Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="I'm A Banana" data-source="post: 6135159" data-attributes="member: 2067">I like lumping them into the celesitals, and I like that he's thinking about them as related to the pegasus and the unicorn and even sphinx and guardian naga, which are absolutely the same sort of monster concept.I'm not enamored of the idea of them as "pets" per se. I imagine a low-level lantern archon would actually really respect and admire a shedu or a lammasu, and I don't like the "oh, he's just a big puppy!" effect on a being of great wisdom and justice who is supposed to be kind of frickin' intimidating. The "immortal guardian" idea is nice. Though we do not need to return to the days when everything in a monster book was there to fight the PC's and had to justify it's inclusion based on that criteria. It's a nice idea, though, certainly worth keeping. Of course, now we're getting into the blurry lines between celestials and fey, what with being guardian spirits over certain locations. Though perhaps what distinguishes them is their feelings on law vs. chaos: fey are wild, untamed, unpredicatable, chaotic wilderness spirits. Immortal guardians are more obedient, loyal, wise, learned, lawful spirits of civilization. The fey are Wizard magic, the guardians are Cleric magic?Well, I guess if they HAVE to make a distinction, there are worse ones. I'm still all for dropping those blurry lines, though. I do hate that the poll won't let me progress without hating on the Opinicus (poor bastard).</blockquote>

Verification