Patrick Renie's page

Are there going to be any empyreal lords that would work for an alchemist?

Yes.

Sutter: ...shame pig!
Judy: It's not a shame pig—it doesn't judge!

Quote:

Sutter's spirit animal, Patrick Renie

... there's a story here, I can smell it.

That's probably just the llama you're smelling.

Rob: "Like cookie monster, but with blood instead of cookies."

Oh, and P.S.: No promises about this book actually putting an end to all those paladin threads.

Spell Sponge is from the new Animal Archive, it's a feat your familiar can take.

Quote:

Whenever your master targets you with a harmless spell with a target of “you,” the spell's duration is doubled as if modified by the Extend Spell metamagic feat. This does not affect spells with a duration of concentration, instantaneous, or permanent, or spells already modified by Extend Spell.

When it says harmless spell, does that mean a spell that actually says "harmless" in the saving throw or spell resistance line? Or does it mean any spell that's not harmful?

The only spells I can find that only have "You" in the target and also actually say "harmless" are Animal Aspect and Greater Animal Aspect.

There's a handful more spells that actually say "harmless" and have "You" in the target line, but it's target "you and 1 ally" or "you or creature touched" and so on. (Freedom of Movement, Invisibility, Greater Invisibility, Wind Walk, Find the Path, Hidden Speech, Tireless Pursuers, Battlemind Link, Sharesister) Do these spells work with the feat?

The use of "harmless" in this instance was an unnecessary complication, since as you pointed out, there are only a couple spells that have a target of "You" and are explicitly stated as harmless. Ignore the word "harmless" so that the sentence reads: "Whenever your master targets you with a spell with a target of 'you,' the spell's duration...."

This feat plays off the share spells ability possessed by most animal companions and familiars, so it should be applicable with any spell cast upon the animal companion or familiar that can only be cast on that creature because of the share spells ability. So spells that target "You and 1 ally" or "You or creature touched" aren't fair game, since you could already cast them on the AC/familiar even without share spells.

Hope this clears things up!

Adam: ...goat eyes!
Rob: No, no, no...
Adam: ...like eight goat eyes!
Rob: Two goat eyes is too many!

Patrick Renie wrote:

some of Golarion's most famous endemic creatures

FWIW, I recommend "autochthonous" over "endemic", because the latter has "infestation" connotations for me. ;)

Ah, how I do enjoy a good new word! Now you'll undoubtedly see "autochthonous" pop up in one of the next books I develop. ;]

I now need to play an awakened, anthropomorphic platypus with levels as Investigator Rogue, maybe Bard for a my own tune. Then again, I might need Monk to cover the martial arts.

On a serious note, I wish we knew what bonus it gave it's master so that it could actually be used right now.

Ask and ye shall receive!

Patrick Renie wrote:

Askanipsion wrote:

Will there be any prestige classes in this for casters who want to specialize with their familiars?

No prestige classes, but there are a host of new archetypes and feats (including some for your familiars) that should help fill out the character concept you're speaking of.

Patrick, you may be able to put my son's mind (and my frazzled nerves) at ease! :)

He has wanted for some time to play a "wild child" character, raised by animals (wolves, in this case) - but he didn't want to play a druid. The thought was the "Beastmaster" archetype, but it precludes him getting an animal companion until 4th level (same as a normal ranger). His words to me were that he'd love soemthing like "Falconeer", but with other animals available.

Will there be an archetype along those lines for rangers?

While I would hate to spoil the fun by giving away specifics, I can say that if your son is looking for a class archetype that grants an animal companion or familiar at 1st level (including wolves!), then this is definitely a book he won't want to miss!

With Mythic Adventures looming ever nearer on the horizon, it should come as no surprise that we'd like to do some new Golarion-specific player options for groups playing with mythic rules. As such, there's really no better time than the present to probe all your minds and find out what you'd like to see in an upcoming book about mythic player options in Inner Sea campaigns.

I'd like to split the discussion in this thread into two different topics:

1) What previously mentioned but impossible/inaccessible/problematic parts of Golarion would you like to see given the mythic Player Companion treatment? For instance, is there some faction or group we've mentioned somewhere that seemed mythic and piqued your interest beyond all reason? Perhaps you're curious what sorts of fell mythic powers your character could acquire by traveling to the Dark Tapestry, or maybe you've always wondered what a Herculean descendent of Cayden Cailean would have in the ways of mythic abilities. The sky's the limit!

2) What brand-spanking-new powers and options do you want to see for mythic characters? These kinds of things can either be Golarion-specific or completely unrelated. Walking on clouds? Creating desolate valleys in the jungle with just a shout? Lifting monuments out of the sea with your mind? If there's some power or awesome feat you've read about in a Pathfinder book and you were like, "Gee, I want to do that!" feel free to post it here for all to see!

There's no bad idea in a brainstorm, so let's see what you've got!

So, as some of you may or may not know, we plan on putting out a book called Blood of the Moon less than a year from now, and we're planning on doing it a lot like this one, except it would be about lycanthropes instead of vampires. It would include new information on the various kinds of lycanthropes in the Pathfinder campaign setting, as well as new rules options and advice for players with lycanthropic PCs or PCs who like hunting down lycanthropes.

That being said, we don't have to do a Blood of the Moon book like this. We don't even have to do a Blood of the Moon at all if absolutely no one is interested; it's not too late to replace it with something else. Several people have taken issue with Blood of the Night in that it doesn't follow the format or style of the previously published Blood of books, or that it doesn't include as many obvious dhampir options as they'd wanted, and I'd like to take these comments and turn them into something constructive.

Now, we could go and do a Blood of the Moon book that follows the same basic template as Blood of Fiends or Blood of Angels. It would give you the same kinds of new rules that those books gave you, including several pages of information on lycanthropes on Golarion, different heritages, variant abilities, new spells and feats, and so forth. Heck, that format is perfectly fine by us—doing that kind of book is actually a bit easier for the writers and developers. But I'm not sure that's what people actually want.

So, basically what I'm asking is, What would you like to see if we do a Blood of the Moon book? There currently aren't really any rules for playing lycanthropic PCs (beyond the "monsters as PCs" rules already built into the game); should it stay that way? What would you change from the way we did Blood of the Night? What would you keep the same? Would you put in a bunch of new feats and traits? Some sort of new playable half-lycanthrope PC race with distinct heritages? Sixteen pages on what it's like to be a lycanthrope on Golarion? I'm honestly curious about what all your ideas are on the matter, and basically how you would do the book if you had creative control over it.

I don't want it to sound like we're changing the line or doing an overhaul on the Blood of books, and I don't even want to give an estimate for when/if this customer feedback makes it into future Player Companions, but it is something I'd like to get peoples' thoughts on.

I still think most people won't know exactly how they feel about Blood of the Night until they're holding the physical copy in their hands. We just received our office copies, and they look rad. Seriously, a PDF does not do these books proper justice, and I think that will become more apparent as we continue to put out more of these.

Looking forward to seeing your thoughts on the matter!

That cover is fantastic! Who is the artist?

This wonderful piece of art is by Emily Fiegenschuh.

who's Patrick? since when is there a Patric?

You're killing me, ulgulanoth. That's no way to earn Patrick Points.

WOOO SUPERDUNGEON!

Patrick Renie wrote:

Mat Black wrote:

so, reading through the accursed halls leaves me with a question. the map says that the scale is 1 square equals ten feet, but the text descriptions seem like the scale should be 1 square equals five feet. which is correct?

1 square equals 10 feet. Just so I can get a clearer idea of what you're referring to, which read-aloud boxes seem to contradict this?

The other one I see that seems to strongly suggest the map scale being 5 feet is:

** spoiler omitted **

Ah, good catch.

I agree that some parts of the dungeon would seem very cramped indeed at the 5 foot scale; for instance, the initial fight would practically fill room A3.

My questions though:

** spoiler omitted **

The farmers of Thornkeep grow potatoes, among other staple crops. We've mentioned other River Kingdoms also growing potatoes, such as Tymon.

Several of the taverns in Sandpoint serve potato dishes, namely the Rusty Dragon and Risa's Place.

Hill giants enjoy eating potatoes, but most are too stupid to grow them.

There are other mentions of potatoes in Golarion, but pointing all such instances out would be superfluous. Long answer short, yeah, there are potatoes all over the Inner Sea region. :]

it was just my imagination. everything is copacetic.

Fantastic!

(I had to keep this chain going because you're right, our avatars go quite well together.)

Wolfsnap wrote:

bigkilla wrote:

Patrick Renie wrote:

Ah, good catch! The prerequisite character level for this feat should actually be 3rd, not 4th.

This.

Actually, I don't think that can be right. The rules for the squire feat say that the squire needs to be at least three levels lower than the PC, which is impossible before 4th level (unless the squire is 0-level?

Indeed. It still doesn't make any sense.

What happened to the squire?

Ah, sorry I missed this!

This feat should be available to 3rd-level characters. If I were to house-rule the discrepancies caused by making this change, I would say that the squire needs to be at least 2 levels lower than the PC if the PC gained the feat at 3rd level, then 3 levels lower when the PC reaches 4th level and thereafter.

A little off topic but related to the Aldori Swordlord. They get the Aldori Dueling Master feat as bonus feat but that feat requires the Quick Draw feat but the Prestige Class doesn't require that. So what happens if you don't have Quick Draw?

Good eye! Thanks to Aldori Dueling Mastery, you gain the Aldori Dueling Master feat as a bonus feat, even if you do not meet the prerequisites.

I'm hoping somebody could provide some more info about the Squire feat. I have a character who would probably take that rather than leadership.. And another who would want both!

Fortunately for your characters, the Squire feat is a new kind of feat in that after you and your squire reach a certain level, it actually turns into the Leadership feat. Until then, it's similar to Leadership, but with some additional restrictions and rules. We haven't done something like this before, so we're really looking forward to seeing how people feel about the new dynamic.

Where can I find a dueling cloak? Khavortorov family uses it in there for there fighting style but I can not find it in any of the books.

The dueling cloak isn't an item that's statted up anywhere, but for the purposes of the combat trait associated with House Khavortorov, any cloak-like item that occupies the shoulder slot counts as a cloak (such as a cloak of displacement or cloak of resistance). Many mundane outfits come with cloaks (as noted in the entry for explorer's outfits, cold-weather outfits, and scholar's outfits on pages 161–162 of the Core Rulebook).

Since even a blanket could serve as a cloak for a crafty enough adventurer, I think it would be fair to say that as long as you don't have some other, non-cloak-like item occupying your shoulders slot and you haven't been stripped of your gear, you can be assumed to be wearing a cloak (unless your character just isn't into that swag, of course).

I might be a little confused for the winter witch prc,

** spoiler omitted **

Short answer: almost. The exception is that your first level in the winter witch PrC doesn't count toward your spells per day in the witch class, as noted on the Winter Witch table on page 63 of Paths of Prestige.

The FAQ linked by Mort the Cleverly Named also counts weapon-like spells as weapons. So, the question is whether they intended to include rays (e.g. scorching ray) and weapon-like spells (e.g. flame blade) in the penalty, or just manufactured weapons.

The Blackened oracle curse is meant to only impose a penalty on attack rolls with manufactured weapons. Thus, rays, weapon-like spells, and natural weapons are not affected by this curse.

Patrick Renie wrote:

F. Wesley Schneider wrote:

Gorbacz wrote:

Llama llama duck.

Ooooooh... might have to have stats for a llama. Patrick would LOVE that (his screen saver cycles through pictures of dogs, cats, and llamas).

I assure you, there will be plenty of llamas in this book if I have any say in the matter, including rules for how they spit (a ranged touch attack) and new barding specially for llamas (barding, in this case, mostly means funny wigs).

My next door neighbor's llama had a baby. Because they are everywhere in Montana, nobody buys them anymore.. so I may be getting it for free.

I may actually get some barding made for it.

It's very important you make your llama feel special when you're designing barding for it.

Patrick Renie wrote:

F. Wesley Schneider wrote:

Gorbacz wrote:

Llama llama duck.

Ooooooh... might have to have stats for a llama. Patrick would LOVE that (his screen saver cycles through pictures of dogs, cats, and llamas).

I assure you, there will be plenty of llamas in this book if I have any say in the matter, including rules for how they spit (a ranged touch attack) and new barding specially for llamas (barding, in this case, mostly means funny wigs).

Patrick's a special one lady's and gents. But he is likely going to be the one developing this, so who am I to say he'll be wrong. :P

If Pathfinder Player Companion: Llama Library hadn't gotten shot down at the brainstorm session, this would be a very different book.

Gorbacz wrote:

Llama llama duck.

Ooooooh... might have to have stats for a llama. Patrick would LOVE that (his screen saver cycles through pictures of dogs, cats, and llamas).

I assure you, there will be plenty of llamas in this book if I have any say in the matter, including rules for how they spit (a ranged touch attack) and new barding specially for llamas (barding, in this case, mostly means funny wigs).

Yay, yay, yay, yay, YAY!!!! ^_^ I am so looking forward to this book (and, like many who already posted, August in general, despite the strain it'll put on my broke college graduate wallet). One quick question, and this is just a yes/no question that doesn't require anyone to reveal any major content of this book: are there any good PrCs for illusionists? I love playing illusionist wizards, and I always get a little sad that there aren't more options available for my illusionist characters.

Without spoiling any details, players who enjoy illusionists will no doubt find several of the prestige classes in this book to their liking.

That is really fantastic! Hats off to Patrick and the cartographer who managed to squeeze all of those tags in!

Crystal is the real hero in this case. I just marked up the blank map—she made it serviceable and pretty!

gbonehead wrote:

Now. Back to working on Shattered Star, you, I'm looking forward to your installment :)

Sent my turnover in weeks ago, so my work on Shattered Star is done for now (and my turnover for PFSS #4-02 was sent in Monday!). It's all in the eldritch hands of the thoroughly cruel, despicably evil James Jacobs. I happen to know he's going through it with his (evil) fine-toothed comb as we speak. Be afraid.

I have seen the comb you speak of. Legend tells that it is made from the sharpened teeth of 20 screaming babes, and was polished with the broken dreams and tears of no fewer than a dozen freelancers. It is the source of Jacobs's power as well as his voluptuous locks of auburn hair.

On a more relevant note...we hear you guys regarding the maps. During development of Isles of the Shackles, we simply found it impossible to include all of the map tags we wanted while (a) keeping all of Mike Shel's awesome content, and (b) making sure the map was still legible. So we had to compromise and only tag the islands that show up in the Gazetteer. Mapping is one of the hardest parts of developing a book, not only because it relies on a unique synergy between the art and writing sides, but also because it's so difficult to strike a balance between what locations to include and what locations to leave for GMs to place as they see fit.

Nebten wrote:

Hey all. I have a question about Rheumy Refrain in Blood of Fiends on page 28.

It states:

Quote:

"If the target fails its Will save, whenever it attempts any action other than moving up to its base speed or making a single melee attack (but not both) in a single round, it must succeed at a concentration check (DC 10 + your Charisma modifier) to avoid wasting its action because of a fit of coughing and sneezing."

My question is, how is a Concentration check made for non-casters (Fighters, rogues, barbarians, etc)? Is this an errror in the print or is there a rule I'm not aware of non-caster Concentration checks?

If it is an error, what check/saving throw is used to replace it?

First, sorry to leave you waiting. This got developed after it left my hands so I was hesitant to step in right away.

I think it's simplest to handle non-spellcasters with a level check + Con modifier. My rationale for this is that it's the default for everybody. However, spellcasters receive special training on how to "play through the pain" which allows them to make a concentration check instead.

Hope that helps. :)

Yeah, there's no rule for non-spellcasters to make concentration checks. I would recommend doing what Hal suggested, or otherwise changing the concentration check to a Fortitude save (DC = 10 + 1/2 the bard's HD + the bard's Charisma modifier).

Well, they managed to botch the evidence thing, too. The project was a wholesale failure for the Pathfinders (except that they got to keep the keg). We had great fun.

Just goes to show that a failed mission can be just as much of a hoot as a successful one. :] Glad you all had a good time!

Congratulations!

Michael Brock wrote:

All I can do is ask everyone to have a little patience while we work towards improving the campaign.

Is there any way you could perhaps share what sorts of ideas your weekly discussions have produced?

Also... so, Mike, how 'bout that Synthesist? And that White-Haired Witch?

-Matt

While I can't speak for the Synthesist at the moment, we have come up with some errata for the White-Haired Witch.

On page 23 of the Dragon Empires Gazetteer, in the White-Haired Witch archetype, in the Constrict, Trip, and Pull paragraphs, change "free action" to "swift action".