Krome's page

Set's opinion looks to be dead on as usual. It even says you have to make this choice every time you channel.

I wish it worked that way for the basic channeling!

I never had any plce limit me on the number of copies made. As long as I can show legal ownership of the PDF

Krome wrote:

Also, the rules clearly state that any creature that blocks your Line of Effect provides Cover. It is further clarified under Soft Cover on page 196, that Cover provided by a creature is Soft Cover and provides +4 AC but does NOT grant the bonus on Reflex Saves.

So using your diagram, the Monster has Soft Cover from the Ranger, so has a +4 to its AC vs the Ranger, but does not get any bonuses to Reflex saves vs the Ranger.

Not to mention you take a -4 to hit for shooting into Melee. Precise Shot and Improved Precise Shot are such no-brainers that I almost wonder if the penalties are either too high, or the feats are too powerful. But then I think I should just keep my big mouth shut. :P

people seem to me meddling with the phrasing and getting confused...

PRD wrote:

Smite Evil (Su): Once per day, a paladin can call out to the powers of good to aid her in her struggle against evil. As a swift action, the paladin chooses one target within sight to smite. If this target is evil, the paladin adds her Charisma bonus (if any) to her attack rolls and adds her paladin level to all damage rolls made against the target of her smite. If the target of smite evil is an outsider with the evil subtype, an evil-aligned dragon, or an undead creature, the bonus to damage increases to 2 points of damage per level the paladin possesses. Regardless of the target, smite evil attacks automatically bypass any DR the creature might possess.

This paragraph talks about the effects of smite evil against the selected target, notice the last two sentences... the first mentions that the damage is increase if the target is evil outsider, evil dragon or undead. but the second sentence mentions that regardless of the targets type, all damage bypasses any DR the target possesses.

PRD wrote:

In addition, while smite evil is in effect, the paladin gains a deflection bonus equal to her Charisma modifier (if any) to her AC against attacks made by the target of the smite. If the paladin targets a creature that is not evil, the smite is wasted with no effect.

This second paragraph then expands on the smite evil indicating that the AC of the paladin is increased vs the target of the smite and then finishes the section stating that if you target a non-evil creature the power is wasted for no effect.

ALL the powers of smite evil only affect the TARGET of the smite - even if 3 other evil creatures are attacking him he gets none of the benefits in relation to those creatures.

Clearly, if the target is not evil there is no effect. The comment about DR applies to all evil targets and not just the few types mentioned for extra bonuses.

Krome you forgot spells. It doesn't seem like a huge thing but the paladin does get several very nice spells on his spell list.

Cure light wounds, resist energy, lesser restoration, Divine Favor, Zone of Truth, Shield Other, Delay Poison, Remove Paralysis, Dispel Magic, Greater Magic Weapon, Remove Curse, Remove Blindness, Death Ward, Neutralize Poison, Holy Sword, Dispel Evil, Dispel Chaos, Restoration

A very nice list with good spells on every level, even with his slightly reduced caster level (much better than it use to be for sure) he always has something to contribute with his spells.

I would note that Greater Magic Weapon and Divine Weapon Bond together are a very nice combination that could quickly give you a weapon that is rather powerful out of a mundane anything you pick up.

I'm not saying this makes the paladin better than the fighter, only that it should be noted.

Additionally on smite evil it should be noted that it does increase your AC even if the target isn't evil, and even if the target isn't evil you still bypass DR for the target -- which could be very useful against elementals, golems, and other creatures... (makes you wonder if they really mean any DR as the Tarrasque has some really nice DR/epic).

Thanks :)

The point I was TRYING to make is that I believe that neither the fighter nor the paladin are actually BETTER than the other. That each has a different purpose. The paladin would make a very poor tank for a human enemy based game, for example. The fighter would be a poor choice for a campaign that focuses on evil outsiders.

:)

Rhymes with Cow, even though I know (doesn't rhyme with cow) it's officially dro.

Started with the red book.

As I know the official version and ignore it, which do you figure?

Also remember that since Paizo is unable to touch the classes in the splat books their only recourse was to modify the core classes.

There was a NEARLY universal opinion that the power level of the classes in the splat books increased. This often meant that the standard core classes were suboptimal choices for many games. The only way to deal with these higher power level classes was to modify the core classes to this new increased power level.

So, the increased core class power level is a result of poorly designed splat and 3rd party classes.

I am really hoping that the CRs finally do present real challenges to players. Honestly using the CRs in 3.5 was as useful as using a Magic 8 Ball to determine random events in the game...

cool polls... keep them coming

So I have a party in Ravenloft, and there's quite the chance one of them will contract Lycanthropy in the near future. I've read up on the Savage Progressions Werewolf, which is three levels of Werewolf with no hit dice plus 2 levels of Wolf with 1 HD (d8) each. Is this even worth it? Losing 5 class levels to be down three HD seems pretty useless. Obviously the party always has the option of trying to remove the lycanthropy, but, if they wanted to keep it, are these rules fair and useful, or is the person who has this getting ripped off. I'm not asking if it's optimized, or specific build information, just if it's a reasonable exchange for 5 levels.

So if the idea is to play in Ravenloft and CURSE the player then no it is not worth keeping and the player should not WANT to keep it.

If the idea is to not CURSE the player but instead gift him with some really nifty cool character/class options then I think the GM should find a different way to accomplish said benefits instead of trying to use a CURSE as a nifty cool benefit...

Think about it... :)

I think the reason AD&D had a more dangerous and GM friendly attitude of creativity and choices is that the rules were "softer." That is, the rules did not try to cover every possible situation imaginable, and the fluff came first and the rules are made to fit the fluff.

Now granted making the rules fit the fluff could be a problem when conflicting fluff happened. But, hey, Fluff Happens! sorry had to...

Honestly, I think a big rule that needs to be erased from 3.x and PFRPG is the rules for encounter design. I designed an adventure and play tested it. The combats were MUCH harder and higher than the "rules allow." The players quickly had to learn they could not just walk into a dungeon and expect to auto clear it with no sweat. Some of the players suggested I lower challenge levels for publication, but interestingly enjoyed the higher level play...

RPGs now are designed around the idea that PCs should expect to complete a dungeon with little challenge and even the encounters that are a challenge are essentially guaranteed the PCs win unless they totally screw up. If a PC dies due to anything other than a major tactical error, the encounter was badly designed (even bad dice rolls are mitigated to save the PC).

But let's face it, 3 goblins are NEVER going to be a serious challenge to a first level party. If you want goblins to be anything other than a joke, then use 3 x number of party members. This allows them some room for comedy and to be deadly as well. An encounter with 3 goblins is not even worth the paper and ink used to describe the encounter.

By the same token a single CL 5 monster is nearly never a real threat to a 5th level party. Fight should be won by the PCs in 3-5 rounds (18-30 seconds- not very heroic- more like a slaughter).

The Paladin has some freaking awesome powers sure... lets look at those freaking awesome powers and their actual usefulness.

Aura of Good- yeah ok, no benefit at all in 99.9999999% of combats.
Detect Evil- occasionally beneficial in circumstances where you are unsure of your opponents alignment. Useless against Demons, Devils, Undead, Chromatic Dragons and a whole host of monsters that are always evil, because we KNOW they are evil.
Smite Evil- very cool ability, but very limited in the number of uses. Of VERY limited use in campaigns that focus on evil outsiders or undead, as the number of combats that could utilize this effect far outweigh the number of uses available.
Divine Grace- Okay, freaking awesome! No doubt about it this class ability rocks.
Lay On Hands- okay, very freaking awesome. Yes this ability rocks.
Aura of Courage- very cool, but extremely limited use. Great if fighting dragons and mummies. But useless 99% of the time.
Divine Health- very cool and very limited. Can make an appearance occasionally in a campaign.
Mercy- freaking cool make Lay on Hands even more useful. Are rather limited versatility however. Regardless, when needed they will be awesome.
Channel Positive Energy- Pretty cool! Very useful in addition to Lay on Hands.
Divine Bond- MUCH better than before and now totally rocks
Aura of Resolve- Very cool. Some potential here, but again limited use.
Aura of Justice- Very cool but suffers same limitations as Smite Evil
Aura of Faith- Potentially very useful. Minor limitations.
Aura of Righteousness- darn cool and useful.
Holy Champion- Very nice boost for the highest level.

So, simply put all of these abilities are awesome cool. Some have limited versatility however. The Paladin is a fantastic combatant vs evil, but in circumstances where the enemy is neutral or even good, the Paladin will be hamstrung.

If you want to totally focus on destroying evil then the Paladin is the obvious choice.

If you want a character that has any other focus at all, or just more versatility, then the Fighter is the choice.

I would say that in the right campaign the Paladin will be the obvious winner in "best class." But in the right campaign the Fighter will be the winner in "best class."

I already posted this in the Homebrew section, but I used the Arcana Unearthed system to come up with a unified magic system where you add all of your caster levels together to get a total caster level.

You can read about it on my blog,

http://www.prestonpoulter.com/2009/10/a-more-unified-magic-system-for-arcan a-unearthed/

I'm a HUGE fan of getting rid of spell lists and the arcane/divine divide. After all, a vast number of spells are already BOTH arcane AND divine to begin with. So the line between the two has already been blurred.

Honestly either make it such that NO spell is both arcane and divine or just go with a unified spell progression system.

I really like this approach a lot.

I think, that BEFORE we get into discussing racial levels and such, we wait for the Bestiary to be released and see how they handle races that are higher levels...

Now, the feats line seems to be a great one to pursue since we know the rules for the feats...

I'm confused about Partial Cover. The diagram on page 194 seems to be wrong. The line running from Seoni (#4) to the ogre touches the wall, meaning it should be blocked, but it's shown as clear.

Also, let's say a ranger is a few squares (in a straight line) behind an ally who fights a medium monster at melee. Will the monster have cover or partial cover relative to the ranger?

M
A
X
X
R

(M - monster; A - ally; X - empty space; R - ranger)

No where in that chart does it say it is "Clear." It specifically says Partial Cover, which is addressed on page 196.

Also, the rules clearly state that any creature that blocks your Line of Effect provides Cover. It is further clarified under Soft Cover on page 196, that Cover provided by a creature is Soft Cover and provides +4 AC but does NOT grant the bonus on Reflex Saves.

So using your diagram, the Monster has Soft Cover from the Ranger, so has a +4 to its AC vs the Ranger, but does not get any bonuses to Reflex saves vs the Ranger.

@Zappo:

First, what a lousy place to put the only mention of that in the entire rulebook.

Second, the problem with using that to set a baseline for the system is that it creates a loophole. As I said, there are non-arcane-caster classes that have Arcane Spell Failure. If the rules state that only Arcane Spells suffer ASF, then scrolls those classes create do not have ASF, even when said classes then cast from them.

Bard= Arcane
Cleric- Divine and no ASF noted
Druid- Divine and no ASF noted
Paladin- Divine and no ASF noted
Ranger- Divine and no ASF noted
Sorcerer= Arcane
Wizard= Arcane

I'm not finding any classes at all that are non arcane casters that use Arcane Spell Failure. Am I missing something?

If it is from an older book, a 3rd party book or whatever, realize the rules may have changed and that OLD class would need to be updated.

Nethys wrote:

I am, as always, happy to assist as well. Though James has yet to set up my 'nethys@paizo.com' email account yet.

Your God of Knowledge,
Nethys

***Wishes he knew who Nethys was*** :)

Apparently Nethys is making a move on Irori's portfolio. Should be fun times to watch Irori take on the newcomer to that portfolio.

lol

We used legendary weapons before WOTC released their book. While I liked some of their concepts the mechanics just did not work for us.

The way we dealt with these weapons was every 5th level we could redirect a set amount of XP toward the weapon. This XP was essentially the amount of XP needed to be spent to add a special ability to a weapon.

You did not loose the XP unless the weapon was destroyed. Otherwise your XP was treated as perfectly normal.

However, since Pathfinder no longer uses XP for making magic items I don't think that system would work now. And honestly I would not be thrilled with having to give up a Feat either.

If we were to "create our own science" then what's the point trying to make that "new science" be something familiar? And it's not just the fact that gun rule purists are hard to satisfy... it's the simple fact that guns and firearms simply don't fit the flavor of Golarion by and large as it's developed over the past 2 years.

Golarion's in a different place, evolution and creation-wise, than it was 2 years ago, when we weren't sure if introducing guns would be a good or a bad thing. Things have changed. Golarion cannot be EVERYTHING, but we can make it be MOST THINGS. Certain elements are simply too expansive and combustible to pepper into a game setting without changing the entire setting—guns are one of those things. I suspect psionics are as well.

Problem solved.

:)

BTW Wikipedia has a pretty interesting description of the Gothic Horror genre and what is often associated with it.

For this to really work it requires two very important things: Setting and Character.

Paizo has been great with settings so far. I think this can be a bit more challenging to maintain through six full adventures. A fine line has to be maintained to keep the players engaged and in suspense and not cross over into yet another "creepy" crypt adventure. The setting for each adventure would need to be unique and engaging in its own right.

The characters developed by Paizo have been great as well. Here I think they would have an easier time. A truly monstrous villain in the guise of a aristocratic gentleman (makes me think of Queen Ileosa Arabasti in Curse of the Crimson Throne). The cast should be flawed but salvageable, though some will never be saved.

The plot itself can be rather simple, or knowing Paizo, could be layers of plots that lead to understanding the events that have happened.

Quite honestly, if well done, I could very well see this kind of AP becoming the most popular AP released yet.

The problem is, that unlike most other APs so far, there is a high level of expectation for something like this. For Second Darkness you just needed to throw in Drow doing something naughty. That essentially all that is necessary for a drow adventure... drow! But for a gothic horror there is more than just a vampire.

I would think many of the non-core four classes could find ways to shine. Especially the half-builds like Bard, Ranger, and Paladin. Their diversity will finally be an advantage and their weaknesses are not so bad anymore.

It also is easier to play to their strengths than in a regular game where another player is often sharing a portion of the niche they occupy.

I share your confusion and will tell you how I run it, though, Paizo is very likely to have different opinions on the matter.

I see all CMs available for Unarmed use. So I allow a blanket use in that way.

For weapons I only allow modifiers to the CMB IF the weapon itself is appropriate to the maneuver. So a +5 dagger will not add anything to tripping though a +5 guisarme will.

IF you are holding the +5 dagger, that doesn't prevent you from making a maneuver. You just don't get its bonuses. So you could be wielding the dagger and trip with your legs.

This is based strictly upon the "feel" or "flavor" of the text.

I don't see anything that says it MUST be done that way. But neither do I see anything that says it MUST be done another way instead.

What have I missed, what do you all mean by "exploding" dice?

No... seriously :)

ok ok ok... exploding dice is popularly used in Shadowrun (MIGHT have been introduced in that game as well). Roll your d6 and if the die rolls a 6, reroll it and ADD the second number to the 6. If the second roll was a 6, reroll it and ADD the third roll to 12, etc.

In this way, a single d6 could produce scores into the 20s! or higher. And yeah I had that happen once in Shadowrun. It was AWESOME! :) lol

The use of this rule for firearms allows firearms the potential to be extremely deadly. Something they seriously lacked.

Well, the rules do not clarify that ALL of the weapon must be made from the special material, but I believe that is the intent.

A lance would normally be made of wood and have a small metal cap for combat. Similar to an arrow with the shaft made from wood and a metal head.

So, since you can make an arrow into a metallic special material I don't see why you can't for a lance. However, the way it phrases it, it sound like the entire weapon must be made from the special material, primarily because there are no special weights and such for arrowheads, and component parts of weapons.

So, I would say, for simplicity sake for rules, no cap, but make the whole weapon special.

HOWEVER, in my own game, yeah I would allow it.

To be honest I always thought the Barbarian was just a Fighter with a different flavor. Sort of Cherry I think.

:)

They both seem to fill the same niches: Tanks, Melee Masters.

I think the Barbarian makes a better Tank though. His rage abilities and the extra HP are a necessity and gives him a slight edge. Also as a Two-Weapon Combatant he usually wins (though not always) again because of the raging.

The Barbarian is also a better battlefield commander, able to move faster across the fight.

Just my opinion though.

As far as I know the only place firearms rules appear are the Campaign Setting. Probably wrong though lol

I have been thinking about this myself for a few weeks. As far as I know there is only one company that makes games for this and the adventures are called 1 on 1.

I think later this year I will begin making all future adventures 1 on 1 games as well. But not positive.

Will there be monster feats?

Can characters who can polymorph, learn monster feats and use them when polymorphed e.g.

Can a character who polymorphs into a dragon learn multi-attack to reduce the -5 attack penalty when in dragon form?

Liking the sounds of these ideas!

In a way I would say you are right about the feats be more precious now. Simply because before, you received so few feats, it really didn't matter. Unless you were a Fighter you simply didn't have enough Feats to worry about Feat Builds.

Now, every class can seriously enhance their character through Feat selections. So, now, if you screw up one selection it can indeed have real consequences.

But the cool thing is that now players have more options available, and can build characters that come closer to achieving their wants.

Isn't Pathfinder AWESOME!?

Quote:

I personally wouldn't use the term major unless it made the product unusable.

OK, I keep this in mind, ... this might be totally beside the topic, but when major flaw or error states that something is unusable, than may I ask in what case you'd use the term "critical flaw/error" since this is the term I had used to state that something is unusable or is this the nearly the same and what is actually said depends on the taste of the speaker making the respective statement?

Greetz
Ganzir

Interesting point though. Fun to look at how one uses language.

Perhaps, others can give a better opinion. :)

Krome wrote:

oh I like that 5 shard and 5 rune weapons...

My six demon bag pwns your pathetic five-shard weapon!

:)

I agree. There is no way in the world I am making a map for 10 acres.

The reason I was asking about those sizes is I think they are reasonable, depending upon the scenario. And no I have no ideas yet about what will happen other than some kind of arena fight. :)

The reason I think they are reasonable is we used to have a gaming table that was 4 feet x 8 feet. We ran a scenario where we fought a great red dragon on the table. There were six of us and the red dragon. As my wife said, any smaller of a table and it would have seemed cramped. The fight raged across the whole table.

But is that really what people want? Would anyone want a fight that ranged across that big a area? I doubt most people have a table that big.

Many places can muster a 4x4 as it is a common size for table top wargames like Warmachine and Warhammer.

And that six foot table is available for cheap at Walmart.

of course I suppose a 30 x 30 inch map would work as well.

I just have no idea what people would want to play on.

In roughest terms I am thinking a module like scenario for somewhere between levels 7-12. Real rough and vague ideas right now.

Maybe a fight against dinosaurs first and then against PCs, with lions and displacer beasts popping out to lunge at PCs. Or maybe a 4 player vs 4 player fight.

heck what would you want for an arena fight?

oh I like that 5 shard and 5 rune weapons...

hey now we know what happened to Arodin! Anyone else looking for some godshards? I just found an ear-shard! >;)

Personally I would like to see a large bound volume containing all of the adventures of an AP. Similar to the Shackled City AP bound book.

**EDIT** Updated to Pathfinder of course :)

Normally I wouldn't care about having an effect on the game world, as you say. But the faction competition was a perfect way to have some.

Now granted I can see some players being butt heads and working against players. I teased that I might do that once but of course never would. I suspect that a player that actually would work against other players doesn't need much incentive to do so anyway.

Now honestly I don't mind the competition being gone. But, if it is gone go ahead make the faction missions a group effort. We're going to do that anyway, unless someone is being a jerk about it. It just makes it easier.

taig wrote:

Krome wrote:

Dave Young 992 wrote:

Set wrote:

it was one of those things that cropped up while I was trying to sleep, and had to get the heck out my head. :)

Well, okay. Please be careful when you're up at night thinking about Cthulu! ;-)

Funny I always have trouble sleeping when I read Cthulu just before bed. No idea why that is... :)

Probably something you ate. :)

... Or something that would eat you.

I woke up later and there was a dark angel crouched in the corner of the bedroom, black feathered wings folded, dark cowl hiding its face. Needless to say, I was startled by the discovery of a monster in my room. Then the dark angel morphed into a bookcase and lamp. I decided I needed more sleep...

Not overly fond of waking up to find something that wants to eat me. :)

okay end sidetrek.

Item descriptions left out Whetstones. WTF does a Whetstone do? =\

so I was thinking of designing a simple PvP and PvNPC adventure set in Absalom, specifically the Irorium.

So I looked up stats in the Absalom book about the Irorium. 200 feet tall, and a 10-acre central stage. That IS big.

So I looked up the Roman Colosseum for comparison. The outer walls are 157 feet tall, and the entirety of the building sits on 6-acres. The central arena is an oval 287 feet by 180 feet.

This makes the central arena just under an acre in size (someone please check this for me- I am not great at math- area of an ellipse is pi x a x b where a and b are one half the major and minor axes). This would be pi x 143.5 x 90 for a total of 40,573. An acre is 43,560 square feet.

So the central area of the Irorium is 10x the size of the Roman Colosseum. Is that right?

Now the Roman Colosseum could accommodate 50,000 spectators in 6 acres. So how many spectators can the Irorium hold? I am assuming the entirety of the 300,000 people of Absalom.

BTW is that total people or citizens? Would slaves, children and foreigners increase that number?

What sized map would be appropriate for the Irorium? I am thinking that a map sized either 4' x 8' representing just over 2.5 acres, 4' x 4' representing 1.3 acres, or 6' x 2.5' (six foot fold up table) for about 1.25 acres. What do you guys think?

What sized map would be appropriate for a massive PvP/PvE battle be?

Krome wrote:

Sean K Reynolds wrote:

Krome wrote:

Found this and thought it would be a great prop for a Wayfinder.

You can buy it here

They make mini versions as well...

Dude! Nice link! I gotta blog about that!

SKR it's saturday I hope you're not working, you guys all deserve a rest!

Wait. What's a Saturday? (goes back to work on Pathfinder #28)

ESPECIALLY if you commission a Tengu iconic :) just not as a bard! :)

Well I am new to Pathfinder, though I have played 3.5 before, I was wondering how effective Summoning is? The problem is the 1 round casting, it seems that all a DM needs to do is have you attempt one or two concentration checks to loose the spell?

It also seems rough to Wild Shape.

I have an unplayed druid and I am having second thoughts on how to build him. Should I take Spell Focus Conjuration at 1st level? Shoudl I adjust my 10 str and 12 dex, this could be important when I can Wild Shape?

Thanks

If I remember right we used it to good effect in 3.5 at lower levels but then at mid to high levels it broke down and was almost useless.

But so far (were are about levels 5-6) the summoner is one of the more effective characters in the group.

Krome wrote:

2) Osirion because a friend here managed to twist some arms at Paizocon and become a Hellknight for Cheliax, so I want to become a Risen Guard for Osirion. One steep requirement to get in though! Got to die and be brought back!

How did he do that???? Is he just a paladin?

I'm hoping to go to next year's Paizocon and getting an official recognition for the Risen Guard. :)

To be a Hellknight they had to sacrifice something for a set time. Not too bad. To be a Risen Guard you would certainly have to die and be brought back! A bit rougher! lol

Krome wrote:

So if there is no Faction competition anymore, why make a big deal of handing out faction missions and keeping them secret.

Just hand out a general page with all faction missions on it, we make note of what factions are at the table and work together to accomplish the missions.

** spoiler omitted **

Wouldn't it just be easier to make these faction missions general knowledge and just get on with the gaming then?

And heck, is there really any reason to keep faction missions at all? If there is no result from doing them why do them (besides metagaming and doing them for special rewards).

I am in strong agreement with Krome here. There needs to be some attachment to the factions, story and player. The Player NEEDS to have a way to affect the game. That is one of the things that makes Organized gaming great for me....Its that you can play a mod and your actions will affect how the world will evolve...Even if it is just in a small manner...

I'm not trying to be a b%&#-head but just trying to understand.

Krome, I believe your last statement is correct. If in the case of a spell like Teleport that allows multiple touched recipients, you must touch all 6 creatures in the same round. That would mean all but one of them would need to be grouped together (touch 1 or 5, move 30 feet, touch the remainder) or they get left behind.

Spectral Hand is a much underutilized spell in my opinion.

Maybe invent a divine version called Touch of the Holy Spirit!

Touch spells rules are ones that seem darn clear, then I read them again and start wondering what if... then my head hurts.

Krome wrote:

I mean CHICKENS can TALK! WHOOOOOOOOOAAAAAAAAAA they don't even have lips! lol

Neither do parrots ;)

though I a not sure what carrots have to do with this thread...

Calixymenthillian wrote:

James Jacobs wrote:

An iconic tengu would be approximately 503,324 times as cool as a dwarf, in fact. That said... the tengu's hardly an iconic RACE to begin with, so we're no more likely to make an iconic character into a tengu then, say, a goblin or a boggard or a troll.

But that said, I suspect that there will indeed be an iconic tengu at some point. In fact, I can almost guarantee it. But I can't say WHEN this happy day will come to pass.

So you're also almost guaranteeing goblin, boggard and troll iconics? After all, those are apparently at least as likely... is this related to the rumors of new rules for monster PC races in the (probably quite distant) future?

Nah, it's just related to the fact that I'd like to see an iconic goblin, tengu, boggard, and troll some day. :-)

Anyone else like that idea?

And you better hurry up with those... 2012 is just around the corner so not much time left....

Oh oh oh slogan for future Paizocons... party like its 2012! Prince was off by 13 years...

I'm a nerd; I have the same one for 3 years.

Another point, the Lust measurement is based on the number of reported STDs. What is really being shown is the relationship between education and STDs. The SE is the poorest educated area of America.

Similarly, Greed and Lust are almost opposites. Showing that the lowest educated are also the poorest.

I like this sites attempt, but the choice of metrics used to measure sin need a bit more work.

Furthermore, the metric for Sloth sounds more like happiness to me, and it being used for sloth may represent the 500+ year latent effect of the spanish inquisition.

One would assume that while education is perceived to be lower in those areas, their fine moral religious upbringing and outstanding ethical character would have resulted in much lower figures instead of being the hypocritical leaders in vice, crime and sin.

I think a better metric of Lust would have been unwed parents- a more in line with the religious view of lust as a sin I think. BTW I think the SE still takes that hands down...

Krome wrote:

Found this and thought it would be a great prop for a Wayfinder.

You can buy it here

They make mini versions as well...

Dude! Nice link! I gotta blog about that!

If my new Society character (has not played yet) manages to accomplish my goal of being an officially recognized Risen Guard for Osirion (Cheliax has its Hellknights), I am going to buy one of those, have a crystal or two mounted and celebrate!