| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| BlackDragonKarameikos |
Posted - 27 Jan 2010 : 23:26:39
I have a question concerning Lycanthropy.
1.) When a Lycanthrope bites someone and passess on the affliction, do they have the same control over the newly created lycan as Vamipres do over their newly created spawn?
2.)Although the lycan has animal empathy in any form, could the Lycan speak its animal language in its human form? Although I would think not, I would like the opinion of others on this one.
3.) would the Tongues or Comprehend Language spell allow the caster to be able to understand the Lycan if they were speaking in their animals language(such as growls, purrs, and roars for a weretiger)? Since it is not a actual language, I would think not.
Any input on this would be helpful. |
| 15 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Artemel |
Posted - 30 Jan 2010 : 18:14:11
quote:
Originally posted by BlackDragonKarameikos
Ok got another question concernig Lycans.
Does the Lycans rake ability get the full Strength Modifier or only half? I would think it would get full as it is putting all its strength into its hind legs to do the rake attack.
Rakes in 3.5 are at half strength bonus. Primarily it is a numbers game where all attacks except main one (or sometimes two) are half the strength bonus. Then again, if a monster has only one attack form, they often give it 1.5x strength. |
| The Sage |
Posted - 29 Jan 2010 : 23:27:26
quote:
Originally posted by Hoondatha
While we're on the subject, I must say I really liked the new take on lythari presented by the Vil Adanrath in Frostfell
Indeed. It's explained in Frostfell that the main connection existing between the lycanthropic lythari and the Vil Adranath was simply that they were both elven -- only the west referred to them as lythari, and the east called them Vil Adranath.
quote:
I can't remember, were they ever mentioned before that book came out? They aren't in The Horde, for instance.
As I recall, they were specifically a Sehestedt-creation for Frostfell. They're featured in Sehestedt's The Fall of Highwatch too. |
| Hoondatha |
Posted - 29 Jan 2010 : 22:39:40
quote:
Originally posted by The Sage
quote:
Originally posted by Hoondatha
I knew about the procreation part, obviously, but I've never heard of a ritual to turn an elf into a lythari. Did I miss that somewhere? Could you give me a source?
See Demihumans of the Realms and Elves of Evermeet. The Monstrous Compendium Annual Vol. 4 is also useful.
Aha. Thanks Sage. I'd forgotten about the ritual part, though I've read it in the past. Thanks for reminding me.
While we're on the subject, I must say I really liked the new take on lythari presented by the Vil Adanrath in Frostfell. I can't remember, were they ever mentioned before that book came out? They aren't in The Horde, for instance. |
| BlackDragonKarameikos |
Posted - 29 Jan 2010 : 20:07:01
Ok got another question concernig Lycans.
Does the Lycans rake ability get the full Strength Modifier or only half? I would think it would get full as it is putting all its strength into its hind legs to do the rake attack. |
| The Sage |
Posted - 29 Jan 2010 : 15:13:47
quote:
Originally posted by Hoondatha
I knew about the procreation part, obviously, but I've never heard of a ritual to turn an elf into a lythari. Did I miss that somewhere? Could you give me a source?
See Demihumans of the Realms and Elves of Evermeet. The Monstrous Compendium Annual Vol. 4 is also useful. |
| Hoondatha |
Posted - 29 Jan 2010 : 12:56:02
I knew about the procreation part, obviously, but I've never heard of a ritual to turn an elf into a lythari. Did I miss that somewhere? Could you give me a source? |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 29 Jan 2010 : 11:11:49
quote:
Originally posted by The Sage
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by The Sage
Lythari. They're lycanthrope elves that can turn into wolves. However, 3e lore also gave the lythari a hybrid form, even though they never originally had one.
This, to me, was one of the biggest of 3E's many inexplicable lore-changes. I hated that one.
Lythari are far more intriguing as an elven race with a unique ability, as opposed to just being variant werewolves. 
I still keep to the no hybrid form if and when I use lythari in my campaign, regardless of what the current lore says.
I mean... considering the fact that the lythari didn't originally have this hybrid form, and the details that surround their brand of shape-changing, in that it is only passed on by ritual or by procreation, I'm still of the mind that they not true lycanthropes. They are, simply, elves who have the ability to transform into wolves.
Agreed. That was one of the first places where I was willing to ignore the "new lore trumps older lore" rule. |
| The Sage |
Posted - 29 Jan 2010 : 06:05:00
quote:
Originally posted by Wooly Rupert
quote:
Originally posted by The Sage
Lythari. They're lycanthrope elves that can turn into wolves. However, 3e lore also gave the lythari a hybrid form, even though they never originally had one.
This, to me, was one of the biggest of 3E's many inexplicable lore-changes. I hated that one.
Lythari are far more intriguing as an elven race with a unique ability, as opposed to just being variant werewolves.
I still keep to the no hybrid form if and when I use lythari in my campaign, regardless of what the current lore says.
I mean... considering the fact that the lythari didn't originally have this hybrid form, and the details that surround their brand of shape-changing, in that it is only passed on by ritual or by procreation, I'm still of the mind that they not true lycanthropes. They are, simply, elves who have the ability to transform into wolves. |
| Wooly Rupert |
Posted - 29 Jan 2010 : 05:12:05
quote:
Originally posted by The Sage
Lythari. They're lycanthrope elves that can turn into wolves. However, 3e lore also gave the lythari a hybrid form, even though they never originally had one.
This, to me, was one of the biggest of 3E's many inexplicable lore-changes. I hated that one.
Lythari are far more intriguing as an elven race with a unique ability, as opposed to just being variant werewolves. |
| The Sage |
Posted - 29 Jan 2010 : 04:31:48
quote:
Originally posted by Kentinal
quote:
Originally posted by Afetbinttuzani
It might be worthwhile, to help people searching for information in the future, to specify in the subject line the edition you are referring to. In 4E, for example, Lycanthropy is hereditary, rather than infectious.
Cheers,
Err in prior Editions it was either hereditary or inflicted by bite.
Indeed. It's referred to as heritable lycanthropy. [See Van Richten's Guide to Werebeasts for a thorough detailing]
quote:
Oh also are Lythiars (spelling) that by ritual could transform an elf.
Lythari. They're lycanthrope elves that can turn into wolves. However, 3e lore also gave the lythari a hybrid form, even though they never originally had one.
|
| Kentinal |
Posted - 29 Jan 2010 : 02:47:50
quote:
Originally posted by Afetbinttuzani
It might be worthwhile, to help people searching for information in the future, to specify in the subject line the edition you are referring to. In 4E, for example, Lycanthropy is hereditary, rather than infectious.
Cheers,
Err in prior Editions it was either hereditary or inflicted by bite. Oh also are Lythiars (spelling) that by ritual could transform an elf. |
| Hoondatha |
Posted - 29 Jan 2010 : 02:40:39
1) No. There's never been any sort of history of lycanthropes being able to directly control those they infect, either in the long run of D&D or in the mythology it's based upon. The "lycanthrope prime" wouldn't be able to control a new lycanthrope at all (the newcomer being a blood-ravened beast, after all), unless through pure force, ie: beating them to a pulp and forcing obedience. And probably not even then. Relations among lycanthropes that have learned to control the curse would fall back on humanoid norms (ie, forming packs or tribes, wrassling out dominance in the old-fashioned way).
2) I'd say yes to a limited degree, dependent on some common sense. Yes they understand it, but how much they speak it depends. For instance, there isn't much a human voice can do to duplicate an eagle's cry or a tiger's roar. I'd probably just call it "pidgeon animal" and leave it at that, allowing the player to give only the most basic of ideas and require at least the hybrid form to speak fully.
3) Probably not, for the same reasoning as WM. But a higher-level version of the spell would probably be powerful enough to handle both tasks at once. |
| Afetbinttuzani |
Posted - 29 Jan 2010 : 02:33:32
It might be worthwhile, to help people searching for information in the future, to specify in the subject line the edition you are referring to. In 4E, for example, Lycanthropy is hereditary, rather than infectious.
Cheers, |
| BlackDragonKarameikos |
Posted - 29 Jan 2010 : 02:05:30
Thanks for the input Wintermute27, I'll also have to look at the Van Richten's guides and see what they say as well, I keep forgetting that I have them and that they have information on Lycans as well. |
| wintermute27 |
Posted - 27 Jan 2010 : 23:48:12
1.) I would say no. In my mind, I see Vampirism as more of a Curse and as such enables magical control over spawn. Lycanthropy is a disease, so I would rule it to be less magical and more "natural" of an affliction.
2.) I would allow a Natural Lycanthrope to communicate to its animal buddies in human form, but I think it would be a learned skill. Afflicted Lycanthropes can't learn this, since they don't get animal empathy in human form.
3.) I agree. The Speak with Animals spell is what I would use in these situations. |
|
|
