The only issue I am really having here is that I don’t see any real difference in Chrysalis types. All of the Sakaru Pixies that have bonded with anything has done so with a Chrysalis. All the trees Elora bonded them to had Chrysalis. All of the Sakaru Pixies Ricther had found had bonded to something in the form of a Chrysalis. I just done see anything saying that they bond differently. Everyone of them have been in a Chrysalis.
I think the ones in the trees weren't in Chrysalises.. Chrysalisi? Is there a plural or is it like moose? Regardless I think that their faces were almost part of the wood instead
Didn't Elora trigger their 'tree communion' instead of fate bond though? I'm thinking it's not the same
no chrysalis if she is vulnerable. Thats what happen when you are forced mate with yourself using a massive wood.
So I wonder if Elora forced it to use Tree communion did that prevent it from completely bonding? So we know those pixies haven’t completely bonded but they have partially. The others that Ricther retrieved didn’t have that benefit. So we should assume they had completely transformed from their total bonding. That leads us back to the Sakaru Pixie in the wall of the dungeon. It didn’t have such benefits from Elora forcing it to use tree communion or from anything else. Shouts quote above did clear state it was mindless. If It had been consumed by the dungeon it could conceivably be reproduced by the dungeon. When the chaos stimulated the Chrysalis to release its Sakaru Pixie it was still a mindless Sakaru and nothing more. As they are right now in the story line pixies are not that powerful at all. They might become more in future stories but the one from the dungeon wasn’t anything more then a chaotic radical added to the fight. If his dungeon can replicate Sakaru pixies and it bonded to another none dungeon creature would it die in time after departing the dungeon? They could make for one heck of a dungeon beast. Although bonding with Singh might only offer a temporary boat to power then one massive hangover.
Do you still not have the books yet? How much does it cost to get your the kindle edition to all his book? I think Richter gives out some of his books for free every once in a while. Or just message him and he might just give it to you.
Spoiler: Rejected Death Shroud. The Land: Raiders: A LitRPG Saga (Chaos Seeds Book 6) (p. 288). Kindle Edition. {} So if Richter puts this down the well of offering...It will be a Resource: Herb Catalyst: Pure expression of Death Magic Creature: Rejected Death Shroud It seems like a very important item to provide to the Dungeon. It will make the Dungeon super dangerous if it makes these things, and increases its death magic. Do you think one will be produced with his resurrection spell? Spoiler: Breath of Life. The Land: Monsters: A LitRPG Saga (Chaos Seeds Book 8) . Tamori Publications, LLC. Kindle Edition. {}
would a slime count as a beast or animal? doesn't matter i suppose, it would be produced as an herb that will kill you, not as a animal or beast.
I don't think a slime would either. Beasts just seemed to be "animals" that were magically augmented or evolved in some way. Can't remember where the quote showed up but that's how I saw it. Guess I took it as a like Kingdom Animalia. It could fit given Aleron's background in biology. That would have Slimes would fall under protists I think
A slime would likely be neither a part of the beast nor the animal category. I don't think biological definitions are important in how this is divided, as that would include most if not all beings apart from living constructs, plants, elementals and undead in the beast/animal category. Its most likely much more arbitrary, with some creatures we would consider beasts instead being considered part of another category, due to intelligence level, heritage (say a non-sapient dragon, little different from a regular reptile save that it belongs to the dragon lineage) or realm of origin. For example, a non-sapient creature from the fae realms that would normally be considered a beast could instead count as a fae animal.
As a child growing up I understood Beast as meaning a large, wild, and dangerous animal. With everyone’s desires to use words at a whim today it could be used to describe any person or anything else, not only to describe ones size or animal like mannerisms. You could be said to be a beast just because you are the best at something. I hate the redefinition of terms. In the days of the romans that would be expected of the vulgar class. Vulgar meaning common in their day. Even at that didn’t Randy make a statement about the dungeon not being confined to just one type of creature? If it had been wouldn’t it have just been reptiles? The only creatures we have witnessed so far have been reptiles or beast. I think Randy has made a comment about it being unlimited due to Ricther. As it really should be due to its chaotic nature as well. In book seven during the absorption of all the dead in book seven during the dungeon battle following the attack on the Lich it was also stated that the dungeon learned their forms. It learned their forms as they were and as they were in life. I assume we will see some skeletons/dead dungeon spawned in the future. If we don’t I will find it VERY disappointing.
Its limited to the beast and animals category. Unlimited lifted the Dungeon from being limited to creating reptiles, a small fragment of the category, to being able to create anything within it. Many creatures are not in that category. For example humans and sprites are animals, but we don't see any created by the Dungeon. It cannot do so because they are in a different category of creatures that the Dungeon hasn't unlocked yet.
We will have to wait and see. I hate to think that the dungeon will not have any skeletons click clacking or any groaners staggering moaning for flesh to eat.
