That's moving the goal posts. I'm talking SPECIFICALLY against fights against shadow demons.
Note also that Eustoyriax is no CR 7 foe. He's CR 11, but brings with him all of the things that make a shadow demon tough, while simultaneously abandoning one of the shadow demon's greatest weaknesses.
It sounds like you, like Magnuskn, have a group that's a lot more experienced at the game than the average group, and as such you WILL need to either bolster the adventures as written or have your players use 15 or even 10 point buy for their characters—they're experienced players, after all, so having them play the game on hard mode is always an option.
Of course, many players don't enjoy that, so the onus falls on the GM to know what needs to be done to adapt the adventure.
Which is why kaiju spend so much time hibernating, first of all, but also why I spent a whole paragraph on page 165 of Bestiary 4 talking about how kaiju metabolisms work, and how they feed off of things other than meat and plants, and why they don't starve when denied "food" but instead go into hibernation.
Table 7–12 on page 175 of the Pathfinder Core Rulebook lists hardness and hit points for common armor, weapons, and shields.
I'd say that a typical helmet is about on par with a typical buckler—hardness 10 (assuming a metal helmet) and 5 hit points.
If a dwarven boulder helmet is a light weapon, well... both types of light weapon listed on that table have only 2 hit points, so I'd go back to the buckler values.
Every time... EVERY time... that I've run a fight involving a shadow demon, it wrecks the party. The combination of incorporeal plus its resistances, spell resistance, immunity, and damage reduction make it a VERY strong foe against a typical APL 7 party. That's the reason that Staunton's journal pretty much lays it out like that—this is a foe that if the PCs aren't ready to deal with can really catch them off guard.
If you feel that your party is doing particularly well, is able to handle a foe like this, or deserves a "surprsie" then by all means let them face Eustoyriax without any foreshadowing. But as written, yes, the intent is absolutely that a group that is observant and pays attention should realize well beforehand what they're going to face and should have a chance to prepare for it accordingly.
Kairos Dawnfury wrote:
I've not looked at the warpriest at all, but then again, I never felt that a cleric of Desna couldn't effectively use starknives in combat. I don't have the same expectations for combat performance for characters that seems to be the norm on the internet though.
Be knowledgable in how real-world symbols work, and check out what sorts of symbols (holy or otherwise) others have invented for their games or worlds for inspiration.
The NPC wrote:
I would say Churchanus's colors were likely brown and green.
What does Nadiri's Holy Symbol look like?
It gets a description in the upcoming Inner Sea Gods book. I don't know if we'll be illustrating it though. And while I invented it... I don't remember what it was, since I invented a hundred or two more holy symbols that same day for the book.
So! Have patience; you'll find out in a few months!
Alexander Augunas wrote:
I was reading Erik's introduction to Visions of WAR, and he mentioned that he'd met WAR at what would turn out to be the last GenCon UK (I think it was in 2008, IIRC). What killed off GenCon UK?
I'm not 100% sure, but I'm guessing it was the cost involved in setting up a convention overseas was too much.
1) Pretty much all of our rules content is open content. You'd just need to follow the restrictions and guidelines of using the OGL in your product, and correctly cite the sources, and re-flavor the parts that aren't open content (the flavor text for the most part).
1a) In the case of something like "Pirahna Strike," no. But if the name utilized a proper noun from Golarion, yes. A feat like "Taldan Duelist" would need to be renamed to something like "Falcata Duelist." A prestige class like "Red Mantis Assassin" would need to renamed to something like "Crimson Assassin."
1b) Only the parts that draw upon specific world flavor. That particular feat has none, so you'd be fine.
1c) You need to reference the source in the OGL, but IIRC you can't cite page numbers in the body of your text. You'd have to read the OGL to be sure.
1) Because you're over-inflating the importance of Golarion in the eyes of Heaven, first of all. It's but one of countless worlds on which things like this, some less devastating, some more devastating, are happening. And because it's something of a test for mortals. And because an army of archons or whatever attacking the region would only give the Abyss more of an excuse to escalate and send even more demons and then suddenly you'd have nothing but ruins—celestials are not bound by human reactions and emotions, and they know that sometimes the best bet is to provide more subtle aid in the form of answering spells and conjurations and the like. And because that's not the game we're setting up to play. And because doing so would leave their own home and other projects undefended—who's to say that the whole Worldwound situation isn't at least partially a lure to distract Heaven or whoever so the demons can strike against whatever it is they had to leave unprotected? But the MAIN reason is that the higher powers move in ways mysterious to us; they're not human, and their knowledge of the situation is greater than ours, and a big part of faith is believing that they're doing the best thing for us by letting us fight our own wars.
2) It would kill a lot of the demons and a lot of the crusaders, but would not hurt the Worldwound—it might even make it bigger. Regardless, once the damage was done, the dead demons would more or less be immediately replaced by reinforcements, but this time there'd be no crusaders to oppose them. AKA: It would make it MUCH worse.
3) Yes—they're all demigods and have domains, subdomains, favored weapons, planar realms, and the like. We'll reveal more about them when the time is right (AKA when we do books about them).
4) I'd like to have obediences for all deities and demigods. But that's not something we ca do all at once. Have patience!
Alexander Augunas wrote:
1) It's the design team, not the development team, who's building that book and running the playtest.
2) Jason: Brauts and beer.
The Thing from Beyond the Edge wrote:
So, if a character learned a considerable bit about one of his ancestors, would you allow him to use his own blood (IOW, genetic material of the creature to be duplicated) to satisfy your material component requirement?
You would only be able to make a simulacrum of yourself that way. Making a simulacrum of an ancestor would require a body part from that ancestor. Simulacrum doesn't work off of science (aka genetics), but magic, after all.
It will indeed shed some light. It won't reveal everything—that still for a later day—but it will reveal some things!
Dagon has a longer tradition in the game of being a demon lord than a powerful deep one—he was listed as a demon lord as early as in the 1st edition Monster Manual. Mother Hydra has NEVER been a part of the game, and both of them in their association with deep ones have never been a part of the game. So, for Dagon at least, he exists in Pathfinder as a demon lord, but he DOES have a lot of association and crossover with Cthulhu and other Lovecraftian elements, if only because his alignment, personality, and worshipers share so much in common.
Furthermore, I've always seen these versions of Dagon and Hydra as being very Earth-centered. Cthulhu as well, but since Cthulhu is from another planet and can dream across dimensions, he's got a MUCH wider net than do Dagon or Hydra, who in the stories strike me as purely earth species. In fact, the deep ones themselves strike me as purely earth species and not interstellar or interdimensional species.
There is certainly room on Golarion for powerful skum overlords or the like—that role is, for the most part, played by aboleths, veiled masters, and the as-of-yet unrevealed entities that exist above veiled master in their overall power structure.
But since neither skum nor deep ones are particularly extraterrestrial, directly involving the Dark Tapestry in their own mythos and stories doesn't make much sense to me.
Kairos Dawnfury wrote:
I believe that they're rare because of a perception that healing and damage at the same time is too powerful of an ability for player characters. It's why we abandoned allowing channeled energy the ability to heal allies and harm undead simultaneously. That's a better question for the design team for a more detailed answer though.
Giving temporary hp helps to prevent hp bloat, since they overlap.
Bill McGrath wrote:
Always! I have EXCELLENT taste in music! :-P
(And by "excellent" I mean "eccentric". Dead Can Dance, Pink Floyd, NIN, classical/soundtrack, Cake, the Beatles, Philip Glass, etc.)
Ok! looks like originally, he was going to have an "improved shadow blend" ability, but it got cut for space reasons and replaced by granting him "see in darkness." Which is a much better choice for him anyway.
1) Sure! They're also more likely to use magic in their gathering as well.
2) I think that would probably be inevitable.
3) Not really. We haven't done much with doppelgangers yet.
xavier c wrote:
If you're the GM or a mad scientist? Yeah.
If you're a player character, no.
Ambrosia Slaad wrote:
1) Unrevealed, but I'd say that it's probably a combination of both.
2) They'd be found in Vudra, yes.
3) By letting us know you want us to explore those places; by buying and giving good reveiews to products where we do go exotic places, and by convincing those you know to think the same way! :-P But perhaps most importantly, by just being patient. We'll get there eventually, but we have lots of other things we need to do as well.
1) I've not yet had a player spellcaster take an interest in using the spell, due to it being only available to a select few classes, and due to it being a higher level and relatively expensive spell.
2) Me. I get to decide how it works. I generally also keep in a previous element of the spell from D&D, which is that you need a small portion of the creature you want to create, and you can only have one simulacrum of that creature active at one time.
1) It's different. In some cases it might be raw magic power left over from the creation of the world. In others it might be a god's blood. In others it might be weird interstellar radiation. In others it might be primal planar energies seeping into their bodies. In others it might just be an excess of soul. It's left entirely undefined so that the creator of a mythic character can make up something in character and suitably personalized. Until one actually becomes mythic, whether or not they know they have the potential depends on the creature. And on the needs of the story you want to tell about them.
2) Yes. They all have their different sensations and outward effects, mostly shown in how those who become mythic by them manifest their abilities. From a game standpoint, that sounds like I'm implying that each source of mythic power should have its own custom list of powers it can grant, but that's not what I'm saying. I'm saying that from an in-game perspective—someone who became mythic from the Mana Wastes and gained Hierophant powers can build the exact same character from any other mythic power source, but it's up to the player and GM to incorporate the power source into the character's description.
3) Depends on the source. See #1 above—things like raw magic power, god's blood, planar seepage, old souls, and whatever.
4) Why a character takes Divine Source is up to them. It could be the first step toward becoming a true demigod and eventually beyond that a deity. It could just be a grab for power or a salve for that character's ego. That said, just as with any mythic power, they could well just find out they have the power one day after completing their trials.
For most of these, you'll note a recurring theme of "make it fit the story you want to tell with the character." That's very much the point of mythic adventures—this is a way to craft a unique and powerful story for a character that lets you bend and break rules now and then and here and there. And by keeping a lot of the details open like this, we don't hedge in every possible mythic NPC and PC into having to pick from the same pool of adjectives.
Mythic tiers are indeed singular and unique. They defy categorization.
Nope; if the class is more common among any race, it'd be gnomes, since they have a racial bonus to the skill Craft (alchemy).
In fact, we've got some similar symbols of our own for the planets in the system. But using those classic real-world symbols for alchemy is a great idea, especially since history has done the hard work of designing it all for us already.
Might you know any sites where an aspiring writer could speak with peers about how to go about making their story and such?
Our forums here are a great place to start, frankly. There are lots of others out there, but that's a better question for James Sutter or Chris Carey than for me.
Archpaladin Zousha wrote:
All of the APs have the potential for world-changing results. Some much more so than others, but they all have this possibility. We don't "hard code" expected changes into our setting though—that's left to each GM to do as best fits the situation in his personal game.
Belle Mythix wrote:
1) Fine; a little groggy. Coffee's not yet kicked in.
2) Unknown. Especially since we've only really detailed 3 of the 8 continents on the planet, and have barely touched the oceans or the Darklands overall.
3) I don't get this question, really. Once a world is so full of lycanthropes that I'm describing the world as "this world is filled with lycanthropes" then that percentage needs to be above 50%. If it's below, it's just 'there are lycanthropes on this world, but they're not everywhere." It's better and more informative to be able to say "Lycanthropes are quite common in this town/city/region/whatever."
4) Because of personal preference. In my opinion, lycanthropes work MUCH better when they are a vast minority. They're best as monsters, and best when they're treated as rarities. Even in a movie like Underworld or the Twilight series or George Martin's excellent "The Skin Trade" the lycanthropes aren't everywhere.
5) No prob!
Ambrosia Slaad wrote:
Don't read too much into that. That's basically me saying "no, but I can't predict the future, so I'm not gonna say no since my word carries to much weight around her to be issuing ultimatums like that, so I'll couch the answer a bit."
Furthermore, we don't publicly talk about our future plans beyond the next 6 to 12 months, and we're on record all the way through January 2015 for our current APs. So don't expect ANY answers about what's beyond that until, at the very earliest, Paizocon 2014.
Jacob Saltband wrote:
Normally, you have to be adjacent to the weapon user to sunder a weapon, and if I were to try to have the dude sunder a whip when he wasn't in the right position, I'd tell the user of the whip, "This guy readies to sunder your weapon if it attempts to trip someone he's adjacent to—as long as you're all cool with me introducing that as a house rule. Feel free to sunder my NPCs' weapons at range like that if you want."
Best case scenario, I'd let the players know that before hand... as in before the campaign starts. It's kinda cheesy to change the rules on players in the middle of a game, especially since the rules are what the players had to obey in order to make their characters.
A much better solution would be just to have the greatsword wielder move up next to the whip user, or perhaps ready an action to attack the whip user if he does so.
The use of improved sunder doesn't make a difference on this situation; you can take the same actions with or without that feat.
Bill McGrath wrote:
Would a kaiju dragon be an awesome monster, or would it be weird and clunky? Do the two categories not complement each other well?
I'd say King Ghidorah from the Godzilla movies would be a dragon kaiju. There's been plenty of other examples in kaiju movies too. I think it'd be fine but you'd want to keep in mind that it should be a low intelligence dragon if it's a kaiju.
xavier c wrote:
That's not the focus of the book. This book is meant to be the go-to reference book fro the deities we DO know about, after all. There will perhaps be name drops and other mentions of other deities, but that's not the book's purpose.
Shadow demons are plenty tough even without protection from evil. It's kinda cheesy to nerf that protection just because you want to possess a PC—it's better to let the PC feel like they're doing something right by letting their good fore-planning and skill at the game actually help make a difference.
So, tread carefully if you want to remove the protection from evil safety net, and keep in mind that there are higher level effects (such as the above mentioned one from Demons Revisited) that do what you want by expending monster resources (in that case, a feat slot).
Matrix Dragon wrote:
And that's exactly why we give Apsu (and Dahak) two different types of favored weapon; in Apsu's case, the quarterstaff. Radiance would thus turn into a quarterstaff unless your GM wanted to do something weird.
xavier c wrote:
Doesn't change a thing.
Gods from other parts of the world, and indeed gods from other worlds are worshiped in the Inner Sea region... but that doesn't make them "Inner Sea Gods."
AKA: The book is big, but not big enough to include everything.
A brief query on the Great Old Ones in B4 (I suspect you were probably the one who wrote their statblocks, yes?). They say that they "count as" mythic rank 10 creatures in their Great Old One subtype, but that doesn't mean they actually have the mythic subtype or get a bunch of mythic abilities (which, if they do, seemingly aren't listed anywhere), does it? They only count as possessing it when dealing with characters, spells and effects that do different things to mythic and non-mythic targets?
I did indeed design the great old ones.
All of them, along with the demon lords and empyreal lords, are "mythic equivalent" creatures. They don't directly use the mythic rules for their powers (with the exception of some mythic spell-like abilities), but they absolutely count as mythic creatures for the purposes of resolving attacks from mythic characters.
They do not have the mythic subtype. Their stats, along with all the other stats in the book, are complete—you don't need to "finish" them by adding the benefits from the mythic subtype.
After years of playing D&D and pathfinder, I am totally burned out on dungeon crawls to the point where I fell asleep during a session of Shattered Star. We have played all the adventure paths up to this. Are there going to be any not-dungeon crawl heavy APs coming? They're well written and all but there are only so many times I can spend an entire month (one game a week) or month and a half of game sessions searching a monster filled mansion, temple, cave system, etc...
Sounds like you might need to consider playing a different game for a while, honestly. Dungeons are a core part of Pathfinder, be they set underground or in derelict ships or old castles or whatever—the gameplay element of exploring a series of rooms with monsters and traps and tricks is not something we'll ever completely ignore in our adventures, because the game is BUILT for this type of play.
That said, Shattered Star is specifically intended to be a dungeon-heavy AP. It is, without a doubt, THE most dungeon-heavy AP we've ever published. By design, for a lot of reasons.
If you're looking for an AP with smaller dungeons/fewer dungeons, consider Curse of the Crimson Throne, Kingmaker, or Skull & Shackles. Note that there are STILL dungeons in those—in fact, each of them has one adventure that's a significant dungeon crawl.