Zhackan
CR 3
CE Small/Medium magical beast (psionic, shapechanger)
Init +2; Senses Darkvision 60 ft., low-light vision; Listen +5, Spot +5
Languages Common; can communicate with zhackals in any form
------------------------------------------------------------
AC 15 (+1 size, +2 Dex, +2 natural) as zhackal, touch 13, flat-footed 13; 14 (+2 Dex, +2 natural) as hybrid, touch 12, flat-footed 12; 13 (+2 Dex, +1 natural) as humanoid, touch 12, flat-footed 11
Hp 26 (HD 4d10+4); DR 5/iron
Fort +5, Ref +6, Will +2
------------------------------------------------------------
Spd 40 ft. as zhackal; 30 ft. as hybrid or humanoid
Melee bite (as zhackal) +6 (1d6+3); bite (as hybrid) +7 (1d8+3); masterwork bronze scimitar +7 (1d6+2)
Space 5 ft.; Reach 5 ft.
Base Atk +4; Grp +7 (+3 as zhackal)
Atk Options psi-like abilities
Combat Gear masterwork bronze scimitar
Psi-like Abilities (Sp) At will—cloud mind (DC 16); 3/day—ego whip (DC 16). Manifester level 6th; the save DCs are Charisma-based.
------------------------------------------------------------
Abilities Str 16, Dex 15, Con 12, Int 11, Wis 13, Cha 16
------------------------------------------------------------
SQ Alternate form, darkvision 60 ft., low-light vision
Feats Alertness, Track, Weapon Focus (bite)
Skills Bluff +5, Disguise +5*, Listen +5, Sense Motive +3, Spot +5, Survival +5
Possessions masterwork bronze scimitar
------------------------------------------------------------
Alternate Form (Su): A zhackan can shift form as a standard action as though using the polymorph spell except he is limited to zhackal, hybrid and humanoid forms, and does not regain any hit points for changing its form. Equipment a zhackan is wearing or carrying transforms to become part of its zhackal form, and magic items cease functioning while it remains in this form. In hybrid form, a zhackan can wear light or medium armor without modification, but wearing heavy armor is impossible. Equipment a zhackan in human form is wearing or carrying does not transform when it assumes hybrid form. When a zhackan in zhackal form assumes hybrid form, its equipment returns to its normal form and magic items resume functioning.
Skills: *In zhackal form, a zhackan is effectively disguised as a zhackal, gaining a +10 bonus on Disguise checks while in this form.
Zhackans roam the tablelands looking for easy prey to kill and consume. They use trickery to get in close to surprise their victims. While indistinguishable from any other zhackal when in that form, they are for more dangerous that those annoying creatures. Zhackans can also take the form of any Medium-sized humanoid or a hybrid form. They can be found traveling with a pack of ordinary zhackals, as well.
:rolleye2: Nice effort though! Come up with something that isn't an athasian werecreature and people will jump to comment on it
There's not much of a point to it....sorry
Why's that?
Nice effort though! Come up with something that isn't an athasian werecreature and people will jump to comment on it
Are weres some sort of taboo or something?
Are weres some sort of taboo or something?
Indeed they are specifically absent from Athas. Not a bad write-up you did, but it is just as if you had posted an orc or a hobbit-halfling.
Indeed they are specifically absent from Athas. Not a bad write-up you did, but it is just as if you had posted an orc or a hobbit-halfling.
So, if something is specifically absent, it shouldn't be considered?
So, if something is specifically absent, it shouldn't be considered?
Like Elonarc said, there are no were creatures on Athas.
Here's a suggestion: Surprise us with something original yet adapted to Athas. (Look inside the Archive and you'll find a couple of monsters that people have created. There are more but those are already in the athas.org monster manuals.)
And if you have an idea you're excited about but are uncertain on how to bring it to life, contact one of the people that made the Archive monsters...maybe they'll help. Good luck!
One thing I would want to point out though is that when presenting a were-critter, you should always stat out the different forms (ie hybred, animal, orginal) that they can take - this leaves less guess work when using the creature by a DM. The reason for this is that the were creature will not be exactly like a normal version of any of thise creatures - ie, if a were-creature has DR 5/silver, they will have it in every form they take.
But the fact that you made the write up deserves something - so here
--> this was given to me a while ago and so I now pass it on to you - it is not bad, but think of it as "aged" and make sure you cook it well before consuming :D I would be willing to hash some ideas with you if you want, I have made creatures that have been applauded and boo-ed, so I think I have run the gambit of responses that one can get and am always willing to spare some time with people who are looking to make orginal material.
My sugguestion is change the name and people would be more receptive to the idea.
Like Elonarc said, there are no were creatures on Athas.
Which, apparently, equates to any idea for a shapechanger being a bad idea. Is this the idea? I'm alright with someone not liking an idea, but to dislike it just on the basis that there is nothing pe-existing seems kind of foolish. Are you going to tell me that you or any other GM has never borrowed anything to put into your campaign that wasn't there before?
Here's a suggestion: Surprise us with something original yet adapted to Athas. (Look inside the Archive and you'll find a couple of monsters that people have created. There are more but those are already in the athas.org monster manuals.)
I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and say you're not trying to be condescending.
I know it was't terribly original, but, I went with this because I like the Jackalwere and saw an opportunity to present it with a Dark Sun feel. You do not have to like it.
And if you have an idea you're excited about but are uncertain on how to bring it to life, contact one of the people that made the Archive monsters...maybe they'll help. Good luck!
I post my ideas more for mechanical help, than for anything else. Sure, I'm glad if people like the idea, but, its not manditory.
I have to say that it is a nice write up, but, like it has been said, were-creatures IIRC have never been part of the 2e DS - that is not to say that there were never were-creatures, but there has not been a reference to them that I recall in any of the monster lists for 2e as an approperate critter for the setting.
Thanks for the comments on the write-up. I try to do stat blocks in the current fad and I must say that I like this one.
I find it interesting that people seem so resistant to shapechangers. Other than "it's not referenced in any of the books" is there a specific reason for this?
One thing I would want to point out though is that when presenting a were-critter, you should always stat out the different forms (ie hybred, animal, orginal) that they can take - this leaves less guess work when using the creature by a DM. The reason for this is that the were creature will not be exactly like a normal version of any of thise creatures - ie, if a were-creature has DR 5/silver, they will have it in every form they take.
Not being actual lycanthropes, I noted where the differences in forms are. Although, I did have to make some adjustments as per the new polymorph rules in PHII, so thanks for pointing that out.
But the fact that you made the write up deserves something - so here
Ooh, chicken, I like chicken. Especially from the Colonel.
I would be willing to hash some ideas with you if you want, I have made creatures that have been applauded and boo-ed, so I think I have run the gambit of responses that one can get and am always willing to spare some time with people who are looking to make orginal material.
Hence the reason I posted it here. The reason I post an idea, though, is more for mechanical feedback more than anything else. Sometimes, something can be glaringly obvious to everyone but hte creator. Whether or not you think it is appropriate for the setting, though, really amounts to being a personal choice. I see a thread discussing introducing the warforged to Dark Sun but it is not dismissed out of hand. Why such thoughts when it comes to shapechangers?
The creature itself isn't bad. I just think people are to caught up in the name. Its similar to a were creature but its not a true lycanthrope.
My sugguestion is change the name and people would be more receptive to the idea.
Thanks. I shall ponder something different, but, being a fan of jackalweres, I'm kind of partial to zhackalwere, even if they only ever show up in my games.
Werecreatures could be considered as a cleasing subject by Pennarin, Doppelganger Eradicator. This would explain why there is no werecreatures on Athas...
I like the idea that there could be a creature that is a man-zhackel-thing, but you would want to steer away from using the terms lycanthrope and were-: that will just make it look like you are tying to intoduce lycanthropes to DS.
There is a creature called a wolf-were, I cannot recall exactly where I seen it at, but I think that this would be a good way to begin with the creature concept you are trying.
Also - I see that you are now using alter self as how it can change - I would suggest sticking to the polymorph, but limite it to only a hybred form of the creature - I would totally throw out having a fullly humaniod form as that would be too close to crossing the line of lycanthropy and makes your critter less orginal. So it would only have a fullly animal form, and a hydred version.
Here is another idea - the zhackel is a pack animal, so it would seem to me that you have two options here - explain that this new creature is shunned by other normal zhackels - hence they do not have the natural mindlink ability because of their mental make-up precludes them from linking with other zhackels (the reason they are not accepted by the noral kind), or make them a pack creature that will travel with other zhackels or others of this specific type.
Also - the DR - why do you have it? I am not opposed to having creatures with DR mind you, but what is the reasoning for this creature? It seems too much like passing this off as a new-werewolf to me. There is nothing that comes to mind that is different enough about this critter that would call for it to have a DR/ iron - but that is just my two bits.
Last thing - the ability scores seem high to me. A common zhackel has Str 7, Dex 17, Con 10, Int 2, Wis 12, Cha 12 and is a small creature.
Well I would suggest that you stick closely with the size increase table for making this critter a medium and then throw in some small attribute mods for mental scores to make it more like Str 11, Dex 15, Con 14, Int 8, Wis 12, Cha 14 - this approach IMO is much more balanced.
Hope I did not come off as being overly critical - this is all just friendly advice and you can take it or leave it as you wish.
:D
Which, apparently, equates to any idea for a shapechanger being a bad idea. Is this the idea? I'm alright with someone not liking an idea, but to dislike it just on the basis that there is nothing pe-existing seems kind of foolish. Are you going to tell me that you or any other GM has never borrowed anything to put into your campaign that wasn't there before?
...I never said all those things
I said there are no were creatures on Athas.I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and say you're not trying to be condescending.
Thank you.
No it was not condescension. Although i did choose badly my words. I was, at the time, being literal. I chose "original" to mean "new and never seen before". A were creature, adapted for Athas, is still pretty much a were creature. If you invent a totally new creature, a new concept, it will be appreciated doubly so on this board.
Still, you don't need to do so to be appreciated, mind you.Hence the reason I posted it here. The reason I post an idea, though, is more for mechanical feedback more than anything else.
Now we know in this case, but if you ever present other stuff, say, a PrC, it's suggested you mention what you want other people's comments on that particular item to be about: stats, fluff, canoninity, etc.
Something you could do if you really wanted to keep the werewolf abilities is to make it an undead.
Werecreatures could be considered as a cleasing subject by Pennarin, Doppelganger Eradicator. This would explain why there is no werecreatures on Athas...
Seems like a good idea.
As an aside, maybe its time we found an alternate name for Pennarin's title. Others have:
Ogre Doom / Ogre Naught.
Pixie Blight / Sprite Claw.
Doppelganger Eradicator / ..... ?
As names go, by its generality it would cover most types of creatures that change form. Ideas?
I have to say that it is a nice write up, but, like it has been said, were-creatures IIRC have never been part of the 2e DS - that is not to say that there were never were-creatures, but there has not been a reference to them that I recall in any of the monster lists for 2e as an approperate critter for the setting.
Tell that to the Pakubrazi. I think the line is blurry enough to not be automatically dismissed.
Tell that to the Pakubrazi. I think the line is blurry enough to not be automatically dismissed.
The what? I am sorry, but the name odes not ring any bells really - unless you are talking about the worm creature that has the wormy arms?
But I did not automatically dismiss the idea, at least I do not think I did, I just said that the lycanthropic creatures did not appear on any list from the 2e material that listed approperate creatures for the setting as far as I can recall - now I could be mistaken and if I am someone please let me know.
The Pakubrazi (I may be spelling it wrong) is a human that turns into a giant flea and sucks people's blood.
What book is THAT from?
Sounds freaky though. I should use it in my game and make the creature a lovely looking bar wench who is looking to score with one of the characters!
Evil is in my blood :D
Something you could do if you really wanted to keep the werewolf abilities is to make it an undead.
No, I don't think so, but thanks. Too many undead creatures as it is.
I do not think that people are opposed to shape-changes. What I and most others do concern ourselfs with though is the fact that were-creatures were not part of DS.
I like the idea that there could be a creature that is a man-zhackel-thing, but you would want to steer away from using the terms lycanthrope and were-: that will just make it look like you are tying to intoduce lycanthropes to DS.
The name is just a name. The jackalwere and the zhackalwere are not technically lycanthropes. They are creatures that can take on a humanoid form and not humanoids that take on an animal form. If I think of something else for a name, I'll change it. I'll keep zhackalwere as a placeholder for now.
Also - I see that you are now using alter self as how it can change - I would suggest sticking to the polymorph, but limite it to only a hybred form of the creature - I would totally throw out having a fullly humaniod form as that would be too close to crossing the line of lycanthropy and makes your critter less orginal. So it would only have a fullly animal form, and a hydred version.
This is interesting. Not sure I agree with it as I like the idea of a creature which could take on a humanoid form to infiltrate a group if it chose to do so. As to the Alter Self vs Polymorph, I originally used Polymorph Self because I forgot some changes had been made to the Polynorph spells in the switch to 3.5. I went with Alter Self because that is the spell that affects the individual whereas Polymorph is the affects others spell.
Here is another idea - the zhackel is a pack animal, so it would seem to me that you have two options here - explain that this new creature is shunned by other normal zhackels - hence they do not have the natural mindlink ability because of their mental make-up precludes them from linking with other zhackels (the reason they are not accepted by the noral kind), or make them a pack creature that will travel with other zhackels or others of this specific type.
I'm basing my creature from the zhackal in Dungeon #111 which does not have Mindlink. I'd probably leave it in if you were to use it with the zhackals from athas.org.
Also - the DR - why do you have it? I am not opposed to having creatures with DR mind you, but what is the reasoning for this creature? It seems too much like passing this off as a new-werewolf to me. There is nothing that comes to mind that is different enough about this critter that would call for it to have a DR/ iron - but that is just my two bits.
It is not a lycanthrope, even though there are similarities. Since it is a magical beast, and it was based partially from the jackalwere, I kept it in. The jackalwere has DR 5/iron and I thought it would work well as iron is much rarer in DS. I thought it would emphisize the sturdiness of the creature without the players having to find magic weapons.
Last thing - the ability scores seem high to me. A common zhackel has Str 7, Dex 17, Con 10, Int 2, Wis 12, Cha 12 and is a small creature.
Well I would suggest that you stick closely with the size increase table for making this critter a medium and then throw in some small attribute mods for mental scores to make it more like Str 11, Dex 15, Con 14, Int 8, Wis 12, Cha 14 - this approach IMO is much more balanced.
Again, I wasn't basing on the athas.org zhackal. As it is, other than a slight increase in Cha, I kept the stats the same. When I was comparing the stats of jackalwere to the stats of the small dog (which is used for the jackal) they were pretty much the same, so I did the same.
Hope I did not come off as being overly critical - this is all just friendly advice and you can take it or leave it as you wish.
Nope. Always good to see another point of view. Thanks.
No it was not condescension. Although i did choose badly my words. I was, at the time, being literal. I chose "original" to mean "new and never seen before". A were creature, adapted for Athas, is still pretty much a were creature. If you invent a totally new creature, a new concept, it will be appreciated doubly so on this board.
Pretty much everything in Athas is an adaption of something else. Yes, there are creatures that were originally created specifically for the Dark Sun game, but even many of those have bled through to other worlds. I liked the concept of the jackalwere and wanted to put a DS spin on it. I can appreciate if many people do not think it fits their version of the DS world, though. If I come up with an original creature idea, I'll be sure to put it out there for good or ill. I always appreciate constructive criticism.
Now we know in this case, but if you ever present other stuff, say, a PrC, it's suggested you mention what you want other people's comments on that particular item to be about: stats, fluff, canoninity, etc.
I'll remember that for the future. Personally, I'm not too concerned with what is considered canon and what is not. My interest lies more in the realm of whether what I put together looks unbalanced in some way.
Thanks for the thoughts.
Anyway, Lycanthropes are too traditional of a monster to have a place in DS. If you want to create a monster and have people take it seriously try making up something that fits into the setting and that has some originality.
A Zhakalwere to me smacks of: I'll take the idea of were creatures and combine it with an exsisting DS animal... in fact that's almost exactly how you described your idea. At least come up with a different name for it, DS intentionally does not have were creatures.
Werewolf Wolfwere, Werejakal Jakalwere, Werezhakal Zhakalwere it's all the same they are all Lycanthropes. Just because its an animal that can turn into a human instead of a human that can turn into an animal doesn't mean it isn't a Lycanthrope.
Actually, there is a difference, but I won't argue the point because I don't think either of us could be swayed in any way.
Anyway, Lycanthropes are too traditional of a monster to have a place in DS. If you want to create a monster and have people take it seriously try making up something that fits into the setting and that has some originality.
Hmm, I've already touched on this aspect, but I'll reiterate this again. I don't really care about what is considered canon or not. The whole there are no were-[insert animal] arguement falls on deaf ears in my case. My game is not your game and vice-versa and that is not a bad thing as far as I'm concerned. I am concerned that you seem to think so, though, and that you feel the need to drive this point home to me. Personally, I like possibilities.
A Zhakalwere to me smacks of: I'll take the idea of were creatures and combine it with an exsisting DS animal... in fact that's almost exactly how you described your idea. At least come up with a different name for it, DS intentionally does not have were creatures.
I'm glad you are able to grasp that I am taking a pre-existing idea and adapting it for DS. I wasn't sure if I was getting that point across. In the future I shall endeaver to make that clearer.
Thanks for your comments, though.
Also - I see that you are now using alter self as how it can change - I would suggest sticking to the polymorph, but limite it to only a hybred form of the creature - I would totally throw out having a fullly humaniod form as that would be too close to crossing the line of lycanthropy and makes your critter less orginal. So it would only have a fullly animal form, and a hydred version.
Upon further research, it seems Alternate Form references Polymorph exclusively, even though it is an affects others type of spell. In the interests of keeping things consistant, I'm going to change that.
Thanks. This is the kind of help which I find useful as it gets me pointed in directions which help me fine-tune what I'm doing.
That all being said, I must say that I do find the DS "animals" to be one of the most interesting parts of the setting and I can certainly understand your desire to extrapolate from them.
I was merely trying to make it clear to you why no one was interested commenting on the finer details of your monster, or including them into official materials.
At what point did I indicate that I was even interested in having anything I do included in any official document? I put this up here because I thought it was interesting and wanted to share it. I am also interested in any comments on balance or mechanics. While I can appreciate a comment about the fact that someone may feel it doesn't fit the world of DS, ultimately it does not diminish the idea for me.
I thought, and, apparently, I may have been wrong, that there may be people here who can appreciate an idea and comment on it, even if they do not agree or support it. Is this or is this not a board where ideas may be shared? If I must only post ideas that will be accepted by some group ideal, then I don't think I will bother.
That all being said, I must say that I do find the DS "animals" to be one of the most interesting parts of the setting and I can certainly understand your desire to extrapolate from them.
Yes, I also like the animals as I think they tend to be more interesting thatn all the undead and such.
I thought, and, apparently, I may have been wrong, that there may be people here who can appreciate an idea and comment on it, even if they do not agree or support it. Is this or is this not a board where ideas may be shared?
It is, and there are. But people tend to respond more if they find the idea relevant to their concept of DS. I think that all of us at one time or another have posted ideas that had a lukewarm reception, or no response at all.
If I must only post ideas that will be accepted by some group ideal, then I don't think I will bother.
I haven't read the thread carefully, but I hope no one railed on you for posting it.
If you do, then let me know how you find that it works for converting normal "core" animals into critters that could be found in DS.
I do not think Sage is implying that you should not post your ideas here for non-official content. I just think that many of us, even if we are using it for home-brew campaigns that will never "officialness", still try and desing creatures that fit in and mess with official material standards. Now that is not to say that everyone does.
I think that at first you were unclear about your total intent for this creature and the level/type of feedback you were looking for - which is why many of us have chimed in about the canon material and such - I really think that is was just a bit of miscommunication
[edit - posted without seeing Brax's comments - which for the most part mirror my own - if you want to see a luke warm - and maybe hostile - reception of a creature the is iconic to the DS setting that I made - check you the pyreen link in my sig
]A little fluff also goes a long way. Is one born a zhackalwere or is it acquired thru a curse or a ceremony. I still stand by my original comment that people would be more open minded to the creature if it were called something other than “zhackalwere”.
Okay. As a magical beast, the zhackalwere is a evolutioary quirk. It could have been created as an experiment in trying to elevate zhackals as some sore servant race to some defiling wizard or such. Maybe it was created by a mad druid as a bioweapon. Or maybe a pack of zhackals was attacked or tried to attack some creature close to the Pristine Tower and the wounded ones were changed.
I don't see it being done through a ceremony unless you see zhackals doing these kinds of thing. I, also, don't see it happening through a curse, unless some hapless spellcaster took the time to curse a pack of zhackals rather than just fireball them or something. This is not something that the zhackalwere passes on to its victims either. You are either a zhackalwere or you are not.
How about these for alternate names:
Zhackalere
Zhackaler
Zhackan
Hmm, I'm sensing a theme here.
How about a psionic version of a Rakshasa that has the markings of the tigone?
Pristine Tower mutation?
...the possibilities are endless... /x-files music :D
Okay. I don't see it being done through a ceremony unless you see zhackals doing these kinds of thing. I, also, don't see it happening through a curse, unless some hapless spellcaster took the time to curse a pack of zhackals rather than just fireball them or something. This is not something that the zhackalwere passes on to its victims either. You are either a zhackalwere or you are not.
I was thinking that it would be a ceremony that a humaniod would preform on themselves in order to gain power. Maybe a druid or a ranger seeking to become closer to nature.
How about these for alternate names:
Zhackalere
Zhackaler
Zhackan
I personally like "Zhackalyn" myself. ;)
And Sysane's druid thing is a good angle to exploit. One possibility.
I was thinking that it would be a ceremony that a humaniod would preform on themselves in order to gain power. Maybe a druid or a ranger seeking to become closer to nature.
I see these more as a creature that changes to humanoid form in order to lull their targets. The humanoid to zhackal idea strikes me as too much like a lycanthrope which seems to be a major point of contention here. Besides, since druids already have a shapechanging ability, does this not seem to be a bit redundant?
I personally like "Zhackalyn" myself. ;)
Interesting.
Zhackan is cool, sounds like a rebel Jaffa tribe from SG1. /go SCIFI!
Yes, as I've been thinking on it I've been drawn to this one more and more. I think I'll use it as a new placeholder for now.
I see these more as a creature that changes to humanoid form in order to lull their targets. The humanoid to zhackal idea strikes me as too much like a lycanthrope which seems to be a major point of contention here. Besides, since druids already have a shapechanging ability, does this not seem to be a bit redundant?
No more than its redundant for say a werebear to take character levels in druid in other settings. I can see where you're coming from though.
It could be a ceremony that a high-level druid or Spirit of the Land preforms on another character as a reward for showing exceptional and repeated devotion towards nature.
No more than its redundant for say a werebear to take character levels in druid in other settings. I can see where you're coming from though.
A werebear taking levels of druid is expanding his reperatoire of shapes. A druid becoming a zhackan seems, to me, a step down since he can already take the shape of a zhackal. Sure, there is the DR and stuff, but it strikes me as a step back. Besides, that would entail a template of the lycanthrope type rather than a creature stat block and that is not what I was aiming for here.
It could be a ceremony that a high-level druid or Spirit of the Land preforms on another character as a reward for showing exceptional and repeated devotion towards nature.
Heh, heh. Not to belittle whatyou stated but this struck as funny when I read of this and thought of this:
Spirit of the Land: For your unceasing devotion and dedication to preserving the land I give you the power of the zhackal!
A werebear taking levels of druid is expanding his reperatoire of shapes. A druid becoming a zhackan seems, to me, a step down since he can already take the shape of a zhackal. Sure, there is the DR and stuff, but it strikes me as a step back.
The druid doesn't have the ability to take on a hydrid form. I'm sure any druid would find that useful.
Besides, that would entail a template of the lycanthrope type rather than a creature stat block and that is not what I was aiming for here
Some templated creatures, such as a lycanthropes, have stat blocks as well.
Heh, heh. Not to belittle whatyou stated but this struck as funny when I read of this and thought of this:
Spirit of the Land: For your unceasing devotion and dedication to preserving the land I give you the power of the zhackal!
Don't see the problem here. Bring the size up to medium for for medium sized characters and it works for me. I personally would find that kick arse if my character was granted this boon.
The druid doesn't have the ability to take on a hydrid form. I'm sure any druid would find that useful.
I don't see it being that great a boon, but, obviously others, like yourself, will see this differently.
Some templated creatures, such as a lycanthropes, have stat blocks as well.
The stat blocks use that template and are examples, which was part of my point. What you are suggesting turns this more into a lycanthrope template which was never what I had in mind. Just my own preference.
Don't see the problem here. Bring the size up to medium for for medium sized characters and it works for me. I personally would find that kick arse if my character was granted this boon.
It's an idea. Not where I was going with mine, but if it works for you, go for it.
I don't see it being that great a boon, but, obviously others, like yourself, will see this differently.
How would it be a hindrance or detrimental to a character?
How would it be a hindrance or detrimental to a character?
I don't see it as a hinderance or detrimental. I just don't see it as being anything that much better that a druid would aspire to it. Just my own thoughts, though.
I don't see it as a hinderance or detrimental. I just don't see it as being anything that much better that a druid would aspire to it. Just my own thoughts, though.
Understandable, but what about for a non druid character like in my high-level druid/SotL example above?
Understandable, but what about for a non druid character like in my high-level druid/SotL example above?
I think it strays to far into the lycanthrope area that people seem to dislike. Beyond that, though, if you want to introduce lycanthropes with a DS flavour I could see some type of ceremony which would give the lycanthrope template to a character. It could be a process of tying a person closer to an animal and, therefore, the land. It could also open the door for were-zhackals, were-tagsters, were-tigones, were-razorwings, and were-jhakars, just to name a few. I actually like the concept.
I was pondering using the shifters as a wild race exibiting animal traits, as well. I would just describe their traits as DS animals rather than their conventional ones.
Kongo
CR 2
LE Medium monstrous humanoid (Reptilian)
Init +2; Senses Darkvision 60 ft., low-light vision, scent; Listen +2, Spot +2
Languages Draconic
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AC 16 (+2 Dex, +4 natural), touch 12, flat-footed 14
Hp 20 (HD 3d8+6)
Fort +5, Ref +5, Will +0
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Spd 40 ft.
Melee spear +5 (1d6+2/x3)
Space 5 ft.; Reach 5 ft.
Base Atk +3; Grp +5
Combat Gear spear
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Abilities Str 15, Dex 15, Con 15, Int 10, Wis 9, Cha 8
SQ Darkvision 60 ft., light sensitivity, low-light vision, scent
Feats Alertness, Track
Skills Craft (trapmaking) +2, Hide +4, Jump +5, Listen +2, Move Silently +3, Search +2, Spot +2, Survival +1/+5
Possessions spear
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Light Sensitivity: Kongos are dazzled in bright sunlight or within the radius of a daylight spell.
Skills: Kongos have a +2 racial bonus on Craft (trapmaking) and Search checks. They also have a +4 racial bonus on Jump checks and receive a +4 racial bonus on Survival checks when tracking by scent.
The kongos are a tauric reptilian race that inhabit the plains. They are nocturnal and are most active at night. Prone to setting traps to capture their prey, they are also adept at tracking said prey.
That was just off the top of my head.
What do they look like, what sort of social structure do they have, etc?
Your stat-block looks really sharp
What do they look like, what sort of social structure do they have, etc?
Thanks.
As a tauric creature, I imagine them to have a kobold upper body on a dog-like body. The skin is scaly, ranging from dark rusty brown to a rusty black colour, covering their entire body. A pair of small horns spring from their head. Glowing red eyes and a non-prehensile tail complete the look.
They spend a majority of the day's hours avoiding the brighter conditions and come forward at night. While mining (in reference to kobolds) is not a priority in the kongo's life, they still use traps to capture food and prey. Kongos lead a pack-like existance with familial groups and alpha males. They tend to appreciate the scrub plains of the tablelands, but can be found in areas of an forest or an oasis.
A little more to them. I imagine them to be a creature that is native to the tablelands and has been around for a long time, maybe instead of kobolds. They could also be a race of mutated (by the Pristine Tower) kobolds that has grown over they years.
Werewolf Wolfwere, Werejakal Jakalwere, Werezhakal Zhakalwere it's all the same they are all Lycanthropes. Just because its an animal that can turn into a human instead of a human that can turn into an animal doesn't mean it isn't a Lycanthrope.
Anyway, Lycanthropes are too traditional of a monster to have a place in DS. If you want to create a monster and have people take it seriously try making up something that fits into the setting and that has some originality.
A Zhakalwere to me smacks of: I'll take the idea of were creatures and combine it with an exsisting DS animal... in fact that's almost exactly how you described your idea. At least come up with a different name for it, DS intentionally does not have were creatures.
You can take this with a grain of salt, but "officially" there are Aranea on Athas.
You can take this with a grain of salt, but "officially" there are Aranea on Athas.
Yeah as spies for the Kreen!