Recent Posts
Kvantum
(Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Roleplaying Game, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules Subscriber)
This is #5 of 6. We already know the last one will likely run to 14th level or so, so it should be the same level range as Legacy of Fire, reduced from RotRL, CotCT, and SD's reaching up to 17ish.so..only goes to level 12 this time? Interesting...
Actually, since this is the first PFRPG adventure path, and thus the first time anyone's done a campaign for PFRPG, we're not 100% sure HOW high level it'll go. It SHOULD be somewhere between Legacy of Fire and Curse of the Crimson Throne, though.
ACK!!!
Just found Vic's thread. Sorry for that.
For those also curious like me see here:
I say, give Ba'al-zebub a sex change! I think that would make the name Ba'alath-zebub. (Zebul means habitation, by the way, zebub flies.)
BTW... keen-eyed observers will note that all of the Archdevils of Hell are male. There's a very very specific reason for this… Hell is misogynistic, among its numerous other social problems.
I say, give Ba'al-zebub a sex change! I think that would make the name Ba'alath-zebub. (Zebul means habitation, by the way, zebub flies.)BTW... keen-eyed observers will note that all of the Archdevils of Hell are male. There's a very very specific reason for this… Hell is misogynistic, among its numerous other social problems.
*keeping eyes peeled*
This cover's been up for three weeks? How'd I miss that?!I'm totally heartbroken to learn that you don't follow my RSS feed.
I have a hard enough time keeping up with email. If I had more feeds going my head might explode.
This cover's been up for three weeks? How'd I miss that?!I'm totally heartbroken to learn that you don't follow my RSS feed.
What if the RSS feed malfunctioned? We might miss something. Isn't it just safer to constantly check? All the time? Constantly? Always? Without ceasing?
What if the RSS feed malfunctioned? We might miss something. Isn't it just safer to constantly check? All the time? Constantly? Always? Without ceasing?This cover's been up for three weeks? How'd I miss that?!I'm totally heartbroken to learn that you don't follow my RSS feed.
Clearly a belt-and-suspenders approach is called for.
Mr Baron
(Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Roleplaying Game, Campaign Setting, Modules Subscriber)
Skeld
(Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Roleplaying Game, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Battles Case Subscriber)
Mr Baron
(Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Roleplaying Game, Campaign Setting, Modules Subscriber)
Kevin Mack
(Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules Subscriber)
Mr Baron
(Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Roleplaying Game, Campaign Setting, Modules Subscriber)
So ... a question.
Pathfinder #28 had an awesome set of rules for demonic possession (which I immediately copied and will be using in my campaign). I found it curious that they were included, since they seemed to have no relation to the content of #28 - I chalked it up to "for future use." Now, #29 has two possession devils. When I saw them, I went "Aha!" ... but they completely ignore the existence of the possession rules from #28.
Was there meant to be a "or you can use the possession rules form Pathfinder #28" note, kind of like there was in #28 for the effects of the Styx?
So ... a question.
Pathfinder #28 had an awesome set of rules for demonic possession (which I immediately copied and will be using in my campaign). I found it curious that they were included, since they seemed to have no relation to the content of #28 - I chalked it up to "for future use." Now, #29 has two possession devils. When I saw them, I went "Aha!" ... but they completely ignore the existence of the possession rules from #28.
Was there meant to be a "or you can use the possession rules form Pathfinder #28" note, kind of like there was in #28 for the effects of the Styx?
Haven't got it yet, but I suspect this is probably because Greg A. Vaughan didn't have access to them due to deadlines not beinmg helpful...
So ... a question.
Pathfinder #28 had an awesome set of rules for demonic possession (which I immediately copied and will be using in my campaign). I found it curious that they were included, since they seemed to have no relation to the content of #28 - I chalked it up to "for future use." Now, #29 has two possession devils. When I saw them, I went "Aha!" ... but they completely ignore the existence of the possession rules from #28.
Was there meant to be a "or you can use the possession rules form Pathfinder #28" note, kind of like there was in #28 for the effects of the Styx?
We'd originally intended for stronger crossover support between adventures and articles in Council of Thieves, but the fact that Council of Thieves was a VERY difficult series to develop due to the fact that the authors had to write the whole thing with limited or no access to the final rules (which were in development at the same time the AP was being written) meant that we had to focus time that would have been spent cross-polinating the two working on making EVERYTHING fit with the new rules.
Kingmaker will have a much stronger set of ties between the adventures and the articles.