any, often subterranean
FREQUENCY: Very rare
ORGANIZATION: None
ACTIVITY CYCLE: Shadow activated
DIET: Living beings
INTELLIGENCE: Average
TREASURE: 50% E
ALIGNMENT: (Any) evil
NO. APPEARING: 1
ARMOR CLASS: 3
MOVEMENT: None
HIT DICE: 20 (stone only)
THAC0: Not applicable
NO. OF ATTACKS: 1
DAMAGE/ATTACK: 1-20
SPECIAL ATTACKS: Blood drain
SPECIAL DEFENSES: None
MAGIC RESISTANCE: See below
SIZE: L (10. tall)
MORALE: Fearless
XP VALUE: 4,000

Ghost-stones are just that: stones inhabited by ghosts. A powerful, evil individual may choose to send his malicious spirit into a specially prepared stone upon his death. The person prefers an undead existence to risking the punishments of the netherworld. The ghost-stone is often placed so that it guards the treasure the evil person hoarded in life; the treasure may actually be concealed within the stone itself.

Combat: If the shadow of a character falls upon a ghost-stone, that person is trapped. The individual can still fight and cast spells, but is unable to move more than 10. away from the stone. The ghoststone uses the shadowy connection to drain the victim.s blood, doing 1-20 hp damage per round automatically. 

There are two ways to destroy a ghoststone. If the stone holding the evil ghost is completely hacked apart, the spirit is forced to depart and undertake its long delayed journey to the netherworld. An exorcism spell has the same effect. The ghost in the stone can be pacified if its name is known. A simple command of: .[Ghost.s true name] be still, and at peace. calms the angry spirit even if its treasure is taken. In a campaign, the DM has the option of revealing the ghost.s name to the PCs, perhaps making the answer a puzzle or riddle.

Since ghost-stones look like any other stones, they normally attack with surprise. The first indication of trouble is when a character.s shadow gets automatically trapped. If the characters have some reason to be suspicious of that particular stone, the DM should allow a saving throw vs. wands to the PC. Any character who strikes the ghoststone physically, without first choosing an attack angle that guarantees that his shadow will not fall upon the stone, could end up trapped also. Each person in addition to the first gains a saving throw vs. wands to avoid entrapment. Only one person at a time will be drained of blood, however. Other trapped individuals are simply unable to move away. If the ghoststone survives attacks against it, it eventually drains all of its victims of blood.

A cleric has the same chance to turn away the spirit in a ghost-stone as he has to turn a ghost. If turning is successful, the ghost-stone releases all victims currently being held. It will not attack unless it is itself attacked, or if a character tries to steal the treasure the ghost-stone is guarding.

(Note that the .Habitat/Society. Category is meaningless for the ghost-stone.)

Originally appeared in Dragon Magazine #162 (1990).


----------



## Cleon (May 20, 2010)

freyar said:


> Fleeing for 1 minute is good.  I guess I can see non-CE ghula, but only if we loosen up the flavor text a bit.






freyar said:


> Then I think it's done, unless you want to put in a throwaway line or something in the org about taking over gnoll tribes.




Well I was thinking the following would have loosened it up enough and covered the humanoid tribes, but Shade's left most of it out of the Update:
Ghula are not irredeemably wicked, a significant minority are not evil  and have conquered their lust for humanoid flesh. Most non-evil ghula  are Chaotic Neutral pranksters who delight in tricks and petty theft,  although their jokes can turn very dangerous if they are angered. A few  ghula are even benevolent creatures who help lost pilgrims, only  terrorizing wicked or impious folk. Some reformed ghula  have taken up a Good- or Neutral-aligned religion. 

Good-aligned ghula (and some neutral ghula) have a fear of sacrilege  instead of an evil ghula’s fear of sanctity; they recoil from unholy  symbols or blasphemous prayers and blasphemies, and refuse to step upon  ground that has been desecrated.

Even evil ghula are not invariably hostile. They will associate with  humanoids who share their malevolent nature, usually bandits or  malevolent spellcasters. They expect their friends and allies to share  their taste for humanoid flesh, anyone who refuses to join in their  feast will become a meal rather than a guest. A few powerful ghula rule  over entire tribes of humanoid cannibals in small, hidden kingdoms. Such  “civilized” evil ghula often use id moss to drug strangers and slaves  into idiocy, the witless captives are then fattened up with rich foods  before being roasted and eaten.​As for the org line, I'd be fine with adding a tribe.

Organization: Solitary, company (2-4), band (5-20) or tribe (1-20 ghula plus 20-200 humanoids, often gnolls)


----------



## Shade (May 20, 2010)

Added all that.  On to the ghost-stone now?


----------



## Cleon (May 20, 2010)

Shade said:


> Added all that.  On to the ghost-stone now?




I'm happy now.

The ghost stone doesn't have much to work with. They just trap a victim and drain their hit points unless the stone is destroyed, exorcised or turned.

They could almost be a hazard.

Can you think of anything that would jazz it up a bit?


----------



## Shade (May 20, 2010)

Maybe treat the stone as a pseudo-phylactery/offensive magic item?   The ghost could function similar to a normal ghost, but could move its stone around to gain tactical advantage of its shadow-leeching powers.


----------



## freyar (May 21, 2010)

These are weird.  Rather than movement, though, I'd rather give them some ghostly abilities, like weak telekinesis, or SLAs.  Is that what you mean, Shade?


----------



## Cleon (May 22, 2010)

Shade said:


> Maybe treat the stone as a pseudo-phylactery/offensive magic item?   The ghost could function similar to a normal ghost, but could move its stone around to gain tactical advantage of its shadow-leeching powers.




Having it move the stone would stretch it too far for me. I wouldn't mind having a ghost that's tied to the stone (maybe it must stay within the stone's shadow-leeching radius?), but it needs an ally or possessed victim to move the stone around.


----------



## freyar (May 24, 2010)

Yes, I'm not fond of actually moving the stone.  Smaller objects, maybe.  We did some kind of "half-ghost" recently with this type of minor telekinesis, I think, but I can't recall the name.


----------



## Cleon (May 24, 2010)

Some kind of poltergeist-like power to throw a small object, causing wild panic in those that see it?


----------



## freyar (May 25, 2010)

I don't know that I'd go so far as to inspire panic, but that's the general idea.  Anyone remember what those half-ghosts were?  I think they have just the ability I'd like. 

By the way, we might look at gaze attacks for the shadow mechanic.


----------



## Shade (May 25, 2010)

Telekinesis (Su): A kada can use telekinesis as a standard action (caster level 2nd). When a kada uses this power, it must wait 1d4 rounds before using it again. A kada can typically use its telekinesis only to affect a certain type of item (usually the same type as its bonded object). For example, a departed warrior might affect swords, while a farmer might affect scythes and an alchemist might have power over glass containers.


----------



## freyar (May 25, 2010)

Yes, that fits.  If we just keep the CL low on telekinesis, it can't do too much with it. We could also limit it to the "sustained force" version.  Or even just switch to mage hand.

If these aren't going to be hazards, we might want to think about HD, too.  20 seems perhaps a bit high for the likely CR (though the shadow grab could end up pretty nasty).


----------



## Cleon (May 26, 2010)

freyar said:


> Yes, that fits.  If we just keep the CL low on telekinesis, it can't do too much with it. We could also limit it to the "sustained force" version.  Or even just switch to mage hand.




It all depends on whether we want it using it in combat or not.

I'm think the "Combat Maneuver" version of _telekinesis_ would be the best option. It doesn't do damage directly, but it could use it to grapple & drag or bull rush an enemy into range of its deadly aura.



freyar said:


> If these aren't going to be hazards, we might want to think about HD, too.  20 seems perhaps a bit high for the likely CR (though the shadow grab could end up pretty nasty).




The 20 Hit Dice is "stone only". I suspect that's just a means of giving the stone a lot of hit points.

We can just give the stone separate hp to the ghost, and hardness too, probably.


----------



## Shade (May 26, 2010)

You know, couldn't we just make it a slight modification to the ghost template?   Oriental Adventures, Monsters of Faerun, and Libris Mortis all offered slightly variant ghost with just a special ability or two different.

In this case, we could swap the standard telekinesis with limited telekinesis (or just state that the ghost's telekinesis ability has no power over its own stone), a "stone phylactery" rather than standard rejuvenation, and the shadow draining power?


----------



## freyar (May 26, 2010)

It does depend on how we want to use telekinesis.  I'm ok with all uses as long as the CL is fairly low.

Hardness is ok, following the animated object precedent.  But I think I'd want to stick to size appropriate HD, like animated objects.  Large animated objects only get 4HD, after all!  I could go for more than that, but I don't think the hp have to represent all the physical hp of the stone, just the hp of the critter.  I'd like to avoid having two hp totals if possible.

Edit: cross-posted with Shade.  I think the variant ghost is probably the best idea after all.  In that case, I can support having two hp totals: one to destroy the ghost and one to get rid of the phylactery (after the ghost has been removed for the time being).


----------



## Shade (May 26, 2010)

Yep.  We could make the stone fairly tough to destroy (maybe requring dispel evil or something else in addition to breaking it?)   PCs can always throw it out of range during a battle, and deal with it later.


----------



## freyar (May 26, 2010)

Works for me.  Let's do that.  

Stone Phylactery (Su): This sqecial quality of a ghost-stone replaces the standard ghost's rejuvenation special quality.  Each ghost-stone is bound to a Large stone, which has hardness 8, 540 hp, and a break DC of 50, and the ghost is not capable of leaving the stone phylactery's space.  If this stone phylactery is not destroyed, a ghost-stone which is reduced to 0 hp or less will rejuvenate in the stone in 1 day.

Points to consider about this:
Ghost-stone really bound to stone's space, or just within a short range?
Should hardness, hp, etc be increased if dispel evil, etc, not used first?  I just took the values for 3 ft of hewn stone in the SRD.
I bumped up the rejuvenation power (no level check, faster rejuvenation) due to the phylactery.


----------



## Shade (May 26, 2010)

freyar said:


> Ghost-stone really bound to stone's space, or just within a short range?




I'd prefer short range, probably 90 or 120 feet.



freyar said:


> Should hardness, hp, etc be increased if dispel evil, etc, not used first?  I just took the values for 3 ft of hewn stone in the SRD.




I was thinking that using the proper spell to beat a significant caster level check is enough to permanently dislodge the ghost from its stone (and thus its next "death" is final).  What do you think?



freyar said:


> I bumped up the rejuvenation power (no level check, faster rejuvenation) due to the phylactery.




Good call.


----------



## freyar (May 27, 2010)

Hmm, I meant *short* like 5 to 20 ft.  Let's think about this.

Interesting idea about breaking the bond between ghost and stone (as an alternative to breaking the stone I guess).  I think I like it.


----------



## Shade (May 27, 2010)

freyar said:


> Hmm, I meant *short* like 5 to 20 ft.  Let's think about this.




Sure.  Let's get Cleon's take.



freyar said:


> Interesting idea about breaking the bond between ghost and stone (as an alternative to breaking the stone I guess).  I think I like it.




It's a common film/TV trope, cutting off the villain from its source of invulnerability/immortality, then finishing the job.


----------



## freyar (May 28, 2010)

While we wait, let's try a quick revision to account for these points:

Stone Phylactery (Su): This sqecial quality of a ghost-stone replaces the standard ghost's rejuvenation special quality. Each ghost-stone is bound to a Large stone, which has hardness 8, 540 hp, and a break DC of 50.  The ghost is unable to move more than X ft from the stone phylactery. If this stone phylactery is not destroyed, a ghost-stone which is reduced to 0 hp or less will rejuvenate automatically in the stone in 1 day.  Alternately, a dispel evil (other spells????) spell cast on the stone with a successful caster level check (DC equal to the ghost-stone's HD?) breaks the connection between the ghost and the phylactery; in that case, the ghost can no longer rejuvenate unless it undergoes a new ritual binding it to the stone (a process that takes at least an uninterrupted day).


----------



## Cleon (May 28, 2010)

freyar said:


> Points to consider about this:
> Ghost-stone really bound to stone's space, or just within a short range?




My preference would be the ghost is bound to the stone's Shadow Draining aura. So it either has to stay within the draining power's area of effect, or can stray outside it but must remain within its Reach of the stone's aura.


----------



## freyar (May 30, 2010)

In that case, how do we want to do the draining?  


> If the shadow of a character falls upon a ghost-stone, that person is trapped. The individual can still fight and cast spells, but is unable to move more than 10. away from the stone. The ghoststone uses the shadowy connection to drain the victim.s blood, doing 1-20 hp damage per round automatically.




I had thought about using some gaze type mechanic, but maybe just a 10 ft aura with a Will? save.  That would mean the ghost can only move 10 ft from the stone.  Sound ok to everyone?


----------



## Cleon (May 31, 2010)

freyar said:


> In that case, how do we want to do the draining?
> 
> 
> I had thought about using some gaze type mechanic, but maybe just a 10 ft aura with a Will? save.  That would mean the ghost can only move 10 ft from the stone.  Sound ok to everyone?




I was thinking of a 10-foot radius aura, yes. Since it's blood drain are we having it attack Constitution?

How are we going to do the "trapping" effect.

The original writeup suggests it's a blanket "impossible to leave", so other creatures can't pull the victim away and they may not use _dimension door_ or the like to escape.

Do we want to include methods of escape?

Maybe a clerical turn/rebuke attempt [or a _consecrate_ spell?] can suppresses the aura for a round? Is a _freedom of movement_ spell any use?


----------



## freyar (May 31, 2010)

I was thinking of it as a compulsion, like hold person or (better yet) sympathy.  I think I'd allow characters that made their save (assuming we allow one ) to drag affected characters out, but an affected character couldn't initiate dim door etc.

Con damage, yes.  Drain maybe, but that seems possibly too much for a lower-HD ghost.  1d2 per round maybe?

Maybe an extra save to escape.  Or turn/rebuke.  If freedom of movement works against hold person (I think it does), maybe it should work here.  Then again, we might want something higher level.


----------



## Shade (Jun 1, 2010)

Wraiths are only CR 5 and deal 1d6 Con drain, so I think 1d2 drain is reasonable here.

Freedom of movement doesn't appear to work against hold person (as hold person paralyzes the victim, rather than "impede movment").  At least, that's how I read it.


----------



## freyar (Jun 1, 2010)

You know, while drain is probably ok by CR, I think I prefer Con damage, since it doesn't seem to be a permanent hp loss (of course, I don't know what the wraith used to do).  Not a big deal here, though.

Freedom of movement specifically calls out paralysis as something that impedes movement.  "This spell enables you or a creature you touch to move and attack normally for the duration of the spell, even under the influence of magic that usually impedes movement, such as paralysis, solid fog, slow, and web."  I think the question is if we want to limit to higher level spells or what.  Thoughts about saves, etc, also?


----------



## Shade (Jun 1, 2010)

Ahh...sure enough.

I think making it work like hold monster is probably the most elegant mechanic, and allowing victims to be freed in similar manners is fine with me.


----------



## Cleon (Jun 1, 2010)

Shade said:


> Wraiths are only CR 5 and deal 1d6 Con drain, so I think 1d2 drain is reasonable here.
> 
> Freedom of movement doesn't appear to work against hold person (as hold person paralyzes the victim, rather than "impede movment").  At least, that's how I read it.




There's a slight problem with that theory.



			
				Freedom of movement SRD said:
			
		

> This spell enables you or a creature you touch to move and attack normally for the duration of the spell, even under the influence of magic that usually impedes movement, such as *paralysis*, solid fog, slow, and web.


----------



## Cleon (Jun 1, 2010)

Shade said:


> Ahh...sure enough.
> 
> I think making it work like hold monster is probably the most elegant mechanic, and allowing victims to be freed in similar manners is fine with me.




The problem is the trapped person is free to move within the area of the shadow-draining field, they just can't leave it.

It's not a hold or paralysis effect, the closest spell-equivalent in the SRD is planar binding, or at least this part of it:



> To create the trap, you must use a _magic circle_ spell, focused inward. The kind of creature to be bound must be known and stated. If you wish to call a specific individual, you must use that individual’s proper name in casting the spell.
> 
> The target creature is allowed a Will saving throw. If the saving throw succeeds, the creature resists the spell. If the saving throw fails, the creature is immediately drawn to the trap (spell resistance does not keep it from being called). The creature can escape from the trap by successfully pitting its spell resistance against your caster level check, by dimensional travel, or with a successful Charisma check (DC 15 + ½ your caster level + your Cha modifier). It can try each method once per day. If it breaks loose, it can flee or attack you. A _dimensional anchor _cast on the creature prevents its escape via _dimensional travel_. You can also employ a calling diagram (see _magic circle against evil_) to make the trap more secure.
> 
> If the creature does not break free of the trap, you can keep it bound for as long as you dare.




The _magic circle_ that planar binding is linked to is a 10-foot radius, remember.

So I'm thinking this power resembles a blood-draining planar binding that works on living material plane residents.

This may get a bit nasty, depending on what methods we allow to escape from the aura or to "break the circle" and allow its occupants to escape.

Of course, we might want it to be nasty.


----------



## freyar (Jun 1, 2010)

Personally, I prefer the compulsion mechanic, but I'm fine with being nasty.


----------



## Shade (Jun 1, 2010)

As long as we don't overcomplicate it, I'm OK with either approach.

Doesn't a psionic power exist that forces victims to remain close to the manifester?  I can't find one at the moment.  Attraction isn't quite what I'd thought.


----------



## freyar (Jun 1, 2010)

I'm not seeing any power that would do what we want.  So how do we break the deadlock?


----------



## Shade (Jun 2, 2010)

Let's return to the original text...



> If the shadow of a character falls upon a ghost-stone, that person is trapped. The individual can still fight and cast spells, but is unable to move more than 10' away from the stone. The ghost-stone uses the shadowy connection to drain the victim's blood, doing 1-20 hp damage per round automatically.






> Since ghost-stones look like any other stones, they normally attack with surprise. The first indication of trouble is when a character's shadow gets automatically trapped.






> Any character who strikes the ghoststone physically, without first choosing an attack angle that guarantees that his shadow will not fall upon the stone, could end up trapped also. Each person in addition to the first gains a saving throw vs. wands to avoid entrapment. Only one person at a time will be drained of blood, however. Other trapped individuals are simply unable to move away. If the ghoststone survives attacks against it, it eventually drains all of its victims of blood.




So, in summary, the victim is trapped by its own shadow, which "streches" to 10 feet.

Here's a precedent we might be able to (heavily) modify...

Shadow Strands (Su): At will, a darkweaver can create an aura of weblike, supernatural, semisolid shadow that emanates outward from it in a 60-foot spread. A darkweaver can see normally through the shadow strands, but other creatures have great difficulty doing so. Each full 5 feet of shadow strands grants one-quarter concealment. Thus, a creature in the shadow strands 10 feet away from another creature would have one-half concealment and a creature in the shadow strands 20 feet away would have total concealment. A creature in the shadow strands has no concealment from creatures within 5 feet. Creatures with darkvision suffer these effects, and the shadow strands even baffle blindsight, but true seeing allows a creature to see normally through them.

Any creature that enters this area can freely move toward the darkweaver, but any attempt to move in any other direction is resisted by the semisolid shadow strands. A creature attempting to move in such a fashion must make a Strength check or an Escape Artist check; the creature can move away from the darkweaver 5 feet for each full 5 points by which the check result exceeds 10. If a creature is adjacent to the darkweaver (within 5 feet), it can move freely so long as it remains adjacent to the darkweaver. A creature protected by a freedom of movement spell is immune to the constraining effects of the shadow strands.

The darkweaver can move about as it wishes and bring the area of shadow strands with it. Creatures are not affected by the darkweaver's moving the strands, but the direction toward the darkweaver will likely change.

Creatures within the strands do not need to guess in which direction the darkweaver lies; it becomes immediately obvious when they try to move away and the shadow strands snarl and twist to block all other routes. When a creature without freedom of movement attempts to move against the strands, the darkweaver is immediately aware of its location even if it cannot see the creature due to invisibility.

Darkweavers are immune to other darkweavers' shadow strands and can see through them.


Some other possibilities/considerations:

If a creature casts no shadow, I'd assume it can't be trapped
If light conditions change to total darkness or other areas where a shadow isn't cast, all victims could be freed
Rather than limiting movement to 10 feet, shouldn't it be based on the creature's Space instead?
Could a creature with the ability to hide in its own shadow be able to hide from the ghost-stone, or would it become more vulnerable?
How would shadow jump work?


----------



## freyar (Jun 2, 2010)

Add to that the idea that the ghost is restricted to the range of the aura.  The shadow strands might just work, though.


----------



## Cleon (Jun 2, 2010)

Shade said:


> So, in summary, the victim is trapped by its own shadow, which "streches" to 10 feet.
> 
> Here's a precedent we might be able to (heavily) modify...
> 
> Shadow Strands (Su): *SNIP*




Having them "hooked by their own shadow" is about right. I'm thinking the shadow-trapping is a means of fixing the victim's soul/spirit to the stone, hence their inability to escape.

However, I'm not seeing that Shadow Strands as being much like what we're talking about.



Shade said:


> Some other possibilities/considerations:
> 
> If a creature casts no shadow, I'd assume it can't be trapped
> If light conditions change to total darkness or other areas where a shadow isn't cast, all victims could be freed
> ...




#1 Makes sense.
#2 Would make escaping from them way to easy methinks.
#3 Sounds OK in principle but I think it'd be easier just sticking to 10 feet.
#4 Could go either way, but I see no reason not to let it try to Hide from the blood drain, or even "wiggle out of its shadow" with an Escape Artist like check.
#5 I'm thinking _shadow jump_ would allow the victim to escape.


----------



## freyar (Jun 3, 2010)

Wow, I get the real feeling this is going to be messy.  

I'd like to leave out hiding in its own shadow, just to keep it slightly simpler. 

#2 makes sense, though maybe it's too easy.  It's this kind of thing that makes me want to turn this into an aura rather than a "shadow grab."


----------



## Shade (Jun 3, 2010)

The aura may be the best approach, as there are no rules to really adjudicate where a shadow falls.

Here's a stab at a first draft...

Shadowtrap Aura (Su):  A ghost-stone continually projects an aura to a radius of 10-feet that grabs hold of creatures' shadows.   Any creature within the area that casts a shadow must succeed on a DC X Will(?) save or become tethered to the ghost-stone via its shadow for x rounds/minutes.  The save DC is Charisma-based.

A creature trapped by the aura may not physically move (or be physically moved by others) outside the aura's area, but is otherwise unhindered.   The area within the shadowtrap aura is treated as a dimensional anchor for purposes of teleportation and other forms of extraplanar escape.  A creature with the shadow jump ability or other mode of shadow travel (such as the shadow walk spell) may escape the area as normal for the spell or ability.

A ghost-stone may employ its blood drain upon any creature trapped by its aura.  A ghost-stone's shadowtrap aura does not function in areas of total darkness.


----------



## freyar (Jun 3, 2010)

That seems reasonable to me.  The only question is if we want it to have a round/minute limit at all.


----------



## Shade (Jun 4, 2010)

I suppose it's not necessary, but it seems rather harsh since the methods of escape are so limited.


----------



## freyar (Jun 4, 2010)

Well, maybe Cleon will weigh in over the weekend.  In the mean time, should we add the blood drain to the aura or write it as a separate ability?  I think I'd like to stick it in the aura.


----------



## Cleon (Jun 5, 2010)

Shade said:


> The aura may be the best approach, as there are no rules to really adjudicate where a shadow falls.
> 
> Here's a stab at a first draft...
> 
> ...




That looks a reasonable beginning although I'd remove the duration limit.

I think it still needs some method of temporary suppressing the effect to allow a chance of escape, such as positive energy channeling (e.g. turning, or the _consecrate_ or _hallow_ spells), and I have no objection to allowing a "one chance per day" to escape via teleportation/planar magic involving a level check of some kind.

Something like:

*Shadowtrap Aura (Su):*  A ghost-stone continually projects an aura to a  radius of 10-feet that captures creatures' shadows.   Any creature  within the area that casts a shadow must succeed on a DC X Will(?) save  or become tethered to the ghost-stone via its shadow.  The save DC is Charisma-based. A ghost-stone's shadowtrap aura does not function in areas of  total darkness.

A creature trapped by the aura may not physically move outside the aura's area (or be physically  moved by others), but is otherwise unhindered. A trapped creature can use teleportation or other forms of extraplanar escape to leave the shadowtrap area if they succeed at a level check (DC X plus the ghost's Hit Dice) but is only permitted one such attempt, a _dimensional anchor_ like effect prevents any further transplanar escape attempts.  A _consecrate_ or _hallow_ spell cast within the shadowtrap area will temporarily disrupt the aura, allowing trapped creatures to leave the aura if they succeed at a Will save (DC X, with a +2 bonus on the save if _hallow_ was used). A  creature with the shadow jump ability or other mode of shadow travel  (such as the _shadow walk_ spell) may escape the area as normal for the  spell or ability.

The ghost-stone can attack all creatures within its shadowtrap aura with its  blood drain power at the end of every round.


----------



## freyar (Jun 6, 2010)

Hmm, here's going to be another variant.  As far as teleportation, I'd rather allow a caster level check every time or not at all.  The once per day bit seems too exception-based and fiddly.

I like the idea of the consecrate or hallow spells, but hallow isn't going to help much since it has a 24 hour casting time.  (Consecrate is fairly expensive, too, though it at least only takes a standard action to cast.)  I'm uncertain about requiring a save to exit, though; maybe it should just let the victims out.

Here's my stab at it:

Shadowtrap Aura (Su): A ghost-stone continually projects an aura to a radius of 10-feet that captures creatures' shadows. Any creature within the area that casts a shadow must succeed on a Will save or become tethered to the ghost-stone via its shadow. The save DC is Charisma-based. A ghost-stone's shadowtrap aura does not function in areas of total darkness.

A creature trapped by the aura may not physically move outside the aura's area (or be physically moved by others), but is otherwise unhindered. A trapped creature can use teleportation or other forms of extraplanar escape to leave the shadowtrap area if they succeed at a caster level check (DC X plus the ghost's Hit Dice); otherwise they are affected as if by dimensional anchor.  A consecrate spell cast within the shadowtrap area will temporarily disrupts the aura, granting trapped creatures one round to escape the aura. A creature with the shadow jump ability or other mode of shadow travel (such as the shadow walk spell) may escape the area as normal for the spell or ability.

At the end of its turn each round, a ghost-stone drains blood from each creature caught by its shadowtrap aura, doing 1d4? Con damage to each.  Each time it drains blood, the ghost-stone gains 5 temporary hit points.


----------



## Cleon (Jun 6, 2010)

freyar said:


> Hmm, here's going to be another variant.  As far as teleportation, I'd rather allow a caster level check every time or not at all.  The once per day bit seems too exception-based and fiddly.
> 
> I like the idea of the consecrate or hallow spells, but hallow isn't going to help much since it has a 24 hour casting time.  (Consecrate is fairly expensive, too, though it at least only takes a standard action to cast.)  I'm uncertain about requiring a save to exit, though; maybe it should just let the victims out.
> 
> ...




I can go along with dropping the hallow but I prefer the single-attempt teleportation, based on the _planar binding_ spell. Why, I was being kind allowing _one_ chance to escape.

Oh well, I would happier going along with multiple attempts if they got progressively more difficult (maybe a +1 DC per repeated attempt?).

I'd also fancy allowing clerics to "turn" the aura, something like:
A cleric can turn or rebuke the shadowtrap aura as if it were an undead creature with Y hit dice; a successful turn check temporarily disrupts the aura, granting trapped creatures one round to escape the aura. A consecrate spell cast within the shadowtrap area will also temporarily  disrupts the aura for 1 round per caster level.​Oh, and as for the blood drain damage I was thinking of something pretty low. I was thinking we could make it 1d3 points per round or even just 1 point. It'd give the PCs a bit more chance to find a way to escape.

Anyhow, putting all that together...

Shadowtrap Aura (Su): A ghost-stone continually projects an aura to a  radius of 10-feet that captures creatures' shadows. Any creature within  the area that casts a shadow must succeed on a Will save or become  tethered to the ghost-stone via its shadow. The save DC is  Charisma-based. A ghost-stone's shadowtrap aura does not function in  areas of total darkness.

A creature trapped by the aura may not physically move outside the  aura's area (or be physically moved by others), but is otherwise  unhindered. The shadowtrap area is under an effect similar to _dimensional anchor,_ a trapped creature must succeed at a  caster level check to escape via _plane shift_, _teleport_ or other forms of  extraplanar travel (DC 10 plus the ghost-stone's Hit Dice plus 1 per additional attempt). A cleric can turn or rebuke the shadowtrap aura as if it were an undead  creature with Y hit dice; a successful turn check temporarily disrupts  the aura, granting trapped creatures one round to escape the aura. A  _consecrate_ spell cast within the shadowtrap area will also temporarily  disrupts the aura for 1 round per caster level. A creature with the shadow jump  ability or other mode of shadow travel (such as the _shadow walk_ spell)  may escape the area as normal for the spell or ability.

At the end of its turn each round, a ghost-stone drains blood from each  creature caught by its shadowtrap aura, doing 1d3 Con damage to each.   Each time it drains blood, the ghost-stone gains 5 temporary hit points.


----------



## Shade (Jun 7, 2010)

freyar said:


> Hmm, here's going to be another variant.  As far as teleportation, I'd rather allow a caster level check every time or not at all.  The once per day bit seems too exception-based and fiddly.




Agreed.  My vote is still for "not at all".

I'd be OK with a successful turn check working on the aura, though.


----------



## freyar (Jun 7, 2010)

Not at all is just fine with me.  Really, I just didn't want anything too fiddly.  Here's the variant plus turning minus teleporting.  Simplifying the turning bit, also.

Shadowtrap Aura (Su): A ghost-stone continually projects an aura to a radius of 10-feet that captures creatures' shadows. Any creature within the area that casts a shadow must succeed on a Will save or become tethered to the ghost-stone via its shadow. The save DC is Charisma-based. A ghost-stone's shadowtrap aura does not function in areas of total darkness.

A creature trapped by the aura may not physically move outside the aura's area (or be physically moved by others), but is otherwise unhindered. The shadowtrap area is under an effect similar to dimensional anchor: a trapped creature cannot escape via plane shift, teleport, or other forms of extraplanar travel, although a creature with the shadow jump ability or other mode of shadow travel (such as the shadow walk spell) may escape the area as normal for the spell or ability. If the ghost-stone is successfully turned or rebuked, the shadowtrap aura is disrupted for 1 round, granting trapped creatures a chance to escape the aura. A consecrate spell cast within the shadowtrap area also temporarily disrupts the aura for 1 round per caster level. 

At the end of its turn each round, a ghost-stone drains blood from each creature caught by its shadowtrap aura, doing 1d3 Con damage to each. Each time it drains blood, the ghost-stone gains 5 temporary hit points.


----------



## Shade (Jun 7, 2010)

Perfect!


----------



## Cleon (Jun 8, 2010)

The latest version is OK by me.

What's next to do?


----------



## freyar (Jun 9, 2010)

Actually, I was just wondering if we need to spell out the effects of spells like freedom of movement, freedom, etc.

Then maybe a homebrews with this and the stone phylactery, just to see where we are.


----------



## Shade (Jun 9, 2010)

Yes, we should probably do so.

Added to Homebrews what we've got so far.


----------



## freyar (Jun 9, 2010)

Let's look back at the original text.  Emphasis mine:


> Combat: If the shadow of a character falls upon a ghost-stone, that person is trapped. The individual can still fight and cast spells, but is unable to move more than 10. away from the stone. The ghoststone uses the shadowy connection to drain the victim.s blood, doing 1-20 hp damage per round automatically.
> 
> There are two ways to destroy a ghoststone. If the stone holding the evil ghost is completely hacked apart, the spirit is forced to depart and undertake its long delayed journey to the netherworld. An *exorcism* spell has the same effect. *The ghost in the stone can be pacified if its name is known.* A simple command of: .[Ghost.s true name] be still, and at peace. calms the angry spirit even if its treasure is taken. In a campaign, the DM has the option of revealing the ghost.s name to the PCs, perhaps making the answer a puzzle or riddle.
> 
> ...




That suggests some edits.  First, we should probably allow some other spells to break the connection to the phylactery.  The DC = HD is probably ok, though, since it shouldn't be too hard.  

Next, we should probably have turning affect the aura the whole time turning works.  And blood drain should only work on one victim at a time; maybe it should be split out after all.  If we can all agree on that, I guess it's about done.


----------



## Cleon (Jun 12, 2010)

freyar said:


> Let's look back at the original text.  Emphasis mine:
> 
> That suggests some edits.  First, we should probably allow some other spells to break the connection to the phylactery.  The DC = HD is probably ok, though, since it shouldn't be too hard.
> 
> Next, we should probably have turning affect the aura the whole time turning works.  And blood drain should only work on one victim at a time; maybe it should be split out after all.  If we can all agree on that, I guess it's about done.




I don't mind _exorcism_ breaking the shadowtrap but I think _freedom of movement_ shouldn't have any effect on it.

We should limit the blood drain to one victim per round.


----------



## freyar (Jun 13, 2010)

Except exorcism isn't core.  We currently have dispel evil, but maybe we should just say "or similar spells" to "break" the phylactery.

I don't know how to avoid having freedom of movement affect it, unless we call it out specifically as not working.  I'm fine with leaving it ambiguous if we can't agree, though.


----------



## Cleon (Jun 13, 2010)

freyar said:


> Except exorcism isn't core.  We currently have dispel evil, but maybe we should just say "or similar spells" to "break" the phylactery.
> 
> I don't know how to avoid having freedom of movement affect it, unless we call it out specifically as not working.  I'm fine with leaving it ambiguous if we can't agree, though.




We can just add freedom to movement to the "cannot escape by" list and dispel evil to the "suppresses shadowtrap" list. Might want to add a mention of the _freedom_ spell.

We'll also need to change the blood drain text. How about giving the  ghost a blood draining touch attack and allowing it to use it as a  ranged attack against anything within its shadowtrap?

Revising...*Shadowtrap Aura (Su):* A ghost-stone continually projects an aura to a  radius of 10-feet that captures creatures' shadows. Any creature within  the area that casts a shadow must succeed on a Will save or become  tethered to the ghost-stone via its shadow. The save DC is  Charisma-based. A ghost-stone's shadowtrap aura does not function in  areas of total darkness.

A creature trapped by the aura may not physically move outside the  aura's area (or be physically moved by others), but is otherwise  unhindered. The shadowtrap area is under an effect similar to   _dimensional anchor_: a trapped creature cannot escape via _plane shift_,  _teleport_, or other forms of extraplanar travel, although a creature with  the shadow jump ability or other mode of shadow travel (such as the _ shadow walk_ spell) may escape the area as normal for the spell or  ability. A _freedom of movement_ spell has no effect on a shadowtrap, but creatures under a _freedom_ spell are immune to its effects. If the ghost-stone is successfully turned or rebuked, the  shadowtrap aura is disrupted for 1 round, granting trapped creatures a  chance to escape the aura. A _consecrate__, dispel evil_ or similar spell cast within the shadowtrap  area also temporarily disrupts the aura for 1 round per caster level.

The ghost-stone can use its blood drain special attack (see above) to make incorporeal ranged touch attacks against a opponents within its shadowtrap. ​Then we just need a blood-drain SA. Something like:

*Blood Drain (Ex):* A ghost-stone has an incorporeal touch attack that does 1d3 Constitution damage. It can use this attack as a melee touch attack or a ranged touch attack, but can only make ranged blood drain attacks against creatures trapped by its shadowtrap aura (see below). Each time it drains blood, the ghost-stone gains 5 temporary hit points.


----------



## freyar (Jun 14, 2010)

Oh, actually, the dispel evil is in the Stone Phylactery SQ as a way to break the phylactery away from the ghost and prevent rejuvenation.  So no need to add it to the aura bit.  Though we may want to specify that breaking the connection of ghost to stone either does or does not turn off the aura.

Also, let's not make the blood drain a ranged touch.  The ghost is free to move within the aura, so it can just be a normal melee incorporeal touch.


----------



## Shade (Jun 14, 2010)

freyar said:


> Oh, actually, the dispel evil is in the Stone Phylactery SQ as a way to break the phylactery away from the ghost and prevent rejuvenation.  So no need to add it to the aura bit.  Though we may want to specify that breaking the connection of ghost to stone either does or does not turn off the aura.
> 
> Also, let's not make the blood drain a ranged touch.  The ghost is free to move within the aura, so it can just be a normal melee incorporeal touch.




Agreed to all that.


----------



## freyar (Jun 14, 2010)

Can we get a homebrews update to figure out where we are?


----------



## Shade (Jun 14, 2010)

Updated.


----------



## freyar (Jun 14, 2010)

Ok, I think we're missing some edits here.

Shadowtrap Aura: I think the aura should be suppressed as long as turning persists.  Also, I don't think dispel evil should suppress the trap, although....

Stone Phylactery: "a dispel evil (or similar spell) ast on the stone with a successful caster level check (DC equal to the ghost-stone's HD?) breaks the connection between the ghost and the phylactery; in that case, the ghost loses the shadowtrap aura and can no longer rejuvenate unless it undergoes a new ritual binding it to the stone (a process that takes at least an uninterrupted day)."

Look reasonable?  Or do you prefer what we have?


----------



## freyar (Jun 14, 2010)

Ooops, double post...


----------



## Shade (Jun 15, 2010)

Good suggestions.  Updated.


----------



## freyar (Jun 15, 2010)

I think the last thing (unless we do a sample) is the DC for the dispel evil check.  Since that also breaks the shadowtrap aura, want to make it a bit harder than the HD?  HD +4 or something?  10+HD/2+Cha + racial bonus?


----------



## Shade (Jun 15, 2010)

HD + x is probably easiest.


----------



## Cleon (Jun 16, 2010)

freyar said:


> Also, let's not make the blood drain a ranged touch.  The ghost is free to move within the aura, so it can just be a normal melee incorporeal touch.




I prefer it as a ranged touch. There's nothing in the original text that suggests the blood draining exposes the ghost-stone to counter attacks, which it could suffer (with the usual 50% ignore chance) if it was making melee incorporeal touch attacks.


----------



## Cleon (Jun 16, 2010)

Shade said:


> HD + x is probably easiest.




Yes, HD+10 or HD+12 or thereabouts would suit me.


----------



## Shade (Jun 16, 2010)

Cleon said:
			
		

> I prefer it as a ranged touch. There's nothing in the original text that suggests the blood draining exposes the ghost-stone to counter attacks, which it could suffer (with the usual 50% ignore chance) if it was making melee incorporeal touch attacks.




I'm not sure how it got associated with attacks in the first place.  Re-reading the original text, it seems to be a function of the shadowtrap, not the ghost-stone itself.



> The ghoststone uses the shadowy connection to drain the victim's blood, doing 1-20 hp damage per round automatically.




My vote is disassociate it with attacks altogether.


----------



## freyar (Jun 16, 2010)

I think this just sort of happened.  Why don't we say this?

Blood Drain (Ex): As a swift action, a ghost-stone may automatically deal 1d3 points of Con damage to a single creature caught in its shadowtrap aura.  Each time it drains blood, the ghost-stone gains 5 temporary hit points.

I went for swift because the blood drain doesn't seem like it should interfere with the ghost's attacks.


----------



## Shade (Jun 16, 2010)

Nice!  I think that works well.


----------



## Cleon (Jun 17, 2010)

freyar said:


> I think this just sort of happened.  Why don't we say this?
> 
> Blood Drain (Ex): As a swift action, a ghost-stone may automatically deal 1d3 points of Con damage to a single creature caught in its shadowtrap aura.  Each time it drains blood, the ghost-stone gains 5 temporary hit points.
> 
> I went for swift because the blood drain doesn't seem like it should interfere with the ghost's attacks.




Suits me.

I tried out swift in an earlier draft of the shadowtrap's blood drain but erased it for some reason.

Oh, I remember why - can't it use a move or standard action to perform a swift action, allowing it to Blood Drain three times a round.

Rephrase it slightly?:

Blood Drain (Ex): Once per round as a swift action, a ghost-stone may automatically  deal 1d3 points of Con damage to a single creature caught in its  shadowtrap aura.  Each time it drains blood, the ghost-stone gains 5  temporary hit points.


----------



## Shade (Jun 17, 2010)

Cleon said:


> Oh, I remember why - can't it use a move or standard action to perform a swift action, allowing it to Blood Drain three times a round.




I've never heard such a thing.  Link or page number?


----------



## freyar (Jun 18, 2010)

I can't find anything about it in the description of swift actions in the SRD...


----------



## Cleon (Jun 19, 2010)

Shade said:


> I've never heard such a thing.  Link or page number?




Sorry, it looks like I was wrong, the SRDs "You can perform only a single swift action per turn" is pretty clear!

For some reason I was thinking they were exchangeable, like you can use a standard action to take a move action, so standard-move-swift actions nestled inside each other like Russian dolls.

My desire for symmetry must have misled me.


----------



## Shade (Jun 21, 2010)

Updated.

+1 CR over a standard ghost?  That blood drain is fairly dangerous.

Anything else, besides a sample?


----------



## freyar (Jun 21, 2010)

The extra CR sounds about right. And I don't think they need anything else but a sample.


----------



## Shade (Jun 21, 2010)

Just modify the MM ghost?

*Ghost-Stone, 5th-Level Human Fighter*
Medium Undead (Augmented Humanoid)(Incorporeal)
Hit Dice: 5d12 (32 hp)
Initiative: +5
Speed: Fly 30 ft. (perfect)(6 squares)
AC: 12 (+1 Dex, +1 deflection) touch 12, flat-footed 11 or 21 (+1 Dex, +8 full plate, +2 heavy shield), touch 11, flat-footed 20
Base Attack/Grapple: +5/+8
Attack: Incorporeal touch +6 melee or +8 against ethereal foes (1d6 or 1d6+3 against ethereal foes); or masterwork bastard sword +10 melee (1d10+3/19-20); or masterwork shortbow +7 ranged (1d6/x3)
Full Attack: Incorporeal touch +6 melee or +8 against ethereal foes (1d6 or 1d6+3 against ethereal foes); or masterwork bastard sword +10 melee (1d10+3/19-20); or masterwork shortbow +7 ranged (1d6/x3)
Space/Reach: 5 ft./5 ft.
Special Attacks: Blood drain, corrupting touch, malevolence, manifestation, shadowtrap aura
Special Qualities: Darkvision 60 ft., incorporeal traits, stone phylactery, +4 turn resistance, undead traits
Saves: Fort +4, Ref +2, Will +2
Abilities: Str 16, Dex 13, Con -, Int 10, Wis 12, Cha 12
Skills: Climb +1, Hide -1, Listen +11, Ride +9, Search +8, Spot +11
Feats: Blind-Fight, Cleave, Exotic Weapon Proficiency (bastard sword), Improved Initiative, Power Attack, Weapon Focus (bastard sword)
Climate/Terrain: Temperate plains
Organization: Solitary, gang (2-4), or mob (7-12)
Challenge Rating: 8
Treasure: None
Alignment: Any
Advancement: By character class
Level Adjustment: +5

Combat

Blood Drain (Ex): As a swift action, a ghost-stone may automatically deal 1d3 points of Con damage to a single creature caught in its shadowtrap aura. Each time it drains blood, the ghost-stone gains 5 temporary hit points.

Corrupting Touch (Su): A ghost that hits a living target with its incorporeal touch attack deals 1d6 points of damage. Against ethereal opponents, it adds its Strength modifier to attack and damage rolls. Against nonethereal opponents, it adds its Dexterity modifier to attack rolls only.

Malevolence (Su): Once per round, an ethereal ghost can merge its body with a creature on the Material Plane. This ability is similar to a magic jar spell (caster level 10th or the ghost’s Hit Dice, whichever is higher), except that it does not require a receptacle. To use this ability, the ghost must be manifested and it must try move into the target’s space; moving into the target’s space to use the malevolence ability does not provoke attacks of opportunity. The target can resist the attack with a successful Will save (DC 16). A creature that successfully saves is immune to that same ghost’s malevolence for 24 hours, and the ghost cannot enter the target’s space. If the save fails, the ghost vanishes into the target’s body.

Manifestation (Su): Every ghost has this ability. A ghost dwells on the Ethereal Plane and, as an ethereal creature, it cannot affect or be affected by anything in the material world. When a ghost manifests, it partly enters the Material Plane and becomes visible but incorporeal on the Material Plane. A manifested ghost can be harmed only by other incorporeal creatures, magic weapons, or spells, with a 50% chance to ignore any damage from a corporeal source. A manifested ghost can pass through solid objects at will, and its own attacks pass through armor. A manifested ghost always moves silently. A manifested ghost can strike with its touch attack or with a ghost touch weapon (see Ghostly Equipment, below). A manifested ghost remains partially on the Ethereal Plane, where is it not incorporeal. A manifested ghost can be attacked by opponents on either the Material Plane or the Ethereal Plane. The ghost’s incorporeality helps protect it from foes on the Material Plane, but not from foes on the Ethereal Plane.

When a spellcasting ghost is not manifested and is on the Ethereal Plane, its spells cannot affect targets on the Material Plane, but they work normally against ethereal targets. When a spellcasting ghost manifests, its spells continue to affect ethereal targets and can affect targets on the Material Plane normally unless the spells rely on touch. A manifested ghost’s touch spells don’t work on nonethereal targets.

A ghost has two home planes, the Material Plane and the Ethereal Plane. It is not considered extraplanar when on either of these planes.

Shadowtrap Aura (Su): A ghost-stone continually projects an aura to a radius of 10-feet that captures creatures' shadows. Any creature within the area that casts a shadow must succeed on a DC 13 Will save or become tethered to the ghost-stone via its shadow. A ghost-stone's shadowtrap aura does not function in areas of total darkness.  The save DC is Charisma-based.

A creature trapped by the aura may not physically move outside the aura's area (or be physically moved by others), but is otherwise unhindered. The shadowtrap area is under an effect similar to dimensional anchor: a trapped creature cannot escape via plane shift, teleport, or other forms of extraplanar travel, although a creature with the shadow jump ability or other mode of shadow travel (such as the shadow walk spell) may escape the area as normal for the spell or ability. A freedom of movement spell has no effect on a shadowtrap, but creatures under a freedom spell are immune to its effects. If the ghost-stone is successfully turned or rebuked, the shadowtrap aura is disrupted for as long as the turning persists, granting trapped creatures a chance to escape the aura. A consecrate or hallow spell cast within the shadowtrap area also temporarily disrupts the aura for 1 round per caster level.

The ghost-stone can use its blood drain special attack (see above) to make incorporeal ranged touch attacks against a opponents within its shadowtrap. 

Stone Phylactery (Su): This sqecial quality of a ghost-stone replaces the standard ghost's rejuvenation ability. Each ghost-stone is bound to a Large stone, which has hardness 8, 540 hp, and a break DC of 50. The ghost is unable to move more than 10 feet from the stone phylactery. If this stone phylactery is not destroyed, a ghost-stone which is reduced to 0 hp or less will rejuvenate automatically in the stone in 1 day. A dispel evil (or similar spell) ast on the stone with a successful DC 15 caster level check breaks the connection between the ghost and the phylactery; in that case, the ghost loses the shadowtrap aura and can no longer rejuvenate unless it undergoes a new ritual binding it to the stone (a process that takes at least an uninterrupted day).

Skills: Ghosts have a +8 racial bonus on Hide, Listen, Search, and Spot checks.


----------



## Shade (Jun 21, 2010)

It looks like we never finished deciding upon telekinesis...



Shade said:


> Telekinesis (Su): A kada can use telekinesis as a standard action (caster level 2nd). When a kada uses this power, it must wait 1d4 rounds before using it again. A kada can typically use its telekinesis only to affect a certain type of item (usually the same type as its bonded object). For example, a departed warrior might affect swords, while a farmer might affect scythes and an alchemist might have power over glass containers.






freyar said:


> Yes, that fits.  If we just keep the CL low on telekinesis, it can't do too much with it. We could also limit it to the "sustained force" version.  Or even just switch to mage hand.






Cleon said:


> It all depends on whether we want it using it in combat or not.
> 
> I'm think the "Combat Maneuver" version of _telekinesis_ would be the best option. It doesn't do damage directly, but it could use it to grapple & drag or bull rush an enemy into range of its deadly aura.






Shade said:


> ...we could swap the standard telekinesis with limited telekinesis (or just state that the ghost's telekinesis ability has no power over its own stone)...






freyar said:


> It does depend on how we want to use telekinesis.  I'm ok with all uses as long as the CL is fairly low.


----------



## freyar (Jun 22, 2010)

You know, I'm not so bothered by telekinesis now that we've done it as a variant ghost. On the other hand, malevolence doesn't seem to work so well for this variant, since they can't leave the shadowtrap aura.  What if we change the note about the variant to the following?

"It functions as a normal ghost, except it never possesses the standard malevolence or rejuvenation powers, may not use telekinesis against its stone phylactery, and always possesses the following abilities:"


----------



## Shade (Jun 22, 2010)

I think that works well.


----------



## freyar (Jun 22, 2010)

I guess that's about it for these, then.


----------



## Shade (Jun 22, 2010)

Updated.


----------



## Cleon (Jun 22, 2010)

Shade said:


> Updated.




There's a "c" missing from the Stone Phylactery text, but apart from that it looks done (at long last!).

Stone Phylactery (Su): This sqecial quality of a ghost-stone replaces  the standard ghost's rejuvenation ability. Each ghost-stone is bound to a  Large stone, which has hardness 8, 540 hp, and a break DC of 50. The  ghost is unable to move more than 10 feet from the stone phylactery. If  this stone phylactery is not destroyed, a ghost-stone which is reduced  to 0 hp or less will rejuvenate automatically in the stone in 1 day. A  dispel evil (or similar spell) *ast *on the stone with a successful DC 15  caster level check breaks the connection between the ghost and the  phylactery; in that case, the ghost loses the shadowtrap aura and can no  longer rejuvenate unless it undergoes a new ritual binding it to the  stone (a process that takes at least an uninterrupted day).


----------



## Shade (Jun 30, 2010)

Fixed the missing "c".

Next!

The Etruscans often associated their own mythology with that of the Greeks. In the course of time Greek names have come to replace the Etruscan ones. It is more probable that, because the only accounts we have of the Etruscans were written by Greeks and Romans, that the writers simply used more familiar names. Sometimes the names were given slightly different spellings to differentiate them from the Greek originals.

Charun was a male demon in the Etruscan underworld who may have been a god fallen on hard times. His symbol is a hammer that he carries on his shoulder, or with which he supports himself, like a cane. He has a nose like a vulture’s, pointed animal ears, hair entwined with snakes, and wings growing out of his back. In Etruscan mythology Charun escorts the dead, and watches over the portals of graves.

Charun is obviously associated with the ferryman of the dead for the Greeks: Charon. The Charun of the Etruscans is, however, more ferocious and active than the dread ferryman. It seems likely that, for the Etruscans, Charun really was the demon of death who kills the dying and carries the victim off to the underworld. Charun was worshiped, or appeased, by the Etruscans essentially like a god. He even had a special order of priests called charuntes (or charontes) who served Charun and who carried hammers similar to the demon’s, These priests have inspired an undead monster. They have returned from the dead, much like a lich, to serve the gods of death and evil using clerical spells instead of magical spells.

*Charuntes*
CLIMATE/TERRAIN: Any
FREQUENCY: Very rare
ORGANIZATION: Roving bands
ACTIVITY CYCLE: Not applicable
DIET: Not applicable
INTELLIGENCE: Very to exceptional
TREASURE: Nil
ALIGNMENT: Neutral evil
NO. APPEARING: 1-4
ARMOR CLASS: 0*
MOVEMENT: 9, Fl 18
HIT DICE: 9 + *
THAC0: See below
NO. OF ATTACKS: 1 hammer/1 snake
DAMAGE/ATTACK: 2-8 + 2*/1-4 + poison
SPECIAL ATTACKS: Clerical spells
SPECIAL DEFENSES: + 1 weapon to hit
MAGIC RESISTANCE: Nil
SIZE: M
MORALE: Fearless (20)
X.P. VALUE: 9th = 7,000 xp;
10th = 8,000 xp;
11th = 9,000 xp, etc.
* At the DM’s discretion, higher level charuntes could have more hit points (due to a high Constitution score when alive) or have better armor and do more damage with their hammers (i.e., using more valu able magical equipment, or having better Dexterity or Strength scores).

Charuntes were once the priests of some neutral evil death god, goddess, or major fiend. They look like winged humanoids with the nose of a vulture, pointed animal ears, and snakes instead of hair. They have come back from the dead to harvest victims for their evil masters.

Combat: Charuntes attack using +2 two-handed hammers. They wear full plate armor +2. The snakes in their hair also attack once per round. Any victim bitten by a snake must save versus poison or die in 2-12 turns.

Charuntes also have clerical spells appropriate for the level they held in life. A priest must reach at least 9th level to come back from the dead as a charuntes. Otherwise, they could be of any level up to level 29. Note that the X.P. VALUE of a charuntes depends on its level. Hence, several values are given. The THAC0 of a charuntes will also vary by level. Taking into account the + 2 weapon, the THAC0 for various levels is: 9th = 14, 10-12th = 12, 13-15th = 10, 16-18th = 8, and 19th + = 6. If a DM allows a charuntes magical weapons greater than +2, or a high Strength score, she should adjust the THAC0 accordingly.

The following spells or attack forms have no effect on charuntes: charm, sleep, hold, enfeeblement, paralysis, polymorph, cold, electricity, insanity, or death spells or symbols (including any poisons). A cleric has the same chance to turn a charuntes as she does a lich. 

Habitat/Society: As undead, charuntes have no real society. They do, however, still retain an affinity for attacking in a group. If only one charuntes is encountered, he will be guarded by two skeleton warriors (see the MONSTROUS MANUAL. book, page 317).

While charuntes can be encountered anywhere, they are most likely to be found in spots that death gods would consider holy. Such spots include: tombs, graveyards, ruined temples, altars to a death deity, battlefields, death-cairns, and burial vaults or mounds.

Originally appeared in Dragon Magazine #210 (1994).


----------



## Shade (Jun 30, 2010)

Outsider or undead?   Monster or template?


----------



## Shade (Jul 2, 2010)

And here's some info on Charun:
Charun - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


----------



## Cleon (Jul 2, 2010)

Shade said:


> Outsider or undead?   Monster or template?




I'd make them Tomb-Tainted Outsiders (Evil, Extraplanar) with the spellcasting abilities of 9th level clerics and probably some potent rebuke undead ability.

We could use the Ghaele as a baseline for the stats and abilities, just inverted to Eeeeevil!


----------



## Shade (Jul 2, 2010)

Yeah, that seems a good fit.

We can borrow the snakes from a medusa.

Ghaele stats:  Str 25, Dex 12, Con 15, Int 16, Wis 17, Cha 16

Drop Int a tad and boost Wis equally?

Str 25, Dex 12, Con 15, Int 14, Wis 19, Cha 16


----------



## Shade (Jul 2, 2010)

Added to Homebrews assuming those stats.


----------



## Cleon (Jul 2, 2010)

Shade said:


> Yeah, that seems a good fit.
> 
> We can borrow the snakes from a medusa.




Exactly what I was thinking of!



Shade said:


> Drop Int a tad and boost Wis equally?
> 
> Str 25, Dex 12, Con 15, Int 14, Wis 19, Cha 16




That makes sense.


----------



## Cleon (Jul 2, 2010)

Shade said:


> Added to Homebrews assuming those stats.




Shouldn't the snakes get a secondary attack's damage bonus, making them 1d4+3?


----------



## Cleon (Jul 2, 2010)

Shall we start talking about spells?

I'm thinking Death and Darkness fit best for the Domains.

The Darkness domain's 3rd to 5th level spells look the best Domain picks - _blacklight, armour of darkness _and _summon monsters V_ (1d3 shadows). For the 2nd level domain spell _death knell_ has a nice ring to it, and _obscuring mist_ is marginally more useful than _cause fear_ for a monster of its likely CR.

Typical Cleric Spells Prepared (6/5+1/5+1/4+1/3+1/1+1; save DC 14 +  spell level): 
0—_x, x, x, x, x, x_;
1st—_obscuring mist*, x, x, x, x, x_; 
2nd—_death knell_*, x, x, x, x, x; 
3rd—_blacklight*, x_, x, x, x; 
4th—_armour of darkness*, x, x, x_; 
5th—_summon monsters V_* (1d3 shadows), x; 
*Domain spell. Domains: Darkness and Death.


----------



## Shade (Jul 2, 2010)

I suppose they should, even though it seems a bit odd.  

Since it serves "the gods of death and evil", let's add Evil as a third domain option (but go with the original two for the example).

The spell selection looks great so far.

Updated.


----------



## Shade (Jul 2, 2010)

A few suggestions...

Typical Cleric Spells Prepared (6/5+1/5+1/4+1/3+1/1+1; save DC 14 + spell level): 
0—detect magic (x3), guidance, read magic, virtue;
1st—bane, command, deathwatch, divine favor, doom, obscuring mist*; 
2nd—bull's strength, darkness, death knell*, desecrate, enthrall, owl's wisdom; 
3rd—animate dead, bestow curse, blacklight*, dispel magic, prayer 
4th—armour of darkness*, divine power, freedom of movement, poison; 
5th—plane shift, summon monsters V* (1d3 shadows);


----------



## Cleon (Jul 3, 2010)

Shade said:


> A few suggestions...
> 
> Typical Cleric Spells Prepared (6/5+1/5+1/4+1/3+1/1+1; save DC 14 + spell level):
> 0—detect magic (x3), guidance, read magic, virtue;
> ...




That looks good.

I've been thinking. These things' flavour text says they are sent to fetch souls for their masters, kind of like an AD&D Night Hag, so how do they do this?

At the minimum, they need the ability to travel between the Lower Realms and the Prime Material (maybe adapt the Genie's Plane Shift?) and an ability to capture an evil soul.

They can do the former using _plane shift_ (although I wouldn't mind giving them a variation on a genie's Plane Shift), but how do they harvest souls?

Some "Harvest Soul" ability?


----------



## freyar (Jul 6, 2010)

This all looks great so far. 

Either version of plane shift is good, and flavor text might be good enough for Harvest Soul (since the night hag doesn't even have a special ability for that).  Still, something that makes raising more difficult would be fine by me.


----------



## Shade (Jul 6, 2010)

Sure, let's go for the genie's plane shifting.  We'll need to determine its home plane(s) to specify in the ability.

What 5th-level spell should replace plane shift?

I agree that soul harvesting will suffice as flavor text.


----------



## freyar (Jul 7, 2010)

How about slay living?

Hades?  A neutral evil aligned plane?

I'm getting fonder of the idea that creatures killed by charuntes can't be returned from the dead as easily.  See whether you like this:

Harvest Souls (Su): Charuntes carry the souls of those they kill back to their dark master.  A creature killed by a charuntes cannot be returned to life by raise dead; a resurrection spell or more powerful magic is necessary.


----------



## Shade (Jul 7, 2010)

I can go for all that.   Updated.

Suggested flight maneuverability?

Suggested natural armor bonus?

Damage reduction 5/good?

Con damage for the poison?   1d6 primary and secondary?


----------



## freyar (Jul 8, 2010)

Agreed to DR and Con damage.

I'm inclined to say poor maneuverability, though average is ok.  

AC ought to be in the 21-26 range for a comparable outsider (since I'm guessing these are about CR 9).  Maybe +4 natural?


----------



## Shade (Jul 8, 2010)

Updated.

Skills: 10 at 12 ranks
Concentration, Knowledge (religion), Knowledge (the planes), Listen, Spellcraft, Spot...

Feats: 4
Spell Focus (Necromancy)?


----------



## freyar (Jul 9, 2010)

Hide, Intimidate, Move Silently, Sense Motive?  Or maybe Survival instead of Sense Motive, if they are sent to track down victims (in which case we may need to change the feats below).

Greater Spell Focus (Necromancy), Stand Still, Power Attack?


----------



## Shade (Jul 9, 2010)

I can go either way on Survival/Track.  It doesn't specifiy whether they harvest specific souls, or simply acquire as many as they can.  Since the rest of your feat selection is such a good fit, I'm inclined to just skip Survival/Track.


----------



## freyar (Jul 9, 2010)

Works for me.


----------



## Cleon (Jul 10, 2010)

Shade said:


> I can go either way on Survival/Track.  It doesn't specifiy whether they harvest specific souls, or simply acquire as many as they can.  Since the rest of your feat selection is such a good fit, I'm inclined to just skip Survival/Track.




I don't mind leaving out the Survival/Track since the original text places no emphasis on the hunting down a particular victim.

We're getting pretty close to finishing these, they're going faster than I thought they would.


----------



## Shade (Jul 12, 2010)

Updated.

Challenge Rating: 11?  They are definitely superior to 9th-level human clerics, and seem comparable to the CR 11 hezrou.

Treasure: Standard (includes combat gear)?

Advancement: 10-18 HD (Medium): 19-27 HD (Large) or by character class (cleric)?   This would allow for charuntes presumably created from giant clerics and other large humanoids, and allows for flexibility with caster level by stacking cleric levels.

A charuntes stands 5 to 6 feet tall and weighs 125 to 200 pounds?

Charuntes speak Abyssal, Common, and Infernal?


----------



## freyar (Jul 12, 2010)

That all strikes me as quite reasonable.  I might add Undercommon to the languages as well.


----------



## Cleon (Jul 14, 2010)

Shade said:


> Updated.
> 
> Challenge Rating: 11?  They are definitely superior to 9th-level human clerics, and seem comparable to the CR 11 hezrou.
> 
> ...




That all looks good, and I agree with Freyar on the Undercommon.


----------



## Shade (Jul 19, 2010)

Updated.

Anything left besides flavor text?


----------



## freyar (Jul 19, 2010)

Looks like that's it.


----------



## Shade (Jul 19, 2010)

Updated with flavor text.


----------



## Cleon (Jul 19, 2010)

Shade said:


> Updated with flavor text.




They look finished to me.


----------



## Shade (Jul 20, 2010)

Sadly, that was the last of the unconverted Moldvay monsters.


----------



## freyar (Jul 21, 2010)

But it was a good run.  26 pages in the thread!


----------



## Cleon (Jul 21, 2010)

Shade said:


> Sadly, that was the last of the unconverted Moldvay monsters.




What about the Moldvay versions of the Baobhan Sidhe and Dracula?

I believe there's already a 3E Baobhan Sidhe floating around somewhere, but does it resemble the Moldvay version?

The Moldvay take on Vlad Tepes is a little underwhelming, a 3E conversion would work out something like 12th level fighter with a couple of SQ and reduced vampire weaknesses.

Apart from that, there's at least one monster that's mentioned in Moldvay but which doesn't have stats - the "Galley Beggar", a prankish frightful ghost skeleton.

Any of those tickle your fancy?


----------



## Shade (Jul 21, 2010)

I'm pretty sure I've seen a conversion (or ten) of Dracula floating around.  If we're looking at uniques, though, we could tackle Hacamuli from Dragon #42.

I'll have to compare the baobhan sidhes.

Does the galley beggar have stats, or is it just in the flavor of the article?


----------



## Cleon (Jul 21, 2010)

Shade said:


> I'm pretty sure I've seen a conversion (or ten) of Dracula floating around.  If we're looking at uniques, though, we could tackle Hacamuli from Dragon #42.
> 
> I'll have to compare the baobhan sidhes.
> 
> Does the galley beggar have stats, or is it just in the flavor of the article?




It says they have the same stats as the MM2 Phantom.

Here's the relevant text:

Monsters with an affinity for skeletons include the bone devil (MM1), eye of fear and flame (FF), babau demon (MM2), and the galley beggar, an unusual ghost found mostly in the north of England. It was first mentioned in Reginald Scot’s book: _The Discoverie of Witchcraft _(1584). A galley beggar is a very thin spirit, often looking like a skeleton. Its main purpose seems to be to terrify anyone it encounters; in fact, the first part of its name, “galley,” means to frighten or scare. Galley beggars have the same game statistics as do phantoms (_Monster Manual II_, page 100).

Ruth Tongue, in _Folklore Society County Publications_ (vol. VIII), reports a headless galley beggar that used to toboggan on a hurdle down the hill between Over and Nether Stowey, his head tucked firmly under his skeleton arm and shrieking with laughter. It was only on dark nights that he rode, but a strange light surrounded him, and he would slide, yelling with laughter, right down into the street between the two villages.

The galley beggar is a ghost in the traditional sense and bears no relation to the ghost of the AD&D game. The DM can use a galley beggar in an adventure to make the skeleton guards of a treasure more effective (since only those characters who made their saving throws against fear could confront the skeletons).

Galley beggars favor strange, almost zany antics. Their senses of humor are both macabre and frightening. Including them is an easy way to add an unusual element to any adventure.


----------



## freyar (Jul 22, 2010)

Well, want to take a ToH or MM5 phantom and modify it a bit?


----------



## Cleon (Jul 22, 2010)

freyar said:


> Well, want to take a ToH or MM5 phantom and modify it a bit?




I don't have either of those sources to hand, so I'm not sure how they differ from the AD&D versions of the Phantom.

Mechanically, the Galley Beggar doesn't look much different from the Monstrous Manual's Phantom - an incorporeal spirit that's hard to banish, which causes fear in those that see it and can speak.

Unlike phantoms, they seem to be sapient creatures rather than "recordings" since they have a zany sense of humour, so I'd give them a human-average intelligence.

They are also able to emit a "strange glow".

Apart from that there's not much to go on. Maybe an internet search will turn up some folklore on them to inspire additional abilities...


----------



## Cleon (Jul 22, 2010)

Okay, after a bit of rummaging around the internet I found the following:

Derbyshire Ghost Society has:
*GALLEY BEGGAR: *
   This Ghosts appearance is startling, it is  skeletal like with little flesh remaining on its bones. It is said to  haunt rural areas and country lanes in Northern England. And gets its  name from the word Gally which means to frighten or scare. It also has  the ability to appear headless.

Parascience.org.uk has:
*Galley Beggar *
  This is an old English ghost, often reported in the North of England  and mentioned as far back as 1584, in Reginald Scot's The Discovery of  Witchcraft. This fearsome ghost is described as being almost without  flesh and bearing it's head under it's arm and emitting a deathly  scream. The name is derived from the word 'Gallery', meaning to terrify.  This ghost is likely to be encountered on country roads and deserted  lanes. 

And I found a rather amusing *picture* of one on the digital devil database. It seems to originate in a Japanese computer RPG, but I think it could serve as inspiration.

So what have we got? The Galley Beggar is a skeletal ghost. It can remove its had and has a "deathly scream".

I'm also wondering about allowing it to manipulate physical objects since it likes playing pranks. Maybe the "tobogganing galley ghost" steals the toboggan it went for a ride on?


----------



## freyar (Jul 22, 2010)

I'll see if I can copy in the ToH phantom tonight.


----------



## Cleon (Jul 23, 2010)

freyar said:


> I'll see if I can copy in the ToH phantom tonight.




Thanks, It'll be a hand reference.

Since Moldvay says Galley Beggar's have the same stats as AD&D Phantoms, here's the 2E Phantom from the *Monstrous Manual*, just to make the comparison easier:

*Phantom*
Climate/Terrain: Any/Land 
Frequency: Very rare
Organization: Solitary
Activity Cycle: Any
Diet: Nil
Intelligence: Nil
Treasure: Nil
Alignment: Neutral
No. Appearing: 1
Armor Class: Nil
Movement: 9
Hit Dice: Nil
THAC0: Nil
No. of Attacks: Nil
Damage/Attack: Nil
Special Attacks: Fear
Special Defenses: Nil
Magic Resistance: See below
Size: Varies, usually M
Morale: Nil
XP Value: Nil

Phantoms are images left behind by particularly strong death traumas. A phantom is like a three-dimensional movie image filmed at the time of death, in the place where it died.
The standard phantom may appear as almost anything. It often appears as the character who experienced the trauma-a transparent image re-enacting the death scene. Alternatively, it could represent whatever was foremost in the victim's mind at the time of death; an attacker, or some goal left unachieved. Phantoms are experienced in faded colors, by all senses.

*Combat:* It is difficult to fight phantoms, since they are merely images and have no power to directly cause harm. They cannot themselves be harmed. Swinging weapons or casting spells into the area of the image does not interfere with the projection, and they cannot be reasoned with. A phantom is not intelligent and does not exist for any real reason; tracking down its killer or completing its quest will not get rid of a phantom.
Phantoms are often mistaken for ghosts, haunts, or groaning spirits, but they can not be turned as undead. Only a priest spell _remove curse_, cast at 12th level, can dispel a phantom.
Although a phantom cannot directly do any actual harm, it is the very essence of magic and calls up a superstitious awe in anyone who sees one. The enchantment is such that the phantom affects both the mind and the senses of the observer. Creatures without minds (such as undead) are immune to the effects of phantoms, as are those rare beings who are somehow unable to experience them (since the phantom is present to all senses, blindness is not normally protection against one).
Characters witnessing a phantom must roll a successful saving throw vs. death magic, with a -2 penalty, or immediately panic and run away as per the effects of a _fear_ spell. Particularly vivid phantoms may require those who fail their saving throw to make a system shock roll, with a +10 bonus to the roll. Failure results in death for the unfortunate victim. Such a character can be raised normally, however.
There are other difficulties with the fear effect; the cause of the phantom's death might still be around. Even after centuries, traps and undead monsters can be just as effective and deadly, and running away in panic is usually not the best defense.
Of course, a phantom may provide characters with important information, either forewarning careful characters of an upcoming danger, or finding a lost and treasured object.
There is a slight chance that a character's death may engender a phantom. This chance should be minuscule to nonexistent for 0-level or very low-level characters, or for those who were expecting to die-those dying of natural causes or in war. However, characters of 4th level or above, dying suddenly or by surprise might have a 1-2% chance of becoming phantoms. If those characters were on an important mission or were subject to _geas _or _quest _spells, this chance might rise to 5-6 percent. The percentage chance for generating a phantom should never be higher than the level of the character at the time of death. (Characters killed by energy-draining undead rarely produce phantoms.) It is up to the DM to decide what the precise image presents. A character who is murdered and generates a phantom may also return as a revenant.
There are nonstandard types of phantoms that affect only one of the senses. Often, these are purely visual images, but they can also manifest themselves as sounds (explosions, moaning, or quiet whispering) or smells. Most of these phantoms require saving throws, but the effects of failure may differ. A gloomy whispering of danger might produce despair (as per the _symbol_ spells) effects. A foul stench might induce the retching effects of a ghast. Suffocating pressure, temperature extremes, the sounds of a swarm of bats, might all carry different consequences of failing the saving throw.
Of greater concern, however is that there are some phantoms that are actually evil, created when powerful evil creatures from other planes are "slain" (forced to return to their home planes) in the Prime material plane. These phantoms appear at the will of the evil creature 35% of the time, and can seriously misinform or endanger any character it meets. These phantoms can be detected with a _detect evil_ spell; _dispel evil_ can neutralize the phantom for a number of turns equal to the caster's level.


----------



## freyar (Jul 25, 2010)

These seem like primitive versions of the "haunts" that Paizo developed for their Pathfinder APs.  Anyway, here's the ToH version (it's a hazard! not sure I like that):

PHANTOM
Hazard (CR 3)
Phantoms are translucent spirits of creatures that died a particularly violent death. A phantom appears much as it did in life, though its form is clearly translucent and incorporeal.  Phantoms have no attack form other than causing fear. A phantom causes fear (by gaze) to any living creature within 30 feet of it (DC 15 Will save negates). Affected creatures flee in terror for 1d6 rounds. If the save is successful, that creature cannot be affected again by that phantom’s fear for one day. A phantom is immune to all attack forms but can be destroyed through the casting of a dismissal or banishment spell.


----------



## Cleon (Jul 25, 2010)

freyar said:


> These seem like primitive versions of the "haunts" that Paizo developed for their Pathfinder APs.  Anyway, here's the ToH version (it's a hazard! not sure I like that):
> 
> PHANTOM
> Hazard (CR 3)
> Phantoms are translucent spirits of creatures that died a particularly violent death. A phantom appears much as it did in life, though its form is clearly translucent and incorporeal.  Phantoms have no attack form other than causing fear. A phantom causes fear (by gaze) to any living creature within 30 feet of it (DC 15 Will save negates). Affected creatures flee in terror for 1d6 rounds. If the save is successful, that creature cannot be affected again by that phantom’s fear for one day. A phantom is immune to all attack forms but can be destroyed through the casting of a dismissal or banishment spell.




That's pretty basic.

I think I'd rather make a regular monster inspired by the Phantom and the Moldvay write-up but not necessarily beholden to it.

Some kind of incorporeal undead with some ghost traits bolted on to it?


----------



## freyar (Jul 26, 2010)

I agree, that seems like a better way to go.


----------



## Shade (Jul 26, 2010)

I'm in.


----------



## Cleon (Jul 27, 2010)

Good!

Medium Undead (Incorporeal) seems pretty obvious.

Don't think they should be very powerful since they are petty spooks. I'm thinking 4 Hit Dice.

They don't seem to fly like most incorporeals, but walk, run  - or toboggan!

I'm thinking we should pinch some of a ghost's Special Abilities, namely Malevolence, Frightful Moan and Horrific Appearance.

We could just make it a sub-template of a ghost, but I'd rather make it a standard monster for simplicity's sake.

Apart from that, I'm thinking an "Eldritch Glow" power that functions like _faerie fire_, so they can become visible and terrify victims even if its pitch black.

I'd like to give them a cut-down Telekinesis equivalent to _mage hand_ - maybe by touch only? - and the normal Rejuvenation.

Give them half a ghost's racial bonus (i.e. +4) on Hide, Listen, Search and Spot? Give them a hefty racial bonus on Intimidation? (+8? or +12?)

That should be a good start.


----------



## Shade (Jul 27, 2010)

I agree with all that.  Definitely a standard monster, and totally incorporeal (not ethereal like a ghost).


----------



## GrayLinnorm (Jul 28, 2010)

And the alignment should be chaotic neutral.


----------



## Cleon (Jul 28, 2010)

Shade said:


> I agree with all that.  Definitely a standard monster, and totally incorporeal (not ethereal like a ghost).




I was thinking incorporeal AND ethereal. Most of the time they're hanging about ethereally, but now and again the Manifest to become visible and scare the bejeesus out of a victim. I suspect they can not manifest in daylight, so only scare folk at night or underground.

Oh, and I would like to rework the ghost's Frightful Moan and Horrific Appearance.

Horrific Appearance might be too potent for a low level monster like this, so I was wondering about a HD-limited ability like a dragon's Frightful Presence. 

Oh, and one description I saw of them says they have a "Deathly Shriek", so how about making their ability-damaging attack a sound-based one instead?

e.g.

*Frightful Appearance (Su):* A galley beggar can unsettle foes with its mere presence. The ability takes effect automatically whenever the beggar attacks, charges, or manifests. Creatures within a radius of 60 feet are subject to the effect unless they have more HD than the galley beggar. A potentially affected creature that succeeds on a DC X Will save remains immune to that dragon’s frightful presence for 24 hours. On a failure, creatures with up to half the beggar's HD become panicked for 4d6 rounds, while those with more HD become shaken for 4d6 rounds. The save DC is Charisma-based.

*Deathly Shriek (Su):* X times a day, a galley beggar can utter a horrifying scream. Any living creature within 60 feet that hears this deathly shriek must succeed on a DC Y Fortitude save or immediately take 1d4 points of Strength damage, 1d4 points of Dexterity damage, and 1d4 points of Constitution damage. A creature that successfully saves against this effect cannot be affected by the same galley beggar's deathly shriek for 24 hours. The save DC is Charisma-based.


----------



## Cleon (Jul 28, 2010)

GrayLinnorm said:


> And the alignment should be chaotic neutral.




I agree that the little descriptions I've seen say CN, but I would like to allow for the possibility of some CE galley beggars that delight in frightening folk to death...


----------



## Shade (Jul 28, 2010)

Added to Homebrews using the wraith's ability scores.  We can adjust them a bit if you'd like.


----------



## freyar (Jul 28, 2010)

It looks ok, though the deathly shriek is probably too powerful for a critter with only 18hp.  Maybe it's ok if it's just 1/day.


----------



## Cleon (Jul 30, 2010)

Shade said:


> Added to Homebrews using the wraith's ability scores.  We can adjust them a bit if you'd like.




I was thinking of giving them the average of a Shadow and a Wraith's ability scores. Galley Beggars don't appear that smart, so I was thinking they should have average intelligence rather than Very- like a wraith.

Besides, their 4 HD is halfway between a Shadow's 3HD and a Wraith's 5 HD.

Shadow: Str —, Dex 14, Con —, Int 6, Wis 12, Cha 13
Wraith: Str —, Dex 16, Con —, Int 14, Wis 14, Cha 15

Average (Galley Beggar): Str —, Dex 15, Con —, Int 10, Wis 13, Cha 14


----------



## Cleon (Jul 30, 2010)

freyar said:


> It looks ok, though the deathly shriek is probably too powerful for a critter with only 18hp.  Maybe it's ok if it's just 1/day.




I was thinking of limiting it to 1/day (or rather 1/night).

It's fairly nasty, but it's also the galley beggar's only means of directly harming the living, since I wasn't going to give them an incorporeal touch attack.

Oh, and they should have 26 hit points, not 18. Undead use 12-siders, remember!


----------



## Shade (Jul 30, 2010)

Updated.


----------



## Cleon (Jul 30, 2010)

Cleon said:


> I'm thinking we should pinch some of a ghost's Special Abilities, namely Malevolence, Frightful Moan and Horrific Appearance.
> 
> We could just make it a sub-template of a ghost, but I'd rather make it a standard monster for simplicity's sake.
> 
> ...




Blast, I meant to put Manifestation, not Malevolence in the above list.

Anyhow, here are writeups for the other Ghost-based Powers I fancy for them. Any ideas on how to overcome their Rejuvenation?:

*Eldritch Glow (Su):* A galley beggar can surround itself with an eerie light with the same effects as the _faerie fire_  spell. This light allows the galley beggar to use its frightful  appearance power in conditions of darkness. Galley beggars can create or  extinguish their eldritch glow as a free action.

*Ghostly Hand (Su):* A manifested galley beggar can telekinetically move small objects as by the _mage hand_ spell, except its ghostly hand has a range of touch.

*Manifestation (Su):* A galley beggar spends most of its time on  the Ethereal Plane were, as an ethereal creature, it cannot affect or be  affected by anything in the material world. When a galley beggar  manifests, it partly enters the Material Plane and becomes visible but  incorporeal on the Material Plane. Galley beggars can not manifest in  daylight (either natural or from the _daylight_ spell) or within the area of a _consecrate_, _hallow_, _magic circle _or similar apotropaic spell - they have to manifest during the night, underground or in other areas of darkness.

A manifested galley beggar can be harmed only by other incorporeal  creatures, magic weapons, or spells, with a 50% chance to ignore any  damage from a corporeal source. A manifested galley beggar can pass  through solid objects at will. A manifested galley beggar remains  partially on the Ethereal Plane, and can be attacked by opponents on  either the Material Plane or the Ethereal Plane.

A galley beggar has two home planes, the Material Plane and the Ethereal  Plane. It is not considered extraplanar when on either of these planes.

*Rejuvenation (Su):* It's difficult to destroy a galley beggar through simple combat: The "destroyed" spirit will often restore itself in 2d4 days. Even the most powerful spells are usually only temporary solutions. A galley beggar that would otherwise be destroyed returns to its old haunts with a successful level check (1d20 + galley beggar's HD) against DC 13. As a rule, the only way to get rid of a galley beggar for sure is to *X*.
*
Turn Resistance (Ex):* A galley beggar has +2 turn resistance. Should a manifested galley beggar be successfully turned it is forced to stop manifesting, remaining ethereal for the duration of the turning.


----------



## Shade (Jul 30, 2010)

I'd really prefer to leave 'em as straight incorporeal creatures, avoiding all the ethereal references, if possible.


----------



## freyar (Jul 30, 2010)

I agree with Shade about incorporeal and not ethereal, since the original monster clearly says they're not AD&D ghosts.  Also, I'm not seeing much call for rejuvenation in any of the source stats we're considering.


----------



## Cleon (Jul 31, 2010)

freyar said:


> I agree with Shade about incorporeal and not ethereal, since the original monster clearly says they're not AD&D ghosts.  Also, I'm not seeing much call for rejuvenation in any of the source stats we're considering.




I'm beginning to think it's time for another Cleon Special.

From what I read they are a kind of ghost. They suddenly appear on rare occasions, to terrify or victimize folk, then vanish mysteriously. If we aren't making them ethereal I think they need _invisibility_ to explain why no-one notices them when they're not on the job.

Hmm... maybe they are a kind of Undead Fey which are trying to scare away the humans who have taken over their land? That'd fit with invisibility, which is a common Fey power. It also explains why I can't find any mention of a Galley Beggar being a ghost of a specific human - they never were humans!

So are we keeping Eldritch Glow, Ghostly Hand and the +2 turn resistance.


----------



## freyar (Aug 1, 2010)

Undead fey isn't a bad idea, actually.  And, yes, I like those three abilities.


----------



## Cleon (Aug 1, 2010)

freyar said:


> Undead fey isn't a bad idea, actually.  And, yes, I like those three abilities.




Okay, I'll revise the Special Abilities list to include those 3 powers.

I'll also modify the Horrifying Appearance so it doesn't include manifestation - since you don't like it  - and I'll do a proposal for invisibility while I'm at it.

Finally, I'd like to curb Deathly Shriek so it only works at night against creatures which don't have any anti-evil spells on them.

Revising...

*Eldritch Glow (Su):* A galley beggar can surround itself with an eerie light with the same effects as the _faerie fire_   spell. This light allows the galley beggar to use its frightful   appearance power in conditions of darkness. Galley beggars can create or   extinguish their eldritch glow as a free action.

*Deathly Shriek (Su):* Once per day, a galley beggar can utter a horrifying scream. A galley beggar's deathly shriek can not harm any creature that is in daylight (natural or from a _daylight_ spell) or that is protected by a _consecrate, magic circle against evil_,_ protection from evil_ or similar spell. Otherwise, any living  creature within 60 feet that hears this deathly shriek must succeed on a  DC 14 Fortitude save or immediately take 1d4 points of Strength damage,  1d4 points of Dexterity damage, and 1d4 points of Constitution damage. A  creature that successfully saves against this effect cannot be affected  by the same galley beggar's deathly shriek for 24 hours. The save DC is  Charisma-based.     

*Frightful Appearance (Su):* A galley beggar can unsettle foes with  its mere presence. The ability takes effect automatically whenever the  beggar attacks, charges, or suddenly appears (usually by dropping its _greater invisibility_). Creatures within a radius of 60  feet are subject to the effect unless they have more HD than the galley  beggar. A potentially affected creature that succeeds on a DC 14 Will  save remains immune to that dragon’s frightful presence for 24 hours. On  a failure, creatures with up to half the beggar's HD become panicked  for 4d6 rounds, while those with more HD become shaken for 4d6 rounds.  The save DC is Charisma-based.

*Ghostly Hand (Su):* A galley beggar can telekinetically move small objects as by the _mage hand_ spell, except its ghostly hand has a range of touch.

*Greater Invisibility (Su):* A galley beggar is normally invisible. A galley beggar can suppress its invisibility as a free action, but can not become visible in daylight (natural or from the _daylight_ spell). An invisible galley beggar can not use its frightful appearance special attack on creatures unable to see invisible creatures. Galley beggars can resume their _greater invisibility_ as a free action. 

*Turn Resistance (Ex):* A galley beggar has +2 turn resistance.


----------



## freyar (Aug 2, 2010)

This is looking pretty good. I'm on board with that.


----------



## Cleon (Aug 2, 2010)

freyar said:


> This is looking pretty good. I'm on board with that.




Let's use that then.

I still fancy Rejuvenation for them, can I bring you round?

Shall we talk Skills and Feats.

Its got bonuses in Hide, Intimidate, Listen, Search and Spot so might as well put its points in those.

Divide the ranks Hide 3, Intimidate 7, Listen 4, Search 3 and Spot 4?

Featwise, here are some incorporeal Undead for inspiration:

*Shadows* get Alertness and Dodge.
*Wraiths* get Blind-Fight and Combat Reflexes with Alertness and Improved Initiative as bonus feats.
*Ghosts* keep the feats they had in life.

Hmm, how about using a Wraith's feats but swap its Combat Reflexes for Dodge?

*Feats:* Alertness (B), Blind-Fight, Dodge, Improved Initiative (B)


----------



## freyar (Aug 2, 2010)

I still don't really like rejuvenation, but I do like the skills and feats.


----------



## GrayLinnorm (Aug 4, 2010)

Given its nature, shouldn't it have ranks in Perform (comedy)?


----------



## Cleon (Aug 4, 2010)

GrayLinnorm said:


> Given its nature, shouldn't it have ranks in Perform (comedy)?




Nah, it only _thinks_ it's funny. It's not like we're converting the Red Skeleton.


----------



## Cleon (Aug 4, 2010)

freyar said:


> I still don't really like rejuvenation, but I do like the skills and feats.




Well I'll have to leave the rejuvenation for the Cleon Special then.

So the skills & feats are:

*Skills:* Hide +9, Intimidate +17, Listen +11, Search +7, Spot +11
*Feats:* Alertness (B), Blind-Fight, Dodge, Improved Initiative (B)


----------



## Shade (Aug 5, 2010)

Cleon said:


> I'm beginning to think it's time for another Cleon Special.




Indeed!



freyar said:


> I still don't really like rejuvenation, but I do like the skills and feats.




Ditto here.



Cleon said:


> Nah, it only _thinks_ it's funny. It's not like we're converting the Red Skeleton.




_Groooooaaaaaaannnnnnnnn_

Updated.


----------



## freyar (Aug 5, 2010)

These are looking pretty good.

Environment: Any land
Organization: Solitary                         (They strike me as pretty much loners, but I don't mind adding an org.)
Challenge Rating: 3                     (I think the special abilities are good enough for that, maybe CR 4.)
Treasure: None
Alignment: Always chaotic, never good
Advancement: 5-8 HD (Medium)                     (Based on spectre and wight)


----------



## Cleon (Aug 5, 2010)

Shade said:


> Indeed!
> 
> Ditto here.
> 
> ...




Hold on, its Reflex save should be +3, not +2.


----------



## Cleon (Aug 5, 2010)

freyar said:


> These are looking pretty good.
> 
> Environment: Any land
> Organization: Solitary                         (They strike me as pretty much loners, but I don't mind adding an org.)
> ...




The Dragon Magazine article mentions a galley beggar being encountered with skeletons, who would attack creatures affected by its fear, which suggests "1 plus 2-12 skeletons, zombies or ghouls" might be appropriate. Not sure what to call the group, though.

Challenge Rating 3 is good enough as far as I'm concerned.

The rest of it looks fine.


----------



## GrayLinnorm (Aug 5, 2010)

Cleon said:


> The Dragon Magazine article mentions a galley beggar being encountered with skeletons, who would attack creatures affected by its fear, which suggests "1 plus 2-12 skeletons, zombies or ghouls" might be appropriate. Not sure what to call the group, though.




Audience?


----------



## Shade (Aug 6, 2010)

Sounds good (pun intended).

Updated.

All we need is desc, flavor, and tactics.


----------



## Cleon (Aug 6, 2010)

GrayLinnorm said:


> Audience?




Well I'd wondered about audience but was afraid it was too corny, but I'm happy if you are.


----------



## Cleon (Aug 6, 2010)

Shade said:


> Sounds good (pun intended).
> 
> Updated.
> 
> All we need is desc, flavor, and tactics.




_A glowing, semi-transparent skeleton suddenly appears, cackling horribly. It pulls its head off its shoulders and tucks it under an elbow, without interrupting its frightful laughter._

Galley beggars are undead that appear to have no purpose in life beyond terrifying mortals. Neutral galley beggars are content merely frightening their victims, but evil beggars delight in driving their victims to death or madness.

A galley beggar looks like the ghostly skeleton, often dressed in equally spectral clothes. They are able to detach and reattach their heads at will. Headlessness has no effect on a galley beggar's abilities, but any creature who sees a galley beggar pull off its head will be affected by its frightful appearance, due to the unnatural horror of the sight.

Scholars believe these undead were once fey, who are now driven to torment the humanoid races who inhabit their former lands. Galley beggars delight in pranks, malevolent tricks and bizarre antics - they are known to steal or rearrange an intruder's possessions while they sleep, and one famous galley beggar liked to toboggan down its town's high street every night.

Galley beggars can speak Common and Sylvan.

*Combat*
Galley beggars can neither appear or attack in daylight, so only pose a threat at night or underground. They use their frightful appearance at every opportunity, often by suddenly appearing (either by leaping out of hiding or dropping their _invisibility_). A hostile galley beggar may try to injure its enemies by unleashing a deathly shriek.


----------



## Shade (Aug 6, 2010)

Fantastic!   Updated.


----------



## Cleon (Aug 6, 2010)

Shade said:


> Fantastic!   Updated.




That looks like them done then.

Have you had a chance to find the Baobhan Sidhe to see if the Moldvay version is different enough to merit a conversion?


----------



## Shade (Aug 6, 2010)

I found WotC's version of the Leanan Sidhe, but no Baobhan Sidhe.  Wasn't that the basis for the banshee?


----------



## Cleon (Aug 6, 2010)

Cleon said:


> That looks like them done then.
> 
> Have you had a chance to find the Baobhan Sidhe to see if the Moldvay version is different enough to merit a conversion?




Hold on a second, we forgot to add Ghostly Hand, Greater Invisibility and Eldritch Glow to its SQs line, which should be:

*Special Qualities:* Darkvision 60 ft., eldritch glow, ghostly hand, _greater invisibility_, incorporeal traits, +2 turn resistance, undead traits


----------



## Shade (Aug 6, 2010)

Fixed.


----------



## Cleon (Aug 6, 2010)

Shade said:


> I found WotC's version of the Leanan Sidhe, but no Baobhan Sidhe.  Wasn't that the basis for the banshee?




No, as far as I know a Banshee has always been a spirit that foretells death.

A Baobhan Sith is basically a bloodsucking fey, a vampire that preys on solitary young men.

They cause death, they don't warn of it!


----------



## freyar (Aug 8, 2010)

Can't say I know much about any of these, but here's the Monstropedia entry.  Sounds like what Cleon says.  Interestingly, the Leanan Sidhe seems related to the Baobhan Sidhe, so we should figure out what WotC did with that one.


----------



## Cleon (Aug 8, 2010)

freyar said:


> Can't say I know much about any of these, but here's the Monstropedia entry.  Sounds like what Cleon says.  Interestingly, the Leanan Sidhe seems related to the Baobhan Sidhe, so we should figure out what WotC did with that one.




The Moldvay entry spelled it Baobhan *Sith*, not Sidhe, although I believe both spellings are valid.

Hmm... maybe we will need to add Force powers and lightsabres to them?

Anyhow, I think I'd better post Moldvay's writeup of them, so we have some stats to argue over constructively debate.


----------



## Cleon (Aug 8, 2010)

*The dancing vampires*
A kind of vampire spirit from Highland folklore is the _baobhan sith_ (pronounced baavan shee). Since Gaelic can be difficult to pronounce, an alternative spelling of the monster’s name could be “bavanshee.” The word itself is a dialectic variation of banshee, but the creature is completely different from the usual banshee. The following tale about a baobhan sith is retold from C.M. Robertson’s _Folklore from the West of Ross-shire_.

Four young men were on a hunting trip and spent the night in an empty shieling, a hut built to give shelter for the sheep in the grazing season. They began to dance, one supplying mouth-music. One of the dancers wished that they had partners. Almost at once, four women came in. Three danced, the fourth stood by the music-maker. But as he hummed, he saw drops of blood falling from the dancers. He fled out of the shieling, pursued by his demon partner, and took refuge among the horses. The woman could not get to him, probably because of the iron with which the horses were shod. Nonetheless, she circled round him all night, and only disappeared when the sun rose. He went back into the shieling and found the bloodless bodies of the dancers lying there. Their partners had drained them white.

*BAOBHAN SITH (Bavanshee)*
FREQUENCY: Very Rare
NO. APPEARING: 1-8
ARMOR CLASS: 5
MOVEMENT: 12”
HIT DICE: 5
% IN LAIR: 10%
TREASURE: A
NO. OF ATTACKS: 1
DAMAGE/ATTACK: 1-6
SPECIAL ATTACKS: Spells and blood drain
SPECIAL DEFENSES: Nil
MAGIC RESISTANCE: Standard
INTELLIGENCE: High
ALIGNMENT: Chaotic Evil
SIZE: M
PSIONIC ABILITY: Nil

Baobhan sith are evil spirits that roam at night seeking victims. As minor demons, they are in the “special” category for clerics who seek to turn them. The baobhan sith look like beautiful young women. Using spells, they try to trick their victims into letting them drain all the blood from the victims’ bodies. Baobhan sith have the magic-user spells _charm person_, _clairaudience_, _suggestion_, _phantasmal force_, and _teleport_.

If a baobhan sith grasps a victim (who usually allows the touch because of _charm person _or _suggestion_) and makes a successful “to hit” roll for vampiric contact, the creature automatically drains blood for 3-18 hp damage in one round. The _charm _or _suggestion _is then broken, and the victim can fight back normally — but the baobhan sith will not release the victim unless the victim makes a strength roll as if to open doors (e.g., a victim with a strength of 15 can throw off an attacker on a 1-2 on 1d6). The baobhan sith drains 3-18 hp with each further round if not removed. Any victim drained below zero hit points is dead. The baobhan sith has a physical attack (a strike with a clawed hand) which does 1-6 hp damage, but the attack is rarely used since they prefer spells and blood draining.

An iron weapon automatically does double damage to a baobhan sith (and gets a +3 bonus to hit). Since they are especially vulnerable to iron, the baobhan sith will always try to avoid contact with it (they can sense it within a 60’ radius). Oddly enough, silvered weapons have only normal effects against them. Holy water does 1-6 hp damage per vial to them.

_Originally appeared in Dragon Magazine #126 (“Hearts of Darkness” by Tom Moldvay, October 1987)._


----------



## Cleon (Aug 8, 2010)

Oh, and there's also a Baobhan Sith in the _*Ravenloft Monstrous Compendium Appendix III - Creatures of Darkness*_, but those are 2' tall malicious pixies rather than bloodsucking young ladies.

The Ravenloft version doesn't bear much (if any) resemblance to the folklore version, unlike Moldvay's take.


----------



## Shade (Aug 9, 2010)

Here's the link to the leanan sidhe.


----------



## freyar (Aug 10, 2010)

Well, on the baobhan sidhe, medium fey?  Tomb tainted?


----------



## Shade (Aug 10, 2010)

freyar said:


> Well, on the baobhan sidhe, medium fey?  Tomb tainted?




Methinks that all makes perfect sense.


----------



## freyar (Aug 10, 2010)

Ok, then.  5HD Medium Fey, with tomb-tainted.  We can rip off blood drain from the vampire:

Blood Drain (Ex): A baobhan sidhe can suck blood from a living victim with its fangs by making a successful grapple check. If it pins the foe, it drains blood, dealing 1d4 points of Constitution drain each round the pin is maintained. On each such successful attack, the baobhan sidhe gains 5 temporary hit points.

SLAs: charm person, suggestion, teleport, clairaudience/clairvoyence, telekinesis (the last for phantasmal force)?  Maybe make charm person at will, suggestion and clairaudience/clairvoyence 3/day, teleport and telekinesis 1/day?

DR cold iron or some kind of vulnerability to cold iron?


----------



## Cleon (Aug 11, 2010)

freyar said:


> Ok, then.  5HD Medium Fey, with tomb-tainted.  We can rip off blood drain from the vampire:




Tomb-Tainted Medium Fey is fine by me. They only appear at night, suggesting some kind of susceptibility to sunlight.

I'm thinking we could base their ability scores on the SRD Dryad:

Nymph: Str 10, Dex 19, Con 11, Int 14, Wis 15, Cha 18

Baobhan's are as smart as Dryads, being Highly (13-14) Intelligent. Since they grapple their victims I'd suggest increasing their Strength and maybe giving them a racial bonus or the Improved Grapple feat.

They don't seem to have as good an AC as an SRD Dryad (AC 5 => 15, vs 17 for the Dryad). Maybe +3 NA and +2 from Dex? That suggests shifting 4 points from Dex to Str:

Baobhan Sidhe: Str 14, Dex 15, Con 11, Int 14, Wis 15, Cha 18, NA +3

What do you think?



freyar said:


> SLAs: charm person, suggestion, teleport, clairaudience/clairvoyence, telekinesis (the last for phantasmal force)?  Maybe make charm person at will, suggestion and clairaudience/clairvoyence 3/day, teleport and telekinesis 1/day?




The _phantasmal force_ spell was an illusion that feels solid, not a telekinetic effect. I'd make in _minor image_ or _major image_.



freyar said:


> DR cold iron or some kind of vulnerability to cold iron?




How about both?

e.g. DR X/magic or cold iron, vulnerability to cold iron


----------



## Shade (Aug 11, 2010)

Per the 2e to 3e conversion guide, phantasmal force became silent image.  Since that is much weaker than telekinesis, let's make it 3/day.

I think I'd prefer just DR 5/cold iron like most fey, but I'm willing to discuss it further.  

Added to Homebrews.


----------



## Cleon (Aug 11, 2010)

Shade said:


> Per the 2e to 3e conversion guide, phantasmal force became silent image.  Since that is much weaker than telekinesis, let's make it 3/day.




Yes, come to think of it the old AD&D _phantasmal force_ illusion didn't include sound.



Shade said:


> I think I'd prefer just DR 5/cold iron like most fey, but I'm willing to discuss it further.
> 
> Added to Homebrews.




I'd rather give them a reason to avoid iron like in the folklore. Either a vulnerability or an aversion like the Repulsed By Silver we gave the Hendar.


----------



## Shade (Aug 11, 2010)

Cleon said:


> I'd rather give them a reason to avoid iron like in the folklore. Either a vulnerability or an aversion like the Repulsed By Silver we gave the Hendar.




Keep in mind that most other creatures with similar aversions have been simplified to DR.  That said, I don't mind a "repulsed by silver" variant if you all want it.


----------



## freyar (Aug 12, 2010)

I think I'd go with Repulsed by Iron, since they wouldn't pass horse shoes.


----------



## Cleon (Aug 12, 2010)

freyar said:


> I think I'd go with Repulsed by Iron, since they wouldn't pass horse shoes.




So just change the names in the Hendar's SQ?

*Repulsed by Cold Iron (Ex):* Baobhan sith loathe cold iron and cannot tolerate its presence. A baobhan sith must make a DC 15 Will save to enter an area laced with cold iron, and can not rest or sleep within 30 feet of cold iron. A baobhan sith has a -2 morale penalty on melee attacks against a creature wearing or wielding a cold iron object.


----------



## freyar (Aug 14, 2010)

I'd make it all iron, not just cold iron.  I think we did an allergy to iron in some regular sidhe (or shee, however they spelled it) in the fey thread, something like the druid's class restriction.   This can be some sort of extension of that.  I'd also make the save DC 20, since they have a +6 Will save, and I'd like it to be harder for them to pass the iron.


----------



## Cleon (Aug 15, 2010)

freyar said:


> I'd make it all iron, not just cold iron.  I think we did an allergy to iron in some regular sidhe (or shee, however they spelled it) in the fey thread, something like the druid's class restriction.   This can be some sort of extension of that.  I'd also make the save DC 20, since they have a +6 Will save, and I'd like it to be harder for them to pass the iron.




I'm OK with the DC increase.

I was reluctant to make it all iron because almost all PCs are likely to encounter will be carrying regular iron or steel. It is in keeping with the folklore though.

Shall we wait to see what Shade thinks?


----------



## Shade (Aug 16, 2010)

I'm fine with all iron, and agree with freyar that the sidhe's version is preferable here:

Iron Intolerance (Ex): Iron is mildly poisonous to sidhe. As a result, sidhe cannot use iron armor, weapons, or gear.


----------



## Cleon (Aug 16, 2010)

Shade said:


> I'm fine with all iron, and agree with freyar that the sidhe's version is preferable here:
> 
> Iron Intolerance (Ex): Iron is mildly poisonous to sidhe. As a result, sidhe cannot use iron armor, weapons, or gear.




That wouldn't give the aversion effect described in the story though.

I'd prefer a "Repulsed by Iron" SQ as previously proposed.


----------



## Shade (Aug 17, 2010)

OK, let's blend the two...

Repulsed by Iron (Ex): Baobhan sith loathe iron and cannot tolerate its presence. A baobhan sith must make a DC 20 Will save to enter an area laced with iron, and cannot rest or sleep within 30 feet of iron. A baobhan sith has a -2 morale penalty on melee attacks against a creature wearing or wielding an object.  Baobhan sith cannot use iron armor, weapons, or gear.


----------



## Cleon (Aug 17, 2010)

Shade said:


> OK, let's blend the two...
> 
> Repulsed by Iron (Ex): Baobhan sith loathe iron and cannot tolerate its presence. A baobhan sith must make a DC 20 Will save to enter an area laced with iron, and cannot rest or sleep within 30 feet of iron. A baobhan sith has a -2 morale penalty on melee attacks against a creature wearing or wielding an object.  Baobhan sith cannot use iron armor, weapons, or gear.




It ought to have an "iron" before the object, plus I wouldn't mind shortening it with an "and":

*Repulsed by Iron (Ex):* Baobhan sith loathe iron and cannot tolerate its  presence. A baobhan sith cannot use iron armor,  weapons, or gear and must make a DC 20 Will save to enter an area  laced with iron. They cannot rest or sleep within 30 feet of iron. A  baobhan sith has a -2 morale penalty on melee attacks against a creature  wearing or wielding an iron object.


----------



## Shade (Aug 17, 2010)

Sounds good.

Updated.


----------



## Cleon (Aug 17, 2010)

Shade said:


> Sounds good.
> 
> Updated.




Skills and feats.

Since they lure their victims to their doom, I'm thinking Bluff, Diplomacy and Sense Motive.

Listen and Spot I suppose.

Maybe make them sneaky with Hide and Move Silently.

Perform (dance) for the remaining skill?

For the feats, I was thinking Negotiator (+2 Diplomacy and Sense Motive) and Great Fortitude (+2 Fort save)


----------



## Shade (Aug 19, 2010)

The skills selection sounds great.  I think we can do better than Great Fortitude, though.


----------



## freyar (Aug 19, 2010)

I'd put an Ability Focus on charm person, but that's just me.

+4 turn resistance?


----------



## Cleon (Aug 20, 2010)

freyar said:


> I'd put an Ability Focus on charm person, but that's just me.
> 
> +4 turn resistance?




I don't think you can Ability Focus a Spell-Like Ability.

How about Quicken Spell-Like Ability (charm person)?

We just need to set the caster level to 10. Not unreasonable as it has a 5th level spell (_teleport_) listed and none of its SLAs have much level-variability.

Turn resistance sounds good. Maybe have it not get the turn resistance if the cleric is waving an iron holy symbol at it?


----------



## freyar (Aug 21, 2010)

Good idea about iron and turn resistance.  We can just add it to "repulsed by iron."

We've definitely put Ability Focus on SLAs before.  It's ok to use, since an SLA is a special attack.  Anyway, I'd prefer the save boost to the quickening.


----------



## Cleon (Aug 21, 2010)

freyar said:


> Good idea about iron and turn resistance.  We can just add it to "repulsed by iron."




I'd prefer a "belt and braces" approach of mentioning it both SQs, e.g.:
*
Repulsed by Iron (Ex):* Baobhan sith loathe iron and cannot tolerate its  presence. A baobhan sith cannot use iron armor, weapons, or gear and  must make a DC 20 Will save to enter an area laced with iron. They  cannot rest or sleep within 30 feet of iron. A baobhan sith has a -2  morale penalty on melee attacks against a creature wearing or wielding  an iron object and loses its +x turn resistance if it is turned by a creature wielding an iron holy symbol.

*Tomb-Tainted (Ex):* Although fey, baobhan sith are harmed by positive  energy and healed by negative energy. They are treated as undead for  purposes of spells and effects that treat undead differently (such as  searing light or holy water). A baobhan sith may be turned as if it  were an undead creature with +x turn resistance (it does not gain this +x turn resistance when turned by a creature with an iron holy symbol).



freyar said:


> We've definitely put Ability Focus on SLAs before.  It's ok to use, since an SLA is a special attack.  Anyway, I'd prefer the save boost to the quickening.




I don't recall ever seeing Ability Focus used on an SLA in a WOTC product, so I'm leery of doing so.

So are we going for Great Fortitude still?


----------



## freyar (Aug 21, 2010)

That's fine for the turn resistance.  Is +4 good?

SLAs are listed on the "Special Attacks" line of a stat block, and the text of Ability Focus is:



			
				SRD said:
			
		

> ABILITY FOCUS [GENERAL]
> 
> Choose one of the creature’s special attacks.
> 
> ...




Nothing about the special attack being Su or Ex.


----------



## Cleon (Aug 22, 2010)

freyar said:


> That's fine for the turn resistance.  Is +4 good?




That seems appropriate. They're turned as "Specials" in _Dragon #126_, which is as high as the turning table goes, so they ought to have a high turn resistance.



freyar said:


> SLAs are listed on the "Special Attacks" line of a stat block, and the text of Ability Focus is:
> 
> Nothing about the special attack being Su or Ex.




...or even (Sp).

Problem with that is that ALL a creature's non-weapon attacks are usually listed on the Special Attack line.

I don't fancy characters putting AF (death attack) or AF (spells) on their character sheets.

However I can see little reason not to allow Spell Focus (Enchantment) to apply to SLAs, although I hear that's been a subject of some controversy...


----------



## Shade (Aug 23, 2010)

Cleon said:


> However I can see little reason not to allow Spell Focus (Enchantment) to apply to SLAs, although I hear that's been a subject of some controversy...






<Head explodes>

After MUCH searching/debating/fighting/bloodletting, the latest official rulings were as follows:

Ability Focus CAN be used on SLAs, albeit only on one specific SLA.  Ditto for class abilities (like death attack...HA!).

Spell Focus CAN never be applied to SLAs (despite the fact that some official sources used it incorrectly in such a manner).


Therefore, I'm all for Ability Focus (charm person).  Tis a good fit here.

Updated.


----------



## Cleon (Aug 24, 2010)

Shade said:


> <Head explodes>
> 
> After MUCH searching/debating/fighting/bloodletting, the latest official rulings were as follows:
> 
> ...




Well I never let a little thing like an RPG's rules stop me from doing what I want. 



Shade said:


> Therefore, I'm all for Ability Focus (charm person).  Tis a good fit here.
> 
> Updated.




Well, if the official errata says you can do it I won't object.

Would you happen to have a reference handy for this ruling?


----------



## Shade (Aug 24, 2010)

Cleon said:


> Would you happen to have a reference handy for this ruling?




I believe the Mad Arab Abdul Alhazred noted in upon page 417 of the _Necronomicon_.  

I don't have one handy (because it isn't), but you can probably search the forums for plenty of debate on the matter.  Trust me, that path leads only to madness.


----------



## freyar (Aug 24, 2010)

What else do we need?


----------



## Shade (Aug 25, 2010)

Caster level for SLAs?

Environment: Any land?

Organization: Solitary or x (2-8)

Challenge Rating: x

Treasure: x

Alignment: Always chaotic evil?

Advancement: x

A baobhan sith is x feet tall and weighs x pounds.

Baobhan sith speak Common and Sylvan?


----------



## Cleon (Aug 25, 2010)

Shade said:


> Caster level for SLAs?




I still think 10th is appropriate.



Shade said:


> Environment: Any land?




Hmm, they tend to prey on sheepherders so how about the kind of terrain you find sheep?

*Environment:* Any plains and hills.



Shade said:


> Organization: Solitary or x (2-8)




a dance of Baobhan Sith?



Shade said:


> Challenge Rating: x




They're not that tough. I would set them at CR3 except their _charm person_ is quite potent.

Challenge Rating 4?



Shade said:


> Treasure: x




They've got Treasure Type A, which is pretty good:

*Type A:
*1-6 1,000s of copper pieces: 25%
1-6 1,000s of silver pieces: 30%
1-6 1,000s of electrum pieces: 35%
1-10 1,000s of gold pieces: 40%
1-4 100s of platinum pieces: 25%
4-40 gems: 60%
3-30 jewelry: 50%
Maps or Magic Items: Any 3: 30%

* Treasure:* Standard coins, double goods, double magic?



Shade said:


> Alignment: Always chaotic evil?




That's a good fit.



Shade said:


> Advancement: x




6-10 HD (Medium)?



Shade said:


> A baobhan sith is x feet tall and weighs x pounds.




Presumably they are the same size as human women, the better to deceive their prey.

A typical baobhan sith is 5½ feet tall and weighs about 100 pounds.



Shade said:


> Baobhan sith speak Common and Sylvan?




I'd add Elven to their languages since their Int 14 is like a Dryad (which speaks Common, Elven & Sylvan in 3E).

Baobhan sith speak Common, Elven and Sylvan.


----------



## Shade (Aug 25, 2010)

Updated.

Finished?


----------



## Cleon (Aug 25, 2010)

Shade said:


> Updated.
> 
> Finished?




They look done to me, except for the "clairvoyence" instead of "clairoyance" in their SLAs.


----------



## freyar (Aug 25, 2010)

Good to go!


----------



## Cleon (Aug 26, 2010)

That's it then, unless you want to do Dracula.

Oh Moldvay's undead, what times we had!


----------



## Shade (Aug 26, 2010)

Let's tackle this guy...

*Hacamuli *(possibly derived from the Hebrew-withering, fading)
FREQUENCY: Very Rare
NO. APPEARING: 1
ARMOR CLASS: 0
MOVE: 12”
HIT DICE: 60 hit points
% IN LAIR: 50%
TREASURE TYPE: U
NO. OF ATTACKS: 2
DAMAGE/ATTACK: 1-10/1-10
SPECIAL ATTACKS: See below
SPECIAL DEFENSES: + 1 or better weapon to hit
MAGIC RESISTANCE: 65%
INTELLIGENCE: High
ALIGNMENT: Chaotic Evil
SIZE: L
PSIONIC ABILITY: 150
Attack/Defense Modes: ACE/ABE

Hacamuli is one of the messengers of Orcus. He appears as a pale, gaunt horse with hazy black eyes. Flies crawl over his mangy, sore-infested body. By gazing into a victim’s eyes, Hacamuli drains three life levels (save versus death) with appropriate changes in hit points and skill level if the player character does not make his saving throw.

In battle, Hacamuli rears up on his hind legs, striking with both front hooves. Each hoof does 1-10 points of damage. In addition, a hit by the right hoof will cause aging 3-30 years (no save) and a hit by the left hoof will cause disease (save versus death: if made, the disease is mild; if not made, the disease is terminal). Two mild diseases equal a severe case; three mild cases, or a mild case in addition to a severe case, equals a terminal case.

Non-magical armor, upon receiving a second hit with the right hoof, will disintegrate in a shower of rust Magical armor must save versus disintegration each time it is hit: If the save is made, nothing happens to the armor; if not made, the armor loses + 1 permanently. When all bonuses are gone, the magical armor is treated as non-magical armor.

Hacamuli has a 60% chance of gating in 2-12 Shadows‚ and a 50% chance of gating in 1-4 Vampires. Hacamuli has the normal demonic spells of Infravision and Teleportation (no error). He can Cast Darkness for a 20’ radius. Maximum damage caused against him per attack type is the same as for any other demon.

Originally appeared in Dragon Magazine #42 (1980).

8


----------



## Shade (Aug 26, 2010)

The "divide by 4.5" rule puts him at 13 HD.


----------



## freyar (Aug 27, 2010)

Think I'd go with Outsider for this one, make him a demon probably, and maybe also tomb-tainted.  

Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't a 3 level energy drain gaze seem pretty powerful at 13HD?


----------



## Shade (Aug 27, 2010)

Absolutely a demon, and I like tomb-tainted for it.

Yeah, either the HD need to go up, or the energy drain needs to go down.

I'd prefer a HD boost, as the fellow is unique and an important servant of Orcus.  I'd recommend putting him in the 18-22 HD range, towards the top of the non-uniques and the lower threshold of the unique demons.


----------



## freyar (Aug 27, 2010)

Let's go for 21 or 22 HD to get him an epic feat. 

He's probably reasonably strong for his HD given the damage listed.  Int is High, but we don't know much else.  Do you have any thoughts?


----------



## Shade (Aug 27, 2010)

Take a balor, lower the mental scores a bit?
Balor:  Str 35, Dex 25, Con 31, Int 24, Wis 24, Cha 28

Here's Kerzit, another unique demon of similar size:
Str 38, Dex 16, Con 28, Int 14, Wis 22, Cha 24

Horses are all Dex 13, so stick with that?

How about...
Str 35, Dex 13, Con 29, Int 14, Wis 22, Cha 24?


----------



## freyar (Aug 27, 2010)

I go for that!


----------



## Shade (Aug 27, 2010)

Added to Homebrews.

We might be able to borrow/modify this:

Death-Stealing Gaze (Su): 30 feet, Fort DC 15 negates, bestows 1 negative level. Any humanoid creature drained to 0 levels by the juvenile nabassu's deathstealing gaze dies and is immediately transformed into a ghoul (MM 119) under the nabassu's permanent command. The death-stealing gaze has no effect on creatures that are not humanoids. The save DC is Charisma-based.

...and this...

Rust (Su): If Dispater succeeds on a touch, his touch causes the target metal to corrode, falling to pieces and becoming useless immediately. His touch can destroy a 10-foot-cube of metal instantly. Magic armor, weapons, and other magic items made of metal must succeed on a DC 36 Reflex save or be dissolved. The save DC is Constitution-based.

A metal weapon that deals damage to Dispater corrodes immediately unless its bearer succeeds on a DC 36 Reflex save. Wooden, stone, and other nonmetallic weapons are unaffected. Dispater can suppress or resume his rusting touch ability as a free action. The save DC is Constitution-based.


----------



## Cleon (Aug 28, 2010)

They certainly need more than 13 Hit Dice!

I was thinking 24 Hit Dice (as if the 60hp original used d4s for HD). That'd give us a couple of Epic Feats to play with.

You gaze Kerzit 24 HD when you converted him, and this fellow seems a similar unique demon.



Shade said:


> Added to Homebrews.
> 
> We might be able to borrow/modify this:
> 
> Death-Stealing Gaze (Su): 30 feet, Fort DC 15 negates, bestows 1 negative level. Any humanoid creature drained to 0 levels by the juvenile nabassu's deathstealing gaze dies and is immediately transformed into a ghoul (MM 119) under the nabassu's permanent command. The death-stealing gaze has no effect on creatures that are not humanoids. The save DC is Charisma-based.




Well the original demon seems more about spreading disease than creating undead, but I suppose we could use that.

Better make the undead a nastier variety though, maybe a life-drained victim turns into a Bodak?


----------



## freyar (Aug 29, 2010)

Well, normally a victim of energy drain would rise as a wight, but a bodak would be pretty cool in this case.

Demon fever or some appropriately boosted version would seem appropriate for the disease conveyed by the left hoof.  And I'm sure we've worked out an aging effect (or several) before now.  Also, do we want to keep the right/left hoof business or give him the choice on either hoof?


----------



## Cleon (Aug 30, 2010)

freyar said:


> Well, normally a victim of energy drain would rise as a wight, but a bodak would be pretty cool in this case.
> 
> Demon fever or some appropriately boosted version would seem appropriate for the disease conveyed by the left hoof.  And I'm sure we've worked out an aging effect (or several) before now.  Also, do we want to keep the right/left hoof business or give him the choice on either hoof?




I like the sinister and dexter hooves, let's keep them.


----------



## freyar (Aug 30, 2010)

Then we'll have Attack: right hoof +X melee (1d10+12 plus "aging") or left hoof +X melee (1d10+12 plus disease) and Full Attack: right hoof +X melee (1d10+12 plus "aging") and left hoof +X melee (1d10+12 plus disease).  Sound good?


----------



## Shade (Aug 30, 2010)

24 HD and bodak as the result of the gaze both appeal.

Updated.

I'd like to rename the gaze as "death stealer" is really the nabassu's niche.  How about "tenebrous gaze", after Orcus's alternate identity?

Demon fever is normally 1d6 Con, and the character must succeed at another saving throw or 1 point of temporary damage is permanent drain instead.  Boost it to 2d6 and chance of 2 points drain?

Here's an aging effect we used previously...

Voidstrike (Su): The touch of a dark lord deals 1d12 points of negative energy damage and subjects the victim to its energy drain attack. Additionally, a successful hit prematurely ages the victim unless it succeeds on a Fortitude save. This imposes a -4 penalty to Strength, Dexterity, and Constitution, and causes the victim's hair to turn white, skin to wrinkle, and posture to stoop. This effect is permanent and can only be removed by a break enchantment effect.

...and another...

From the ker's "ker blight":
The second successful hit against a single target prematurely ages the victim unless it succeeds on a DC 18 Fortitude save. This imposes a -4 penalty to Strength, Dexterity, and Constitution, and causes the victim's hair to turn white, skin to wrinkle, and posture to stoop. This effect lasts for 1 year our until the victim receives a remove curse spell.


----------



## Cleon (Aug 30, 2010)

Shade said:


> 24 HD and bodak as the result of the gaze both appeal.
> 
> Updated.
> 
> ...




That just means "dark gaze" though. I'd prefer something that meant "death gaze" such as *Thanatist Gaze*.



Shade said:


> Here's an aging effect we used previously...
> 
> Voidstrike (Su): The touch of a dark lord deals 1d12 points of negative energy damage and subjects the victim to its energy drain attack. Additionally, a successful hit prematurely ages the victim unless it succeeds on a Fortitude save. This imposes a -4 penalty to Strength, Dexterity, and Constitution, and causes the victim's hair to turn white, skin to wrinkle, and posture to stoop. This effect is permanent and can only be removed by a break enchantment effect.
> 
> ...




Well if they're rendered old and decrepit, I'd think it would slow them down too. How about "This imposes a -4 penalty to Strength, Dexterity, and Constitution and the victim can not run or charge" for the effect?

Oh, and is the penalty cumulative, so three kicks are a -12 penalty?

Something like:

*Curse of Aging (Su):* Every time a Hamaculi hits with its dexter hoof, its opponent must succeed on a DC X Fortitude save or prematurely age - causing the victim's hair to turn white, skin to wrinkle, and posture to stoop. This curse imposes a -4 penalty to Strength, Dexterity, and Constitution and the victim can no longer run or charge. The penalty is cumulative (so three failed saves would result in a -12 Str, Dex and Con), and should the victim's Con drop to 0 they will die. This effect is permanent, but can be removed by a _wish_, _miracle _or _break enchantment_ spell, or by the victim drinking an _elixir of youth_ or similar potion (the elixir removes the curse but does not reduce the drinker's age as it normally would). A spellcaster must succeed at a DC X level check to  use _break enchantment_ to remove the curse of aging.


----------



## Shade (Aug 30, 2010)

I'd rather not reduce the speed because, while logical, none of the other D&D aging effects do that.  I'd prefer game consistency to realism.

That's an excellent question about the cumulative nature.  I'm surprised that didn't arise when we discussed the dark lord.  I'd say "no", since it essentially is pushing a character past "venerable" on the age chart.   Beyond that, they'd be dead.  

Let's also stick to "left" and "right", as I'm not sure most DMs know what "dexter" and its companion mean (I don't!  )


----------



## freyar (Aug 30, 2010)

I'll agree not to reduce speed/allow them to run and charge for the same reasons as Shade.

Hmm.  I kind of like the cumulative idea, but I can see the reason not to do that.

Ah, good old Latin.  Note how left-handed people are "sinister."  My wife, who's a lefty, really hates that.  There's also a theory (that's discredited but sadly still hanging around the medical establishment) that left-handedness is caused by brain damage.  If you ever see a neurologist, one of the first things they'll ask is if you're left-handed.


----------



## Shade (Aug 31, 2010)

freyar said:


> Ah, good old Latin.  Note how left-handed people are "sinister."  My wife, who's a lefty, really hates that.  There's also a theory (that's discredited but sadly still hanging around the medical establishment) that left-handedness is caused by brain damage.  If you ever see a neurologist, one of the first things they'll ask is if you're left-handed.




Those leftist bastards!  

If we want to make it cumulative, we can reduce the penalty to -1 Str, -1 Con, and -1 Dex, to a maximum of -5, which would follow the aging chart more closely (rather than jumping straight to venerable).   Sound appealing?

Thoughts on the "greater demon fever" described upthread?


----------



## freyar (Aug 31, 2010)

Let's make it cumulative and have it be -1 each hit.  Good idea.

I liked the 2d6 and chance of 2 being permanent drain for the greater demon fever.


----------



## Shade (Aug 31, 2010)

Updated.

What about this?



> Non-magical armor, upon receiving a second hit with the right hoof, will disintegrate in a shower of rust Magical armor must save versus disintegration each time it is hit: If the save is made, nothing happens to the armor; if not made, the armor loses + 1 permanently. When all bonuses are gone, the magical armor is treated as non-magical armor.




Rust (Su): If Dispater succeeds on a touch, his touch causes the target metal to corrode, falling to pieces and becoming useless immediately. His touch can destroy a 10-foot-cube of metal instantly. Magic armor, weapons, and other magic items made of metal must succeed on a DC 36 Reflex save or be dissolved. The save DC is Constitution-based.

A metal weapon that deals damage to Dispater corrodes immediately unless its bearer succeeds on a DC 36 Reflex save. Wooden, stone, and other nonmetallic weapons are unaffected. Dispater can suppress or resume his rusting touch ability as a free action. The save DC is Constitution-based.


----------



## Cleon (Aug 31, 2010)

Shade said:


> Those leftist bastards!
> 
> If we want to make it cumulative, we can reduce the penalty to -1 Str, -1 Con, and -1 Dex, to a maximum of -5, which would follow the aging chart more closely (rather than jumping straight to venerable).   Sound appealing?
> 
> Thoughts on the "greater demon fever" described upthread?




That seems rather feeble. A _bestow curse_ can inflict a -6 on one stat or a -4 on attacks, saves and checks and these things are messengers of Orcus.

I'd rather it do a penalty and some ability damage or ability drain. This think should be _nasty_.


----------



## Cleon (Aug 31, 2010)

freyar said:


> I'll agree not to reduce speed/allow them to run and charge for the same reasons as Shade.
> 
> Hmm.  I kind of like the cumulative idea, but I can see the reason not to do that.
> 
> Ah, good old Latin.  Note how left-handed people are "sinister."  My wife, who's a lefty, really hates that.  There's also a theory (that's discredited but sadly still hanging around the medical establishment) that left-handedness is caused by brain damage.  If you ever see a neurologist, one of the first things they'll ask is if you're left-handed.




That's a new one to me, and I'm a sinister individual - in several senses of the word...


----------



## Shade (Aug 31, 2010)

Cleon said:
			
		

> That seems rather feeble. A bestow curse can inflict a -6 on one stat or a -4 on attacks, saves and checks and these things are messengers of Orcus.
> 
> I'd rather it do a penalty and some ability damage or ability drain. This think should be nasty.




Keep in mind that it also ages and rusts, and all that with each set of strikes!


----------



## Cleon (Sep 1, 2010)

Shade said:


> Keep in mind that it also ages and rusts, and all that with each set of strikes!




A mere -1 still doesn't seem enough.


----------



## Shade (Sep 1, 2010)

Cleon said:


> A mere -1 still doesn't seem enough.




In that case, return to jumping straight to the max penalty, and not making it cumulative?

I'd rather not add ability damage/drain, since 1.) it already penalizes abilities, and 2.) the disease does that.


----------



## Cleon (Sep 1, 2010)

Shade said:


> In that case, return to jumping straight to the max penalty, and not making it cumulative?
> 
> I'd rather not add ability damage/drain, since 1.) it already penalizes abilities, and 2.) the disease does that.




I just like the idea of it aging victims to death. Is that so much to ask?


----------



## Shade (Sep 1, 2010)

Cleon said:


> I just like the idea of it aging victims to death. Is that so much to ask?




If it didn't already have the energy-draining gaze, I might feel the same way.  As it stands, those mere mortals will be dead and bodakified in no time.


----------



## Cleon (Sep 1, 2010)

Shade said:


> If it didn't already have the energy-draining gaze, I might feel the same way.  As it stands, those mere mortals will be dead and bodakified in no time.




I didn't get where I am today by letting mortals off easy.

Ah well, I can accept the -5 max if necessary.

So shall we move on?


----------



## Shade (Sep 1, 2010)

Sure.  Once again...

Updated.

What about this?



> Non-magical armor, upon receiving a second hit with the right hoof, will disintegrate in a shower of rust Magical armor must save versus disintegration each time it is hit: If the save is made, nothing happens to the armor; if not made, the armor loses + 1 permanently. When all bonuses are gone, the magical armor is treated as non-magical armor.




Rust (Su): If Dispater succeeds on a touch, his touch causes the target metal to corrode, falling to pieces and becoming useless immediately. His touch can destroy a 10-foot-cube of metal instantly. Magic armor, weapons, and other magic items made of metal must succeed on a DC 36 Reflex save or be dissolved. The save DC is Constitution-based.

A metal weapon that deals damage to Dispater corrodes immediately unless its bearer succeeds on a DC 36 Reflex save. Wooden, stone, and other nonmetallic weapons are unaffected. Dispater can suppress or resume his rusting touch ability as a free action. The save DC is Constitution-based.


----------



## Cleon (Sep 1, 2010)

Shade said:


> Sure.  Once again...
> 
> Updated.
> 
> What about this?




We could combine the rusting and aging into one "touch of decrepitude" SA - first failed save turns the creature old, second failure affects their gear?


----------



## Shade (Sep 3, 2010)

Cleon said:


> We could combine the rusting and aging into one "touch of decrepitude" SA - first failed save turns the creature old, second failure affects their gear?




I suppose that could work.  I reserve the option to keep 'em separate after we work it up and see how it looks.


----------



## Cleon (Sep 3, 2010)

Shade said:


> I suppose that could work.  I reserve the option to keep 'em separate after we work it up and see how it looks.




It should be easy enough:

*Curse of Decrepitude (Su):* The right hoof of a hamaculi causes aging and decay. Any opponent struck by its right hoof attack must succeed on a DC *X* Fortitude save or prematurely age - causing the  victim's hair to turn white, skin to wrinkle, and posture to stoop - this curse  imposes a -4 penalty to Strength, Dexterity, and Constitution.

If a hamaculi kicks a creature already suffering from the curse of decrepitude it decays their armour and clothing instead. The opponent must succeed at a DC *X* Reflex save or their armour and clothing rots away or dissolves into rust. A hamaculi can also use its right hoof attack to destroy unattended objects up to a 10-foot-cube in size.

The effects of this curse are permanent, but can be removed by a _wish_, _miracle _or _break enchantment_ spell, or by the victim drinking or bathing in an _elixir of youth_  or similar potion (the elixir removes all the curse's effects but does not reduce the  drinker's age as it normally would). A spellcaster must succeed at a DC *Y* level check to  use _break enchantment_ to remove the curse of decrepitude.


----------



## Shade (Sep 3, 2010)

I don't like the mutually exclusive aspect.  I want it to age the person *AND* effect their equipment, all with one strike.   I also want Hacamuli to be able to simply hit an object with his hoof and rust it.

Revising...

Curse of Decrepitude (Su): Every time Hamaculi hits with its right hoof, its opponent must succeed on a DC 31 Fortitude save or prematurely age. This imposes a -4 penalty to Strength, Dexterity, and Constitution, and causes the victim's hair to turn white, skin to wrinkle, and posture to stoop. The penalty is not cumulative.  Should the victim's Con drop to 0 they will die. This effect is permanent, but can be removed by a wish, miracle or break enchantment spell, or by drinking an elixir of youth or similar potion (the elixir removes the curse but does not reduce the drinker's age as it normally would). A spellcaster must succeed on a DC X level check to use break enchantment to remove the curse. 

Additionally, the opponent must succeed on a DC X Reflex save or its armor and clothing rots away or dissolves into rust. Hamaculi can also use its right hoof attack to destroy unattended objects up to a 10-foot-cube in size.  Unattended magical items are allowed a DC X Fortitude save to avoid dissolution.  The save DCs are Constitution-based.


----------



## Cleon (Sep 3, 2010)

Shade said:


> I don't like the mutually exclusive aspect.  I want it to age the person *AND* effect their equipment, all with one strike.   I also want Hacamuli to be able to simply hit an object with his hoof and rust it.




It's not mutually exclusive, it's progressive - first one and then both. Still, I don't mind it doing both in one strike.



Shade said:


> Revising...
> 
> Curse of Decrepitude (Su): Every time Hamaculi hits with its right hoof, its opponent must succeed on a DC 31 Fortitude save or prematurely age. This imposes a -4 penalty to Strength, Dexterity, and Constitution, and causes the victim's hair to turn white, skin to wrinkle, and posture to stoop. The penalty is not cumulative.  Should the victim's Con drop to 0 they will die. This effect is permanent, but can be removed by a wish, miracle or break enchantment spell, or by drinking an elixir of youth or similar potion (the elixir removes the curse but does not reduce the drinker's age as it normally would). A spellcaster must succeed on a DC X level check to use break enchantment to remove the curse.
> 
> Additionally, the opponent must succeed on a DC X Reflex save or its armor and clothing rots away or dissolves into rust. Hamaculi can also use its right hoof attack to destroy unattended objects up to a 10-foot-cube in size.  Unattended magical items are allowed a DC X Fortitude save to avoid dissolution.  The save DCs are Constitution-based.




That looks fine to me. All we have to do is set a difficulty for the level check. DC25 or 30? I feel it ought to be hard, they are heralds or Orcus after all.


----------



## Shade (Sep 7, 2010)

Let's go with 30.  Updated.

Let's figure out his AC.  Other unique demons with similar Hit Dice have ACs in the 37-41 range.  So maybe 39?

Orcus has DR 20/cold iron and good.  Make Hacamuli's 10 or 15/cold iron and good?


----------



## Cleon (Sep 8, 2010)

Shade said:


> Let's go with 30.  Updated.
> 
> Let's figure out his AC.  Other unique demons with similar Hit Dice have ACs in the 37-41 range.  So maybe 39?




AC39 is fine by me. I fancy giving it a deflection bonus equal to its Charisma, but it would be alright with just natural armour:

*AC #1:* 39 (-1 size, +1 Dex, +29 natural), touch 10, flat-footed 38

*AC #2:* 39 (-1 size, +1 Dex, +7 deflection, +22 natural), touch 17, flat-footed 38



Shade said:


> Orcus has DR 20/cold iron and good.  Make Hacamuli's 10 or 15/cold iron and good?




I'd prefer say 10.

It's only got 24 Hit Dice, after all.


----------



## Shade (Sep 8, 2010)

Updated.

Skills: 10 at 27 ranks
Bluff, Diplomacy, Sense Motive (since he's a messenger for Orcus)?
Concentration, Knowledge (the planes), Listen, Spot?
What else?

Feats: 8 (2 can be epic)
Dire Charge, Improved Critical (hoof), Improved Initiative, Quicken SLA (deeper darkness), Weapon Focus (hoof)...

Treasure: x

Hacamuli is x feet long and weighs x pounds.

Hacamuli speaks Abyssal, Celestial, and Draconic (like most demons)?


----------



## Cleon (Sep 8, 2010)

Shade said:


> Updated.
> 
> Skills: 10 at 27 ranks
> Bluff, Diplomacy, Sense Motive (since he's a messenger for Orcus)?
> ...




Knowledge (religion) since that covers Undead (and unholy rites too, I guess).

Intimidate would be handy for certain "messages".

Spellcraft? Hide? Move Silently?



Shade said:


> Feats: 8 (2 can be epic)
> Dire Charge, Improved Critical (hoof), Improved Initiative, Quicken SLA (deeper darkness), Weapon Focus (hoof)...




I'd give it Quicken SLA (greater teleport) since it has a CL of 22.



Shade said:


> Treasure: x




Treasure type U is gems & magic, so how about:

*Treasure:* Double goods (gems & jewelery only), double items.



Shade said:


> Hacamuli is x feet long and weighs x pounds.




Well Hacamuli's basically a skinny horse, so 8 foot long and 900 pounds?

An average horse is about 1000-1100 pounds.



Shade said:


> Hacamuli speaks Abyssal, Celestial, and Draconic (like most demons)?




Since he's a messenger how about adding Infernal for talking to the devils?


----------



## Shade (Sep 9, 2010)

Updated.

I replaced Spellcraft with Use Magic Device, since he doesn't cast spells, but does carry double items.  

We need two more feats (one can be epic).  I'm thinking we should give him command/rebuke undead, as he's a herald of Orcus.  If so, we could give him turning-related feats, like Divine Might (which would also require Power Attack) or Extra Turning.  Thoughts?


----------



## Cleon (Sep 10, 2010)

Shade said:


> Updated.
> 
> I replaced Spellcraft with Use Magic Device, since he doesn't cast spells, but does carry double items.
> 
> We need two more feats (one can be epic).  I'm thinking we should give him command/rebuke undead, as he's a herald of Orcus.  If so, we could give him turning-related feats, like Divine Might (which would also require Power Attack) or Extra Turning.  Thoughts?




Command Undead and Extra Turning are good ideas. 

How about increasing its Charisma to 25 and adding _inflict critical wounds_ to its SLAs so we can give it Negative Energy Burst?


----------



## Shade (Sep 10, 2010)

Great idea!

Updated.

We still need to determine his effective turn resistance for tomb-tainted.  How about +6?

CR 21?


----------



## Cleon (Sep 11, 2010)

Shade said:


> Great idea!
> 
> Updated.
> 
> ...




+6 CR seems fair.

The challenge rating seems reasonable too.

Hold on, the  Thanatist Gaze has "The gaze has no effect on creatures that are not  humanoids." Is that just for the bodak bit or does it only energy drain humanoids? If the latter I don't like it much.


----------



## Shade (Sep 13, 2010)

Cleon said:


> Hold on, the  Thanatist Gaze has "The gaze has no effect on creatures that are not  humanoids." Is that just for the bodak bit or does it only energy drain humanoids? If the latter I don't like it much.




That must be a holdover from the other demon from which I borrowed.  Let's drop the humanoid bit altogether, as I've seen several "bodak creature" templates.

Updated.


----------



## Cleon (Sep 14, 2010)

Shade said:


> That must be a holdover from the other demon from which I borrowed.  Let's drop the humanoid bit altogether, as I've seen several "bodak creature" templates.
> 
> Updated.




I was thinking "Any humanoid drained to 0 levels by Hacamuli's gaze dies and is immediately  transformed into a bodak under Hacamuli's permanent command" but having it affect any creature is better. Makes it a far more effective herald when sent to convey a "message" to a non-humanoid if they know they risk becoming an undead thrall.

Anyhow, I can't see anything else to quibble about, so it looks like the Hacamuli's finished.


----------



## freyar (Sep 14, 2010)

Oh well, I liked the cumulative aging, but que sera, sera.  Looks done!


----------



## Cleon (Sep 15, 2010)

freyar said:


> Oh well, I liked the cumulative aging, but que sera, sera.  Looks done!




I preferred a cumulative effect to, we just couldn't agree on one!

Oh well, it's fine as it is.


----------



## freyar (Sep 16, 2010)

Was this really the last one, are are there more from Mr. Moldvay?


----------



## Cleon (Sep 17, 2010)

freyar said:


> Was this really the last one, are are there more from Mr. Moldvay?




I think we've finished with the creatures from his Undead articles (unless you change your mind about not doing Dracula), but there are some other Moldvay monsters that don't appear to be in the CC, like the Saraph and Apollyon from the very Demons, Devils and Spirits article in _Dragon #42_ the Hamaculi came from.

Most of his other Dragon articles were in the *Giants of the Earth* series, which were NPCs rather than monsters. 

Oh, and he did stats for Donald Duck in _Dragon #60_'s The Dragon's Bestiary - I'm not sure whether that counts as a monster or a NPC!


----------



## freyar (Sep 19, 2010)

Haven't we done somebody's version of an apollyon already?  Sounds familiar.

If Santa Claus can be a monster, I don't see why Donald Duck can't be!  Of course, there is a little bit of a copyright/trademark issue there.


----------



## Cleon (Sep 20, 2010)

freyar said:


> Haven't we done somebody's version of an apollyon already?  Sounds familiar.




Possibly, I just didn't see it in the Creature Catalog.



freyar said:


> If Santa Claus can be a monster, I don't see why Donald Duck can't be!  Of course, there is a little bit of a copyright/trademark issue there.




Yes, we'd need to file off the product identity to make him a generic cartoon barbarian duck or something.


----------



## Shade (Sep 20, 2010)

freyar said:


> Haven't we done somebody's version of an apollyon already?  Sounds familiar.




Heck yeah!  That ranks as one of my favorite conversions.  

Creature Catalog - Preview Creature

The saraph actually became the Sollux as D&D evolved.

I'll pass on "generic Donald Duck clone" until April.

Moldvay may have suggested some variant undead without stat blocks in some of those articles, but otherwise, I think this thread is truly finished (unless we decide to do Dracula).

Actually, what the heck, Halloween's approaching!

*DRACULA (Vlad Tepes)*
FREQUENCY: Unique
NO. APPEARING: 2
ARMOR CLASS: -1 (-4 with dexterity)
MOVE: 12”/18”
HIT DICE: 12 (96 hp)
% IN LAIR: 10%
TREASURE TYPE: G
NO. OF ATTACKS: 2 (by touch or weapon)
DAMAGE/ATTACK: 1-8 (+7)
SPECIAL ATTACKS: Energy drain, hypnosis, +4 to hit in combat
SPECIAL DEFENSES: +1 or better weapon to hit
MAGIC RESISTANCE: 25%
INTELLIGENCE: Exceptional
ALIGNMENT! Chaotic evil
SIZE: M
PSIONIC ABILITY: 204
Attack/Defense Modes: B,C/J
S: 19
D: 17
I: 17
C: 19
W: 17
CH: 17

Dracula is similar to the usual AD&D game vampire in the Monster Manual, except as noted in this article. His strength is 19 (as per Legends & Lore), and he can wield a long sword if he so desires, doing 8-15 hp damage per attack (the weapon may be magical as well). Dracula can regenerate 5 hp per melee round. Garlic, mirrors, and holy symbols only cause him to hesitate 1-2 rounds because of his strength of will, and he can survive up to 10 rounds in sunlight or running water.

Dracula is assumed to have been reborn as a true vampire after his death, perhaps being summoned to a magical universe by an unlucky wizard. It is highly likely that he would make use of magical weapons and items in an AD&D game world, selecting those items appropriate to warriors since he had no skill at magic or the priesthood in life. Magical rings, amulets, scrolls of protection, swords and daggers, and similar items would be preferred.

Unlike most vampires, who have been completely overwhelmed by their transition into the undead, Dracula can sometimes overcome his undead state of mind by sheer willpower. It is possible that he could be impressed enough by an exceptional display of courage or faithful service on the part of a character or retainer to call off any attacks he is making. It is probable that Dracula will become involved in the politics of whatever world he enters. His relationship with Orcus, demon prince of the undead, is best left to the DM,s imagination.

When trying to turn Dracula away, a cleric should consider this monster to be classed in the "special" category. Conversely, though Dracula has no other clerical abilities-as such, he may exert his incredible willpower to force other undead beings into servitude for short periods of time. Treat him as an evil 12th-level cleric, making the usual attempts to call undead into service as per the rules for turning undead.

Originally appeared in Dragon Magazine #126 (1987).


----------



## Cleon (Sep 21, 2010)

So, 12th level fighter with turn undead as a 12th level cleric and a few Psi-Like Abilities.

Same Strength as a 3E Hill Giant? Str 25?


----------



## Shade (Sep 21, 2010)

Rather than work him up as a fighter, and slap on the vampire template, I'd rather we develop him as a unique undead creature that shares some of the vampiric traits and possesses some class abilities.   Something like we've done with the Generals of the Animal Kings.

Str 25 appeals.  Cha should be much higher than 17.

Assuming the listed ability scores were his "human" scores, and applying the vampire template modifiers, gives us...

Str 25, Dex 21, Int 19, Wis 19, Cha 21

The vampire lord template boosts the vampire as follows:  Str +6, Dex +4, Int +2, Wis +2, Cha +4.  If we apply those modifiers, we get...

Str 31, Dex 25, Int 21, Wis 21, Cha 25

I'd be fine with going with that set of scores, or blending the standard vampire physical scores with the mental scores of the vampire lord (Str 25, Dex 21, Int 21, Wis 21, Cha 25).

Thoughts?


----------



## Cleon (Sep 22, 2010)

Shade said:


> Assuming the listed ability scores were his "human" scores, and applying the vampire template modifiers, gives us...
> 
> Str 25, Dex 21, Int 19, Wis 19, Cha 21
> 
> ...




Those physical scores are fine by me, since they're in keeping with 3.5's inflation. Do we want to increase the HD too? Maybe to 18?

Giving him a fighter skill SQ like General Ox is a possibility, but it doesn't make much difference. Whichever way we do it, I'd like to wrangle a full BAB like a fighter.


----------



## Shade (Sep 22, 2010)

Added to Homebrews.

Since he's unique and tenacious, I'd recommend adding Unholy Toughness.

+12 natural armor like a vampire lord?

Give him some of the other additional bonuses from the vampire lord template (improved standard vampire abilities, control weather, telekinesis, telepathy)?

Suggested enhancements to his longsword?  Keen and/or wounding seems a good fit (for bleeding prey).


----------



## Cleon (Sep 22, 2010)

Shade said:


> Added to Homebrews.
> 
> Since he's unique and tenacious, I'd recommend adding Unholy Toughness.
> 
> ...




+12 NA is fine.

I'd go for improved vampire abilities, control weather and telepathy.

Telekinesis doesn't fit methinks.



Shade said:


> Suggested enhancements to his longsword?  Keen and/or wounding seems a good fit (for bleeding prey).




Nah, it just has to be _merciful_ and _ghost touch_.


----------



## freyar (Sep 22, 2010)

Hehehe, I'm assuming Cleon is kidding on the weapon and that a keen wounding longsword works.  

I also like +12 NA, control weather, and telepathy.  I wouldn't mind telekinesis either but don't have a strong opinion.


----------



## Shade (Sep 22, 2010)

Don't make me mercifully touch your ghost!  

Updated.



> It is highly likely that he would make use of magical weapons and items in an AD&D game world, selecting those items appropriate to warriors since he had no skill at magic or the priesthood in life. Magical rings, amulets, scrolls of protection, swords and daggers, and similar items would be preferred.




Ring of protection?  Cloak of resistance?  Other magical gear?


----------



## freyar (Sep 23, 2010)

Oh, Dracula should surely have better gear than a ring of protection and a cloak of resistance, right?  Maybe go +5 for each and see what else we can come up with?


----------



## Shade (Sep 23, 2010)

freyar said:


> Oh, Dracula should surely have better gear than a ring of protection and a cloak of resistance, right?  Maybe go +5 for each and see what else we can come up with?




But of course!  Those just seemed no-brainers to get the ball rolling.


----------



## Cleon (Sep 23, 2010)

freyar said:


> Hehehe, I'm assuming Cleon is kidding on the weapon and that a keen wounding longsword works.




I didn't  for nothing. 



Shade said:


> Don't make me mercifully touch your ghost!




Isn't that illegal in most states?


----------



## Cleon (Sep 23, 2010)

Shade said:


> But of course!  Those just seemed no-brainers to get the ball rolling.




Well we'll want to start with an _amulet of health_, _cloak of the bat_ and a few _potions of gaseous form_. 









Okay, I've got over that.

How about a _darkskull_?


----------



## Shade (Sep 23, 2010)

_Cloak of the bat_ was the first thing I though of...before I sobered up.  

A _darkskull_ is a great idea!

Some more:
Amulet of mighty fists
Boots of teleportation
Dust of dryness (to avoid that pesky "can't cross water" weakness)
Glove of storing (to quickly "sheathe" his sword when energy drain is preferable)
Portable hole (for taking his coffin "on the go")


----------



## Cleon (Sep 24, 2010)

Shade said:


> _Cloak of the bat_ was the first thing I though of...before I sobered up.
> 
> A _darkskull_ is a great idea!
> 
> ...




That seems like a lot of magic.

Perhaps we should settle on an approximate budget before we assign magic items?

What's the standard treasure value of a 12-14th level character again?


----------



## Shade (Sep 24, 2010)

I wasn't suggesting we give him *all* of that!  I was just throwing ideas around.

Why 12th-14th?  Dude's got 18 HD and is treated as an 18th-level fighter!

18th-level NPC gear:  130,000 gp

Although, as essentially someone with the vampire and vampire lord template, his CR is going to be CR 23, with "Quadruple standard" treasure, yielding average treasure value of 424,000 gp.  That compares favorably to an 18th-level PC's gear (440,000 gp).  As a unique "boss monster", I'm comfortable giving him that much.


----------



## freyar (Sep 25, 2010)

Going with the 400,000+ gp treasure can let him buy all Shade's suggested items (including the cloak and ring) with +5 on cloak, ring, and amulet and still have money left over.  So it's a start.


----------



## Cleon (Sep 25, 2010)

Shade said:


> I wasn't suggesting we give him *all* of that!  I was just throwing ideas around.
> 
> Why 12th-14th?  Dude's got 18 HD and is treated as an 18th-level fighter!




Sorry, I forgotten we'd given him a 50% boost.



Shade said:


> 18th-level NPC gear:  130,000 gp
> 
> Although, as essentially someone with the vampire and vampire lord template, his CR is going to be CR 23, with "Quadruple standard" treasure, yielding average treasure value of 424,000 gp.  That compares favorably to an 18th-level PC's gear (440,000 gp).  As a unique "boss monster", I'm comfortable giving him that much.




424,000 is a good ballpark figure.

We can afford a good many additional properties on the sword. I'm thinking speed and icy.

_+1 keen wounding icy speed longsword_ - that's a +8 total, and we might as well spring the extra 3,000 for adamantine. Total cost of 131,315 gp.

As well as a _darkskull_ I would like to give him an _obsidian steed_ - it'd explain how he gets from Earth to whatever Material Plane the adventurers are on!

What defensive magic shall we give him?


----------



## freyar (Sep 26, 2010)

Well, a cloak of resistance +5 and a ring of protection +5 were the starting points.  I think, to be honest, with Shade's list and the super-longsword, we're getting close to the budget.  The steed might be cheap enough to fit in there, but we should total it up.  I'm too tired at the moment, though.


----------



## Cleon (Sep 26, 2010)

Well let's see.

_+1 keen wounding icy speed longsword_ - 131,315 gp
_darkskull_ - 60,000 gp
_obsidian steed_ - 28,500 gp
_+5 cloak of resistance_ - 25,000 gp
_+5 ring of protection_ - 50,000 gp
_boots of teleportation_ - 49,000 gp
_portable hole_ - 20,000 gp
_glove of storing_ - 10,000 gp
_dust of dryness_ - 850 gp
_+2 amulet of mighty fists_ - 24,000 gp

Total - 398,665 gp

That leaves 25,335 gp, enough for a _ring of evasion_ or _+5 bracers of armour_.

I prefer the ring.


----------



## freyar (Sep 27, 2010)

I think I'd go for the ring, too.  And since the dust is so cheap, we can just tack on a few extra doses if we want.


----------



## Shade (Sep 27, 2010)

Let's drop the "icy" property (I assume you meant _frost_ rather than _icy burst_) and put a "+" back into the enhancement bonus.  I don't want it to be a mere +1 sword with tons of properties just for the sake of having 'em.  I'd rather he hit more frequently.  That said, the pricy _speed_ property allows another swing, which is a worthy tradeoff, increasing the likelihood of a bloodbath.  

I'm also not real fond of adamantine.  How often is Dracula going to be fighting constructs and sundering stuff?  Wouldn't silver make more sense, for overcoming rival vampires and opposing-aligned devils?

Updated with these assumptions in mind.  Feel free to continue to debate.

Skills: 9 at 21 ranks
Bluff, Diplomacy, Intimidate, Knowledge (religion), Listen, Spot...

Feats: Alertness (B), Combat Reflexes (B), Dodge (B), Improved Initiative (B), Iron Will (B), Lightning Reflexes (B), plus 7 more and 10 fighter bonus feats

Some suggestions:
Improved Grapple
Improved Unarmed Strike (necessary for Improved Grapple)
Weapon Focus (longsword)
Greater Weapon Focus (longsword)
Weapon Specialization (longsword)
Greater Weapon Specialization (longsword)
Improved Critical (longsword)
Combat Expertise
Improved Feint
Mobility
Spring Attack
Whirlwind Attack
Superior Expertise


----------



## freyar (Sep 27, 2010)

Sense Motive, Use Magic Device, Knowledge (history) since he's old?

Those feats look appealing.  We rarely get to use IUS and Imp Grapple, and I think they're fitting for Dracula.  How about adding Deflect Arrows, Improved Trip, Knock Down, and either Stunning Fist or Eyes in the Back of your Head?

I'm happy with the equipment, by the way.


----------



## Shade (Sep 28, 2010)

I like your additional feats and skills selection.   Now I'll wait to give Cleon an opportunity to tell us why we're all wrong.


----------



## Cleon (Sep 28, 2010)

Shade said:


> Let's drop the "icy" property (I assume you meant _frost_ rather than _icy burst_) and put a "+" back into the enhancement bonus.  I don't want it to be a mere +1 sword with tons of properties just for the sake of having 'em.  I'd rather he hit more frequently.  That said, the pricy _speed_ property allows another swing, which is a worthy tradeoff, increasing the likelihood of a bloodbath.
> 
> I'm also not real fond of adamantine.  How often is Dracula going to be fighting constructs and sundering stuff?  Wouldn't silver make more sense, for overcoming rival vampires and opposing-aligned devils?
> 
> Updated with these assumptions in mind.  Feel free to continue to debate.




Well I thought his attack bonus ought to be good enough as it is, but don't mind swapping _frost_ for a _+2_.

I guess alchemical silver is OK.



Shade said:


> Skills: 9 at 21 ranks
> Bluff, Diplomacy, Intimidate, Knowledge (religion), Listen, Spot...




Well either some Vampire skills or some Fighter skills would seem to be in order.

Vampire - Search, Sense Motive
Fighter - Ride (for his _obsidian steed_)

Not sure about the Knowledge (religion), but couldn't think of anything better.



Shade said:


> Feats: Alertness (B), Combat Reflexes (B), Dodge (B), Improved Initiative (B), Iron Will (B), Lightning Reflexes (B), plus 7 more and 10 fighter bonus feats
> 
> Some suggestions:
> Improved Grapple
> ...




The IUS / Grapple are good ideas.

Combat Reflexes and the usual Weapon Mastery feats for longsword would suit me.


----------



## Cleon (Sep 28, 2010)

Shade said:


> I like your additional feats and skills selection.   Now I'll wait to give Cleon an opportunity to tell us why we're all wrong.




Well to begin with there's the peculiar way you spell colour...

Actually, I like freyar's suggestions of History and UMD.

Maybe we could swamp Knowledge (religion) for (history), since Dracula wasn't the most pious of people?

*Skills:* Bluff, Diplomacy, Intimidate, Knowledge (history), Listen, Ride, Sense Motive, Spot, Use Magic Device


----------



## freyar (Sep 28, 2010)

That skill list looks just fine.


----------



## Shade (Sep 29, 2010)

Cleon said:
			
		

> Well to begin with there's the peculiar way you spell colour...




Don't forget "armor" and "specialize"...  

Updated.

Improved Critical and keen no longer stack, so shall we drop the feat and replace it with freyar's other suggestion (Eyes in the Back of Your Head), or drop the property and put another "+" on his sword (or add back Cleon's frost property)?

Environment: Any?

Organization: Solitary, troupe (Dracula plus x-x  enslaved vampires), retinue (Dracula plus x-x  enslaved vampires and x-x dominated humanoids)...
Vampire has Solitary, pair, gang (3–5), or troupe (1–2 plus 2–5 vampire spawn)
Vampire lord is simply Solitary

Challenge Rating: 24?
He's essentially an 18th-level fighter.  The vampire template adds +2, vampire lord +3 more, and he has a few additional benefits beyond that worth of at least 1 more CR.

Dracula is 6 feet tall and weighs x pounds.

Dracula speaks Abyssal, Common, Draconic, and Undercommon?


----------



## Shade (Sep 29, 2010)

Also...



> Garlic, mirrors, and holy symbols only cause him to hesitate 1-2 rounds because of his strength of will, and he can survive up to 10 rounds in sunlight or running water.






			
				Vampire template said:
			
		

> For all their power, vampires have a number of weaknesses.
> 
> Repelling a Vampire: Vampires cannot tolerate the strong odor of garlic and will not enter an area laced with it. Similarly, they recoil from a mirror or a strongly presented holy symbol. These things don’t harm the vampire—they merely keep it at bay. A recoiling vampire must stay at least 5 feet away from a creature holding the mirror or holy symbol and cannot touch or make melee attacks against the creature holding the item for the rest of the encounter. Holding a vampire at bay takes a standard action.
> 
> ...




And...



> It is probable that Dracula will become involved in the politics of whatever world he enters. His relationship with Orcus, demon prince of the undead, is best left to the DM,s imagination.




Maybe some ranks in Knowledge (nobility and royalty) and Knowledge (the planes)?   Perhaps pilfer some (or all) ranks from Ride?


----------



## Cleon (Sep 29, 2010)

Shade said:


> Don't forget "armor" and "specialize"...
> 
> Updated.




I tried to forget, but you keep on reminding me.



Shade said:


> Improved Critical and keen no longer stack, so shall we drop the feat and replace it with freyar's other suggestion (Eyes in the Back of Your Head), or drop the property and put another "+" on his sword (or add back Cleon's frost property)?




Of those options Eyes in the Back of Your Head is my favourite.



Shade said:


> Environment: Any?




Any land, unless you want to stick the Aquatic subtype on him. 



Shade said:


> Organization: Solitary, troupe (Dracula plus x-x  enslaved vampires), retinue (Dracula plus x-x  enslaved vampires and x-x dominated humanoids)...




That seems OK. 3-6 enslaved vampires and 5-30 dominated humanoids?



Shade said:


> Challenge Rating: 24?
> He's essentially an 18th-level fighter.  The vampire template adds +2, vampire lord +3 more, and he has a few additional benefits beyond that worth of at least 1 more CR.




That seems far too high frankly. That's one higher than a Solar, who would make mincemeat of Dracs.

Eyeballing his stats Dracula looks more like a CR 21.



Shade said:


> Dracula is 6 feet tall and weighs x pounds.
> 
> Dracula speaks Abyssal, Common, Draconic, and Undercommon?




200 pounds?

I don't much care for the Undercommon, but like the other languages.


----------



## Cleon (Sep 29, 2010)

Shade said:


> Maybe some ranks in Knowledge (nobility and royalty) and Knowledge (the planes)?   Perhaps pilfer some (or all) ranks from Ride?




I was tempted by nobility & royalty but it seemed a bit niche. Still, he doesn't need 21 ranks in Ride or History, so how about rearranging the ranks:

Knowledge (history) 15, Knowledge (nobility and royalty) 9, Knowledge (the planes) 6, Ride 12 ?

That gives him Ride +19, enough to hit DC20 all the time, which is all you need for any standard Ride check.


----------



## Shade (Sep 29, 2010)

Cleon said:


> Of those options Eyes in the Back of Your Head is my favourite.




I like it, too.



Cleon said:


> Any land, unless you want to stick the Aquatic subtype on him.




Aquaticula underbar?  



Cleon said:


> That seems OK. 3-6 enslaved vampires and 5-30 dominated humanoids?




Sure.



Cleon said:


> That seems far too high frankly. That's one higher than a Solar, who would make mincemeat of Dracs.
> 
> Eyeballing his stats Dracula looks more like a CR 21.




I'm willing to go as low as 22.  



Cleon said:


> 200 pounds?




Sure!



Cleon said:


> I don't much care for the Undercommon, but like the other languages.




Yeah, that's a better fit for Drowcula.  (Sorry freyar!)



Cleon said:


> I was tempted by nobility & royalty but it seemed a bit niche. Still, he doesn't need 21 ranks in Ride or History, so how about rearranging the ranks:
> 
> Knowledge (history) 15, Knowledge (nobility and royalty) 9, Knowledge (the planes) 6, Ride 12 ?
> 
> That gives him Ride +19, enough to hit DC20 all the time, which is all you need for any standard Ride check.




Sounds good.

Updated.


----------



## Cleon (Sep 29, 2010)

Shade said:


> I like it, too.
> 
> Aquaticula underbar?




I prefer Aquala.



Shade said:


> I'm willing to go as low as 22.




As you like, though it still seems low.

Even if he ganged up with his CR22 twin a SRD Solar would still make mincemeat of them both.



Shade said:


> Yeah, that's a better fit for Drowcula.  (Sorry freyar!)




At least he isn't Drzz'cula.


----------



## Shade (Sep 30, 2010)

Cleon said:


> Even if he ganged up with his CR22 twin a SRD Solar would still make mincemeat of them both.




Solars are a bit under-CRed.  He'd give a good fight to Geryon or the Hag Countess.   Besides, if we CR him too low, people will "do the math" and realize that their generically-templated 18th-level vampire lord is weaker than Drac, but higher CRed.  



Cleon said:


> At least he isn't Drzz'cula.




Ooh...great idea.  Let's make a good version of him, with paired scimitars and lotsa angst!


----------



## Cleon (Oct 2, 2010)

Shade said:


> Solars are a bit under-CRed.  He'd give a good fight to Geryon or the Hag Countess.   Besides, if we CR him too low, people will "do the math" and realize that their generically-templated 18th-level vampire lord is weaker than Drac, but higher CRed.




Yes, the Solar is yet another example of a problematic CR.

22 Still seems too low for Dracs, but I guess I can live with it.



Shade said:


> Ooh...great idea.  Let's make a good version of him, with paired scimitars and lotsa angst!




Don't forget the extradimensional panther!


----------



## Shade (Oct 4, 2010)

Cleon said:


> Yes, the Solar is yet another example of a problematic CR.
> 
> 22 Still seems too low for Dracs, but I guess I can live with it.




Too low?  I originally recommended CR 24!


----------



## freyar (Oct 5, 2010)

I'm confused, too.  I thought you wanted CR 21, Cleon.


----------



## Cleon (Oct 7, 2010)

freyar said:


> I'm confused, too.  I thought you wanted CR 21, Cleon.




Sorry, I meant to high but it didn't come out right.


----------



## Shade (Oct 7, 2010)

In that case, I suppose we're finished with this monster, this thread.


----------



## freyar (Oct 7, 2010)

Goodbye, Moldvay! We'll sure miss you!


----------



## Cleon (Oct 9, 2010)

Shade said:


> In that case, I suppose we're finished with this monster, this thread.




Well there is one monster I'd like to talk about. I looked up the Saraphs and it differs slightly from the Sollux version of the Sun Brother - not much, but enough to make a difference.

Unlike the sollux, which are denizens of the Prime Material, the saraphs are native to the elemental plane of fire and have spell-like abilities. They also have a special metal which gains magical properties when used by saraphs.

I've already done my own version of the Saraphs as an 10 HD Extraplanar Outsider, but would you like to stat them up?

*SARAPHS*
Saraph (from the Hebrew, Shin, Resh, Pe—to burn or devour with fire)

FREQUENCY: Very Rare
NO. APPEARING: 1
ARMOR CLASS: -1
MOVE: 9”
HIT DICE: 10
% IN LAIR: Nil
TREASURE TYPE: Nil
NO. OF ATTACKS: 3/2
DAMAGE/ATTACK: 1-8(+7)
SPECIAL ATTACKS: +4 to hit
SPECIAL DEFENSES: See below
MAGIC RESISTANCE: Standard
INTELLIGENCE: Very
ALIGNMENT: Neutral (tending toward Lawful Good)
SIZE: M
PSIONIC ABILITY: Nil

Saraphs are a hominid race which lives on the Elemental Plane of Fire. They appear as seven-foot-tall, ruddy-skinned individuals with bright red hair and pink-irised eyes.

Within their homeland there is, presumably, a large variety of classes and types of Saraphs. Outside their home, however, one meets only members of the Brotherhood of the Sun. These warrior Lords wear a red surcoat with a flaming golden sun in its center, over a suit of scale mail which appears to be made from some cooper-gold alloy (though it is as strong as steel). The Saraphs’ helmets, greaves, and bracers are made from the same material, as is the longsword and dagger belted at their sides. The sun motif on a red field is repeated on their shields.

Since they come from a highly magical Plane, Saraphs’ armor and weapons acquire magical properties on the Physical Plane. Treat as Scale Mail +1, Shield +1, Sword +1 (Flame Tongue), and Dagger +1. The magical bonuses apply only when the armor and weapons are used by Saraphs.

Individuals of the Saraph race are generally larger than humans, and have quicker reflexes, coming from the Plane of Fire. As the Brothers of the Sun are chosen for maximum strength and dexterity, treat any brother as having 18/00 Strength and 18 Dexterity, with all appropriate bonuses.

Saraphs may cast the following spells once per day (as a 10th level Magic-User): _Fireball, Fire Shield, Fire Charm, Burning Hands, Detect Magic, Detect Invisible, Dispel Magic_. They can _Produce Flame_ or cause _Pyrotechnics_ as often as desired. Fire-based attacks do no damage on Saraphs if the fire is non-magical; magical fire attacks are at -1 on both “to hit” and damage dice.

The Saraphs are at war with the Efreeti. The war occasionally spills over to the Prime Material Plane since Saraphs hunt Efreeti through the Physical Plane and vice versa. The Efreeti have made an alliance with Fire Giants. Saraphs have countered this alliance with one between themselves and Golden Dragons.

The Brothers of the Sun are few in number, and, outside of the Plane of Fire, will always be encountered singly. Saraphs appear on the Physical Plane to track down and kill Efreeti. They also serve Gold Dragons who have aided the Saraph race in the past, often acting as treasure guards when the dragons are out feeding.

Saraphs have been known to contract service with high-level characters (particularly lawful good or neutral Magic-Users) in return for that character’s aid. Contracts will specify the length and nature of service for both parties. Note that such contracts depend solely on the good will of either side; service is a matter of conscience, not coercion.

_Originally appeared in Dragon Magazine #42_


----------



## Cleon (Oct 9, 2010)

Shade said:


> In that case, I suppose we're finished with this monster, this thread.




Just to check, does Drac's +8 turn resistance include the bonus from his _darkskull_? Shouldn't it have an "Adjusted by magic items" asterisk next to it, e.g. "+8*".

Since the original Moldvay version's turned as a special, I'm thinking he ought to be higher than the SRD Vampire's +4. The Greater Vampire conversions on Enworld has +6 turn resistance for a Vampire Lord plus the following SQs for the Prince and Arch-Prince:

*Improved Turn Resistance (Ex):* A prince cannot be commanded (but can still be rebuked or turned).

*Improved Turn Resistance (Ex):* An arch-prince cannot be commanded or rebuked (but can still be turned).

I'd like Vlad to have a +6 turn resistance with one or the other of the above improvements.

With a _darkskull_, that would give Drac a +10* turn resistance.


----------



## freyar (Oct 13, 2010)

Hmm, +6 turn resistance and the arch-prince's SQ appeal.

On the saraph, I'm not opposed to doing an "enhanced sollux" for them.  But do they belong in an undead thread?


----------



## Cleon (Oct 14, 2010)

freyar said:


> Hmm, +6 turn resistance and the arch-prince's SQ appeal.
> 
> On the saraph, I'm not opposed to doing an "enhanced sollux" for them.  But do they belong in an undead thread?




Well we've already been talked about a few of Moldvay's spirits on this, so it was just an extension of that.

I'd be happy moving it to the Dragon Mag conversions if you'd rather.


----------



## Shade (Oct 19, 2010)

I like the suggestions for Dracula.  Updated.

I'd rather not do a separate saraph conversion for the CC, though, unless we make them true 10-HD genies and not "hominids with class levels".  The SLAs are a better fit that way, and makes for a unique creature.  I'd also like to cut out all references to the "Brothers of the Sun", since that is tied to the sollux.  Since this thread is effectively dead, converting it here is fine.


----------



## Cleon (Oct 20, 2010)

Shade said:


> I like the suggestions for Dracula.  Updated.




I think Dracs is done then.



Shade said:


> I'd rather not do a separate saraph conversion for the CC, though, unless we make them true 10-HD genies and not "hominids with class levels".  The SLAs are a better fit that way, and makes for a unique creature.  I'd also like to cut out all references to the "Brothers of the Sun", since that is tied to the sollux.  Since this thread is effectively dead, converting it here is fine.




As I said earlier I've already done a homebrew conversion of the Saraphs, but I'd be interested to see an alternative take on it.

Although it might not be _that_ alternative, since 10 Hit Dice Outsider is what I went for too.


----------



## Shade (Oct 20, 2010)

Modifying from an efreet...

*Genie, Saraph*
Medium Outsider (Extraplanar, Fire)
Hit Dice: 10d8+20 (65 hp)
Initiative: +8
Speed: 20 ft. (4 squares)
Armor Class: 21 (+3 Dex, +3 natural, +5 _+1 scale mail_), touch 13, flat-footed 18
Base Attack/Grapple: +10/+14
Attack: _Flame tongue_ +15 melee (1d8+7/19-20 plus 1d6 fire and an additional 1d10 fire on a critical hit) or _+1 dagger _+15 ranged (1d4+5/19-20)
Full Attack: _Flame tongue_ +15/+10 melee (1d8+7/19-20 plus 1d6 fire and an additional 1d10 fire on a critical hit) or _+1 dagger _+15 ranged (1d4+5/19-20)
Space/Reach: 5 ft./5 ft.
Special Attacks: Saraph armaments, spell-like abilities
Special Qualities: Changes shape, darkvision 60 ft., immunity to fire, plane shift, telepathy 100 ft., vulnerability to cold 
Saves: Fort +9, Ref +11, Will +9
Abilities: Str 19, Dex 18, Con 14, Int 12, Wis 15, Cha 15
Skills: 9 at 13 ranks
Feats: Improved Initiative (B), 4 more
Environment: Elemental Plane of Fire
Organization: Solitary, company (2–4), or band (6–15)
Challenge Rating: x
Treasure: Standard coins; double goods; standard items
Alignment: Always lawful, never evil?
Advancement: 11–15 HD (Medium); 16–30 HD (Large)
Level Adjustment: —

Change Shape (Su): A saraph can assume the form of any Small, Medium, or Large humanoid or giant.

Plane Shift (Sp): A genie can enter any of the elemental planes, the Astral Plane, or the Material Plane. This ability transports the genie and up to eight other creatures, provided they all link hands with the genie. It is otherwise similar to the spell of the same name (caster level 13th).

Saraph Armaments (Ex):  A saraph's weapons and armor are produced from a special copper-gold alloy attuned only to saraphs.  When worn or wielded by a non-saraph, these items lose their magical properties.

Spell-Like Abilities: At will—produce flame, pyrotechnics (DC 14); 1/day—burning hands, detect magic, dispel magic, fireball (DC 15), fire shield, see invisibility. Caster level 10th. The save DCs are Charisma-based.


----------



## Cleon (Oct 20, 2010)

Seems a good start.

It's a bit lower-keyed then my version (I went a bit overboard, as usual ).

The speed ought to be "20 ft. (4 squares) in scale mail armour, base speed 30 ft.".

Why the Change Shape? The original saraphs didn't have it. (They didn't have Plane Shift either, but that makes sense since they need some way to visit the prime material).


----------



## Shade (Oct 22, 2010)

Cleon said:


> The speed ought to be "20 ft. (4 squares) in scale mail armour, base speed 30 ft.".




Good catch.



Cleon said:


> Why the Change Shape? The original saraphs didn't have it. (They didn't have Plane Shift either, but that makes sense since they need some way to visit the prime material).




It's a holdover from the efreet.  I'll drop it.

Added to Homebrews.



> Saraphs appear on the Physical Plane to track down and kill Efreeti.




Skills: 9 at 13 ranks
Concentration, Diplomacy, Intimidate, Jump, Knowledge (the planes), Listen, Sense Motive, Spot, Survival?

Feats: Improved Initiative (B), 4 more
Combat Reflexes, Power Attack, Track, Weapon Focus (longsword)?


----------



## Cleon (Oct 23, 2010)

Shade said:


> Skills: 9 at 13 ranks
> Concentration, Diplomacy, Intimidate, Jump, Knowledge (the planes), Listen, Sense Motive, Spot, Survival?
> 
> Feats: Improved Initiative (B), 4 more
> ...




Those look good to me.

I didn't think of giving them Track in my conversion - guess that take on 'em will have to rely on allies to find those blasted Efreet.


----------



## Shade (Oct 25, 2010)

Updated.

CR 8?

A saraph stands 7 feet tall and weighs about x pounds.

Sarphs speak Celestial, Common, Draconic, and Ignan?


----------



## Cleon (Oct 26, 2010)

Shade said:


> Updated.
> 
> CR 8?




That's three less than the CR11 Sollux, and the Saraph isn't that different. One or the other must be miss-CR'd. I suspect the Sollux, but that's the fault of underpowered nature of pure fighter classes.



Shade said:


> A saraph stands 7 feet tall and weighs about x pounds.




Well if it was built like an exceptionally tall (7') muscular human I figure they'd would weigh around 250 to 280 pounds.



Shade said:


> Sarphs speak Celestial, Common, Draconic, and Ignan?




Sarphs?

The languages are OK.


----------



## Shade (Oct 26, 2010)

Cleon said:


> That's three less than the CR11 Sollux, and the Saraph isn't that different. One or the other must be miss-CR'd. I suspect the Sollux, but that's the fault of underpowered nature of pure fighter classes.




I suspect so.  I can't justify pushing the saraph over the efreet.



Cleon said:


> Well if it was built like an exceptionally tall (7') muscular human I figure they'd would weigh around 250 to 280 pounds.




That'll work!



Cleon said:


> Sarphs?




Yes.  That is the plural of saraph.  Look it up!


----------



## Cleon (Oct 27, 2010)

Shade said:


> I suspect so.  I can't justify pushing the saraph over the efreet.




CR 8 does fit their stats, and they're certainly in the same challenge ballpark as the SRD Efreet.


----------



## Shade (Oct 27, 2010)

Updated.  Finished?


----------



## Cleon (Oct 28, 2010)

Shade said:


> Updated.  Finished?




Looks sound. Here's the version I came up with.

The CR looks too high, but it's based on the Enworld conversion of the Sollux which is CR10. I know not giving them the Fire subtype is a bit odd, but fire resistance and the Forged in Fire SQ seemed the best fit to the original.

Besides, I wanted them to be different. 

 *Saraphs*
Medium Outsider (Extraplanar)
*Hit Dice:* 10d8+30 (75 hp)
*Initiative:* +8
*Speed:* 20 ft. (4 squares) in scale mail armor, base speed 30 ft.
*Armor Class: *27 (+3 Dex, +4 natural, +7 armor, +3 shield), touch 13, flat-footed 24
*Base Attack/Grapple:* +10/+16
*Attack:*_ +1 axiomatic fire outsider bane saraph metal longsword_ +18 melee (1d8+9 plus 1d6 fire/17-20) or mighty [+6] composite long bow with _saraph metal arrows_ +15 ranged (1d8+7 plus 1d6 fire/x3)
*Full Attack: *_+1 axiomatic fire outsider bane saraph metal longsword_ +18/+13 melee (1d8+9 plus 1d6 fire/17-20) or mighty [+6] composite long bow with _saraph metal arrows_ +15/+10 ranged (1d6+7 plus 1d6 fire/x3)
*Space/Reach: *5 ft./5 ft.
*Special Attacks:* Master fighter, saraph metal, spell-like abilities
*Special Qualities:* Darkvision 60 ft., fire resistance 10, forged in fire, immunity to illusions, immunity to non-magical fire, see invisibility
*Saves: *Fort +12, Ref +13, Will +12 [includes _+2 cloak of resistance_]
*Abilities:* Str 23, Dex 18, Con 16, Int 14, Wis 17, Cha 14
*Skills:* Climb +19, Concentration +16, Diplomacy +17, Handle Animal +17, Intimidate +15, Listen +16, Knowledge (the planes) +15, Ride +19, Sense Motive +16, Spot +16, Survival +3 (+5 on other planes)
*Feats: *Cleave, Combat Expertise, Dodge, Improved Critical (longsword), Improved Initiative *, Mobility, Power Attack, Spring Attack, Weapon Focus (longsword), Weapon Specialization (longsword), Whirlwind Attack
Environment: **Any warm land or underground and the elemental plane of fire
Organization: Solitary, crusade (1 plus 1-5 sollux) or brotherhood (1-6 plus 10-50 sollux and 1 young adult or older gold dragon)
Challenge Rating: 12
Treasure: Standard (plus see text)
Alignment: Usually lawful neutral
Advancement: 11-15 HD (Medium); 16-30 HD (Large) or by character class
Level Adjustment: +4

The warrior standing before you looks like a muscular, crimson-skinned human standing over seven feet tall. His bright yellow hair hangs in braids from beneath his helm. His eyes glow a brilliant red-tinged yellow with intense pink irises. His well-polished weaponry hint at martial discipline. His red-gold scale armor and shield bears an emblem of a blazing sun.

Saraphs are distant relatives of the efreet. Saraphs are in a continuous state of war with the efreet, and occasionally visit the prime material plane to attack efreet interests there or defend their own prime material holdings from the efreet and their allies. They have a similar kinship to sollux as genies have to jann, but their relationship is far friendlier, with saraphs often acting as leaders to bands of sollux. A saraphs can live in climes as cool as those preferred by humanoids, but is more comfortable in areas of great heat, such as active volcanoes, thermal vents, and hot deserts.

The bulk of saraph society remains in their homes in the elemental planes of fire. Those saraphs encountered on the Material Plane invariably belong to the Brotherhood of the Sun, a knightly order dedicated to finding and eradicating efreet. Known as Brothers of the Sun (regardless of gender), these knights train constantly, becoming accomplished fighters. They carry armor and weapons made from an unknown red-gold metal that displays magical properties when used by a saraph, and usually carry equipment bearing additional enchantments. Brothers of the Sun are mostly lawful neutral, but some are lawful good.

The saraphs have an alliance with gold dragons. They may call upon a dragon to help them destroy a particularly strong efreeti plot, and in return they serve gold dragons who have aided the saraph race (guarding the dragon's lair, for example).

Saraphs enjoy a good meal, but only eat food that is piping hot.

Saraphs stand just over 7 feet tall and weigh 180 to 240 pounds. Males and females are almost identical in size.

Saraphs Sun Brothers are selected from the elite, the saraphs presented here had the following ability scores before racial adjustments: Str 15, Dex 12, Con 12, Int 10, Wis 13, Cha 8.

Saraphs speak Common, Draconic and Ignan.

The sample saraphs Sun Brother possesses the following equipment (factored into the statistics above): +3 light fortification saraph metal scale mail, heavy saraph metal shield, +1 axiomatic fire outsider bane saraph metal longsword, cloak of resistance +2, mighty [+6] composite longbow with 20 saraph metal arrows, and one saraph metal greater slaying arrow (fire outsiders).

COMBAT
Saraphs are generally even-tempered and have a somewhat friendly outlook toward other creatures. This does not extend to efreet, however, who they will attack on sight. Saraphs have a very martial culture, and fight with great skill and tactics.

Forged in Fire (Ex): A saraphs takes no damage from natural fire, including nonmagical fires or the flames and heat of the elemental plane of fire. A saraphs gains a +4 bonus on all saving throws against magical heat and fire. This bonus increases by +1 for every five additional hit dice the saraphs attains. Spells and powers which have a special effect upon creatures with the Fire subtype affect a saraphs as if it has the Fire subtype.

Master Fighter: Saraphs possess all of the abilities of a fighter of a level equal to their Hit Dice, including being treated as a fighter for meeting prerequisites for feats and any other purposes. This only applies to highly trained saraphs warrior lords, such as the Brotherhood of the Sun. Within their homeland on the Elemental Plane of Fire there are other castes of saraphs.

Saraph Metal: This metal looks like a mixture of copper and gold but is as strong as masterwork steel. All saraph metal items are masterwork and gain a +1 enhancement bonus when used by a saraphs. In addition, a saraph metal weapon gains the flaming property when used by a saraphs and a saraphs can cause a saraph metal item to emit light as a continual flame spell at will, the saraphs can switch this light on or off as a free action. These magical properties are due to the saraph metal channeling a saraphs' innate magical abilities, a saraph metal item is only a masterwork item in the hands of a non-saraphs.

See Invisibility (Su): As the see invisibility spell, always active, caster level 10th.

Spell-Like Abilities (Sp): At-will—produce flame, pyrotechnics (DC 14); 3/day—burning hands (DC 13), detect magic, 1/day—dispel magic, fireball (DC 15), fire shield (warm only), hypnotic pattern (DC 14). The caster level is 10th. Save DCs are Charisma-based.*


----------



## Shade (Oct 29, 2010)

Anything else Modvay-ian we may have missed?   Even fragmentary stuff?


----------



## Cleon (Oct 30, 2010)

Shade said:


> Anything else Modvay-ian we may have missed?   Even fragmentary stuff?




What about the Casurua from Dragon #210's _Too Evil To Die_ and reissued in Monstrous Compendium Annual Volume Two as the Ghost, Casura? Didn't we decide there was already an official version of it?

There might be something else with his name on it, I'll have to go through my Dragons again.


----------



## Shade (Nov 1, 2010)

Cleon said:


> What about the Casurua from Dragon #210's _Too Evil To Die_ and reissued in Monstrous Compendium Annual Volume Two as the Ghost, Casura? Didn't we decide there was already an official version of it?




Indeed there is:  Dragon Compendium Volume One (p. 181).


----------



## Cleon (Nov 2, 2010)

Shade said:


> Indeed there is:  Dragon Compendium Volume One (p. 181).




I vaguely recalled it was something like that.

Unless you want to break protocol and do a different version of the Casurua, that doesn't leave much.

Most of Moldvay's other Dragon writeups were Giants of the Earth NPCs.

We seem to be left with Dragon #60's Donald Duck (who I remember us talking about before) and Dragon#41's Silkie.

Either of those of any interest?


----------



## Shade (Nov 3, 2010)

The silkie appears too similar to the selkie for a separate conversion.

Let's save Donald Duck for April and Send in the Clowns.  

So I suppose this thread has finally achieved eternal rest.


----------



## Cleon (Nov 4, 2010)

Shade said:


> The silkie appears too similar to the selkie for a separate conversion.




After reading them they seem quite different to me, at least in some respects.

The 3E _Fiend Folio_ Selkie (and the Enworld version in the *Crypt*) both appear to be based on the _Monstrous Manual / MC1_ version, which in turn seems to derive from the version in the 1E _Monster Manual II_. The original creature was a seal that turns into a human, like a wolfwere does.

In the Moldvay version, the Silkie has twice the HD and is Large-sized in seal form, it also has innate spellcasting or SLAs (including _lightning bolt_!). The Moldvay Silkie looks like a Fey to me - they even kidnap human babies and leave changlings in their place.

I might have a stab at converting them, even if you don't fancy it.

EDIT: Oh, and Moldvay's Silkie needs silver or magic weapons to hit, while the Selkie is vulnerable to mundane weapons :ENDEDIT



Shade said:


> Let's save Donald Duck for April and Send in the Clowns.




Saving the best for last, eh. 



Shade said:


> So I suppose this thread has finally achieved eternal rest.




The undead never sleep!


----------



## Shade (Nov 5, 2010)

Alright, you've convinced me to convert the feylike silkie.


----------



## Cleon (Nov 6, 2010)

Shade said:


> Alright, you've convinced me to convert the feylike silkie.




Good!

I'll save you some time:

The Silkie*
Created by Tom Moldvay*
*FREQUENCY:*_ Uncommon
_*NO. APPEARING:*_ 1-8
_*ARMOR CLASS:*_ 5
_*MOVE:*_ 30”
_*HIT DICE:*_ 6
_*% IN LAIR:*_ 10%
_*TREASURE TYPE:*_ W (no map)
_*NO. OF ATTACKS:*_ 2
_*DAMAGE/ATTACK:*_ 2-8
_*SPECIAL ATTACKS:*_ Pack attack
_*SPECIAL DEFENSES:*_ Silver, or + 1 weapon to be hit
_*MAGIC RESISTANCE:*_ Standard
_*INTELLIGENCE:*_ High +
_*ALIGNMENT:*_ Chaotic Good
_*SIZE:*_ L
_*PSIONIC ABILITY:*_ Nil
_
The Silkie are a race of wereseals. In their non-animal form, they appear as black-haired, gray-eyed Half Elves and have all typical Half-Elf abilities. Silkie Half Elves usually fight with flint spears, daggers, double-headed axes, or polished stone hammers. On land, Silkie warriors wear multi-layered, sharkskin armor and use sharkskin shields (AC4).

Silkie seals are usually distinguishable from normal seals by their large size. Silkie seals have one ramming attack for 2-8. When fighting enemies who are in small to medium-sized boats, Silkie often try to ram the boat en masse, overturning it, then drowning their victims by force of numbers. Silkie often travel with 2-12 seals (AC6, Move 24”, HD2, ram attack 1-6). They may summon 1-10 dolphins, provided the dolphins are no further than ½ mile away (1-10 turns away swimming at normal speed).

Silkie are allied to dolphins and Aquatic Elves in their war against Sahuagin and Sharks. Good will exists between the Silkie and the non-aquatic races of Elves and Half Elves (except the Drow). Silkie are tolerant toward Tritons, Locathah, Mermen, and any Human to whom they are related. Silkie are antipathetic toward Ixitxachitl or any other evil sea race, and Neutral toward all other races. Silkie do sometimes feud with fishermen, particularly if the fishermen also hunt seal pelts, net Aquatic Elves, or over-fish an area to near depletion.

All Silkie are descended from Angus MacOdrum. In the legendary past, Angus, a high-level Magic-User and Fighter, led an Aquatic Elven army to victory against a Sahuagin incursion. Angus married 12 Aquatic Elven sisters; from these unions came the Silkie race (Silkie enemies claim this legend is an invention, and that Angus was merely an overly proud magician whom the gods cursed and who passed this curse on to his descendants). Clan MacOdrum encompasses Silkies, Humans, and Aquatic Elves in approximately 50%-25%-25% ratio. The MacOdrum of MacOdrum is always a Silkie, who takes the name Angus upon mounting the Clan throne.

An occasional Silkie family builds a sea cave lair but most (90%) Silkie live in Land Under Wave. Land Under Wave is composed of several unnamed cities built completely under water. The cities are separated by hundreds of miles but are linked into one by a magical teleportation mass-transit system. Each city is kept by by a magical bubble dome. The same magic maintains a constant supply of fresh air and the artificial sun which powers the city and provides light, heat, and allows for weather control. It is usually the climate of early summer or late spring in Land Under Wave. Fruits and vegetables grow all year round (the only meat Silkies eat is that which they catch while as seals).

Land Under Wave is a wonder. Buildings are made of multicolored, polished marble, heavily ornamented with gold, silver, and jewels. The architectural style is light and airy. All buildings are interconnected by passages under the sea floor. More than half the land area is taken up by intricate formal gardens with flowing brooks and fountains. Land Under Wave would be a paradise were it not for one fact: All servants are captured Humans.

The Silkie roam isolated rock skenies and beaches at night to dance under the moonlight Whenever they manage to find an unguarded Human baby or child, they will steal that child, replacing it with a soulless changeling. Human MacOdrums are never taken, as they are kin, but all other Humans are fair game.

The captured child is raised in Land Under Wave. The captivity is far from harsh. The child attends Silkie schools and is adopted into Silkie families. Still, the child is a captive, and must serve a full fifty (Human) years from the time the child learns its jobs until the time of release. Even so, captivity is looked upon as a blessing. Time flows differently in Land Under Wave and the period of fifty-year service ages the Human servant but a decade.

Furthermore, the Silkie are natural Magic-Users and teach their servants many useful spells, besides rewarding them handsomely with gold and jewels upon release. Many captives choose to remain in Land Under Wave rather than return to the surface world.

Land Under Wave is filled with magic. The elder Silkie all settle down to a life of elegant leisure intermingled with magical research. Only the younger Silkie venture out of Land Under Wave to mingle with other races and dance beneath the moon.

Unlike other lycanthropes, Silkie can only change into seals by donning a magical seal skin. Any individual who captures a Silkie seal skin can force that Silkie to do his bidding. A controlled Silkie cannot lie to its master and will perform any reasonable service or promise any reasonable ransom for the return of his seal skin (without which he cannot dive deep enough to reach Land Under Wave). As long as the captor continues to act honorably, the Silkie will faithfully fulfill its part of the bargain. Any dishonorable or treacherous act on the captor’s part frees the Silkie from obligation.

Silkies, in human form, may cast the following spells: _Friends_, _Mending_, _Unseen Servant_, _Read Magic_, _Forget_, _Fools Gold_, _Gust of Wind_, and _Lightning Bolt_. All spells are cast as a sixth-level Magic-User.

A captive Silkie is under magical geas not to use its spells against its captor. The geas holds only so long as the captor’s actions remain honorable with respect to the Silkie. The elder Silkie have much more powerful spells, particularly sea magic and weather magic, but they venture out of Land Under Wave only on extreme occasions and are encountered very rarely.

_Originally appeared in Dragon Magazine #41 (“Dragon’s Bestiary - The Silkie” by Tom Moldvay, Sept 1980)._


----------



## freyar (Nov 7, 2010)

Uggh, the ancestry of these makes me lean toward humanoid or monstrous humanoid, though.  I guess we could do the opposite of the FF selkie: fey with humanoid ancestry.


----------



## Cleon (Nov 7, 2010)

freyar said:


> Uggh, the ancestry of these makes me lean toward humanoid or monstrous humanoid, though.  I guess we could do the opposite of the FF selkie: fey with humanoid ancestry.




I'm leaning towards Fey, if only to distinguish them more from the Fiend Folio Selkie.

The _Dragon_ writeup gives them Large size, but I think that's just for their seal form and their humanoid shape is man-sized. I'd hope Moldvay would have mentioned it if they were 8-foot tall "half elves"!


----------



## Shade (Nov 8, 2010)

Yeah, let's go with fey and _not_ giant half-elves.


----------



## Cleon (Nov 10, 2010)

Shade said:


> Yeah, let's go with fey and _not_ giant half-elves.




Agreed, I think we'd better have full separate stats for both "seal form" and "half-elf form".

Do we have 3E stats for seals? I don't recall ever seeing any.

Anyhow, here's a couple of questions:

Do silkies breathe water? Since both aquatic elves and selkies can, that implies Silkies do too, suggesting we'd better give them the Aquatic subtype. I wouldn't mind giving them _water breathing_ as an innate magical ability instead though, probably one they can use on other creatures - if they carry children off to their cities beneath the seas, they have to have some means of ensuring they don't drown during the trip!

How do we handle the spells? I prefer innate sorcerer levels over SLAs, since that seems a better fit with the description.

For ability scores, apart from a good Int and Charisma (since they're handsome and "High+"Intelligence), I'd like to give them a good Constitution since (a) it will compensate for their small d6 Hit Dice, (b) I'd like their Fort save to be comparable to whatever a regular seal would likely have, and (c) I think they should be good at holding their breath.

Anyway, I'll post a working outline, although it will be pretty bare-bones at first.


----------



## freyar (Nov 10, 2010)

Ok, then, Medium fey with alternate form (or change shape?) as Large seals (but only with a magical skin).

How do we want to set abilities?

Also, it mentions that they're "natural Magic-Users" and gives them some SLAs.  Want to use that as justification to give them sorc casting as well?

Anyone else find it odd that CG fey keep slaves?  I can see getting around the good part in some way if they were lawful and saw it as an exchange (maybe ), but since they're also chaotic???

EDIT: cross-posted with Cleon.  Let's do both SLAs and sorcerer casting.  And looking back over things, I think alternate form works better than change shape and also works better with a different complete stat block.


----------



## Cleon (Nov 10, 2010)

*Silkie Working Draft*

*Silkie*
*Humanoid Form*
Medium-Size Fey (Shapechanger)
Hit Dice: 6d6+18 (39 hp)
Initiative: +2
Speed: 30 ft., swim 30 ft.
Armor Class: 16 (+2 Dex, +2 leather armour, +2 shield), touch 12, flat-footed 14
Base Attack/Grapple: +3/+4
Attack: Masterwork battleaxe or masterwork warhammer +6 melee (1d8+1/×3) or shortspear +6 melee (1d6+1/×3) or masterwork shortspear +6 ranged (1d6+1/×3) 
Full Attack: Masterwork battleaxe or masterwork warhammer +6 melee (1d8+1/×3) or  shortspear +6 melee (1d6+1/×3) or masterwork shortspear +6 ranged  (1d6+1/×3) 
Space/Reach: 5 ft./5 ft.
Special Attacks: Spells
Special Qualities: Alternate form, children of the sea, DR 10/silver, magic sealskin, marine mammal empathy
Saves: Fort +7, Ref +7, Will +8
Abilities: Str 13, Dex 15, Con 16, Int 14, Wis 12, Cha 15
Skills: Concentration +12, Diplomacy +11, Handle Animal +11, Knowledge (arcane) +11), Listen +10, Spellcraft +13 (+15 with scrolls), Spot +10, Swim +9, Use Magic Device +13 (+15 with scrolls)
Feats: Great Fortitude, Iron Will, Weapon Finesse
Climate/Terrain: Cold aquatic
Organization: Solitary, shore party (2-8 and one leader of 1st-4th level), pack (2-8  plus 2-12 seals and one leader of 1st-4th level), family (5-10 plus 2-12  seals and 20% noncombatant young and 1-2 leaders of 1st-4th level and  0-1 subchiefs of 3rd-5th level) or band (10-40 plus 5-30 seals plus 20%  noncombatants and 1 leader of 1st-4th level per 10 adults and 1-3  subchiefs of 3rd-5th level and 1 chief of 5th-7th level)
Challenge Rating: 6
Treasure: Standard
Alignment: Usually chaotic, often good
Advancement: By character class
Level Adjustment: +4

_A tall and handsome half-elf, black-haired and gray-eyed_

*Seal Form*
Large-Size Fey (Shapechanger)
Hit Dice: 6d6+18 (21+39 hp)
Initiative: +2
Speed: 20 ft., swim 80 ft.
Armor Class: 15 (-1 size, +2 Dex, +4 natural), touch 11, flat-footed 13
Base Attack/Grapple: +3/+11
Attack: Bite +6 melee (1d8+6) or slam +6 melee (1d8+6)
Full Attack: Bite +6 melee (1d8+6) or slam +6 melee (1d8+6)
Space/Reach: 5 ft./5 ft.
Special Attacks: Capsize boat, spells
Special Qualities: Alternate form, children of the sea, DR 10/silver, hold breath, magic sealskin, marine mammal empathy
Saves: Great Fortitude, Iron Will, Weapon Finesse
Abilities: Str 19, Dex 15, Con 16, Int 14, Wis 12, Cha 15
Skills: Concentration +12, Diplomacy +11, Handle Animal +11, Knowledge (arcane) +11), Listen +10, Spellcraft +13 (+15 with scrolls), Spot +10, Swim +12, Use Magic Device +13 (+15 with scrolls)
Feats: Great Fortitude, Iron Will, Weapon Finesse
Climate/Terrain: Cold aquatic
Organization: Solitary, shore party (2-8 and one leader of 1st-4th level), pack (2-8  plus 2-12 seals and one leader of 1st-4th level), family (5-10 plus 2-12  seals and 20% noncombatant young and 1-2 leaders of 1st-4th level and  0-1 subchiefs of 3rd-5th level) or band (10-40 plus 5-30 seals plus 20%  noncombatants and 1 leader of 1st-4th level per 10 adults and 1-3  subchiefs of 3rd-5th level and 1 chief of 5th-7th level)
Challenge Rating: 6
Treasure: Standard
Alignment: Usually chaotic, often good
Advancement: By character class
Level Adjustment: +4

_An exceptionally big seal with gray eyes_

Silkie are a race of shapechanging fey. According to legend, they are  descended from Angus MacOdrum, a powerful fighter-wizard who united  clans of humans, aquatic elves and selkies into a new tribe. The silkie  are allied with aquatic elves and selkies, and will aid them against  their foes – particularly sahuagin and sharks. All silkie are innate  sorcerers, and some are spellcasters of great skill.

Like their selkie cousins, silkie can take on the form of a seal, but  they can only change into seals if they don a magical seal skin. Silkie  tradition obliges a silkie to become the servant to any individual who  captures the silkie's seal skin, the silkie cannot lie to his or her  master and must deliver any reasonable service or ransom for the return  of their skin. Any dishonorable or treacherous act on the captor’s part  frees the silkie from obligation.

Some silkie families and bands live in sea caves, but the majority of  the race dwell in Land Under Wave, a group of wondrous cities at the  bottom of the sea. Powerful magic provides these cities with a dome of  breathable air, an artificial sun and perpetually pleasant weather, so  fine fruit and vegetables grow all year round. The cities are hundreds  of miles apart, but are interconnected by permanent teleportation circle  spells that allow instant travel between them. Time runs strangely in  Land Under Wave, causing living creatures to age five times slower than  they would outside the cities' magic.

The silkies of Land Under Wave have a tradition of taking humanoid  children to raise as servants. Some of these were abandoned infants left  to die of exposure, but the more chaotic silkies are not adverse to  stealing unattended children and leaving a changeling in their place.  These humanoid servants are adopted by silkie families and treated  kindly, but have to serve the silkie for 50 years before being freed  (although many elect to remain in Land Under Wave after finishing their  service). The magic of the silkie's domed cities means the servants only  age a decade during those 50 years.

Silkie look just like particularly tall and finely built half elves in  their humanoid form, a typical silkie is between 5½ and 6 feet tall and  weighs about 160 pounds in humanoid form. In seal form, a silkie is from  7 to 8 feet long and weighs around 500 pounds.

Silkies speak Aquan, Common, Elven and Sylvan.

*Combat*
Silkies fight with spells or weapons when in humanoid form and with  spells or teeth in seal form. They usually start combat by casting spells, then melee or withdraw as the circumstances warrant.

In half-elf form, silkies protect themselves with sharkskin leather   armor and shields and fight with stone-bladed weapons, favoring spears,  battle axes and  warhammers. The stone from which their weapons are made  is magically  treated to be as tough as steel. In seal form silkies fight with spells or their teeth, they often try to capsize boats used by land-dwelling opponents.

*Alternate Form (Su):* A silkie can assume the form of a handsome  half-elf or an unusually large seal. It must be wearing its Magic Skin  (see below) to assume seal form.

*Capsize Boat (Ex):* Silkies in seal form can capsize boats up to 50 ft. in length. They  must succeed at a  Strength check against a DC of 15 plus the boat's length in  feet to capsize it (e.g. a 30 ft. boat has a DC of 15+30 of 45 to capsize). Any unsecured occupants or cargo  in a  capsized boat ends up in the water. Groups of silkies use Aid Another actions on this Strength check to tip over boats too big for a single silkie.

*Children of the Sea** (Su):* Once per day, a selkie  can call forth a pod of 2d4+1 porpoises as a standard action. These  marine mammal allies arrive in 2d6 rounds and aid the selkie for up to 1  hour.

*Hold Breath (Ex):* A silkie in seal form can hold its breath for a number of rounds equal to 8 times its Constitution score before it risks drowning.

*Magic Sealskin (Su):*  All silkies possess an enchanted sealskin which allows them to assume  seal form (see Alternate Form, above). Should another creature steal  this skin, the silkie is unable to attack them unless the skin's thief  attacks the silkie first (as per the affect of the _sanctuary_  spell). Furthermore, the silkie has a -4 penalty to resist all  Charisma-based skills and saves against enchantment spells performed by  the skin-thief.

 If a silkie's sealskin is destroyed, the silkie is able to create a new  one by performing an hour-long ritual in the Land Below Waves with the  assistance of a silkie with a magic sealskin.

*Marine Mammal Empathy (Ex):* A silkie can communicate with any marine mammal and has a +4 racial bonus on Charisma-based checks against seals and porpoises.

*Spells:* A silkie casts spells as a 6th level sorcerer.

_Typical Spells Known (6/7/6/3, save DC 12 + spell level)_
_*0*_---_daze_, _detect magic_, _ghost sound_, _mending_, _prestidigitation, ray of frost,_ _read magic_;
_*1st*_---_charm person_, _magic missile_, _shield_, _unseen servant_
_* 2nd*_---_daze monster_, _gust of wind_
_* 3rd*_---_lightning bolt     _


----------



## freyar (Nov 11, 2010)

We could make both forms aquatic and amphibious.  But that still doesn't help with the slaves I guess...

For summoning, we could just stick to the SRD porpoise (maybe quite a few of them), but I wouldn't be opposed to allowing them to summon an SRD orca or two instead.  For the empathy, I'd definitely go with all marine mammals, though.

Are you totally opposed to SLAs?  I'd like casting and SLAs.


----------



## Shade (Nov 11, 2010)

freyar said:


> Anyone else find it odd that CG fey keep slaves?  I can see getting around the good part in some way if they were lawful and saw it as an exchange (maybe ), but since they're also chaotic???




Yeah, I don't like it.  How about "usually chaotic" for the alignment, and then DMs can choose to have good ones not take slaves.



freyar said:


> EDIT: cross-posted with Cleon.  Let's do both SLAs and sorcerer casting.




Agreed.



freyar said:


> We could make both forms aquatic and amphibious.  But that still doesn't help with the slaves I guess...




Give 'em water breathing as a SLA to use on its slaves.



freyar said:


> For summoning, we could just stick to the SRD porpoise (maybe quite a few of them), but I wouldn't be opposed to allowing them to summon an SRD orca or two instead.  For the empathy, I'd definitely go with all marine mammals, though.




Agreed with all that.


----------



## Cleon (Nov 12, 2010)

Shade said:


> Yeah, I don't like it.  How about "usually chaotic" for the alignment, and then DMs can choose to have good ones not take slaves.




How about "Usually chaotic, often good?"



Shade said:


> Give 'em water breathing as a SLA to use on its slaves.




With Aquatic/Amphibious? That'd be OK by me.

Hold on, it specifically says they can only dive deep enough to The Land Under the Waves in seal form. That implies only the seal form has Aquatic and/or water breathing.



Shade said:


> Agreed with all that.




I'll Update the working draft.

EDIT: *Updated*.


----------



## Cleon (Nov 12, 2010)

For the summon porpoises trick we could just go for a _summon_ spell approach, e.g.:

*Summon Porpoises (Sp):* Once a day, a silkie can summon 1d4+1 porpoises as if it cast _summon nature's ally III_.

I'd prefer a version modelled on a Vampire's Children of the Night SA, though:

*Children of the Sea** (Su):* Once per day, a selkie can call forth a pod of *2d4+1* porpoises as a standard action. These marine mammal allies arrive in 2d6 rounds and aid the selkie for up to 1 hour.


----------



## freyar (Nov 14, 2010)

Except, oddly, seals are not aquatic in the sense that they can't breathe water.  Check out the porpoise and the whales in the SRD.  Maybe we should give the seal form Hold Breath like the SRD critters since "Land under Wave" has some air pocket around it.  Maybe the mythal or whatever that powers the air dome lets them carry the servants down.  Or maybe they often learn water breathing, not as an SLA, but as a sorc spell.  I guess I like that last.

Edit: I like the Su summons better, too.  And, like I said, I'm ok with adding 1 or 2 orcas as an option.


----------



## Cleon (Nov 14, 2010)

freyar said:


> Except, oddly, seals are not aquatic in the sense that they can't breathe water.  Check out the porpoise and the whales in the SRD.  Maybe we should give the seal form Hold Breath like the SRD critters since "Land under Wave" has some air pocket around it.  Maybe the mythal or whatever that powers the air dome lets them carry the servants down.  Or maybe they often learn water breathing, not as an SLA, but as a sorc spell.  I guess I like that last.




Yes, didn't I mention that problem earlier?

My preferred solution would be to give the "seal form" _water breathing_ as a Sp ability, so the Silkie just casts it on itself.

I'd be OK with Hold Breath, but if the Land Under Wave is at the bottom of the sea it'll need a very high Con multiplier to be able to dive that deep.



freyar said:


> Edit: I like the Su summons better, too.  And, like I said, I'm ok with adding 1 or 2 orcas as an option.




Apart from the fact some orcas eat seals and dolphins, they seem too powerful. It takes a _summon nature's ally V_ spell to conjure a single SRD Orca.

Besides, the original version could only porpoisely summon dolphins.

Oh, and as I said earlier are their 3E edition stats for seals anywhere?

For that matter, is this article the only source for AD&D stats for seals?


----------



## freyar (Nov 15, 2010)

I seal what you're doing with that porpoise!   Ok, I can drop the orcas for flavor reasons. 

I think I prefer hold breath but keep water breathing as a common spell for capturing servants.


----------



## Cleon (Nov 17, 2010)

freyar said:


> I seal what you're doing with that porpoise!   Ok, I can drop the orcas for flavor reasons.




So do you prefer _summon porpoise_s or _children of the sea_?

I like the latter.



freyar said:


> I think I prefer hold breath but keep water breathing as a common spell for capturing servants.




That's OK by me. I've stuck Hold Breath in the seal-form of the working draft, and cut out its Aquatic subtype and _water breathing_.

8 times Con for Hold Breath seemed appropriate, the same as a whale, since they need to dive deep.


----------



## freyar (Nov 18, 2010)

I like chicken children of the sea better, too.  Agreed to 8xCon.


----------



## Cleon (Nov 20, 2010)

freyar said:


> I like chicken children of the sea better, too.  Agreed to 8xCon.




*Updated*.

What shall we do next, spells or decide whether to do something for the seal form's "pack attack"?


----------



## freyar (Nov 22, 2010)

Let's think about pack attacking.  I know we've done something similar before, but I'm getting tired and don't remember what.


----------



## Shade (Nov 22, 2010)

Here's one...

Pack Tactics (Ex): When two or more night dragons flank an opponent, they receive double the normal bonus on attack rolls (+4), and can flank creatures that cannot normally be flanked (due to greater uncanny dodge, all-around vision, etc.) Additionally, a night dragon flanking an opponent deals an additonal +1d6 points of damage for each night dragon within 30 feet.


----------



## Cleon (Nov 23, 2010)

freyar said:


> Let's think about pack attacking.  I know we've  done something similar before, but I'm getting tired and don't remember  what.






Shade said:


> Here's one...
> 
> Pack Tactics (Ex): When two or more night dragons flank an opponent, they receive double the normal bonus on attack rolls (+4), and can flank creatures that cannot normally be flanked (due to greater uncanny dodge, all-around vision, etc.) Additionally, a night dragon flanking an opponent deals an additonal +1d6 points of damage for each night dragon within 30 feet.




I was thinking of the *Pack Spider* conversion we did, but that doesn't seem a very good fit.

Since they use it to tip over boats, it seems more like a way to increase their Strength checks. We could just make it a Capsize Boat extraordinary attack (Str check at DC X, with a +Y bonus per additional silkie aiding), but upon reflection I would prefer a "Pack Tactics" like the above AND a Capsize Boat SA.


----------



## Shade (Nov 23, 2010)

Yeah, that seems the best course of action.


----------



## freyar (Nov 24, 2010)

Go for it!


----------



## Cleon (Nov 24, 2010)

Shade said:


> Yeah, that seems the best course of action.




I'd be happy to drop the "Pack Tactics" and just give them a Capsize Boat special attack.

Something like:

*Capsize Boat (Ex):* Silkies in seal form can capsize boats. The silkie must succeed at a Strength check against a DC of (15 + length of boat in feet?) to tip the boat over. For each additional silkie aiding the capsize attempt add a +2 bonus on the Strength check (max +20). Any unsecured occupants or cargo in a capsized boat ends up in the water.


----------



## freyar (Nov 25, 2010)

I'll go with that, since it fits the original text better.  However, this is basically Aid Another, right?  Also, 



> Unlike other lycanthropes, Silkie can only change into seals by donning a magical seal skin. Any individual who captures a Silkie seal skin can force that Silkie to do his bidding. A controlled Silkie cannot lie to its master and will perform any reasonable service or promise any reasonable ransom for the return of his seal skin (without which he cannot dive deep enough to reach Land Under Wave). As long as the captor continues to act honorably, the Silkie will faithfully fulfill its part of the bargain. Any dishonorable or treacherous act on the captor’s part frees the Silkie from obligation.
> 
> ...
> 
> A captive Silkie is under magical geas not to use its spells against its captor. The geas holds only so long as the captor’s actions remain honorable with respect to the Silkie. The elder Silkie have much more powerful spells, particularly sea magic and weather magic, but they venture out of Land Under Wave only on extreme occasions and are encountered very rarely.




How shall we do the seal skin?  Borrow from that tiger lycanthrope with the skin we did earlier (what were those called?)?

And how about the captivity bit?


----------



## Cleon (Nov 26, 2010)

freyar said:


> I'll go with that, since it fits the original text better.  However, this is basically Aid Another, right?  Also,




Yes, a slightly improved Aid Another is what I was going for.



freyar said:


> How shall we do the seal skin?  Borrow from that tiger lycanthrope with the skin we did earlier (what were those called?)?




If I remember correctly, that was a variant weretiger we did for a Chinese Vampire conversion we did. The vampire threw a tiger-skin over a victim and they were cursed to become its weretiger slaves.

I don't think there's much we can use from that.

Basically, we need to add some stuff to its Alternate Form SQ about how it can only assume seal form with its enchanted sealskin.



freyar said:


> And how about the captivity bit?




How about if the Silkie was barred from attacking someone who'd stolen its skin unless they attacked first (à la _sanctuary_), plus they had some penalty to resist Charisma-based skills and enchantment/charm spells performed by the skin-thief.


----------



## freyar (Dec 1, 2010)

Not sure how we've missed replying to this.  

Why don't you just have Capsize without the multiple silkies bit and then call out Aid Another in tactics?  Seems more sensible.

I think I can agree to the sealskin addition to Alternate Form as long as we add that the sealskin does nothing for a non-silkie.  Well, except the captivity bit.  I like that idea!


----------



## Cleon (Dec 1, 2010)

freyar said:


> Not sure how we've missed replying to this.
> 
> Why don't you just have Capsize without the multiple silkies bit and then call out Aid Another in tactics?  Seems more sensible.




It seemed more sensible to me to have everything in the same place. 



freyar said:


> I think I can agree to the sealskin addition to Alternate Form as long as we add that the sealskin does nothing for a non-silkie.  Well, except the captivity bit.  I like that idea!




It might be easier to divide it into two Special Qualities, e.g. an "Alternate Form" for the shapechanging and a "skinbound" for the being beholden to a mortal who steals their skin.

Another thing to consider is what happens if the skin is destroyed - does this kill the silkie, or can it get a knew one by returning to the Land Under Waves?


----------



## freyar (Dec 2, 2010)

If you're keeping it in the same place, then, how about 

Capsize Boat (Ex): Silkies in seal form can capsize boats. The silkie must succeed at a Strength check against a DC of (15 + length of boat in feet?) to tip the boat over. Silkies often use Aid Another actions when attempting to capsize a boat. Any unsecured occupants or cargo in a capsized boat ends up in the water.

We should probably also look up DCs from similar abilities.

EDIT: I agree with splitting the two abilities and just mentioning the skin in alternate form.  I'd let a silkie go make a new magic skin in Land Under Wave, assuming it can get back.  Probably an expensive ritual, though.


----------



## Cleon (Dec 4, 2010)

freyar said:


> If you're keeping it in the same place, then, how about
> 
> Capsize Boat (Ex): Silkies in seal form can capsize boats. The silkie must succeed at a Strength check against a DC of (15 + length of boat in feet?) to tip the boat over. Silkies often use Aid Another actions when attempting to capsize a boat. Any unsecured occupants or cargo in a capsized boat ends up in the water.




*Capsize Boat (Ex):* Silkies in seal form can capsize boats. The silkie  must succeed at a Strength check against a DC of (15 + length of boat in  feet?) to tip the boat over. Silkies often use Aid Another actions to help another silkie  attempting to capsize a boat. Any unsecured occupants or cargo in a  capsized boat ends up in the water.

Are we still omitting Pack Tactics? I briefly toyed with the idea of something like:

*Pack Tactics (Ex):* Silkies in seal form have an instinctive gift for coordinated effort. If a silkie in seal form uses an Aid Another action on another silkie in seal form it gives a +3 bonus instead of the usual +2.



freyar said:


> We should probably also look up DCs from similar abilities.
> 
> EDIT: I agree with splitting the two abilities and just mentioning the skin in alternate form.  I'd let a silkie go make a new magic skin in Land Under Wave, assuming it can get back.  Probably an expensive ritual, though.




Let's have a go at them then:

*Alternate Form (Su):* A silkie can assume the form of a handsome half-elf or an unusually large seal. It must be wearing its Magic Skin (see below) to assume seal form.

*Magic Sealskin (Su):* All silkies possess an enchanted sealskin which allows them to assume seal form (see Alternate Form, above). Should another creature steal this skin, the silkie is unable to attack them unless the skin's thief attacks the silkie first (as per the affect of the _sanctuary_ spell). Furthermore, the silkie has a -4 penalty to resist all Charisma-based skills and saves against enchantment spells performed by the skin-thief.

If a silkie's sealskin is destroyed, the silkie is able to create a new one by performing an hour-long ritual in the Land Below Waves with the assistance of a silkie with a magic sealskin.


----------



## freyar (Dec 6, 2010)

I think we're dropping pack tactics, but I like the rest.  I still think we should look up other capsize abilities we've used before for the DC, but I can't remember which critters on the CC have it.


----------



## Shade (Dec 6, 2010)

Creature Catalog - Preview Creature
Creature Catalog - Preview Creature


----------



## freyar (Dec 7, 2010)

Urrph, those don't have DCs.  Anyone care to flip through some MMs?  I don't have enough time to do that...


----------



## Shade (Dec 7, 2010)

Capsize (Ex): A submerged dragon turtle that surfaces under a boat or ship less than 20 feet long capsizes the vessel 95% of the time. It has a 50% chance to capsize a vessel from 20 to 60 feet long and a 20% chance to capsize one over 60 feet long. 

Ramming (Ex): As a standard action during its turn each round, an ocean strider can swim at up to quadruple speed (240 feet) and ram a waterborne target (such as a ship or another creature). To ram, the ocean strider must end its movement in the target's space. This attack deals 2d8+6 points of damage. If the target is a creature, it can attempt either an attack of opportunity or a DC 29 Reflex save for half damage. The save DC is Strength-based.

Upon ramming a ship, the ocean strider can make a Strength check to breach its hull, which causes the ship to sink in 1d10 minutes. The break DC varies with the type of vessel rammed, as follows: rowboat DC 20, keelboat DC 23, sailing ship or longship DC 25, warship DC 27, or galley DC 30. (See Chapter 5 of the DMG for information about ships). Regardless of the check result, every creature aboard must attempt a Reflex saving throw (DC 15). Success means the creature takes 1d10 points of damage from being thrown about by the impact; failure means the creature is hurled overboard.

Ramming (Ex): Once every 12 rounds, a leviathan can move at up to 720 feet and ram a Large or smaller creature or any sort of ship. To ram, the leviathan must end its movement in the target's space. If the target is a ship, the creature always precedes this attack with a long surface approach so everyone aboard can see what's coming. This attack deals 6d6+22 points of damage. If the target is a creature, it can attempt either an attack of opportunity or a Reflex save (DC 31) for half damage.

Upon ramming a ship, the leviathan can make a Strength check to breach its hull, which causes the ship to sink in 1d10 minutes. The break DC varies with the type of vessel rammed, as follows: rowboat DC 20, keelboat DC 23, sailing ship or longship DC 25, warship DC 27, or galley DC 30. (See Chapter 5 of the DMG for information about ships). Regardless of the check result, every creature aboard must attempt a Reflex saving throw (DC 15). Success means the creature takes 1d10 points of damage from being thrown about by the impact; failure means the creature is hurled overboard.

Swamping (Ex): Once every 12 rounds, a leviathan can create waves up to 40 feet high by rising from the water and then slamming its enormous tail flukes or head against the surface. This causes any sailing vessel within 300 feet to capsize if the character steering it fails a Profession (sailor) check (DC 15). A modifier applies to this check, based on type of ship, as follows: rowboat -2, warship +0, galley or keelboat +3, sailing ship +5, longship +7. Any creature flung into the water by a capsizing ship must succeed at a Swim check (DC 15) or immediately begin drowning.


----------



## freyar (Dec 7, 2010)

Well, the break DCs for ramming could provide some inspiration.  What if we drop the DC by 5 for each boat type?  It's not terribly easy to flip a rowboat, but my experience suggests that DC 15 isn't unreasonable.  Anywhere between there and 20 would be ok, I guess.


----------



## Shade (Dec 7, 2010)

I may have missed it upthread, but why are we trying to break from the typical capsizing mechanics and go with a save DC?


----------



## freyar (Dec 7, 2010)

To allow for Aid Another actions, mechanically speaking.  But, also, the critters with capsize based on a % chance are large things surfacing under boats, so the boat either capsizes or not.  For a silkie to capsize the boat is more like if a PC (or you or I!) tried to do it, which we would normally model with a Str check at some DC.


----------



## Cleon (Dec 7, 2010)

freyar said:


> To allow for Aid Another actions, mechanically speaking.  But, also, the critters with capsize based on a % chance are large things surfacing under boats, so the boat either capsizes or not.  For a silkie to capsize the boat is more like if a PC (or you or I!) tried to do it, which we would normally model with a Str check at some DC.




I think a Strength check based on X plus boat length in feet is still the best way to go. If we use the DCs of the Ramming/Swamping SAs it'd be far too easy for a group of silkies to capsize even large vessels.

Ten silkies in concert would have a +22 on the Strength check (+4 for one, +18 for nine Aid Anothers). That would capsize a Warship on 5+ and a galley on 8+ using the Ramming DCs!

If we set the DC to something around 10 + half boat length (i.e. rowboat 15, keelboat 35, longship 45, sailing ship 50, warship 60, galley 80), they'd have a 40% chance of capsizing a keelboat but couldn't manage anything larger without more Silkies - e.g. a dozen Silkies have a 10% chance of tipping over a longship, but it needs twenty for a warship and thirty for a galley.

What think thou?


----------



## Shade (Dec 8, 2010)

Honestly, I can't see 'em flipping anything bigger than a keelboat.  My suspension of disbelief can only stretch so far.


----------



## freyar (Dec 9, 2010)

Ok, then let's take Cleon's suggestion for the DC.  But, really, if there are really large groups of silkies, why couldn't they flip something larger?  Still, we could just say "Silkies in seal form can capsize boats up to X ft in length."


----------



## Shade (Dec 9, 2010)

freyar said:


> Ok, then let's take Cleon's suggestion for the DC.  But, really, if there are really large groups of silkies, why couldn't they flip something larger?  Still, we could just say "Silkies in seal form can capsize boats up to X ft in length."




It just seems unlikely that a bunch of humans treading water could flip a big ship.  It's a bit different when a single ginormous creature surfaces beneath one.


----------



## freyar (Dec 9, 2010)

That's fine.  Want to just add a length restriction like I suggested?


----------



## Shade (Dec 10, 2010)

freyar said:


> That's fine.  Want to just add a length restriction like I suggested?




Yep!


----------



## freyar (Dec 10, 2010)

Go ahead, then, pick a length.  15 ft?


----------



## Cleon (Dec 11, 2010)

freyar said:


> Go ahead, then, pick a length.  15 ft?




That's only rowing boat size, I'd make it bigger than that, at least keelboat size (30 to 50 feet?).

A crew of humans can drag a keelboat or longship over land, so I'd think a team of silkies should be able to tip one over.


----------



## freyar (Dec 13, 2010)

I think you're going to have a hard time getting Shade past 30 ft.


----------



## Shade (Dec 14, 2010)

I'll accept 30 feet comfortably, 50 feet uncomfortably.


----------



## freyar (Dec 15, 2010)

How about a 50 ft limit, and some variation of Cleon's proposed DC = 10+1/2 boat length in ft?  If you want to make it more difficult, we could go with 2/3 or something.


----------



## Shade (Dec 15, 2010)

Cleon's proposed DC formula is probably adequate.


----------



## Cleon (Dec 16, 2010)

Shade said:


> Cleon's proposed DC formula is probably adequate.




If you want to make it difficult I'd go back to my original proposal of +length rather than + 1/2 length.

If we set the base DC at 15 (i.e. DC = 15 plus length in feet) with a max length of 50 feet.

Then it takes at least 12 average silkies to tip a 30-foot boat (DC45), twelve silkies have +26 on the check. A single silkie would have trouble tipping anything bigger than a 1-man coracle.


----------



## Shade (Dec 16, 2010)

Sounds good.  I'll let you update your entry before moving this to Homebrews.


----------



## freyar (Dec 16, 2010)

Works ok for me, too.


----------



## Cleon (Dec 17, 2010)

Shade said:


> Sounds good.  I'll let you update your entry before moving this to Homebrews.




I've *updated* the Capsize Boat and added the Alternate Form and Magic Sealskin we settled on earlier.


----------



## Shade (Dec 20, 2010)

Are we ready for feats, skills, and spells?


----------



## Cleon (Dec 21, 2010)

Shade said:


> Are we ready for feats, skills, and spells?




Guess so.


----------



## freyar (Dec 22, 2010)

3 ranks each in Listen, Spot, and Swim?


----------



## Shade (Dec 22, 2010)

freyar said:


> 3 ranks each in Listen, Spot, and Swim?




Skills appeal.

Selkies and seals both have Alertness and Weapon Finesse.  The latter isn't useful in seal form, but works in humanoid form.  

The similar seawolf has Iron Will, Stealthy, and Weapon Focus (bite).

Any combo of those seem fine to me.


----------



## Cleon (Dec 22, 2010)

freyar said:


> 3 ranks each in Listen, Spot, and Swim?




Eh? Silkies have enough skill points for 8 skills at 9 ranks!

I'd look for inspiration in the Nixie and the Nymph:

*Nixie:* Bluff +8, Craft (any one) +5, Escape Artist +6, Handle Animal +8, Hide +7*, Listen +8, Perform (sing) +7, Search +3, Sense Motive +5, Spot +8, Swim +6
*Nymph:* Concentration +10, Diplomacy +6, Escape Artist +12, Handle Animal +13, Heal +12, Hide +12, Listen +12, Move Silently +12, Ride +5, Sense Motive +12, Spot +12, Swim +8, Use Rope +3 (+5 with bindings)

Both have Swim at their racial default, so I'd give the Silkie the same.

Since Silkie are all sorcerers they need Concentration and Spellcraft at a minimum, and I'd add Knowledge (arcane) and Use Magic Device since the "Land Below Waves" seems quite advanced technomagically.

Handle Animal, Listen and Spot seem appropriate.

That leaves one more skill (assuming they're all maxed-out). As they are very charming fellows I'd go for Diplomacy.

*Skills:* Concentration 9, Diplomacy 9, Knowledge (arcane) 9, Handle Animal 9, Listen 9, Spellcraft 9, Spot 9, Swim 0, Use Magic Device 9


----------



## Cleon (Dec 22, 2010)

Shade said:


> Skills appeal.
> 
> Selkies and seals both have Alertness and Weapon Finesse.  The latter isn't useful in seal form, but works in humanoid form.
> 
> ...




I fancy Great Fortitude since Fortitude is their weakest save. That would make their Will save their lowest save, though, so I would give them Iron Will as well.

Of the other feats, Weapon Finesse is my favourite.

*Feats:* Great Fortitude, Iron Will, Weapon Finesse
*Saves:* Fort +7, Ref +7, Will +8
*Attack:* Battleaxe or warhammer +5 melee (1d8+1/×3) or shortspear +5 melee (1d6+1/×3) or shortspear +5 ranged (1d6+1/×3)

Also, could we make its weapons masterwork for a +6 melee/ranged attack?


----------



## Shade (Dec 22, 2010)

Cleon said:


> *Skills:* Concentration 9, Diplomacy 9, Knowledge (arcane) 9, Handle Animal 9, Listen 9, Spellcraft 9, Spot 9, Swim 0, Use Magic Device 9




Looks good.



Cleon said:


> *Feats:* Great Fortitude, Iron Will, Weapon Finesse




Not terribly exciting, but it'll suffice.



Cleon said:


> Also, could we make its weapons masterwork for a +6 melee/ranged attack?




That's fine with me.


----------



## Cleon (Dec 28, 2010)

Shade said:


> Looks good.
> 
> Not terribly exciting, but it'll suffice.
> 
> That's fine with me.




*Updated* working draft.


----------



## freyar (Dec 29, 2010)

Do we just need the spells known, then, along with org and treasure?  I can go ahead and suggest standard treasure.


----------



## Shade (Dec 30, 2010)

Agreed to Standard treasure.



> Silkies, in human form, may cast the following spells: Friends, Mending, Unseen Servant, Read Magic, Forget, Fools Gold, Gust of Wind, and Lightning Bolt. All spells are cast as a sixth-level Magic-User.





Typical Spells Known
0---daze, detect magic, mending, read magic, 3 more
1st---charm person, unseen servant, 2 more
2nd---daze monster, gust of wind
3rd---lightning bolt


----------



## Cleon (Dec 31, 2010)

Shade said:


> Agreed to Standard treasure.




Standard's OK by me.



Shade said:


> Typical Spells Known
> 0---daze, detect magic, mending, read magic, 3 more
> 1st---charm person, unseen servant, 2 more
> 2nd---daze monster, gust of wind
> 3rd---lightning bolt




How about these for the missing ones:

0---_ghost sound_, _prestidigitation, ray of frost_
1st---_magic missile_, _shield_


----------



## freyar (Dec 31, 2010)

I like that well enough!


----------



## Cleon (Jan 1, 2011)

freyar said:


> I like that well enough!




*Updated* working draft with spells and treasure.

We've still got Organization and Level Adjustment to agree on.

There's mention of families sometimes living in sea caves, so I'd include a "family" organization. I'd also include a "band" organisation like the SRD Elf has. Something like this:

*Organization:* Solitary, shore party (2-8 and one leader of 1st-4th level), pack (2-8 plus 2-12 seals and one leader of 1st-4th level), family (5-10 plus 2-12 seals and 20% noncombatant young and 1-2 leaders of 1st-4th level and 0-1 subchiefs of 3rd-5th level) or band (10-40 plus 10-60 seals plus 20% noncombatants and 1 leader of 1st-4th level per 10 adults and 1-3 subchiefs of 3rd-5th level and 1 chief of 5th-7th level)

For LA, I'm thinking somewhere around +3 or +4.


----------



## Shade (Jan 4, 2011)

Org looks good, and I prefer +4 LA.


----------



## Cleon (Jan 4, 2011)

Shade said:


> Org looks good, and I prefer +4 LA.




*Updated* working draft with Org and LA.

I halved the number of seals in a band to 5-30, since 10-60 seemed too many. Originally I set the seal/silkie ratio to the same as the smaller "packs", but after reflection those groups are likely going on fishing exhibitions so would take more seals with them.

Is it time to remove the question marks from "Challenge Rating: 6", "Alignment: Usually chaotic, often good" and "Advancement: By character class"?


----------



## freyar (Jan 4, 2011)

Yes, it is.  And I think you should do the honors on writing flavor, tactics, etc.  And Shade should homebrew these up.


----------



## Shade (Jan 4, 2011)

freyar said:


> Yes, it is.  And I think you should do the honors on writing flavor, tactics, etc.  And Shade should homebrew these up.




Yep.  I'll let Cleon see these through to completion, then move 'em to Homebrews.


----------



## Cleon (Jan 5, 2011)

Shade said:


> Yep.  I'll let Cleon see these through to completion, then move 'em to Homebrews.




Translation: leave it to Cleon to do all the work, as usual. 

I'll whip up the rest of the text in due course.


----------



## Shade (Jan 5, 2011)

Cleon said:


> Translation: leave it to Cleon to do all the work, as usual.




Nice Sense Motive roll.


----------



## Cleon (Jan 7, 2011)

Shade said:


> Nice Sense Motive roll.




Yes, but the dice result was far higher than I needed. I could have passed it with a "take 5" considering the circumstance bonuses. 

How's this for the flavour. I've already *Updated* the working draft with it. I wondered about having them only be able to speak in humanoid form, but decided against it since the MM2 Selkie doesn't have that liability.

_A tall and handsome half-elf, black-haired and gray-eyed_

_An exceptionally big seal with gray eyes_

Silkie are a race of shapechanging fey. According to legend, they are descended from Angus MacOdrum, a powerful fighter-wizard who united clans of humans, aquatic elves and selkies into a new tribe. The silkie are allied with aquatic elves and selkies, and will aid them against their foes – particularly sahuagin and sharks. All silkie are innate sorcerers, and some are spellcasters of great skill.

Like their selkie cousins, silkie can take on the form of a seal, but they can only change into seals if they don a magical seal skin. Silkie tradition obliges a silkie to become the servant to any individual who captures the silkie's seal skin, the silkie cannot lie to his or her master and must deliver any reasonable service or ransom for the return of their skin. Any dishonorable or treacherous act on the captor’s part frees the silkie from obligation.

Some silkie families and bands live in sea caves, but the majority of the race dwell in Land Under Wave, a group of wondrous cities at the bottom of the sea. Powerful magic provides these cities with a dome of breathable air, an artificial sun and perpetually pleasant weather, so fine fruit and vegetables grow all year round. The cities are hundreds of miles apart, but are interconnected by permanent teleportation circle spells that allow instant travel between them. Time runs strangely in Land Under Wave, causing living creatures to age five times slower than they would outside the cities' magic.

The silkies of Land Under Wave have a tradition of taking humanoid children to raise as servants. Some of these were abandoned infants left to die of exposure, but the more chaotic silkies are not adverse to stealing unattended children and leaving a changeling in their place. These humanoid servants are adopted by silkie families and treated kindly, but have to serve the silkie for 50 years before being freed (although many elect to remain in Land Under Wave after finishing their service). The magic of the silkie's domed cities means the servants only age a decade during those 50 years.

In half-elf form, silkies protect themselves with sharkskin leather  armor and shields and fight with stone-bladed weapons, favoring spears, battle axes and  warhammers. The stone from which their weapons are made is magically treated to be as tough as steel.

Silkie look just like particularly tall and finely built half elves in their humanoid form, a typical silkie is between 5½ and 6 feet tall and weighs about 160 pounds in humanoid form. In seal form, a silkie is from 7 to 8 feet long and weighs around 500 pounds.

Silkies speak Aquan, Common, Elven and Sylvan.

*Combat*
Silkies fight with spells or weapons when in humanoid form and with spells or teeth in seal form. They usually start combat by casting spells, then melee or withdraw as the circumstances warrant.


----------



## freyar (Jan 8, 2011)

Looks good to me!


----------



## Cleon (Jan 9, 2011)

freyar said:


> Looks good to me!




Ta.

If it's OK with Shade I think we're about done with the Silkie.


----------



## freyar (Jan 10, 2011)

And this thread, I guess.


----------



## Shade (Jan 10, 2011)

Looks great!  I'll transfer it to Homebrews when I get a chance.


----------



## Shade (Jan 11, 2011)

Transferred to Homebrews.   I tightened up the flavor text a bit, and corrected a few typos/inconsistencies.


----------



## Cleon (Jan 11, 2011)

Shade said:


> Transferred to Homebrews.   I tightened up the flavor text a bit, and corrected a few typos/inconsistencies.




Yes, I did wonder about moving the bit about weapons and armour into the Combat entry, but never got around to it.

I think it needs a "seal form" entry under Combat, though. How about:

"In seal form silkies fight with spells or their teeth, they often try to capsize boats used by land-dwelling opponents."

EDIT: I forgot to take those CR/Alignment/Advancement question marks out of my working draft. Might as well fix that.  *Updated* the working draft just to pretty it up.


----------



## Shade (Jan 11, 2011)

Cleon said:


> I think it needs a "seal form" entry under Combat, though. How about:
> 
> "In seal form silkies fight with spells or their teeth, they often try to capsize boats used by land-dwelling opponents."




Updated.


----------



## freyar (Jan 13, 2011)

Now that really looks done.  

No more Moldvay!


----------



## Cleon (Jan 13, 2011)

freyar said:


> Now that really looks done.




Yes, it looks like we're finished.



freyar said:


> No more Moldvay!




Don't despair my dear Freyar, we've still got Donald Duck to look forward too...


----------

