|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
James Jacobs wrote:
Hi JamesGiven that Nurgal is also alleged to be a half brother of Socothbenoth, would i be correct to assume his mother is Lamashtu, in which case he is presumably also a half brother of Nocticula?
James Jacobs wrote:
you tease, you!
Purple Dragon Knight wrote:
He paid for it and the nice folks at Paizo delivered it with their usual efficiency - its not far from Seattle to the UK!! That's how :o)
On pg 395 of the new release "curse of the crimson throne" updated version, I noticed some new wording not in the original part 6 "crown of fangs"! It states in the section on continuing the campaign that "Runelord Sorshen is an incredibly dangerous foes, one of the most powerful wizards to have ever ruled on Golarion, and facing her might require heroes of mythic power. In fact, she may feature in a prominent role in an upcoming Pathfinder product, so if you'd rather hold off on the return of the Runelord of Lust in your game until then, using her vampiric minions......"
So does this mean that Paizo are preparing some new module or adventure path involving the mythic rules and Sorshen and if so will you give any further details - like when we might look forward to seeing this?
Very excited by the prospect
I like this a lot because it hasn't been "spoiled" with a lot of dungeon decor that requires you to work it into the story. A relatively blank dungeon map allows the GM to go to work with no limitations imposed by strange coloured pools, or markings which imply a particular deity. More like this please. I'll definitely buy this one.
1. Do NPC classes grant the character a favoured class bonus - for example would a ratfolk expert be able to take expert as his/her favoured class and either add one skill rank or one hit point?
Hi James, I know this is more of a question for Wes, but he doesn't answer questions posted on his equivalent of this messageboard, so I thought you might have a view.
Devils are all about temptation and using temptation to corrupt souls. But of all the devils listed in the various Pathfinder products, there is no devil focused on the greatest temptation of them all.....no devil focused on sexual temptation......I know hell is misogynistic in the extreme, but I would have thought that Ardad Lili would have created some devils to seduce and make fools of men at the very least. Or have I misunderstood hell or missed the relevant devil type?
I'm up to my neck in Cheliax right now running the latest adventure path, but needed a "temptation devil" for a side adventure to bring the party up to the next level and couldn;t find one.
Apologies if this has been asked before
If, for example, a drow in Sekamina casts "Mount" what animal would appear? The spell specifies a horse or pony, but as neither has darkvision that seems wrong underground, however, it seems equally wrong that the spell is useless underground. Any thoughts? Is there an "undeground" version of the spell?
I am sure I recall seeing rules in a Paizo product for a magic item which is a covered wagon or cart or varisian caravan that is Larger on the inside, etc ( as in tiny hut or secure shelter) but after a fairly extensive search trhough my pdf library i cannot seem to locate it, can someone point me to the relevant publication?
Hi there, i have received email notification of shipment of my three subscription products this month : hells bright shadow, occult bestiary and dirty tactics tool box. The last two have appeared in pdf form in my downloads, but mysteriously, hells bright shadow has NOT appeared........could you check this out please? Thanks. Tim
Sara Marie wrote:
Thanks, i'll just wait patiently then :0)
Hi Sara-Marie, i received the shipping notice and pdf of my Occult Adventures on Tuesday, but have still not received the same for my other Paizo products (Hell Unleashed, etc) which are due this month. This has not happened with any of my previous orders even when shipped in more than one package. Should i be worried? Thanks and sorry to bother you.
all good points, but as most eidolons get two attacks for free and usually add a third, you get three DR overcoming attacks, whilst the potion/oil only gives you one and then only once. The cold iron is a good one for use against demons, but alchemical silver is a lot more expensive and reduces the damage for slashing and piecing weapons. Silversheen is 250gp for a single use, so too expensive for 1st levellers. Overall, it does seem that a DR overcoming eidolon is quite useful (to say the least) espcially with an enlarge person spell. Compared to a druid's companion which is much more difficult to buff against DR - for example. A cold iron wielding summoner with a good aligned eidolon is going to get three/four attacks a round at first level against a demon with no DR enough to scare any low CR demon I suspect - no other class gets close......is all I'm saying :o)
James Jacobs wrote:
Thanks James - I have posted it in rules Questions and tagged it as FAQ as you suggest, although it wasn't really intended as a rules question (I know we aren't supposed to use this forum for such things). My real question was to you as creative director, asking whether the change was intentional or just a by-product of the decision to make all eidolons specific outsider sub-types - ie did the team set out to give eidolons this extra power as part of the rebalancing or did they simply want eidolons to be specific sub-types to try to narrow the room for crazy builds and going down that route had the unintended consequence of giving eidolons the power to overcome opposing alignment DR? If that also falls under the heading if "inappropriate questions" for this forum, then apologies and please ignore me :o)
Not sure you are correct - page 29 of Unchained under the heading "Eidolon Subtypes" states: "the first time a summoner calls his eidolon he must decide on its subtype. The eidolons subtype determines...." The list of subtypes from which the summoner has to choose are Angel, Azata, etc. So I don't see how you can be choosing a sub-type if that is not in fact one of the eidolon's sub-types! It also gains the relevant alignment sub-types IN ADDITION as stated lower down the page. At least that is RAW as far as I read it. But lets not argue as its not really relevant to the issue of overcoming DR.
Well I can think of at least 6 devils which might be confronting 1st and 2nd level adventurers in Hell's Rebels all of which have DR/good:
The new "unchained" summoner (which is the only vfersion permitted in PFS) now has an eidolon which has a specific creature sub-type and specific alignment sub-types. For example the summoner might have an eidolon with the following type and subtype - "outsider (archon, good, lawful, extraplanar)". Now I may have misunderstood the pathfinder rules in a serious way, but as I understand it, any creature with the "good" sub-type deals damage which overcomes DR/good (and likewise for chaotic, evil and lawful subtypes). So my question is: was it the intention of the authors that under the new "unchained" rules, for example, an archon eidolon would be able to overcome DR/good and DR/lawful at 1st level? That seems to be a very big change in the context of a summoner's ability to take on outsiders of the opposing alignment - and here I'm thinking of the upcoming Hell's Rebels adventure path (or for that matter the Worldwound adventure path). As far as I can recall, at 1st level, only a Paladin would have the ability to overcome DR/good - and then only once per day with his smite evil ability. Most spells which allow weapons to overcome DR are 2nd level or higher (ie only available to characters of 3rd/4th level or higher).
Hi James! A quick question concerning "unchained" (which is a great book by the way). The new "unchained" summoner now has an eidolon which has a specific creature sub-type and specific alignment sub-types. For example the summoner might have an eidolon with the following type and subtyoe - "outsider (archon, good, lawful, extraplanar)". Now I may have misunderstood the pathfinder rules in a serious way, but as I understand it, any creature with the "good" sub-type deals damage which overcomes DR/good (and likewise for chaotic, evil and lawful subtypes). So my question is: was it the intention of the authors that under the new "unchained" rules, for example, an archon eidolon would be able to overcome DR/good and DR/lawful at 1st level? That seems to be a very big change in the context of a summoner's ability to take on outsiders of the opposing alignment - and here I'm thinking of the upcoming Hell's Rebels adventure path (or for that matter the Worldwound adventure path). As far as I can recall, at 1st level, only a Paladin would have the ability to overcome DR/good - and then only once per day with his smite evil ability. Most spells which allow weapons to overcome DR are 2nd level or higher (ie only available to characters of 3rd/4th level or higher.
If the cities detailed are all ports, i see real use in this book for anyone running a ship based campaign.....the chance to set up new trade routes would make for many options as a GM and lots of fun for players - must remember to ban my players from buying or reading this one! Really looking forward to this
James Jacobs wrote:
Hi James, in Dungeons of Golarion, it states that the drow outpost in Black Siren Citadel is loyal to Blackstrand, which would put Blackstrand under the Asphodell mountains in north west Andoran. That is where it is shown in the map on page 38 of Into the Darkness, so does that mean its the text on page 43 of Into the Darklands (in the sidebar) which we need to switch - I presume it does, so the map is correct and the sidebar is where the mix up happened? Thanks
Not sure you are right about the broodmaster, as i think you'd just split the base evolutions between the two small eidolons and then apply the rules as you would for the APG summoner, but i could be wrong. I definitely agree that the First Worlder won't work with unchained. Not sure abiut the shadow caller.
Hey, thanks for that "inside info" :o). If you happen to be able to speak to the people in charge of such things at Paizo, do you think you could suggest to them that they (1) produce a free download with a list of the existing archetypes that work for the unchained summoner (and the other new unchained classes) and (2) perhaps also produce a free download with updates/reworkings for those archetypes that don't?
Its pretty obvious to me that the senior staff at Paizo really want to abandon the old APG summoner in gffavour of the new unchained summoner - and to some extent I can sympathise with this as the old version is very unweildy for GMs and also overpowered (IMHO) compared to some other classes. But if that is the plan, then they need to give us the archetypes for the new unchained summoner to help that process.
If you check out the new Heroes of the Wild player companion, you'll see that it includes a new summoner archtype - the wild caller - this allows the summoner to call a plant eidolon with one of four base forms, BUT It also allows the summoner to vary the form which appears in different terrains, so you can have a tree version with one set of base evolutions in the forest and a fungus form with another set of base evolutions underground. Sadly, as this changes the base form of the eidolon, it will (I assume) not be eligible for PFS but it does get close to your idea of having multiple eidolons only one of which can be summoned at a time. I actually really like this new archtype, but i'm not sure yet if it works with the unchained summoner........in that sense, i really think paizo needs to specify which archtypes already published work with the new unchained summoner, as i for one am a bit confused......and i'm a fan of the limits imposed by the unchqined summoner (being both a GM and a player)
To cut a very long story short, I have a player who is a half-drow first worlder summoner. As such her eidolon has the "Fey" type. She is wanting to deliberately infect the eidolon with the blight in Fangwood (where she operates). Technically, I think the blighted fey template can be added to any Fey. As such, the rules as written would seem to allow this to occur. Of course it will tie her eidolon to the blighted part of Fangwood (I assume) but can anyone see any rules based reason why I should not allow this. The summoner character is a follower of Cyth-V'sug.
Sean K Reynolds wrote:
I think you're right Sean, but its worth noting that the picture of the drow alchemist with the wings discovery on page 38 of the Monster Codex does not have wings visible which either means (1) they do appear and disappear - which doesn't seem right to me in the context of an alchemist - or (2) the artist forgot to include the wings!!
I don't think Columbus Day is a public holiday in Washington State, so i imagine the Paizo team will be working as usual on Monday. Maybe USPS won't work, but we should still get our pdf copies as i think they are dropped into our downloads when the label for the postal delivery is generated. But i could be wrong!
I don't think its been mentioned in the string above, but the one big plus of the First Worlder is that although the Summon Monster ability of a plain vanilla summoner is swapped for Summon Nature's Ally and although it takes longer to cast and only lasts for 1 round/level rather than 1 minute/level (all noted above) - the First Worlder can have as many SNA spells going at the same time as he/she wishes AND whilst his/her eidolon is summmoned. This differs from the plain vanilla summoner (if the eidolon is summoned, the Summon Monster spell-like ability cannot be used) and the Master Summoner (who can only have one Summon Monster spell active whilst the eidolon is summoned).
So a First Worlder can have vast numbers of allies summoned all at the same time as well as his eidolon, though only for short periods.
Learning the Rules wrote:
If I as a M size Human have an etra quiver with Huge Crossbow bolts and a quiver with regular longbow arrows choose what ammo a summoned Bow Spirit uses?
As I read the spell, the bow spirit is the same size as the ranger who casts the spell - I base that on the fact it occupies the same space. So I think it has to use ammunition for a creature the same size as the ranger - using larger ammunition will cause it to suffer the appropriate penalties. Having said that, I assume that you could use the spell Enlarge Person in conjunction with bow spirit to achieve your aim......
I think your Starting point would be to look at HIPS from the perspective of a shadowdancer or assassin:
"an assassin can use the Stealth skill even while being observed. As long as he is within 10 feet of some sort of shadow, an assassin can hide himself from view in the open without having anything to actually hide behind. He cannot, however, hide in his own shadow."
As such I think its clear that using HIPS is just a special form of using stealth to hide - normally you'd need to have some form of cover to use stealth, but with HIPS you can use stealth provided you are within 10 feet of shadow.
Looking at the rules on using stealth:
"if people are observing you using any of their senses (but typically sight), you can't use Stealth. Against most creatures, finding cover or concealment allows you to use Stealth. If your observers are momentarily distracted (such as by a Bluff check), you can attempt to use Stealth. While the others turn their attention from you, you can attempt a Stealth check if you can get to an unobserved place of some kind. This check, however, is made at a –10 penalty because you have to move fast."
"Normally, you make a Stealth check as part of movement, so it doesn't take a separate action. However, using Stealth immediately after a ranged attack (see Sniping, above) is a move action."
1. Based on those sections, I think HIPS is part of a move action if you move to a position within 10 feet of shadow and then hide. If you are already standing still, then I think its not an action, unless you have been observed already and are attempting to hide whilst standing still, in that case, you'd have to use bluff to distract your observers and the use of bluff would be a standard action if your GM feels the distraction is similar to a feint, otherwise its a full round action (or longer) depending on how your GM decides to treat the distraction you attempt.
2. I think that also answers the stand in one place and vanish - HIPS is not "invisibility" it simply allows you to use stealth without cover - so you'd have to use bluff as referred to above.
3. for your third question, I'd treat the spell casting similarly to sniping: "If you've already successfully used Stealth at least 10 feet from your target, you can make one ranged attack and then immediately use Stealth again. You take a –20 penalty on your Stealth check to maintain your obscured location."
4. vs stealth would be my interpretation - HIPS is about using stealth, so if you speak, I think the person who is in range to hear would use their perception against your stealth with the penalty referred to above. Again, i think its important to point out that HIPS is NOT invisibility.
5. I suppose you would flank if you were right next to the target using HIPS successfully as per above.
Hope that helps
Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, Starfinder, the Starfinder logo, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc. The Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Legends, Pathfinder Online, Starfinder Adventure Path, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.