Creature Types/Subtypes & Classification

[Verequus]

I agree with most of the previously mentioned points. I think ideas that can logically simplify the existing rules is beneficial.

- Giants should be integrated into Humanoid.
- Dragons should be integrated into Magical Beast.

I would also consider a new type; 'Spirit' which could perhaps encompass Fey and Outsiders.

Okay, while I can understand your first point completely (the main difference between Giants and Humanoids is, that the first all have low-light vision, the rest can be easily consilodated), I think, that merging Dragons with Magical Beast weakens the Dragons strongly - only a d10, a lost good will save, some immunities and 4 skill points per hit dice. Maybe a subtype (Dragon) would be appropriate, if the main motiviation behind the mergings is that Giants and Dragons encompass more or less one kind of creature. A general type shouldn't be so limited.

To the Spirit type: Wouldn't it be to many creatures packed into a type? This change warrants at least the suggested subtypes (demon, tanar'ri) and then (fey).

I like the idea of more animal subtypes that apply to many creatures: arachnid, reptilian, avian, equine, etc. A horse affecting thing should affect centaurs too, a bird one should affect harpies.

I like that, too. Unfortunately, it could require another change for my favorite magic system, EoMR... On the other hand, I can already create a spell, which can affect both a horse and a centaur, but then it is because every animal and every monstrous humanoid is an acceptable target. Even if we remain in the realm of the core rules, we wouldn't have to use a subtype, because we could include every creature, which has equine features would be affected.

Ehm, what kind of spell could be created, which is usable on equine beings only? I can't think of any. Hmm, if there isn't more than one special case, then having such a subtype is useless. Maybe the focus should be reptilian, avian, mammalian, etc.? Some spells like a modified Summon Monster would profit from it, some characteristics can be shared, but if this affects the gameplay enough? I haven't seen a single complain yet.

Although I am rather tempted to divide animal into two categories (predators with a full HD BAB and non-predator (game? prey?) for the others, like cows or nightingale, with a 3/4 BAB);

Prey and Predator should be templates - the warbeast template would be better, if it had such a basis, because it can address some issues differently, if necessary.

 

[Knight Otu]

Ehm, what kind of spell could be created, which is usable on equine beings only? I can't think of any. Hmm, if there isn't more than one special case, then having such a subtype is useless. Maybe the focus should be reptilian, avian, mammalian, etc.? Some spells like a modified Summon Monster would profit from it, some characteristics can be shared, but if this affects the gameplay enough? I haven't seen a single complain yet.

There may not be any spells, but there certainly can be abilities. There are creatures that affect equine creatures (such as the bloodmare from one of the Creature Collections). The Ghostwalk web enhancement has a template that can only be applied to horse-like creatures.
There is a number of drow-linked PrCs that affect arachnoid creatures.
For intelligent creatures, it can also be a matter of prerequisites. Does an azer qualify for dwarf-limited things? Draegloths for drow/elf limited stuff?
Meaning we have an use for at least some kind subtypes. But we shouldn't ignore those we do not have an immediate use for (within reasonable limits - ruminant or not isn't exactly an useful distinction in-game ).

 

[Verequus]

Meaning we have an use for at least some kind subtypes. But we shouldn't ignore those we do not have an immediate use for (within reasonable limits - ruminant or not isn't exactly an useful distinction in-game ).

Agreed, but a horse should be still something like "Animal (Mammalian, Equine)" - the kind of the last subtype is only usable for distinction. Oh, what can a bloodmare and this Ghostwalk template do to horses? And are those effects acceptable, if used on a centaur? Otherwise the idea from Voadam wouldn't really function.

 

[Knight Otu]

Those two wouldn't work too well on centaurs - The bloodmare intices and lures horses to it, leading them until they are exhausted, where it kills and eats these horses.
The ghostwalk template effectively turns a horse into a half-unicorn.

That said, these abilities can still be limited in other ways, such as creature type (equine animals and magical beasts) or intelligence score. That way, you could have Centaurs as Monstrous Humanoid [Equine], though I'm not as sure if I'd use Equine for centaurs. Avian for harpies, however, I would.

 

[Verequus]

What is the difference between a centaur and a harpy? Why wouldn't you use Equine on centaurs, but Avian on harpies?

 

[BigRedRod]

Much like the piss poor element system in D&D I'd scrap all of the type/subtype system for creatures and just go back to the drawing board

Too many of the types seem completely arbitary and secondary to any kind of rule mechanic

 

[Verequus]

Much like the piss poor element system in D&D I'd scrap all of the type/subtype system for creatures and just go back to the drawing board

Too many of the types seem completely arbitary and secondary to any kind of rule mechanic

Could you explain that more? What types seem to you arbitray?

 

[Knight Otu]

Just a feeling, no real arguments. I propably would use it, it simply isn't as sure as the avian for harpies (and I think we hijacked this thread long enough. ).

 

[Arcane Runes Press]

I think there are changes which could be made.

I agree on the issue of all plant/undead creatures being immune to mind affecting spells, whether or not they are intelligent. I find that to be rather silly, counterintuitive, and a roadblock to the implementation of interesting spells and creatures.

I also would like to see Fey rolled into a subtype. As it stands, there are relatively few Fey creatures, and I find the stat/ability restrictions placed on fey to run counter to many depictions of fey in fantasy and myth. That's part of the reason why I wrote a Greater fey subtype for Visions: The Pumpkin Patch. If fey were a subtype, then it would be simpler to create fey who feel different from one another. As it stands, I see no good reason why ALL fey should have d6 hit die, and wizard-equivalent BAB.

Giant should also be a subtype of humanoid, as demons are a subtype of outsider. Fold "giantish" abilities into the subtype, much as Demon abilities are.

I also think "Abberation" is too broad a category - yes, it's intended to be a catchall, but it goes too far.

 

[BigRedRod]

Could you explain that more? What types seem to you arbitray?

Types
Abberration
Animal
Construct
Dragon
Elemental
Fey
Giant
Humanoid
Magical Beast
Monstrous Humanoid
Ooze
Outsider
Plant
Undead
Vermin

Sub-types
Air
Aquatic
Cold
Earth
Fire
Water
Goblinoid
Incorporeal
Lawful
Chaotic
Evil
Good
Native
Reptillian
Shapechanger


Just a quick glance reveals that the types and sub types are all over the place without any real thought or theme. Most of it has been fudged together and clouded further as time has passed

Currently types serve little purpose. They have a few rules attached which tend to be ignored in both common play and official supplements. And yet most loathe to use sub-types for various reasons. Most player races end up with the humanoid subtype when other types seem to fit far better

A better system would seem to have far fewer Types and give most monsters a sub-type or two. Even player races would benefit.

The problem is similar with the "elements" in D&D
We have : Lightning, Fire, Cold, Air, Acid, Sonic, Earth, Water
and possibly even others like wood
There wouldn't be a problem if D&D didn't try and make itself inherently elemental but it has and as such it is a mess

It would need a great deal of work to sort out. ButI remain hopeful that fourth edition will really trim back some of the dead wood and try things afresh

Don't get me wrong, I love D&D. I've yet to find another system which approaches the high-quality inherent in 3.5e. It is just that the whole element and type system makes less sense than the way pokemon handles it