• Resources are back! Use the menu in the main navbar. If you own a resource, please check it for formatting, icons, etc.

PF2 Leshies Previewed From Lost Omens Character Guide

Leshies are another of the three new ancestries from the new Pathfinder 2E book. Nature spirits given form, these guys havecrafted plant bodies.

083019_LeafLeshy_360.jpg


This small-sized race has 8 hit points, 25' speed, and gains sustenance from the sun. They have Constitution and Wisdom boosts, and an Intelligence flaw. They also have their own ancestry feats, including this one:

Screenshot 2019-09-03 at 16.55.06.png

More info here.
 
Russ Morrissey

Comments

zztong

Explorer
I can't stop laughing at people saying this is jumping the shark. It never ceases to shock me how closeminded people think Fantasy should be. If it wasn't for Tolkien none of you would know what to do with yourselves
At least you're laughing in your shock. :)

I'll take the "closeminded" criticism. That's fair.

But I think its perhaps more of an age thing than a Tolkien thing, at least locally. While I've always been "meh" about Golarion, I've two good friends that really like the world. Both of them dismissed the Leshy. None of us are Tolkien die-hards.

EDIT: Or actually, the underlying theme of your Tolkein assertion is probably good, just not Tolkein. I tend to be attracted to near-historical fantasy. Friend #1 draws inspiration from the Black Company books. Friend #2 draws inspiration from Greyhawk and Golarion and actually kind of hates Tolkien. I suspect its more a matter of beginning to stray too far from human.
 
Last edited:

RSIxidor

Explorer
They shouldn't call them leshies, though. A leshy is something completely different:
Kobolds aren't the same as folklore kobolds, either. D&D and other RPGs have interpreted folklore and mythological concepts in new ways since the beginning of the game. In the same way kobolds take some inspiration from the folklore origin while changing quite a lot about the concept, leshys seem to be taking the idea of a woodland defender and changing most of the rest.
 

Tonguez

Adventurer
They are plant people. Plant people are a fantasy trope. It's nice. Now I can play a deku scrub or a korok.
More a sci-fi trope really, although there are some overlaps. Usually in ‘fantasy’ plant people are usually Spirits of Fae rather than a race
 

Kaodi

Adventurer
The main thing is that we finally have an ancestry with an intelligence penalty. Just to squeeze that much more out of untrained improvisation and assurance, :D .
 

Connorsrpg

Adventurer
Sounds interesting. I could see a place for these in many settings I have used or written. I LOVE many race options. You don't have to include them in every setting or region within a setting. Not sure why people get upset by expanding race options.

If your setting does not have them that is fine. A setting is defined as much by what it does not have, as what it does. :) But this race could be introduced to a campaign in many good ways. Anyway, leshies look good to me. I loved killorens and wildens, and have been working on a small fey race myself. These would all really suit some settings (or regions within settings). If not yours, that is fine too. We all game in very different places. :)
 

Green Onceler

Villager
A lot of 2e's art has missed the mark for me. However, I do not have any issue with this art.

Although I really like Golarion as a setting, I dislike the "Muppet Show" vibe of all the weird races and tend to limit them in my games to core + by request. The anthropomorphic animal races are generally my least liked. I've specifically avoided buying Inner Sea Races.
 

Lucas Yew

Explorer
They shouldn't call them leshies, though. A leshy is something completely different:
Like others mentioned above, blame D&D for all these unsound re-imaginations of RL folklore figures. Such as the Lamia; what on earth had them end up with the lower half of a lion, not a proper snake?! :mad:

Edit: Well there's the Matriarch, I know, but I'd rather have them unified as a single snake half with human torso species...
 

CapnZapp

Adventurer
A lot of 2e's art has missed the mark for me. However, I do not have any issue with this art.

Although I really like Golarion as a setting, I dislike the "Muppet Show" vibe of all the weird races and tend to limit them in my games to core + by request. The anthropomorphic animal races are generally my least liked. I've specifically avoided buying Inner Sea Races.
Are you mixing up PF1 and PF2 now?
 

CapnZapp

Adventurer
Like others mentioned above, blame D&D for all these unsound re-imaginations of RL folklore figures.
You're the only one assigning blame, as far as I can see. All the others simply present the facts in ways that do not support your agenda. Cheers
 

Aldarc

Adventurer
I can't stop laughing at people saying this is jumping the shark. It never ceases to shock me how closeminded people think Fantasy should be. If it wasn't for Tolkien none of you would know what to do with yourselves
On the whole, fantasy does seem somewhat conservative in its imagination for what a fantasy world could be.

More a sci-fi trope really, although there are some overlaps. Usually in ‘fantasy’ plant people are usually Spirits of Fae rather than a race
I'm not sure if that generalization holds much water even in D&D-esque fantasy.
 

billd91

Hobbit on Quest
I... uhh... I feel very out of touch.

I'm thinking "they're jumping the shark" and yet the fans on the Paizo board are cheering.
Of course they're cheering. Leshies were some of the more creative monsters introduced in the Pathfinder Bestiaries (starting with Bestiary 3, I think) in PF1. And given Paizo's penchant for faerie creatures and their servants in various APs, they should be a good fit for Golarion as an ancestry.

If you feel out of touch, you probably didn't keep up with developments in Pathfinder over the years. Nothing wrong with that, but it's far from jumping the shark.
 

zztong

Explorer
Of course they're cheering. Leshies were some of the more creative monsters introduced in the Pathfinder Bestiaries (starting with Bestiary 3, I think) in PF1. And given Paizo's penchant for faerie creatures and their servants in various APs, they should be a good fit for Golarion as an ancestry.

If you feel out of touch, you probably didn't keep up with developments in Pathfinder over the years. Nothing wrong with that, but it's far from jumping the shark.
Yeh, I agree. Its another example of Paizo and I heading in different directions. I seem to be taking some time to get through this conversion, hoping that something will click and I'll like it. I should probably just acknowledge and embrace the fact that isn't going to happen and focus on some other game. I won't be able to help my friend with his PF2 game, but he'll cope.
 

Ravenbrook

Villager
Kobolds aren't the same as folklore kobolds, either. D&D and other RPGs have interpreted folklore and mythological concepts in new ways since the beginning of the game. In the same way kobolds take some inspiration from the folklore origin while changing quite a lot about the concept, leshys seem to be taking the idea of a woodland defender and changing most of the rest.
Yeah, that's why I don't call these "dog people" (or are they reptilians?) "kobolds" in my campaign.
 

Tonguez

Adventurer
In early editions, they were more dog-like. They took on reptilian features until in 3rd they were stated to be reptilian.
it was explained at one point that the original DnD kobolds were doglike but had scaly skin. However when the artist took that description away he came back with an image of something that was more reptilian (scaly skin) and thus was born the 'confusion'. 3e made the decision to link Kobolds to dragons and thus codified the 'reptile' (but are Dragons reptiles?)
 

Ravenbrook

Villager
it was explained at one point that the original DnD kobolds were doglike but had scaly skin. However when the artist took that description away he came back with an image of something that was more reptilian (scaly skin) and thus was born the 'confusion'. 3e made the decision to link Kobolds to dragons and thus codified the 'reptile' (but are Dragons reptiles?)
Maybe dragons, like dinosaurs, are actually birds.
 

Advertisement

Advertisement

Top