Aberrant Templar's page

...and with one published Pathfinder module (Doom comes to Dustpawn) even featuring an elven spaceship the players can visit and explore, explicitly meaning elves even had spaceships.

Well ... one single group of elves living in Lirgen, sponsored by the Saoc Brethren, built a magically-powered spaceship. The Lirgen's Glory was more "Lirgen spaceship crewed by elves" than "elven spaceship". It's not like there was a Sovyrian starfleet orbiting Castrovel.

As a side note, the Azlanti also had magical spaceship technology. One of their aetherships, King Xeros, appears in an early Pathfinder Society Scenario. That makes Azlant and Lirgen the only two nations on Golarion to have developed some form of space travel, both of which were powered by magic (bottles of air, bound demons, magical crystal) and both of which were developed in the final days of their respective civilizations.

Personally I rather like the Gap, because it gives an interesting twist to the Precursors and Lost Technology tropes that are so common in SciFi. I'm neutral on the Drift. It just sounds like a twist on hyperspace from Star Wars, which fits the Space Opera vibe. I guess you could accomplish a similar effect by having spaceships travel through astral space or whatever, but this is a little more technology-oriented.

I also don't really mind having the standard stock fantasy races take a back seat. It's not that I think there's anything specifically wrong with elves, dwarves, halflings, gnomes, etc. It's just that they end up being the standard races in pretty much every fantasy game ever. I kinda like it when designers freshen things up a bit. I appreciated Earthdawn, for example, because it gave me Obsidiman and T'skrang and the like. I really enjoyed Dark Sun. My favorite parts of Pathfinder are still Numeria, Alkenstar, the other planets in the solar system, and everything else running in a non-traditional fantasy direction (heck, in my home campaign I turned Nidel into a BDSM Film Noir land of private detectives pounding pavement for silver pieces, arcane femme fatale, and mafioso with spiked chains).

I guess at this point in my life I've grown a little blasé toward Tolkienesque pseudo-medieval stuff. I'm excited about Starfinder specifically because it seems like it will scratch a new itch.

Have any GM's made changes to "your" Golarion setting as a result of campaigns or just your own customization?

...How have you made Golarion "yours"?

1.) One of my short campaigns was set in Nidal, which I depict as being much more of a "film noir"-style place. All the same Hellraiser-inspired craziness is there, it's just more behind-the-scenes and subtle. People don't walk around in black leather studded with chains (they save that for private, special occasions). The windows in Nisroch sport "Opparan Blinds" (Oppara isn't exactly Venice, but it has canals and it's not like Venetian Blinds were actually from Venice). The alleys and side-streets of Nisroch are also lit up by "Nidalese Glass" signs, which are shaped tubes of (usually red) colored glass with a continual flame stuffed inside.

My previous write-up of Nidal from a different thread

2.) An Aldori dueling sword is a katana. Not in a "they're different weapons but I'm using the same stats" kind of way ... I mean they are literally the same weapon with a regional name. None of the people in remote, isolated Rostland had ever seen a katana before, so when Sirian First came back into town with a new name and a new sword everyone just referred to it as "Aldori's sword". The name stuck.

3.) Keeping with the above-mentioned theme, I use an in-house archetype of the samurai class to represent Aldori initiates. The archetype trades away heavier armor, order, banner, and mounted abilities for more focused dueling abilities and better defense in light or no armor.

4.) I also use an in-house archetype of the samurai class to represent Hellknight armigers. The archetype trades away the banner abilities, the mount, & the mounted archer ability for some armor training and expanded Order abilities themed to the different Hellknight orders.

5.) Although I look forward to the new Hellknight sourcebook, I'm not sure how much I'll end up using since I've already spilled some extensive ink on the Hellknights in my world.

6.) Orcs are a Spawn of Rovagug. Not individual orcs ... the entire orc race itself is, collectively, one of the Spawn of Rovagug. They "leaked out" of Rovagug's prison millennia before Earthfall but primarily stayed in the darklands and harassed the ancient dwarves until they were driven to the surface during the Quest For Sky.

I was just prepping the Wrath of the Righteous for my next campaign, and I came across a paragraph in the description of the Chalice of Ozem that I didn't really notice before:

"This chalice is perhaps the last surviving artifact from Sacred Ozem, now forever lost in a tragic battle that ultimately led to the foundation of the Knights of Ozem. Made of shimmering mithral and studded with dozens of rubies, the Chalice of Ozem was carried from the ruins and handed down through generations until it was finally given to Iomedae, who used it in her fight against Erum-Hel during the Battle of Three Sorrows."

So ... apparently the Knights of Ozem are named after the place where they were founded (which, I'm sure, was a really ... awesome ... place to live). I've skimmed through other sources but I haven't found any other information about "Sacred Ozem". All the other descriptions of the Knights of Ozem more or less begin with their role in the Shining Crusade.

My questions are:

1. Are there other published mentions of Ozem (pre-knightly order) that I'm missing, or is the mention of it in Wrath of the Righteous the first time it was teased?

2. Was Ozem a city? Or was it a country/kingdom?

3. Did the ruination of Ozem happen pre-Earthfall or post-Earthfall?

4. Are there plans to reveal more about the history of Ozem and its better-known knightly order in the reasonably near future, or is this something we'll have to wait on?

One of Golarion's superpowers, Cheliax, is founded on the ideals of diabolism - a Lawful Evil practice of power. How would this look in practice? What would a typical village, town, and large city enter look like? Are there devilish idols everywhere Are the majority of citizens Neutral or Lawful Evil? Or is the makeup pretty much the same as anywhere else?

Diabolism isn't the worship of hell and Asmodeus. It's a political philosophy that uses hell as a model, because hell is arguably the most orderly and lawful place in the universe. The argument for it would be something along the lines of "hell is filled with some of the worst, most evil, and most selfish creatures imaginable and yet they have a system of government that maintains an orderly and rational society, and has endured for millennia. We have difficulty keeping farmers and nobles in line for more than a few generations. Maybe we can learn something from how the government and society of hell is structured?"

So diabolism is a form of political theory (like agrarianism or federalism). Based on its description in the Inner Sea World Guide and the old Campaign Setting book (and its write up in the wiki), diabolism emphasizes:

1. Hierarchical systems of power
2. Strong, authoritative leadership
3. Disindividuation (being a cog in the proverbial machine)
4. The value of slavery to society

It's also important to note that diabolism is really popular among the ruling class of Cheliax and Isger, but not so much with the rest of the population.

It's also important to note that diabolism isn't just an attractive philosophy because it gives justification to the people in power, but that it is also pretty darn close to the sort of government that ran the vast empire back when Aroden was alive. The switch from the lawful neutral Aroden to the lawful evil Asmodeus is rather subtle in some places. Aroden also seems to have support strong centralized hierarchies, strong authoritative leadership, working for the greater good of society often at the expense of the individual, and legalized slavery. So it wasn't so much that House Thrune put some radically new form of government in place after Aroden died and the country collapsed into civil war. They just gave the people back what they'd always had, only with different ideological underpinnings that really only would matter to an academic. Your average farmer would go back to living in a safe, controlled world pretty close to the one their grandparents remembered from childhood ... and the point of comparison would be "is this strong authority better than the 30 year civil war that we just had"?

So in practice Cheliax would look a lot like other world governments. It has a queen and a variety of noble houses who hold most of the power, it has something that resembles a small-ish middle class (merchants and the like) and a large number of peasants. There is also a robust slave trade that probably predominately supports agriculture. Honestly, it would look a lot like Taldor only it would probably seem more efficient.

There probably wouldn't be devilish idols everywhere because it would look tacky. Also, because idols imply some form of worship. You'd probably see devils and hellish imagery being worked into popular art though, since artists tend to reflect society. Devil worship would be more common among the ruling class, but House Thrune views itself more as a business partner with hell, not a servant. So dealing with devils is acceptable, but being a minion to one would be less acceptable. The closer you get to the capital, Egorian, the more open and obvious the influence of hell would become.

The majority of citizens would probably lean more toward lawful, since Cheliax has been a super lawful society long before Aroden died.

The people on the lower rungs of society would probably live about the same as they would anywhere else. There may even be a greater level of upward mobility available to them, since a system influenced by hell would probably have a system of rewards for people willing to participate in their own subjugation.

The nobles on the upper rungs of society would also probably live about the same as anywhere else, only things would be somewhat ... darker. Something like the films Dangerous Liaisons/Cruel Intentions, the Devil Wears Prada, Heathers, or any number of movies/books where a bunch of rich and powerful people do horrible things to each other in order to maneuver into a position of slightly greater power. It would be a lot like Taldor, only with less boredom and more malice.

The middle class would probably feel the squeeze the most, since the people above them would view them as potential threats and because they'd have enough money and mobility to stand out from the rest of society.

Remember all those times when all casters ran out of spells, then the Fighter/Rogue said "Screw it! I'm going on my own!" and did not die horribly a few moments later?

Yes. I remember plenty of times in my gaming history where the party wizard said "Guys, I'm out of spells" and the rest of us just shrugged and called it a learning experience in resource management while we pushed on through another handful of encounters before resting for the day.

If the mechanics of class A and class B both fit your concept, and A is obviously better mechanically than B, why would you pick B?

Variety. I'll play A, sure. But if I decide to play a similar concept again in the future I'll probably come at it from a different angle and try out B for a change.

As long as the character is interesting and is good enough to do the job, I don't particularly care if they're the best possible combination of plusses available.

Prove it.

You can't prove a grey area in the rules one way or another. But I can lay out reasoning and support it by citing the rulebook.

You're saying "A charge is a move, duh". Prove it.

I'm not saying "A charge is a move".

I'm saying "a charge is not necessarily an attack. A charge is a special full-round action that may or may not involve an attack."

Here's the test. If a charge is not an attack, what is it?

"Charging is a special full-round action that allows you to move up to twice your speed and attack during the action."

Where does it say that?

In the Combat section of the Core Rulebook, under the rules for Charging. The very first paragraph, quoted above, explains what a charge is.

How do I command my mount to charge?

You don't. At least not in any mechanical way that requires you to make a specific skill check or take a specific action.

The player says "I make a mounted charge" or something to that effect. The horse and rider each take a full round action. Mount moves and doesn't attack. The rider moves and attacks. Both parties suffer the penalties to AC from charging. Both parties get the bonus to hit, although that doesn't matter from the mount's perspective.

Where does it say that?

The same place it says that you have to take a specific action or make a specific check in order for your mount to charge. Nowhere.

The Handle Animal skill says that you have to make a check (and take a move action) to command an animal to attack, but the attack trick just says:

"The animal attacks apparent enemies. You may point to a particular creature that you wish the animal to attack, and it will comply if able."

Attack is a specific type of action you'll find listed under Standard Actions. There are also several actions that require "Attack Rolls" that you could reasonably extend this to ... but charging doesn't necessarily require an attack roll. Attack rolls are defined as "represent(ing) your attempt to strike your opponent on your turn in a round." Charging doesn't necessarily involve an attempt to strike an opponent. It could just mean that you're moving toward them in a very specific manner.

So if you're charging and not attacking, then all you're doing is moving in a restricted manner. There are no Handle Animal tricks or Ride tasks that cover "special full round actions" like charging.

TL;DR there are absolutely no rules that say you need to make a check or take an action in order for your mount to charge.

If you want to say that charging is an attack, there are no rules that specifically prove you wrong or right.

If you want to say that charging is not an attack, there are no rules that specifically prove you wrong or right.

But, for the record, of the two positions the second option is better supported by the rules.

Charging is an attack. It's specifically listed as such.

This statement is incorrect.

[QUOTE-"PRD Combat Section"]Charging is a special full-round action that allows you to move up to twice your speed and attack during the action.

Charging is not an attack. It is an action with special rules that lets you both move and attack. The attack part is optional.

Attacking on a Charge: After moving, you may make a single melee attack.

Emphasis mine. You MAY make an attack. You don't have to. Now, there isn't much of a reason for you to charge someone without attacking normally. Without the attack, a charge is just a heavily restricted full round of movement. Two move actions would cover the same distance with more flexibility.

But the horse carrying the rider into combat can charge without attacking (which would require a Handle Animal check) just fine.

IF that wasn't enough...

NPCS cannot do mounted charges, if you can't do mounted charges you cannot do spirited charges or ride-by attacks or anything. which leads to the question of why would a country want a cavalry?

No seriously, why would you want to spend the money to board a horse, train a soldier to ride it for a grand total of... +1 attack.

So if anyone reads this, preferably the people remaking the mounted combat rules. Please keep these points i've made in mind. There is a reason that cavalries changed warfare and made history the way it is now.

If the rules change prevents an NPC knight from performing a mounted charge, then someone's going to have to break it down for me because I don't see it.

Charging atop a mount and attacking something with a lance/sword doesn't require you to make a Handle Animal check. That would be covered (at most) by a Ride check.

You only need to make Handle Animal checks to make an animal perform a trick/task, and there is a fairly specific list of actions that fall into that category. Making your horse move, or spurring it to charge isn't a trick. That's just movement.

The only way you'd need to make a Handle Animal check is if the horse also attacks at the end of the charge. Which it doesn't have to do, since the attack part of charging is optional.

So a knight charging atop a horse with a lance can happen just fine. A particularly skilled knight (with PC classes) can charge with a lance AND have their mount attack too. Everyone else can just charge with a lance.

Historical cavalry works just fine.

This appears to be a book code.

All the titles mean something. Each are some sort of holy book, text, or device through which holy scripture is delivered.

The numbers are important. Forum poster Zylphryx had a good observation. He suggested a book code that follows the format: page, line and word.. But I have been unable to get it to work right.

It does look like a book cypher, since all the books are in-game holy books for the various gods and the Inner Sea Gods hardcover is coming out soon. With a book cypher you have to assume everyone has the same book (holy books are great for this, since they are commonly found and reproducing them exactly tends to be a matter of faith for people. Just about guaranteed the same word will appear in the same place in multiple copies). Obviously the "meta" book is the Inner Sea Gods book, since I doubt Paizo will print a reproduction of Abadar's holy book.

Skull of Mashaag 247:1:1
The Bone Lands in a Spiral 43: 13: 7
The Order of Numbers 9: 22: 8
Our Master's Book 192:4:4
The Bone Lands in a Spiral 63: 8: 10
The Book of Joy 19: 19: 4
The Birth of Light and Truth 139:18:3
Skull of Mashaag 247:1:1
The Skull of Mashaag 224: 39: 1
The Order of Numbers 8: 31: 9
The Order of Numbers 15:2:4
The Eight Scrolls 117: 34: 1
The Skull of Mashaag 339: 12: 10
The Skull of Mashaag 238:35: 7
The Birth of Light and Truth 162: 36: 3
The Skull of Mashaag 224: 39: 1

The first part is a holy book for one of the gods. So this refers to the chapter in Inner Sea Gods. I've added zeroes to even out the rest of the numbers.

LAM 247: 01: 01
PHA 043: 13: 07
ABA 009: 22: 08
??? 192: 04: 04
PHA 063: 08: 10
CAL 019: 19: 04
SAR 139: 18: 03
LAM 247: 01: 01
LAM 224: 39: 01
ABA 008: 31: 09
ABA 015: 02: 04
DES 117: 34: 01
LAM 339: 12: 10
LAM 238: 35: 07
SAR 162: 36: 03
LAM 224: 39: 01

The first number ranges from 8 - 339. A very wide range.
The second ranges from 1-39.
The third ranges from 1-10.

The first number, being the largest, is probably the starting word. So "Skull of Mashaag 247" means "Go to the 247th word of the Lamashtu chapter."

The second and third numbers are a bit trickier, since we don't know how the chapters in Inner Sea Gods are set up. Thirty-nine is a reasonable ballpark paragraph length, and 10 or less seems like a good ballpark for word length.

My guess (and this is a total shot in the dark) is that each of those words will be the first word in a paragraph. That would make the second number the specific word within that paragraph, and the third number a reference to the specific letter in that word.

That would make "The Order of Numbers 9: 22: 8" a code meaning "The eight letter of the twenty-second word of the paragraph starting at the ninth word of the Abadar chapter".

Which would make the solution a single word, or sequence of words (omit spaces & punctuation), that is sixteen characters long.

Normally I would assume that this is just gibberish by an overachieving troll. BUT Jim Groves mentioned that James Jacobs posted a riddle poem that foreshadowed Reign of Winter (I haven't seen it, anyone have a link?) so I figured it was at least worth a crack.

There's basically no way to solve it until Inner Sea Gods comes out, though. At that point it should be easy to crack. That's the problem with book cyphers. If you don't know the book, it's basically impossible. But once you have the book cracking becomes super easy.

double middle fingers that are shooting laser beams into the sky at flying robot spaceships

This summarizes everything I want to see in Iron Gods.

I also want barbarians with mohawks and laser axes.

Eh, I live in Syracuse, New York. Snow is just this thing that happens here. "It's snowing outside" has about the same punch as someone telling me "It's Tuesday".

But SU did cancel classes last Wednesday night. Night, not the day. We all still had to follow the plows in for work and school before 2pm. That's pretty huge, though. I can't remember the last time classes were cancelled due to snow. Maybe 5 or 6 years ago?

Hopefully it will climb back up into the 40's soon so I can start wearing shorts again.

I actually have read them.

You should probably read them again.

Tinker vs. Des Moines upheld that speech can only be censored by a school if it is disruptive to the learning environment. Considering some schools are banning hair styles using that as justification, it's pretty hard to say the students came out ahead.

Well, the school in that link is a charter school, not a public school. Since they are in a nebulous area between public and private schools they can probably get away with a lot more restrictions than public school can.

Also, four days after the news article you linked was published that school reversed its decision.

So the Tinker test still seems to be working quite well at protecting student speech.

New Jersey vs. T.L.O. is also one of the founding decisions that led to the modern usage of metal detectors and bag searches in schools. The decision upheld that a school providing a safe environment can override privacy... which is why so many students today are having their belongings searched.

Yep, the Court believes that schools need to provide a safe environment for children. If necessary, that means they can use metal detectors and bag searches.

It's the exact same reasoning why airport screenings and drunk driver checkpoints are ok. In the balance between privacy and public safety, schools, airports, and highways tilt toward public safety.

Does being a citizen have anything to do with driving on a highway or flying out of an airport? Of course not. Just like being a student under the age of 18 has nothing to do with your citizenship.

And with Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier, the problem with your New York Times example is that, in this case, it's not the editor saying no. The editor is another student; it's someone outside of the paper's organization stepping in. So it would be more like the U.S. government stepping in and telling the New York times they can't run a story on teen pregnancy.

You really need to go back and reread this one again carefully. Because the rebuttal to what you said here is right in the case.

It wasn't "someone outside the paper's organization stepping in". The paper was 100% owned and controlled by the school. It was paid for 100% by school funds. The people in charge of it were school employees, overseeing enrolled students. It was physically created on school property.

It is in no way, whatsoever, like the government stepping in and telling the NYT what they can and can't write. If you'd read the case, you'd know that.

The fact they can remove citizenship from civilians so easily now is the most troubling aspect of it.

Do you have any idea how few people have had their citizenship stripped from them involuntarily? We're talking hundreds, maybe, with the bulk of it happening during WW2. And in nearly every single case it was a foreign national who came to the USA as an adult and became a citizen, who had their citizenship revoked because they lied on an official document ("No sir, I was never a Nazi" or "Why no, I have never attended a training camp in the Sudan. I've never been to Sudan.")

And even if you get caught doing something bad, the government still has to bring you to trial and prove it. It's not easy by any definition.

Natural-born citizens can't be de-naturalized unless they choose to renounce their citizenship in person at certain locations (embassies) or to certain people (ambassadors), and then formally fill out an oath of renunciation.

It used to be that you would automatically lose your citizenship if you took a policy level position with a foreign government, became an officer in a foreign military, or joined the military of a country hostile to the USA, but most of that was thrown out by the Supreme Court in the late 60s. Some of the "serve in a military hostile to the USA" bits have been maybe kinda sorta brought back post 9/11. Kinda.

The code can just as easily be read to imply that any enemy of the dwarves should be dealt with swiftly, harshly, and with extreme prejudice no matter where you encounter them.

Assuming you do so in a way that "Yet even in the struggle against our enemies, I will act in a way that brings honor to Torag."

And Torag is a Lawful Good deity. So "harshly, and with extreme prejudice" may be pushing it.

Torag is the god of people whose culture was founded in the Darklands. Dwarves were basically the only inhabitants of their ancestral homeland who weren't evil rampaging, civilization crushing monsters OR fiendish masterminds of darkness.

So Torag's caution about accepting surrender and showing mercy is probably based on some very old and very well established experience of his people being attacked by monsters who are basically irredeemable alien. No matter how much the Intellect Devourer begs for mercy, you know it's just going to turn on you when your back is turned. Taking the time to try and redeem an enemy who wants to eat you, turn you into a slave, or wear your skin as a suit would be foolish from his perspective, especially since everyone involved has very long lifespans where a mistake can come back and haunt you decades later. High cost, high risk, low potential of success, and low reward. Plus, Torag is all about community, not the individual. The only way the dwarves could compete against the horrors of the darklands were to wrap themselves in steel and work together. An individual trying to make their way in the world is fine, so long as they fulfill their duty to the rest of society. Everyone rows or we all sink kind of mentality. Which fits his Lawful Good alignment.

Sarenrae, by comparison, is an ascended angel who apparently played a big role in the aftermath of mortals being granted free will. She's more concerned about individual choices (not to the same level as, say, Desna). She's Neutral good. So while she's pretty freaking harsh to people who won't repent, she's definitely willing to take the time to give them a chance. And, unlike Torag, she isn't a racial god. Torag has "his" people. Sarenrae has everyone. So she'd naturally be more tolerant and accepting since "her people" is a pretty inclusive group.

So it makes sense that Torag would look pragmatically at the risks and rewards of showing mercy to an enemy. And considering the overall history of orcs and goblins, it's probably wise to assume that the orc is a rampaging monster hell bent on killing you and not a tragic figure attempting to overcome his nature and society.

But Torag is a very defensive deity who focuses on the long term and the larger community. Not a crusading, bloodthirsty killer deity who actively sends out paladins to murder families.

I always sort of figured that Torag's priests would have a variation of The Scorpion and the Frog as a major religious parable. While Sarenrae's priests would be all about The Lion and the Mouse

This, pretty much. The Bill of Rights only applies to actual citizens of the United States; legally, citizenship doesn't start until 18.

Not to derail the thread further ... but that isn't true at all. Being 18 years old or older may come into play if you are a non-citizen trying to become a citizen, but it is entirely possible (and quite common) to be an American citizen from birth.

For example, both my parents are citizens and I was born in New York state. I was a US citizen from pretty much the moment the doctor slapped my butt and signed the birth certificate. And I'll continue to be a citizen until I actively choose not to be and take steps to stop being one.

And the Bill of Rights most definitely applies to children under the age of 18. It just applies awkwardly at times because there are more laws to consider besides the Constitution itself. Courts recognize the authority of families and parents over their children (to an extent, most of the time), and of the need for schools and such to make rules to keep a building full of puberty-driven teenagers from running wild.

So the state can't force a 6 year old to attend a specific church, but if mom and dad want to the kid doesn't really have a choice as far as the state is concerned ... unless the parents disagree and the court has to step in and adjudicate, or unless there is some clear harm to the child, or blah blah blah mountains of court cases.

But no, citizenship starts whenever it starts for that specific individual. Ranging in age from "minutes" to "decades" of life.

EDIT: In case there are any questions, here's the relevant website for US Citizenship and Immigration Services. You are automatically a citizen at birth if you meet the listed criteria. After birth you need to apply to become a citizen, either by pointing out that you should have been one at birth or through the naturalization process. Naturalization is a whole issue unto itself, but I'm pretty sure the only age barrier there is the general barrier to people under 18 making decisions for themselves without an adult. For which there are multiple workarounds.

http://www.uscis.gov/us-citizenship

Considering the Book of the Damned says that the Oinodeamon pretty much IS the plane of Abaddon, that may be a really good reason why no one wants to invade the place.

Lamashtu is a god who lives in the Abyss. She isn't the actual Abyss itself. I imagine that, if she actually invaded, her first assault on Abaddon would last just about as long as it took for her to realize that the opposing god of Abaddon WAS Abaddon. Sort of like in the Alan Moore comic where the alien bounty hunter lands on a strange planet and goes looking for the unsociable Green Lantern Mogo. Best to leave before he notices and things ... escalate.

That, and there's basically no way that Hell, the Abyss, Heaven, or any other outer planar realm would:

A.) Team up with someone else to wipe out a third party, because outer planar entities of different alignments probably couldn't cooperate long enough to do that. Or,

B.) Invade Abaddon alone and risk being weakened enough for someone else to jump them. Or,

C.) Want to invade Abaddon in the first place and risk adding the unforeseen complications of a sudden planar power vacuum to their own timetable of plans.

So the "why" that I'm curious about isn't "why is Abaddon still around". I'm curious why the most powerful daemon and creator of the horseman is named "Oinodaemon".

He's the ... wine ... demon? The vine demon? I wonder if there is a rationale behind that name choice.

Evil Midnight Lurker wrote:

Aberrant Templar wrote:

Globsters don't have an intelligence score, and have no capacity for learning or reason. And they're oozes. So they mostly just float around eating whatever happens to get close to them. They aren't even animals with instinctive drives, they're literally mindless.

Mindless doesn't mean "immobile and unresponsive," it actually means "(governed absolutely by) instinctive drives." I.e. mindless vermin, aka insects. Bees don't just sit there and wait for flowers to happen by.

But jellyfish do. I know I keep on going with that term, but really, it is the first thing I think of when you say "sea ooze".

Really, we are now just getting down to the ecological niches and hunting strategies of fictional predators. While we could cite real world examples all day, it is next to impossible for us to come to a conclusion ourselves. Admittedly, trying to get developer commentary is fairly close to the official reason for why this part of the board is here, but meh.

I will say that I thought that "mindless and only eats whatever it happens to come across" is fairly much the defining nature of most oozes. But I have little experience with them.

Lemeres described it better than I did. But yes, globsters strike me more like jellyfish than vermin. They're non-intelligent oozes that live in the sea.

Anyway, the term "mindless" in pathfinder doesn't necessarily mean "governed by instinctive drives". It can, but as a game term it covers vermin, oozes, and also some constructs and undead. Monsters with the Animal type, with instinctive drives to eat and reproduce, aren't mindless. Vermin are odd, since it covers some creatures that would have those same instinctive drives, but also creatures that are part of a hive with no individual dive to do anything except be a tiny cog in a larger hive machine.

So you can't really go by the dictionary definitions for the words "mindless" and "vermin" when discussing their game usage. It's a good starting point, but the game terms are somewhat ... broader. Ultimately "mindless" just means "this creature does not possess an intelligence score".

Personally, I like the idea that globsters need to eat 4 medium sized creatures within a single 24 hour period in order to reproduce. Otherwise they finish digesting whatever they ate and have to start again. And since they have no specific drive to reproduce, they aren't really going to be going out of their way to eat more creatures once they're digesting something. Which means the only time they reproduce is when they accidentally end up in an area with plentiful food (an entire school of fish got a little too close), or when plentiful food seeks them out (a group of sea elves explore the wrong tunnel).

As for spectral undead taking over the world, even intelligent undead are tormented souls trapped forever in the shadowy nether between life and death. They probably don't perceive the passage of time the way living people do (it's hard to make plans when you can't keep track of what day it is), and they are probably haunted by confusing memories of their past life and strange inhuman urges that non-undead cannot fully comprehend. Most undead don't try and take over the world because their undead state and altered perceptions give them blue and orange morality where things that are seemingly rational to us (create a bunch of spawn and conquer the world!) do not compute.

Any good reason why they don't just propagate forever?

Globsters don't have an intelligence score, and have no capacity for learning or reason. And they're oozes. So they mostly just float around eating whatever happens to get close to them. They aren't even animals with instinctive drives, they're literally mindless.

Also, the description says they can reproduce after consuming four medium sized creatures but it doesn't say those creatures carry over from day to day.

So I imagine areas where globsters exists quickly become devoid of food and develop a reputation among intelligent underwater critters as a place not to go.

"Maybe I have lost my mind, but whoever I am, I'm still me, and I am not a killer."

Dark City.

^- Great movie.

Jatambe thinks The Whispering Tyrant is a spoiled man-child with delusions of godhood. He'll get around to cuffing the youngun upside the head when he's good and done smoking his evening pipe.

Jatambe is probably the canon character I'm most interested in seeing more of. I would absolutely love to see an adventure path that deals with Ird, the Magaambya, and the Ten Magic Warriors. Everything from the pre-Earthfall Mwangi civilization through the Shory is just an area/time-period that I'm dying to read more about.

There have been a bunch of hints and tidbits dropped in various sources. I'm particularly fond of the theory that the masks of the Decemvirate are actually the masks of the 10 Magic Warriors (totally running with that in my home game).

The Tower of The Elephant is a freakin' boss story.

Easily one of my favorites.

I also love the Kull of Atlantis story, The Skull of Silence. Which is the one where Kull's entire stated motivation for riding into the forbidden temple of death and poking the ancient world-ending evil from beyond reality with a stick to see what happens ... is that he's bored.

Aberrant Templar wrote:

+1 to this. I personally like letting monsters be monsters, so heroes can have something to fight. Once you start blurring the lines between "people" and "monsters" you start opening up all sorts of unfortunate implications.

Making aliens that are actually alien and giving me some blue & orange morality to work with is a lot harder to pull off, and I really appreciate it

Apparently, typing the phrase "unfortunate implications" is like casting a gate spell for a troper. :)

That's because TV Tropes ruin your life :-)

Conan meets Star Trek isn't really my bag, dig?

Conan met a space alien once. It was the slave of a magical sorcerer. It flew all the way from the planet Yag.

RJGrady wrote:

If I want to do Ancient Rome, I'll write up one of the human ethnicities that way. Setting aside the unfortunate implications of turning "exotic cultures" into non-humans, Drow are not human, and therefore turning them into a kind of human seems like wasted potential to me.

This. This This This This This.

This is why I LIKE the humano-centrism of Golarion. Give non-human races their own non-human cultures. Thank you Paizo.

+1 to this. I personally like letting monsters be monsters, so heroes can have something to fight. Once you start blurring the lines between "people" and "monsters" you start opening up all sorts of unfortunate implications.

Making aliens that are actually alien and giving me some blue & orange morality to work with is a lot harder to pull off, and I really appreciate it

If it's genetic -- inheritable -- it doesn't matter that it was put there by artificial means. Once it's in the population, it's there.

Azlanti genes should mean better survival (higher Con) and likely a mate-choice advantage as well (higher Cha).

Elves apparently evolve via some form of Lamarckian evolution. Drop a bunch of desert elves in the tundra and you'll end up with a community of snow elves. If the snow elves start worshipping demons and doing bad things to babies, they'll turn into drow.

Oh, and there is an insane amount of evidence that intelligent design is a legit thing in a bunch of cases. Just ask Lamashtu.

I guess my point is that Darwinian evolution clearly isn't the only game in town on Golarion, and you sometimes have to play a little fast and loose with real world examples of science, religion, ethics, historical advancement, and the pace of technological development in order to wrap your head around it all.

That's a very awesome theory. It makes sense, even. TB still had a fully functional god-trap at Xin-Shalast, why go make another one? Because it had to be more powerful. I really like that train of thought.

Plus Aroden had already experienced that trap. It's hard to pull the exact same ploy twice in row. So the set-up was similar but the execution would have had to have been different.

So Aroden would have known the Tyrant was capable of building such a trap, but not how this new and more powerful one worked. Which would be a really good reason for him not to come down and fight according to the Tyrant's rules.

About asmodeus being a great strategist, no he isn't, he is a great liar, con man etc. but strategist no it's not. If you want a great strategist you go to Torag, since a)iirc gorum didn't exist back then and b)it's quite difficult to make him stop being a bully for enough time to talk strategy (unless you make him fight).

While i am not sure about that but i think that asmodeus made the cage of the rovagug and not lure him inside.

Maybe we're looking at the word "strategist" from different angles. Perhaps "schemer" would be a better word for me to use.

Aroden wouldn't have needed any help with military strategy. He may not have been as great at that sort of thing as someone like Torag but he was decent enough at it to have built an empire, and his conflict with the Whispering Tyrant was never really about warfare. It always seemed rather personal. Yes, there were armies involved and tons and tons of people died ... but that wasn't really the point either time they fought each other. Mass battles were the sideshow, not the main event. And, realistically, if Aroden had come down in person the armies probably wouldn't have been quite so necessary. Aroden was bumping of Demon Lords and their minions in personal combat. He didn't really need an army behind him to do damage. And the Tyrant never really seemed to care about crushing the crusaders. The only times we have a record of him personally involving himself in a fight were to kill Arazni in 3823, to set up Iomeade at the battle of Three Sorrows (the 5th & presumably 6th Acts of Iomeade), and then to (fail to) kill General Arnisant in 3827. Other than a few pokes and prods, it looks like he just sat back and waited for Aroden to show up, letting his minions do all the fighting, while periodically stepping out to crush whoever the biggest, baddest crusader on the battlefield was as a way to taunt Aroden and push him into coming out to fight (because the people he went after; Arzani, Iomeade, and Arnisant, all had a personal connection to Aroden).

So when I said "strategy" I meant something more like "what is the Tyrant up to? What is his angle? He wants me to show myself, but I don't believe for a minute that this will be a straight fight or that he even wants a fight. What sort of trap is he setting up?"

And, for that, Asmoedus is perfect. As smart and sneaky as the Tyrant may have been, he was still a rank armature compared to Asmodeus. His domains are trickery and deception. When it comes to wheels within wheels planning, he's the king. Plus, he is a god of magic (it's one of his domains). So not only is he qualified to out-con the Tyrant, but he's also qualified to understand all the epic magical stuff involved:

Amodeus despises mortals, but he gets along well enough with the betters of mortals (i.e. gods). Even though Aroden was once a mortal himself, he's one of the divine family now. Which makes him better than that obnoxious upstart twerp of a lich vandalizing the world that Asmodeus is going to someday control. And as far as gods go, Asmodeus would probably have though fairly well of Aroden (by comparison). Aroden was lawful, was not good, was male, and was totally into empire building. Those are things Asmodeus approves of. I find it totally believable that Aroden would seek Asmodeus's help, and that Asmodeus would be thrilled (and successful) at giving it.

Of course, the involvement of Asmodeus is a hypothesis at best, and mostly just something I decided for my home game. I don't have any real evidence to point to other than personalities, the Rule of Cool, and a little sympathy for the devil.

BTW, Gorum would definitely have existed during the Shining Crusade. He's apparently one of those deities that popped up during the Age of Darkness. Specifically the first time men and orcs fought. The conflict with Tar-Baphon didn't happen until well after the Age of Darkness ended (The Whispering Tyrant unified the orcs as part of his army).

But, C'est La Vie. Whatever works for your game, man. And the work shows.

I also added a bit more, since one of my players was a Hellknight and Cheliax will be playing a larger role in my campaign after we finish Carrion Crown.

The only thing I don't like about that theory is the idea that The Whispering Tyrant is so awesome that "A bunch of mortals couldn't outsmart or actually defeat him." That's deprotagonizing to the Shining Crusade in a way that just doesn't sit well.

I didn't say the words you just quoted. But I do think it seems a little odd that a mythic lich isn't powerful or clever enough to get past a magical ward ... even though that's kind of what he does ... but his cowardly minion apparently is.

My theory does suggest that Aroden let a metric ton of people die in order to deflect attention away from his actual plans, and that he (along with, probably, his high priest) lied to his followers in order to keep up appearances. But I don't particularly have a problem with that. Aroden wasn't good, after all. And a lot more people probably would have died if Aroden had played by the Tyrant's rules and lost.

Besides, the Whispering Tyrant is a campaign ending mythical bad guy. I don't have a problem with him curbstomping demigods and an army. The important thing is that, in the very end, a small group of high level heroes (the general, the priest, etc) took advantage of the distraction provided by the armies dying around them to go toe-to-toe with the Whispering Tyrant. Most of them died and they didn't totally defeat him, because they are NPCs. Which means their sole reason for existing is to set up adventures for future, theoretical PCs.

The Whispering Tyrant is locked away in a dungeon, and the god he fought in ages past is dead. Which means he'll stay locked up until a DM is ready for a bunch of PCs to come along and outsmart/defeat him because no one else can do it.

As it should be.

Imho, it pretty much has to be in there. I really can't see how they could hold him imprisoned in Gallowspire if it weren't. Perhaps I'm missing something about phylacteries, but I think that it's got to be in there with him to trap him this way.

I always assumed that the Whispering Tyrant fell victim to his own trap. Hoisted by his own petard, so to speak. The Great Seal isn't really what is holding him in place (although it does a fine job of messing with him and keeping his minions away). The Great Seal and the lesser seals are a layer of protection, but they're also a shell game designed to keep the Whispering Way occupied so they focus their energy trying to break it and not the actual lock. And like any good shell game, the first trick is making your mark believe that the ball is actually under one of the cups. It helps that Aroden had three shills in the audience; Taldor, the Dwarves of Kraggodan, and the Knights of Ozem. And the best shills are the ones who don't know it. You get a more authentic reaction that way.

My theory is that the Tyrant is stuck in a trap he designed himself to hold Aroden, which explains why an insanely powerful "big bad of the campaign setting" mythic Lich who killed a demigod can't seem to bypass defenses set up by mortals he was easily defeating until they started carrying artifacts ... while his "no doubt impressive but not nearly as impressive as the Tyrant" seneschal, Gildais, did. Because Gildais doesn't have a piece of the Shield of Aroden stuck in his hand, tricking the Tyrant's ingenious trap into believing the Tyrant is Aroden. Because the Tyrant was the only person smart enough (and arrogant enough) to trap himself. And now the poor fellow has a splinter in his proverbial paw....

The theory started with the fact that Aroden didn't show up to fight the Whispering Tyrant in person, even though the Tyrant was actively trying to draw him out and even mutilated Aroden's herald (so he most certainly had Aroden's attention. You don't kill a god's herald without the god noticing).

The lack of appearance is rather unusual for Aroden, considering he was easily the most active and personally involved of the gods. He was leading heroes into the Abyss to kill Ibdurengian, and founding empires. Plus Aroden and the Tyrant had a good hero/nemesis relationship. Not showing up to fight him (especially after he humiliated and murdered Arazni) is ... baffling.

Yes, a lot of what Aroden did was back when he was a "living god" walking around the planet, but ascending into the heavens didn't stop him from stepping up. In fact, Aroden physically manifested in the world AFTER the Tyrant was defeated. The Shining Crusade went from 3754 until the 3827. Aroden physically showed up in 4433 to fight Deskari.

So why didn't Aroden show up for this fight? Because he knew the whole thing was a set-up for an even better trap than the one Tar-Baphon had laid for him on the Isle of Terror thousands of years ago.

So the Isle of Terror used to have a "thriving metropolis called Kestrillon, a shining beacon of magical research" on it that Tar-Baphon conquered. Not because cared about the city itself, but because he wanted to build a trap for Aroden nearby. It says Tar-Baphon constructed the "Wizard-King's Pit" but that name refers to both the trap and the dungeon complex. It doesn't necessarily mean he created the portal to the negative energy plane itself. He could have easily chose that site because a portal, or the beginnings of a portal, or whatever was already there. Which would explain why there was a metropolis of magical researchers already living there. He wanted the island for the same reason they did. He wanted to use whatever made that island magically special to create his trap.

I bold-faced some of the important elements to keep in mind when looking at Gallowspire.

Notice any similarities between Gallowspire and the Wizard-King's Pit? He conquered a city so he'd have a place of operations to dig deep down into the earth at just the right spot so he could break into natural caverns and reach something with a connection to the Negative Material Plane. He used those mines to built a giant dungeon complex filled with his minions. And he tried to draw Aroden into it. There's even a naming similarity (First the Well of Sorrows. Later the Well of Tears).

(Maybe unrelated, but look at the top-down map of Xin-Grafar on page 15 of The City of Golden Death. Now look at the map of Adorak on page 48 of the Shadows of Gallowspire. Minus the molten gold, do they look a little similar?)

Also, how many people actually witnessed the Whispering Tyrant's defeat? The general who died, and the high priest who fashioned the Great Seal (with Aroden's help). The only first-hand description we have (from page 6 of the Shadows of Gallowspire, quoted by TheWarriorPoet above) was from a squire who may not have understood the extent of what was happening. So the idea that the Tyrant was pulled down because his Phylactery is there is unreliable narration. It's a (reasonable) assumption being made by people who knew they were fighting a lich who was just defeated, but who didn't necessarily know the backstory of the Tyrant's last conflict with Aroden.

And we don't know much about the Shield of Aroden, which is a major artifact with mysterious origins. You'd think a highly organized and active faith like Aroden's would have a better idea of where the Shield came from before it ended up in General Arnisant's (and the Tyrant's) hand. All we really know about the now entirely powerless artifact was that it blocked the Tyrant's magic, that it broke into 12 pieces (which was apparently a holy number for Aroden) and that when the Tyrant wished for Arnisant's heart, a piece of the shield went instead.

What if Aroden was playing on the Tyrant's arrogance the whole time? While the Tyrant was trying to draw Aroden out, Aroden was trying to maneuver this specially crafted artifict close enough to the Tyrant so that it could trigger the Tyrant's trap, without tipping his hand. The Tyrant crushed Aroden's herald, and he was going to crush his artifact carrying general. He didn't realize he'd been outsmarted until it was too late. The "holy fire" obscured what was actually the Tyrant's own magic keying in on the shard in his hand and ensnaring him, so everyone naturally credited the hero general and his artifact. Especially since the only witnesses were crusaders and evil minions in the middle of a climatic battle who probably didn't have the skill to understand what was happening magically under the best of circumstances. The best surviving witness was the High Priest of Aroden, who immediately credited the shield and made a fuss about this magical new Great Seal that Aroden had helped him make.

Add a few hundred years and a ton of people who believe that the Great Seal is the only thing holding back the Tyrant ... and where is a cultist going to focus his attention?

This also potentially gives an explanation as to how Aroden died. Because the Tyrant is pretty freaking smart too, and even though he's trapped he is now in possession of a shard of an artifact that is tied closely enough to Aroden to trigger the trap. Maybe it's a tiny little piece of him, but given time and nothing else to do it may have been enough for the Tyrant to hit back. The final result of their fight being a draw. Aroden dies, but the super-arrogant Tyrant is still trapped.

Umbriere Moonwhisper wrote:

a feat for Int to ATK and DMG with daggers (and other small and generally sneaky weapons) or a feat for WIS to attack with ranged weapons would be nice too.

What about Cha? Why is Cha always left behind? :(

It's almost as if nobody likes Charisma.

How ironic.

Just like it states in the document right now, once per enemy per 24 hours.

Ok, cool. Yeah, I'll totally playtest this new version with my group when I get home from work tonight.

Just eyeballing it, I do think that being able to add a status effect as part of the Studied Strike is something worth considering. It would give the ability a bit more oomph and a good reason to consider ending Studied Combat early.

Also, it would fit well with the Holmes-style fighting from the Robert Downy Jr. movie:

"Two: throat; paralyze vocal chords, stop scream"

As it is right now, there isn't a lot of incentive to take your Studied Strike as anything except your final hit against the target. Milk that static bonus for as long as you can. But, if a Studied Strike could temporarily deafen, sicken, silence, or otherwise mess with an opponent then you'd have a lot more temptation to use the strike earlier.

Higher level investigators would have more status effect choices, and talents could provide additional effects to choose from or make the effects last longer than, say, 1 round.

Also, Poison Lore is a GREAT addition to the class in all respects. I love it. (sorry, just trying to balance the negative constructive criticism with some praise. :P )

Yeah, this one was definitely a win. Also the investigative aspects of it (being able to examine and identify poisons) is the sort of thing I'm hoping to see more of with this class.

Is there something along the lines of Poison Lore that can be tied to Sense Motive or Perception? A way for an investigator to get additional information from tracking opponents, or from a successful "hunch"?

I'm really concerned about the fact that people in the thread have pointed out VERY specific reasons why Studied Strike is flavorful but bad and yet despite these VERY specific arguments, Stephen seems to only counter with "this is how it is" or "this is how I think it should be" kind of comments. And the whole thing about just switching it back to Sneak Attack instead of trying to make Studied Combat work just came across as "I'm so close to done I don't care." Rude, in other words.

It's great that the devs are getting so involved in the forum aspect, but I will never understand the [apparent] need to guard their thought processes or insights.

Studied Combat is a fantastic idea. (Is there an echo in here?) Limiting it to once per 24 hours makes absolutely zero sense, for any reason I can think of. First of all, it's not a magical ability, so you can't fluff that away as "the investigator is out of magical studying ability." Studying a target once, damaging it, and then reassessing them after the fact to see what would be the next most preferable target is completely reasonable. Secondly, the bonus damage added by Studied Strike will never amount to anything significant if you can only use it ONCE PER ENEMY. Great, you can probably wipe out mooks faster, if you take the time to study them.

Honestly, truly, I respect the design team, but sometimes their stubbornness on leaving things a certain way in spite of overwhelming amounts of creative discussion 'just because' is really hard to swallow.

People seriously need to chill out about this.

This is the second draft of a playtest, and the first draft of an ability that has been out for ~24 hours. You apparently missed several "we're looking at possible changes" posts from Stephen, including one no less than 20 minutes before you posted that acknowledged at least one specific change.

Relax.

I hear what you are saying, I do. But to be honest, most people seem to want something that is quick, deals more damage often, and in the same ways that sneak attack does.

Studied strike has an entry fee, is more more focused on one foe, and it mostly a accuracy buff.

I would be comfortable either decreasing the activation to a swift or taking away the 24 hour reuses (but not both), and increasing the duration to Int modifier, but that's about as far as I would go. Anything more, and it just starts looking like sneak attack with a faster progression than the investigator should have.

And my guess is that most folks are not going to think that goes far enough, because the benchmark is sneak attack attack as the first iteration had, or so it seems.

Well, it's only been an hour and this is the internet. So there hasn't been much time for people to fiddle with the new revision and ... it's the internet. *shrug*

Personally, I think Studied Strike has a lot of promise. The one big advantage it has over sneak attack is that it isn't situation dependent. You don't have to flank, or hit a flat-footed enemy. I like that.

What if you added an Inspiration point cost? Spend a point of Inspiration to activate Studied Strike, but then let it last for longer and give the investigator the opportunity to make multiple strikes against a single opponent? If using the ability requires spending a point from a limited daily pool, would that justify some extra oomph?

Well, I like Poison Lore a lot better than Poison Use. Even though it effectively gives you Poison Use, the additional benefits are interesting and help it fit better with the theme. So, for whatever it's worth, I'd consider that change a definite win.

Sherlock Holmes, Batman, the 2 most iconic investigators, used a lot of underhanded tactics, oh wait, from what i heard, Dick Tracy and Harry Dresden were also pretty underhanded. in fact, the concept of the underhanded detective is fairly well known.

Sherlock Holmes didn't actually do much fighting at all (outside the Robert Downy Jr. reboot). Most of the "combat" was with guns, but Holmes & Watson usually missed except that time they shot a dog. The idea that Holmes was good with a pistol comes from people saying that he was known to be a good shot, and the fact that he shot "V.R." into the wall of his apartment. But he doesn't exactly live up to his reputation in practice.

Same for the hand to hand stuff. There's an occasional bit of hand to hand combat, but it's all Victorian-style boxing that Holmes apparently excelled at. Not exactly "hit below the belt" kinda stuff.

And the whole "martial arts" stuff didn't come into play until after Holmes was killed off and Doyle had to bring him back. You never actually see Holmes use any special martial arts. That's just what he tells Watson by way of explaining how he survived the fight/fall with Moriarty (who, btw, is basically a one-hit-wonder. He was never mentioned before The Final Solution).

So sneak attack works well for the film versions of Holmes, but not so much for the book versions.

I also don't remember Dick Tracy being particularly underhand. He occasionally "socked" someone in the jaw, and frequently got into gunfights, but I don't recall anything that resembled a sneak attack. Lots of gadgets, not so much sneak.

Depictions of Batman after the 1980s are definitely ninja sneak attacky, but not so much before that. And Batman is a special case anyway.

Most of the iconic investigators wouldn't have fought at all. Nero Wolfe didn't even leave his house. Hercule Poirot and Miss Marple never threw a single punch. I haven't read The Moonstone in a while, but I don't remember any fighting there. Dupin just solved the crime and turned things over to the police.

Sneak attack isn't as much of a stretch as poison use. Holmes did pistol whip someone that one time, and the most recent Holmes films have set it up nicely. But it certainly isn't iconic to the investigator archetype.

I've been working on a first level investigator for a Pathfinder Society game, and I can't figure out how to contribute when we have to fight something. As a reference point, one of my most successful pathfinder field agents is a bard with no strength or dexterity bonus.

Now that they've mentioned the possibility of removing sneak attack and pulling the class a bit further away from the rogue, I'll throw out another poke for the idea of making the investigator a Bard/Alchemist instead of a Rogue/Alchemist.

Without sneak attack, the only remaining tie-in to the rogue class are the talents ... which could easily be covered by alchemist discoveries.

Plus, if you use bard as a base instead of rogue then you can tie Inspiration in as a replacement for Bardic Performance. Then you won't have to invent a new chain of feats to play with Inspiration. You can just get extra mileage out of the existing feats.

Like Bardic Performance, rounds of Inspiration could be spent to:

1. Power certain discoveries
2. Give the investigator a bonus to their own combat abilities (similar to the archeologist archetype) for a round as a swift action.
3. Give a timely bonus to a single ally as an immediate action.

Unlike a regular bard, who can give bonuses to the entire party, an investigator could only boost a single ally. BUT it could be done immediately, to boost (and sometimes save) an ally who would otherwise fall a bit short.

Unlike an archaeologist, who only has to boost himself, an investigator has a lot more possible demands on his limited pool of inspiration points. Which means there ends up being a choice each round and you have to be more careful about burning through Inspiration too quickly. Do you boost yourself this round, or save your inspiration to give the fighter an extra +1 on her will save? You could also make the self-boost a choice, so the investigator could boost AC or saves, but only one per round. At higher levels, they could boost more than one.

EDIT: I also think these abilities should be mostly non-magical. You'd have the same limitations as Bardic Performance (the investigator needs to be seen/heard) but giving a bonus to an ally would be fluffed more as "shouting a timely warning". Or maybe something on the lines of "Luckily, before we got into this fight, I deduced our enemy would lead with a color spray and told Ms. Fighter to brace herself right from the start." Even though the player didn't know what would happen, the investigator character was on top of it.

Wether or not the player "notices a pickpocket" or "notices a pickpocket that has a red scar on his left cheek" is general handled case to case, wether you tell them automatically, give them the information if they ask what he looks like, or require them to roll higher.

EDIT: I also think it's a bad idea to hide plot-essential details behind Perception checks because if the character rolls a 1, the story grinds to a halt or they're left with no idea what's going to happen, but that's slightly off topic.

I totally agree that plot-essential details shouldn't require a specific class (or even a specific skill check).

I'm talking about information that isn't necessarily plot-essential, but also isn't a normal part of a skill check.

Not just "the person who tried to pick your pocket had a red scar on his left cheek", which could potentially be a part of a normal skill check that any class could make. I think investigators should have a way to get more specific, accurate information that would give the investigator's player an advantage. Stuff like "the person who just tried to pick your pocket is neutral good, and only doing it because he's poor and desperate" or "the person eating at the table over there is an arcane spellcaster capable of casting 3rd level spells".

The important thing is that information the investigator learns on a successful check should be more than what would normally be possible from a skill check. A different class making a successful perception check could figure out that their enemy is an arcane spellcaster by noticing the spell component pouch, but an investigator should also be able to deduce what spells are prepared, or caster level, or some other bit of information. There doesn't need to be a rational justification as to HOW the investigator could know these bits of information. Literature & cinema are filled with examples of investigator type characters making successful leaps of unsupported logic.

Having an investigator in the party would mean knowing more about what your enemies are capable of, which would allow better preparation (assuming there's time to prepare).

Regardless of the level, Poison Immunity is not something that really fits this type of class. It's appropriate for more mystical classes like a Monk, Druid, even Paladin. Not a gumshoe.

I don't know ... gumshoes tend to be raging alcoholics who somehow manage to not die of liver failure....

Poison resistance seems more reasonable than poison use.

I really like these approach. It's far better to let somebody do something new than let someone do something that is already being done by another class. Obviously this is march harder to incorporate. Existing scenarios won't contemplate novel uses and the efficacy of such things may be really dependent on the GM. But I still think that fundamentally this is beter than just letting them duplicate and exceed the skill checks of other classes.

Overall, I feel like the Sherlock-Holmes-Style-Fighting is pretty well covered by the sneak attack, and the chemistry is well covered by the alchemist abilities.

So that leaves the information gathering aspect of the investigator, which I feel needs to be a little better developed to give the class the right feel.

Letting investigators learn extra information would be a great way to feed background info to the players that they may otherwise not be able to learn. A way for the DM to cut back on the number of suspiciously detailed notes left behind by villains, or help the players have a better idea of what the bad guys are capable of:

"Hmm ... the murder happened four hours ago. There are tiny traces of bat guano and a faint hint sulfur here where the killer was leaning against the wall. Our suspect is a wizard. At least 5th level. He still has at least one casting of fireball prepared."

Having an investigator in the party would mean that, assuming there was a bit of time, the party could better prepare themselves for some of the challenges they'd face. Even if it doesn't necessarily provide bonuses (although it may, with some abilities) it is still an advantage all to itself. It also fits with the concept, and may appeal to people who'd be interested in playing such a character.

It is odd heal isn't a class skill for investigator.

However, I feel that if a character knows enough to create extracts that would manipulate the anatomy of a character. Not knowing how to handle poisons properly seems a bit silly to me. Like a graphic designer not knowing how to use the brush tool in a art program.

I totally agree that Heal should be a class skill for the investigator. At least, Heal is the skill that makes the most sense for autopsies and the like.

As for the analogy, there's no physical penalty for a graphic designer not using a brush tool. But there is if you apply poison wrong, which is why it involves special training.

A better analogy may be "a medical examiner knows a lot about human anatomy and cutting up dead bodies, but isn't necessarily a very good surgeon when it comes to cutting up the living."

Or keeping with the design analogy, maybe a graphic designer who works with computers not being skilled with an actual, physical paint brush and canvas.

All of the investigative aspects of poison use can be covered with skill checks. Applying poison to a blade in a stressful situation without spilling it involves not just education, but practice. Likewise, the person applying poison to a blade skillfully doesn't necessarily have to know the chemistry behind how it works or how to make it. They're different skill sets.

So why exactly do most of you feel poisons are out of place? To me it makes complete sense. When I think of a investigator I think of someone sent out to gather information on crimes or missions. This person would likely be a expert at identifying and using poisons. Dealing with murder weapons, and making assumptions on the spot of what exactly transpired.

The Poison Use class ability covers using poisoned melee weapons in combat. Full stop.

The Poison Use class ability does not help you identify poisons. It does not help you drop poison into someone's drink, inject it via syringe, mix it into food, or fill a room with poisonous gas. It does not help you handle a murder weapon. It does not help you with forensic investigation. It does not help you create a poison, or manipulate a poison, or refine a poison.

It only covers poison applied to a weapon to be used in combat. Which is the sort of thing investigators investigate, not the sort of thing they do themselves.

I'm of the opinion that Spy and Secret Agent should be covered by Investigator archetypes, however. I think the fluff for this class is a bit narrow, since mechanically it's quite successful at fulfilling not just the PI, but also the gadgeteer, scientist, poisoner, and criminal mastermind roles.

I'd like to see "Investigator Talents" renamed "Investigator Discoveries" (or something similar) and linked to Alchemist Discoveries. Representing the self-education and new techniques that investigators develop as they gain levels. Start with one at 1st level and give a new one every other level, and make it a big list. That way no two investigators will be exactly the same, and players can work toward different themes depending on their character concept.

For example, there could be an "Alchemy Bomb" discovery that gives the Investigator the alchemist's bomb ability. The first time you take the discovery, you get level+Int bombs a day that do 1d6 damage. Just like a first level alchemist. The number of bombs would continue to scale, but the damage wouldn't unless you took the discovery multiple times (each time would increase damage by +1d6). Taking this discovery would then allow you to take other alchemist bomb discoveries, most importantly "smoke bombs".

The Investigator's bomb would never be as good as the base alchemist's could be, but it would allow investigators to have a utility belt of smoke bombs if that's the direction they want to go in character-wise. If not, the player could pick different discoveries.

The end result would be a more customizable class that could be used to cover a wider range of investigator type characters.

EDIT: I understand that no two investigators will be quite the same now, since they can pick different talents. I'm talking about making the discoveries more of a central focus of the class. Instead of every investigator getting sneak attack, make it a discovery. Instead of every investigator getting poison use, make it a discovery.

That way individual investigators could dabble in various interests to one degree or another.

Also instead of giving a ton of bonuses to skills, give investigators new and/or improved ways of using skills. I'd take an investigator who can deduce extra information from a successful perception check than other classes can over a bunch of boring mathematical bonuses.

Those are fair points regarding Poison Use. I suspect if the fluff was more Master of Whispers a la GoT (or included it as an extension of the classes' implied role) we would be more in agreement.

We definitely would. I don't have a problem with poisons being used by non-evil characters, or poisoned weapons being used by classes beyond the ninja or rogue.

I guess my TL;DR of my thoughts on the Investigator is that the fluff of the class doesn't really seem to match what the class does.

The class description:

"Whether on the trail of a fugitive, a long-lost treasure trove, or the mastermind behind a dangerous conspiracy..."

...makes the class seem like less of a secret agent spy (where poison use would fit) and more of the golden age pulp detective type character (where it wouldn't).

I definitely think Bard/Alchemist would be a better mix than Rogue. The brawler class is an evolution of concepts that were previously archetypes for the fighter & monk. I think the Investigator would be a good evolution of archetypes that already exist for the bard (i.e. detective & archaeologist).

I think poison use makes sense. Poisons don't have to be evil, despite what the paladin says. If they incapacitate or take out someone without killing, they could be very handy. After all, ability damage heals.

And yes, Batman's belt has knockout gas. On Sherlock Holmes, read this article. Holmes was an expert on poisons and their use.

Holmes was absolutely an expert on poisons. But the only person he ever poisoned was himself. He wasn't applying contact poison to his riding crop.

And knockout gas would be closer to an alchemist's bomb, not the poison use special ability.

So that leaves Batman, Dexter, and arguably maybe grudgingly Sherlock Holmes in the "poison use" category.

By comparison in the non-poison use category we have:

Arsene Lupin, Auguste Dupin, Hercule Poirot, Miss Marple, Philip Marlowe, Nero Wolfe, Albert Campion, Brother Cadfael, Charlie Chan, The Continental Op, Harry Dresden, Encyclopedia Brown, The Hardy Boys, Inspector Morse, Mike Hammer, Sgt. Cuff ...

...and that's just what I could think of off the top of my head and on a single TV Tropes page.

Poison use is not a hallmark of the cinematic or literary detective/inspector. It's a hallmark of the people the detective/inspector put in prison, and the examples above (batman & dexter) are subversions. Which is why it makes more sense for it to be an alternate or optional ability.

I feel like all of the poison abilities are an ill fit for the investigator class and should be replaced. Also, not sure about the amount of sneak attack...

^- I agree with this. The investigator was the first class I flipped to because it's one of my favorite archetypes.

Personally I feel like this class would be a better "Bard/Alchemist" hybrid instead of a "Rogue/Alchemist" hybrid. The only rogue ability that really seems to fit here are the Rogue Talents, which could easily be replaced by Alchemist Discoveries (with a different list to pick from, of course).

Poison use doesn't really fit with the concept very well. Yes, Holmes was a phenomenal chemist but he didn't USE poison, he just identified it when other people did. The same goes with sneak attack. It isn't a terrible mechanical choice, but it just seems ... off. Even the more active literary detectives didn't really run around stabbing people in the kidneys.

Overall, I feel like this is a support class that doesn't really do much to support the party (other than winning at skill checks). Which is part of why I think Bard would be a better mix than Rogue.

I don't really like the inspiration mechanic as is. It seems a little clumsy. Some skill boosts cost points, but some skills don't so you can do it on every check? So some skills are always going to get a random bonus? I love the overall idea, I just feel it needs more legs. Maybe get rid of the "free use" bit and just give a class bonus to those skills, and then expand the list of things you can do with inspiration points (tie it into the talents/discoveries better so we get more Inspired Alertness and fewer Intellectual Inspirations).

I do like the alchemy abilities, but I feel like they'd be better casting spells like a bard than using extracts like an alchemist. Especially if they have ways to disguise their spell casting.

I'd like more of a mix of a Gentleman/Gentlewoman Detective like Holmes, Dupin, and maybe some Lupin mixed with a splash of Occult Detective like Harry D'Amour, John Thunstone, and maybe John Constantine.

If there is an ambiguity in the PF rules, and there's additional text in corresponding 3.5E rules that clarifies, do you consider that compelling evidence as to the meaning of the rules, or do you assume it's an intentional change?

I say this with the greatest of love, but I've never credited Tabletop Roleplaying Game sourcebooks with an overabundance of careful editing.

When D&D moved from 3.0 to 3.5, and then from 3.5 to Pathfinder, there was a lot of copy/pasting going on. Artifacts from earlier editions made it into later editions (like text in Armor Proficiency that describes Fighters gaining it as a bonus feat). Things get cut off. Things get missed, and sometimes designers get their wires crossed.

Honestly, if a sentence or two is cut out then I'm more likely to assume it was lost by mistake in the transfer between editions. I'll go with whatever the current rule is, but if nothing else it's helpful to see what came before.

Responses to FireberdGNOME. Spoilered for size.