You do not have to play them super-goody. It should be possible to play them as neutral, same way as you can not be absolutely evil as Lich.
Age of Ashes spoiler
In that Adventure Path from Pathfinder you have a gold dragon who, due to personal tragedy and “end justify the means” thinking became Lawful Evil and a red dragon who, while not good, is rather friendly to the PCs after they rescued him from torture and helps them out later with no ulterior motive or backstabbing, even risking his live for them.
Actually do not expect that big of a leeway there!
During the Reddit AMA, the devs said quite specifically that Gold Dragons are supposed to be the embodiment of Good, just as Liches are of Evil.
Neutral might be possible, though even then that wouldn’t be attractive to me, as it would still be a goody-twoshoes-Gold Dragon, even just the lore of what it is supposed to be would be offputting to me.
Swarm-that-walks isn’t a creature itself worm that walks template is for any evil but I think swarm-that-walks will be chaotic evil in the game based in the kickstarter update. I’ll also link the mythic apocalypse locust mythic enemy.
AFAIK, D&D material doesn’t mention Gold Dragons as embodying law or good, only that they are the epitome of good dragons because they are the most powerful metallic dragons. In fact both Silvers and Golds are Lawful Good in D&D and Pathfinder.
golds have a strict hierarchy and general huge boner for rules and law while silvers tend to be a lot more relaxed and simply want to do good in the world.
EDIT: to be more precise i wasn’t strictly speaking on how their alignment is listed in manuals but more on how the general lore described them. Yes both are lawful good creature but if i had to pick a spectrum golds are more balanced to the lawful and silver to the good side
While they do prefer to do Good in a Lawful manner, I wouldn’t say its to the point where you could say they are the embodiment of law. They don’t value following the rules to the point of allowing something evil to occur just because the action required to stop it would be technically unlawful.
Just saw your edit: Agree with you on that; Golds are more lawful leaning than Silvers despite both being lawful good.
Aren’t Silvers the Law-obsessed Metallics in Pathfinder though? What I’ve been able to find talks about them gathering more and more pacts and rules as they age until every aspect of their life (including eating, sex, and at one point in history, pooping) was govern by some code of conduct they follow.
Golds in Pathfinder tend towards leadership and mentoring, and outside of an eugenics project controlled by a Gold that has actually tarnished and become Lawful Evil, are not described as being so exacting and ordered.
Spark of Divinity Feat is a 3rd party feat, so that is a big no. However perhaps yoy confused it with General Mythic Ability Divine Source.
" Divine Source (Su)
You can grant divine spells to those who follow your cause, allowing them to select you as their deity for the purposes of determining their spells and domains. Select two domains upon taking this ability. These domains must be alignmentdomains matching your alignmentif possible, unless your alignment is neutral. You grant access to these domains as if you were a deity. Creatures that gain spells from you don’t receive any spells per day of levels higher than your tier; they lose those spell slots. In addition, you can cast spells from domains you grant as long as their level is equal to or less than your tier. Each day as a spell-like ability, you can cast one spell of each level equal to or less than your tier (selecting from those available to you from your divine source domains). If you’re a cleric or you venerate a deity, you may change your spell domains to those you grant others. At 6th tier and 9th tier, you can select this ability again, adding one domain and two subdomains to your list each time and adding their spells to the list of those that you can cast."
I agree with you on Swarm-That-Walks have armies that are just swarm subsets of itself.
We know all three uncommon paths have uncommon Mythic Spell Books, while Azata, Angel, Lich, Trickster, Aeon, and Demon have common mythic spell books and I have been racking my mind as to what that means exactly.
It dawned on me that all the common Mythic Paths have a reference class that informs how their own spellcasting book works. So the Lich spellbook (not counting the option to merge said spellcasting in with a Full Casters spellcasting), works like a wizards spell book but no Arcane Spellcasting failure chance, the Azata works mechanically like a Bards Spellbook, Aeon like an Inquisitors Spellbook, an Angels like a Clerics Spellbook, a Trickster like an Eldritch Scion’s Spellbook, a Demon like a Bloodragers Spellbook.
But they have made no mention of the uncommon paths having a reference class at all, its just been assumed that they do, but what if Gold Dragon, Swarm-That-Walks, and Legendary Mortal’s Spellbooks mechanically resemble no existing class at all.
So folks were assuming Gold Dragon’s Spellbook would resemble the sorcerers, but what if instead of spell slots & Spells Know, the Gold Dragon’s Spellbook is filled with a bunch of Spell Like Abilities instead, each of which has a certain amount of uses per day, simular to how a Dragon Disciple gets an SLAs to turn into a Dragon. Of course that Gold Dragon gets more of them and they are more varied and include summoning other Dragons.
Maybe a Swarm-That-Walks acts like a Spell Thief, gaining different spells depending upon what it eats.
Maybe Legendary Mortal is either a straight up class Gesalt or it gets a spell book that isn’t magically in of itself at all, but uses the spell book mechanic for none magical wonderous “spells” like making an full attack action against everyone within 60 feet of you.
How exactly do we know this for certain?
I thought I had kept uptodate especially on all the dev statements regarding magic and Lich especially, but I’ve never once read anything regarding “common spell book”… is there a solid source for this that I’ve just missed?
Iophanite angels are lawful good, dark angels are neutral evil, Astral Deva, Balisse, Cassisian, Choral, Dapsara, Empyrean, Monadic Deva, Movanic Deva, Planetar, and Solar angels are neutral good, there are no chaotic angels also the Erinyes Devils (fallen angels) are lawful evil so no they are not any good
“Angels are a group of altruistic celestials native to all three Upper Planes: Nirvana, Heaven, and Elysium. They represent all the multiple interpretations of goodness, and can be anything from lawful to chaotic.”
Thanks, I wasn’t even aware of that specific thread… though it still is hard to say how accurate that information is; as I’ve said, I’ve been keeping pretty up2date on everything Lich and magic in WotR, and never heard anything of the kind before myself.
But maybe it was in some stream indeed, some offhand remark in russian, which I do not speak aside from a few phrases, so that might explain it.
Also agreed that the thread in question could be moved into the WotR section.