PDA

View Full Version : Did you call ME a beast, human?



Maryring
2006-04-23, 01:03 PM
Canilu

Size/Type: Medium Humanoid (anitopian)
Hit Dice: 1d8 (4 hp)
Initiative: +0
Speed: 30 ft. (6 squares)
Armor Class: 10, touch 10, flat-footed 10
Base Attack/Grapple: +0/+1
Attack: Claw +1 melee (1d3+1)
Full Attack: 2 Claws +1 melee (1d3+1)
Space/Reach: 5 ft./5 ft.
Special Attacks:
Special Qualities: *
Saves: Fort +0, Ref +2, Will +0
Abilities: Str 13, Dex 10, Con 11, Int 10, Wis 11, Cha 8
Skills: Survival +4, Tumble +4
Feats: Track
Environment: Warm plains and forests.
Organization: Pair, Family (3-5), Pack (15-20) or Tribe (Refer to a city of the same size as the tribe)
Challenge Rating: 1/4
Treasure: Standard
Alignment: Usually Lawful good
Advancement: By character class
Level Adjustment: +0

The Canilues look a little like gnolls from a distance, with the exception of their fur colour, which go from rustred, to sunyellow, to black. However, their eyes are almost identical to humans. Unlike Gnolls, Canilues are noble creatures that disdains the use of ambushes, traps and other, similar methods. They are natural hunters that rely only on their own strenght and smarts to fell prey. If their target is sentinent, they give it a chance to defend itself in a fair, one on one match. They never attack children or mothers unless their own lives depend on it, and even then it is only if all other methods of survival are exhausted. They prefer humanoid prey like humans or elves.

Combat:

A canilu prefer to challenge sentinent prey to a duel to the death. Regardless if the target refuses or accepts, the canilu will fight it's prey as though it is a duel. They aren't stupid though, and if they suspect that the opponent will fight dirty, they will take their precautions. In battle, they prefer to get close to their target and either grapple it or take it out with their natural attacks.

Canilu traits (ex)

Canilues possess the following racial traits.

+2 Strength, -2 Charisma. Canilues are strong, but are not very charismatic.
A Canilu's base land speed is 30 feet.
Natural Weapons: Canilues have 2 claws
+2 dodge bonus on Armor Class and +2 racial bonus to attack rolls against humans, elves, half-elves, dwarves, gnomes and halflings and creatures with the same type and subtype.
Canilues do not provoke attacks of opportunity and gain a +4 on grapple checks against humans, elves, half-elves, dwarves, gnomes and halflings and creatures with the same type and subtype.
Canilues treats humans, elves, half-elves, dwarves, gnomes and halflings and creatures with the same type and subtype as the same type of creature if doing so is beneficial.
Automatic Languages: Common. Bonus Languages: Dwarven, Elven, Gnome, Halfling.
Favored Class: Monk.

Arte

Size/Type: Medium Humanoid (anitopian)
Hit Dice: 1d8 (4 hp)
Initiative: +5
Speed: 40 ft. (8 squares)
Armor Class: 11 (+1 dex), touch 11, flat-footed 10
Base Attack/Grapple: +0/-1
Attack: Quarterstaff -1 melee (1d6-1)
Full Attack: Quarterstaff -1 melee (1d6-1)
Space/Reach: 5 ft./5 ft.
Special Attacks:
Special Qualities: Sound affinity.
Saves: Fort +0, Ref +3, Will +0
Abilities: Str 8, Dex 13, Con 10, Int 11, Wis 11, Cha 11
Skills: Diplomacy +4, Listen +4, Perform (any) +4
Feats: Improved Initiative
Environment: Warm plains
Organization: Pair, Family (3-5), or Tribe (Refer to a city of the same size as the tribe)
Challenge Rating: 1/4
Treasure: Standard
Alignment: Usually Chaotic good
Advancement: By character class
Level Adjustment: +0

The Arte are musical creatures with a very keen hearing. Some might say that it is way too keen. They look like humanoid rabbits, usually with monocoloured fur. They are herbivores that prefer colourful flowers. Their carefree attitude and general kindness makes them easily liked. They have a surprisingly well relationship with the canilues, and has thus far managed to stay of their menu.

Combat:

Arte loathe fighting and will try to escape a fight at first opportunity. The only exception is when the life of an Arte's child is in danger. This sets of an extreme fury in the Arte, and it won't stop fighting before the child is safe.

Arte traits (ex)

Arte possess the following racial traits.

+2 Dexterity, -2 Strenght. The Arte are generally nimble but very weak.
An Arte base land speed is 40 feet.
Protective Rage: If a creature threatens the child of an Arte, it is set into an incredible fury and becomes a very strong fighting machine. For as long as the child is in danger, the Arte gets a +4 on all attack rolls, damage rolls, armor class, skill checks ability checks and saving throws that are directly tied to the salvation of the child.
Sound affinity: Arte receive a +4 on listen checks and a +2 racial bonus on saving throws against language dependant and sonic effects. Add +1 to the save DC of all spells with either the language dependant or sonic description.
All Arte have Perform as a class skill.
Arte gain a +1 dodge bonus to armor class against humanoids.
Automatic Languages: Common. Bonus Languages: Dwarven, Elven, Gnome, Halfling.
Favored Class: Bard.

(Well, what do you think? Overpowered, underpowered? I really need these races as +0 races for a game I'm making.)

Catch
2006-04-23, 01:26 PM
For the Canilu, I'd add another stat penalty, maybe wisdom or intelligence. +2 strength and two natural attacks plus all the other fluff for only -2 charisma is a little much. In regards to the bonus to AC and the Improved Grapple, for the sake of clarity (and brevity) just say humanoids, rather than listing all those races.

The Arte are fall under the same category as the Canilu, Too powerful for a LA of +0. Two stat bonuses, a speed bonus and a rage ability is too much. That's a solid LA +1 in my eyes. I'd stick with one bonus stat and one penalty stat, and pitch the rage entirely. Even then, it would still be borderline because of the speed.

Nice work, though.

kamikasei
2006-04-23, 01:28 PM
I like the idea of the Arte, I can picture a group of rabbity creatures lounging about in a clearing munching on a basket of flowers, listening to music. A nice little agrarian utopia scene.

The Canilus however I have more of a problem with, if I'm not misunderstanding the statement that "they prefer humanoid prey like humans or elves". That sounds to me like this race basically spends its time wandering around and challenging sentient beings to duels to the death without provocation. I have difficulty seeing how they are "usually lawful good".

All just flavour issues I'm afraid, I'm not really qualified to assess level adjustments...

Maryring
2006-04-23, 02:30 PM
Ah, but making it (humanoids) would make it a lot more powerful, since that would include a bunch of other beings as well. And it isn't that overpowered actually, considering the Gnoll which have a +4 to str, +2 to con and -2 to int and cha, plus darkvision and natural armor.

For the Arte, the rage is basically fluff. How many good parents take their kids on adventures anyway? And the speed isn't that much either when you consider the kobold who also have a +10 to speed. I guess I could drop the con and int stat alterings though.


The Canilus however I have more of a problem with, if I'm not misunderstanding the statement that "they prefer humanoid prey like humans or elves". That sounds to me like this race basically spends its time wandering around and challenging sentient beings to duels to the death without provocation. I have difficulty seeing how they are "usually lawful good".

I think you are misunderstanding, as it isn't as much "challenge to death duels without provocations", but rather "give dinner a fair chance to defend itself".

kamikasei
2006-04-23, 02:39 PM
I think you are misunderstanding, as it isn't as much "challenge to death duels without provocations", but rather "give dinner a fair chance to defend itself".
Uhm. Okay... so then it's the "nominating a sentient being as 'dinner'" that I have an issue with calling 'good'. Saying "hey lunch, en garde!" is just 'foolish' :).

Seriously though, I'm right in saying that these guys kill and eat sentient beings simply as part of their nature? What's good about that?

Maryring
2006-04-23, 02:42 PM
Eating sentinent beings isn't any more evil than eating nonsentinent beings. Otherwise, you have to make all dragons evil, or neutral at best. Eating is a neutral act, gluttony is an evil act and giving up food to save others is a good act. What they eat is also only one part of them. If alignment was decided by what you eat, only vegetarians and herbivores could be good. :)

Winged One
2006-04-23, 02:46 PM
That arguement falls completely appart when you try to apply it to a non-scavenger who eats sentient creatures. It's not the eating itself, but the fact that they kill people and have an INT score higher than 2.

Steward
2006-04-23, 02:48 PM
Eating sentinent beings isn't any more evil than eating nonsentinent beings. Otherwise, you have to make all dragons evil, or neutral at best. Eating is a neutral act, gluttony is an evil act and giving up food to save others is a good act. What they eat is also only one part of them. If alignment was decided by what you eat, only vegetarians and herbivores could be good. :)

Yes, but what is good about eating sentient creatures? Eating people doesn't make you "usually Lawful Good". It makes you "Neutral" at best, right? After all, we usually don't call the creature that comes out of nowhere and starts killing strangers for food, "Good", especially when they know that other people don't appreciate it.

I would put them at "True Neutral" if I were you. And if you were me I'd ask you why you were me and I were you. Then we'd go on an adventure to find the mad scientist responsible for switching our bodies. And I'd be played by Will Smith.

kamikasei
2006-04-23, 02:52 PM
That arguement falls completely appart when you try to apply it to a non-scavenger who eats sentient creatures. It's not the eating itself, but the fact that they kill people and have an INT score higher than 2.
Indeed. If it didn't carry risks of disease and suchlike, I don't think cannibalism would or should be viewed as wrong; but killing your neighbour because you're hungry would presumably still be impolite.

Steward
2006-04-23, 02:56 PM
Indeed. If it didn't carry risks of disease and suchlike, I don't think cannibalism would or should be viewed as wrong; but killing your neighbour because you're hungry would presumably still be impolite.

It also tends to make D&D sessions awkward.

"So, where's the cleric?"

"I ate him."

"You mean your character ate his character?"

"No, I did. I went up to his house and challenged him to a duel. He lost. I devoured his tattered corpse."

"Are...are you kidding me with that?"

"No. Say, are you gonna eat that?"

"That's my wife!"

"Interesting. D'you think she goes well with mustard?"

kamikasei
2006-04-23, 03:03 PM
It also tends to make D&D sessions awkward.
You think that's bad, try attending the funerals.

</humour>

Anyway... I maintain that a race which kills other sentient beings as part of its day-to-day life should not be "usually lawful good". Also, I notice that packs of about 20 can be grouped together before you reach tribe- or city-size. Am I the only one for whom that spells unsustainability? Where can 20 sapievores find daily meals without being an official menace?

How do the tribes keep themselves fed?

Edit:
More generally, what do these guys do all day? What is their culture, government, art? If their regular diet is human or elf, surely they either: a) put a lot of work into every meal, so that hunting, eating and sleeping are almost all that they do, in which case they're just animals with high int; or b) farm sentient beings for food the way illithid keep thralls for reproduction, in which case they're pretty seriously evil.

I really have a hard time picturing these guys as a race rather than a random encounter. Even less as a player...

Maryring
2006-04-23, 03:13 PM
I think you are pulling things out of context here, and I don't think I ever said that they were carnivores did I? Now you tell me where dragons fit in and I will tell you where these guys fit in.

Steward
2006-04-23, 03:19 PM
I think you are pulling things out of context here, and I don't think I ever said that they were carnivores did I? Now you tell me where dragons fit in and I will tell you where these guys fit in.

If they eat human flesh, they have to be at least carnivores. If they are omnivorous, then they'll probably have to focus on the plant-side of their diet more. Focusing entirely on eating sentient races tends not to go well, especially when you're in a tribe. NPCs fight back too, you know.

Maryring
2006-04-23, 03:22 PM
That's exactly it. They are omnivores, but anyway can we stop this discussion now? I wanted to make these guys LA +0. Not discuss their diet.

And for further reference, Gnolls prefer sentinent prey as well. That means that these creatures actually can exist.

ChaotikLawfull
2006-04-23, 03:32 PM
Yes, but gnolls are usually evil. I don't think a race can eat other things that are a lot like them (in terms of sentience and sapience, et al) and justify being good. At best, I'd make these guys LN.

Maryring
2006-04-23, 03:35 PM
Can we please stop the alignment discussion? I am prepared to argue to death their G part, but I don't want too because this isn't what this topic is about.

Krulla
2006-04-23, 03:38 PM
I like them. Kind of remind me of Yautja (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yautja) - Honorable hunters which never prey on children or mothers, but show those who are able to fight no mercy.

I cannot comment on how balanced they are, however, but it would certainly be very interesting to play one.

kamikasei
2006-04-23, 03:44 PM
Sorry to drag things away from the intended topic. However if you have less mechanical writeups on these races or their setting, please do post them. They're interesting, and it sounds like their world is too.

Orion-the-G
2006-04-23, 03:48 PM
the Canilu are definitely not balanced from a LA 0 standpoint.

First and foremost Str +2 and Cha -2 is a questionable bonus to begin with (look at half-orcs for instance).

Second Scent is an EXTREMELY powerful ability. Aside from the fact that it is effectively a bonus feat, it also is only one level below Blindsense in effectiveness.

To my knowledge there is no such thing as a 'racial' bonus to AC. Do what dwarves do and give them a dodge bonus.

The natural weapons are not uber-overpowered on their own. However, combined with the rest of the class they just help to make them overpowered.

As for the bonuses against certain types: What does 'similar' mean? How do you define when a creature is similar to the ones you've lsted. You might as well just say all humaniods unless you can give a specific list. It'll just cause trouble otherwise.

I also don't understand what their last ability means. At a guess I'd say it means that a Canilu ranger treats all them as favored enemies but only has to buy one favored enemy 'slot' (which is odd since they favor Monks)

Definitely at least LA +1, pushing +2.


-----------------------------------------
Canilues aren't as bad. The 'protective rage' is basically flavor text as far as PCs are concerned (except against NPC enemies). However, I do have one big problem with them in that they are basically a blatant Bard power-build. They get bonuses to two of the bard's most important stats, and they get a lot of bonuses to a bard's spells.

Building a race that is made so obviously for one class is something I strongly discourage.

Brickwall
2006-04-23, 03:57 PM
I wish to dispell all presented notions about dragons.

Chromatic dragons are evil. They raid villages, take money, eat passersby if they can't be paid a lot (and then may decide to anyway).

Metallic dragons are good. They hunt cattle, and other large amounts of food. They do not terrorize humans. They do not consider humanoids as having a place on their food pyramid. Sure, they CAN eat humans, but they certainly don't hunt them. They often much prefer to live amongst them or far away from them, which either way tends to be a peaceful arrangement.

So, yeah, eating sentients is an evil act. It's covered in the Book of Vile Darkness. The book never says it's an evil act, but the book mentions it a lot. Sentients, in the standard D&D universe, are not morally edible.

Onto a topic you are probably more interested in.

Use Medium and Small sized Humanoids instead of listing all those races. That list doesn't cover any of the Races Of books, so they'd have an unfair advantage. Besides, "similar creatures" is may too much a subjective thing. A DM might even take that to mean "all humanoids". Shorten it for the sake of brevity and conclusiveness.

Favored Class Monk? You mean their population has an affinity for patience, restraint, and monastaries? Natural Weapons do not have any association with Unarmed Strike. The monk class is wasted on them if anything.

Which brings me to the topic of even HAVING natural weapons in the first place. It's quite imbalancing at lower levels. Consider the Unearthed Arcana option of buying away LA, then give them some. A natural weapon means you can never be disarmed, and I'm sure you only need one feat to be able to use all of them in a full attack.

They eat people and learn common. Seems a contradiction. Both of these races should have their own language unless they stemmed from human society recently, or were assimilated.

Sound Affinity sounds quite magical. That's fine, but it seems silly. Wouldn't big ears make it HARDER to resist sonic effects?

I think that's it for now.

Maryring
2006-04-23, 04:16 PM
I do indeed have flavour text on them, and I'll gladly share some later on.

Continuing on, Scent seems to be a problem, so I'll throw it out.

Change racial (my bad) to dodge.

Explain the term similar. In this case, similar means any race with the same subtype as the ones listed. I would use a subtype, but every single PHB race has an unique subtype (except halfelf). Made it quite hard for me to make something off.

And yes, that was intended as a Ranger benefit.

And "Arte" was not intended to end up like that, so I will definately remove the int and con. Gnomes get similar bonuses to illusion spells which is 16 spells (language and sonic) versus 47 (illusion).

No, they have an affinity for improving themselves through rigid training in order to become perfection itself.

Monks deal more damage at first level than their natural attacks.

And their own language is a dialect of common.

Basically, it seems that it all boils down to the fact that I shouldn't have posted these races without some background info on their world.

Brickwall
2006-04-23, 04:21 PM
Rigid training to become perfection? A: it sounds quite non-hunter like. B: A fighter or paladin could possibly doing the same thing.

Orion-the-G
2006-04-23, 04:26 PM
Monks deal more damage at first level than their natural attacks.

However, keep in mind that this first level character gets 3 attacks a round for free. The monk does a bit more damage but gets only 2 and at a worse bonus. A strength based build for these guys could easily top the damage output of a sword weilding fighter. At higher levels the natural weapons pale in comparison to the magical gear everyone else is lugging aroudn but at low levels (1-5) they rule the battlefeild.

Brickwall
2006-04-23, 04:37 PM
Well, a smart Can would simply take some nice feats that let him make his natural weapons magical. Yes, they exist.

Orion-the-G
2006-04-23, 04:40 PM
Yes, but at higher levels the low-damage, poor critical ability just makes them too weak to stack up to a longsword. Even if both are +5 the claws come out as weak.

Not to mention that at the highest levels the claws will fade simply becasue you can't use bonus attacks on them.

Maryring
2006-04-24, 07:25 AM
Canilues by Amino Lamina:
The canilues are a loyal and courageous race. They are omnivores who prefer meat over plant food, and this has created a strong hunter mentality in them. From a young age, children are taught how to manage on their own. This teaching stresses honourable fighting above most anything else, and children are taught to never attack those unable to defend themselves. This includes children, pregnant women and sick or crippled individual. If a canilu does this, and it gets known, he is considered a dishonourable outcast, and will be kept under strict supervision in order to prevent the individual from doing it again. Other than this particular trait, they donít seem to have any sort of judicial system.

Canilues prefer to live in natural dens in the earth. A canilu who reaches adulthood often choose a suitable place nearby his or her family where he or she digs her own home. These dens tend to be very large and complicated, and often several dens are built into one complex underground lair. Despite this, canilues prefer the surface and only retreat to their dens to sleep.

Physically, male canilues resemble canines with human traits, while the females resemble felines. This bizarre physiology makes it easy to mistake them for two different races altogether, but I have proof that this is not the case. (I.E. Theyíve told me so) Strangely enough, there is little actual difference between the two genders other than looks. The males have a fur coat with autumn like colours. Yellowish, reddish and brownish colours dominate, but black isnít unheard of. Females have lighter colours, ranging from yellowish, through reddish into more pink colours. Both genders have sharp claws, with the males having longer claws than the females. Both genders also have strong fangs with little male to female difference. The males have short, straight tails with little mobility, where the females have longer, slender tails.

Socially, the canilu seems to be a very advanced race. They are regal, even intimidating towards strangers, but towards friends they are a lot more humble and pleasant to be around. They are also very loyal in friendships, and those who manage to befriend a canilu will have a trustworthy friend indeed. Unfortunately, befriending a canilu is very dangerous to adults. Canilues eat other living beings regardless of their sentience. To them, food is food. It doesnít matter if it can solve complex brain crackers or create magnificent works of art. It is still a life required to ensure the survival of others. When I asked them if this wasnít a selfish thought, I was countered with the fact that I ate meat too and that was the same thing. I donít want to admit it, but I have to agree with them on that point. Anyway, there is a method of befriending them that usually works. Bear in mind that this is in no way a guarantee to avoid being eaten, but it works most of the time. Canilues have a lot of respect for courageous individuals. Approaching a canilu hunting you instead of fleeing from it will usually catch it off guard, and having a laid-back attitude, and keeping it, is a lifesaver. You see, the canilues never attack prey that is unaware. Their noble nature prevents them from doing that. Instead they give their target a chance to defend itself. If you manage to show courage and guts in that situation, there is a good chance that the canilu wonít eat you. I speak from experience, because that is what saved my life during my first meeting with these magnificent creatures.


(An extract from "The species of the land: A study of species in and around the land of Foremia")

OzymandiasVolt
2006-04-24, 04:05 PM
They can't eat innocent sentients and still be Good. It isn't possible. Killing an innocent sentient is murder, and murder is always evil. What, eating nonsentients isn't good enough for them? Eating a sentient and eating a nonsentient are NOT the same thing. Just because their race believes it doesn't change the fact that they're wrong. It also doesn't make their actions less evil. They shouldn't be surprised when other races start hating them the way they hate gnolls and worgs.

The reason everyone keeps mentioning it is because it is a flaw in the race's description.

Gyrfalcon
2006-04-24, 05:46 PM
Well, avoiding the whole sentient/non-sentient food debate, this does set up conflicts between two Lawful Good civilizations, since no civilization with a standing military is going to stand by idly while another group eats their citizens as food. It might lead to a few confused paladins though when their Smite Evil fails to work.

Canilu:

Attack: Claw +1 melee (1d3+1) or Bite +1 melee (1d4+1)
Full Attack: 2 Claws +1 melee (1d1+1) and Bite -4 melee (1d4+1)

Without the Multiattack feat, their secondary natural attack (bite in this case) suffers a -5 penalty. With Multiattack, it would be -2. Either way, their strength bonus gives both attacks a +1 to hit and +1 damage.

I'd have to say that improving themselves through rigid training or not, their lifestyle does not seem devoted to the sort of monastic and isolated lifestyle that the standard monk fluff talks about. I'd say given their nomadic lifestyle either ranger or barbarian, personally.

Overall, they're a little unbalanced compared to half-orcs, who take two penalties in return for the strength bonus. Also the Canilu will have +2 armor, +4 on grapples that don't provoke AoO against most humanoid opponents in civilized areas where the half-orc has darkvision.

I know you want them be LA +0, but I'd say they're LA +1 still. I would give them +4 on Intimidate and -4 on Diplomacy checks versus their favored sentient prey species. (humans, elves, half-elves, dwarves, gnomes and halflings)

Arte:

Attack: Quarterstaff -1 melee (1d6-1)
Full Attack: Quarterstaff -5 melee (1d6-1), Quarterstaff -9 melee (1d6-1)

The Arte suffer -1 damage due to low strength on all attacks, and when attacking with a quarterstaff and trying to use both ends, you recieve all penalties of fighting with a one-handed weapon and a light weapon. Because the Arte in this case lack Two-Weapon Fighting, the penalities are -4 main attack, -8 off-hand attack.

Below the Arte trait, you call them Canilues.

Overall, I'd say that they're a solid +0 LA, and possibly a little weak for it - defensive rage is fairly useless for an adventuring Arte, as how often are you going to see Arte children being threatened away from your lands?

Hyrael
2006-04-24, 06:34 PM
on the subject of eating sentient beings, i think I can shed some light on the subject. there seems to be a little groping for a reson why its wrong to eat a human but not a cow.

here's my theory:
humans (you know what I mean) are 'blessed' with foresight. we dont live in the present, but in a sort of temporal smear, dwelling on the past and endlessly anticipating the future. compare this to say, a dog, or a deer. they live purely in the moment, for the most part, with some fuzzy memory and very little anticipation. humans have imagination. OTHER animals dont. therefore, when wolves chase a deer, with the intent to eat it, it feels fear, but it is 'living in the moment.' it cant already feel the jaws ripping into its flesh, feel its blood flowing. a human can. a human can feel it all happening already, and is thinking about how it never got to say goodbye to its wife, young, and friends, will never see them again, and how painful this is going to be, and how he wished he could...

you see my point? its just an idle thought.

Orion-the-G
2006-04-24, 06:38 PM
Sentience is less relevant than the fact that they will very likely end up killing a good individual for no purpose other than their own survival. Killing a person to eat them is no different than killing a person to steal their money or killing a person to steal their food. In this case the food simply is built into the person.

I would have little problem if their thoughts were along the line of 'we just wiped out this group of orcs that was ravaging the countryside, dinner time!' If you've already killed the sentient for other reasons (which presumably were good) then eating them isn't really rubbing salt in any wounds.

However, as written they seem perfectly willing to eat 'little timmy and his mother' as 'vladmort the dark'. That is what prevents them from being reasonably good creatures. In this case they are killing other good creatures, for purely selfish reasons.

EDIT: of course, this is assuming that the moral system of the world they live in is like standard D+D. Subjective morality would allow them to be as pure as a paladin in their own minds while being blood-drenched devils to everyone else.

Gyrfalcon
2006-04-24, 06:43 PM
Oh no, they wouldn't eat little timmy and his mother...

that might deplete the prey population. It's why you don't shoot and eat does and fawns when going and hunting deer.

Maryring
2006-04-25, 01:02 AM
CAN YOU STOP THIS AT ONCE. Go find another thread to discuss it in. What you are doing is exceptionally rude and disrespectful. It isn't that much work to create a new topic.

Gyrfalcon, thank you for being kind enough to not go into the debate and instead helped me with my problem. That, unlike most other comments, I appreciate.

Orion-the-G
2006-04-25, 01:15 AM
I apologize for upsetting you, but I think you're being unreasonable. You presented the race to us, including those parts of it that weren't mechanical. It's perfectly natural that we discuss those parts, and it's hardly drowning out the mechanical discussion. Especially since the thread has only just reached it's third page.

If you don't want to get into an arguement about it that's fine. You don't have to respond, but getting this upset over people discussing something you put on the table is a bit of an overreaction.

Maryring
2006-04-25, 01:49 AM
Well, you know, if it hadn't been for the simple fact that it detracts from my main issue. It's no fun when all your topics get detracted to issues you did not want to go into. I'll gladly discuss it, after the mechanical issues are over and I've given green lights. And I AM mad, because I have asked you nicely to stop this discussion twice.

Gyrfalcon
2006-04-25, 02:37 AM
My own apologies for poking my nose into that debate as well. *:-[

Er... to offer something useful, I'd suggest on the Arte to have their full attack be a single swipe with the quarterstaff as a two-handed weapon, so that it'd only be -1 to hit.

Jack Mann
2006-04-25, 04:15 AM
Like I always say, if you didn't want people commenting on it, you shouldn't have put it up on the internet. Doesn't matter if it's artwork, fiction or what have you, as soon as you make it public, people are going to comment on it, even if you don't want them to.

Maryring
2006-04-25, 05:23 AM
I have asked them TWICE to take this to another place. Continuing on is disrespectful, rude and unconciderate.

Jack Mann
2006-04-25, 06:06 AM
And again, I don't have a lot of sympathy for you. If you didn't want people to comment on it, you shouldn't have put it up. Just like if you posted a story, people are going to comment on it. If you say you don't want them to, well, you shouldn't have put it up. You should've posted just the parts you wanted commentary on.

The_Logic_Ninja
2006-04-25, 06:08 AM
I have asked them TWICE to take this to another place. Continuing on is disrespectful, rude and unconciderate.

These people are clearly enjoying the discussion, and are invested in it--and want to have it. Why should your desires take precedence over theirs?

Maryring
2006-04-25, 06:18 AM
Because I have asked you to move it to a different topic. You should need no other reason.

The_Logic_Ninja
2006-04-25, 06:22 AM
Umm... so if, say, Billy-Bob thinks your threads incite arguments and are generally bad, and asks you not to start any more threads, you shouldn't and wouldn't do so?

I'm not seeing your reasoning. Why is it that other people should do what you say, even though there's more of them and each of their desires is just as important as yours? But not vice-versa?

Maryring
2006-04-25, 06:30 AM
It is called common courtesy. I ask you to create a new topic because this discussion detracts from my main purpose with this topic. It is that simple.

The_Logic_Ninja
2006-04-25, 06:32 AM
That didn't answer or even address the relevant questions.

Maryring
2006-04-25, 06:36 AM
It did. You just seem to miss it.

The_Pyre
2006-04-25, 06:36 AM
The Canilues actually remind me of a stronger shifter with the Razorclaw/Longtooth trait. While the damage is weaker (1d4 claw, 1d6 bite, IIRC), the Canilue doesn't have to switch them on. The fact that they get +2 to strength means they'll be dealing more damage. I made a 2nd level shifter barbarian that can potentially deal 10-20 damage in a full attack, and that's only with a +2 to Dex and not Str. Granted, it's a barb with a buffed up strength, but what would stop another player from doing that? 1d3+6 is not much different than 1d4+6, after all, and with Barbarian 1/Fighter 1 instead of Barb2, you can make it go as high as 1d4+8 per claw (for the shifter). A Canilue can go 1d3+8 per claw, plus 1d4+4 for the bite. That's plenty for level 2.

Unfortunately, I couldn't leave myself out of the alignment debate, as well. The easiest fix, of course, is to get rid of the sentient creature diet, if not change the alignment into LE or LN. The only difference will be susceptibility to evil-targetting effects, anyway.

The_Logic_Ninja
2006-04-25, 06:39 AM
It did. You just seem to miss it.

No. Common courtesy doesn't translate to people having to do whatever you ask, whereas you being free of similar obligations (what if someone tells you to stop posting? or to stop telling people to get their discussion out of your thread? Would you do it?).

Jack Mann
2006-04-25, 06:46 AM
If the discussion of their alignment actually interfered with the discussion of the mechanical aspects of the race, then it would be discourteous to continue. *But they do not. *That aspect of the discussion has not stopped people from talking about the stats, as The Pyre just demonstrated. *The alignment of the race is, in most D&D games, just as important if not more important than their stats. *It's a valid criticism of the race as you presented them. *If you only wanted us to talk about the crunch, you should have given us only the crunch, and none of the fluff. *By putting the fluff in, you put it up for criticism.

Gyrfalcon
2006-04-25, 06:59 AM
Well.... except that 3/4ths of the replies have been people talking about the alignment and/or dietary habits of the race, as opposed to critiquing the crunchy bits. In the interests of leaving this thread for the crunchy bits, what about creating a new thread linked to this one to discuss the relative morality of eating other sentients?

Maryring
2006-04-25, 07:05 AM
Thanks Gyrfalcon.

The "eating sentinents" discussion can be continued here.

http://www.giantitp.com/cgi-bin/yabb/YaBB.pl?board=gaming;action=display;num=1145963110 ;start=0#0

Maryring
2006-04-25, 04:48 PM
Since people don't care anymore thanks to your discussion I have remade them on my own. Take it or leave it.

Gyrfalcon
2006-04-25, 04:59 PM
Overall good, I think the Arte are about right now. (You still call them Canilues when discussing their racial traits though)

Otherwise, the Attack/Full Attack bonuses and damage are off on the Canilu, and damage is off on the Arte.

Otherwise, removing the bite from the Canilu should make them LA+0, so that works as well.

The_Logic_Ninja
2006-04-25, 05:52 PM
Since people don't care anymore thanks to your discussion I have remade them on my own. Take it or leave it.

Cheer up, emo kid.