Can someone please tell me what the agathion-descended aasimar are like?

Well, they're basically celestial humans that descended from the race of outsiders known as agathions.

Well, they're basically celestial humans that descended from the race of outsiders known as agathions.

EEwww....that's cold.......

Agathion(Idyllkin)

Angel(Angelkin)

Archon(Lawbringer)

Azata(Musetouched)

Garuda(Plumekith)

Peri(Emberkin)

The new oracle curses are interesting to say the least, and not what I had been expecting after reading Blood of Fiends.

The Blackened curse gives you burnt hands and upper arms, causing you to get a hefty penalty to 'weapon' attack rolls. This also adds fire spells to your spells known over time. I have to wonder... does this penalty apply to ray and touch attack spells? I guess it should since we're allowed to take 'Weapon Focus (ray)'. Anyway, interesting flavor, and I don't think the bonus spells that it grants overlap with those from the Flames mystery.

Wolfscarred Face curses you with a deformed and wolf-like face and a permanent chance of failing to cast spells which have verbal components (but you don't lose the spell). You get a bite attack and Magic Fang spells added to your list in return. My inner munchkin tells me that a Dual Cursed Wolfscarred/Deaf oracle is a workable combo since Deaf makes all your spells silent spells, effectively negating the former curse. Of course, you would still need to hide your face, and would also have to deal with the horrible roleplaying side effect of being deaf, lol. Anyway, I guess this curse would generally be somehow linked to the Agathions?

Thanks to everyone who helped.

And wolfscarred face? It sounds both very cool and in an odd way dismaying. I already use beast-folk when I can, and it's sad to think that they've got to go everywhere hiding behind a mask (oh well, I can always run games/campaigns in Nex or Varisia or the River Kingdoms, they're used to oddballs there!).

Thanks again to the posters and to Paizo!

The Blackened curse gives you burnt hands and upper arms, causing you to get a hefty penalty to 'weapon' attack rolls. This also adds fire spells to your spells known over time. I have to wonder... does this penalty apply to ray and touch attack spells? I guess it should since we're allowed to take 'Weapon Focus (ray)'. Anyway, interesting flavor, and I don't think the bonus spells that it grants overlap with those from the Flames mystery.

I looked at Weapon Focus since you mentioned it, and I think you have it backwards.

Choose one type of weapon. You can also choose unarmed strike or grapple (or ray, if you are a spellcaster) as your weapon for the purposes of this feat.

So it specifically calls out unarmed strikes and rays as things that aren't weapons, but that you can take the feat for anyway -- and if they aren't weapons, then it stands to reason that melee touch attacks aren't either.

So it specifically calls out unarmed strikes and rays as things that aren't weapons, but that you can take the feat for anyway -- and if they aren't weapons, then it stands to reason that melee touch attacks aren't either.

Ooo, good catch. So, basically if you have this curse you're going to be trying to use only spells and special abilities for attacking. Interesting....

So it specifically calls out unarmed strikes and rays as things that aren't weapons, but that you can take the feat for anyway -- and if they aren't weapons, then it stands to reason that melee touch attacks aren't either.

While that is a reasonable reading, there is actually a FAQ on this. Quick Version: rays are generally treated as weapons for all purposes. So, the curse would in all likelihood apply to them (though I don't have the book, and couldn't say for certain).

Your welcome Eric Hinkle.

Fredrik wrote:

So it specifically calls out unarmed strikes and rays as things that aren't weapons, but that you can take the feat for anyway -- and if they aren't weapons, then it stands to reason that melee touch attacks aren't either.

While that is a reasonable reading, there is actually a FAQ on this. Quick Version: rays are generally treated as weapons for all purposes. So, the curse would in all likelihood apply to them (though I don't have the book, and couldn't say for certain).

The book just says that you get a -4 penalty on all 'weapon' attack rolls.

Hmmm, so the end result of this is either A: you get the penalty to all attack rolls or B: you get the penalty on all weapon attack rolls AND rays?

The problem with A is that if this was the case there would have been no reason to call out 'weapon' attack rolls specifically. The problem with B is that there is no reason why you should get the penalty on rays but not get it on melee touch attacks.

Then, there is also the issue that if you follow the curse as written then you would also get a -4 penalty to bite attacks (if you have one).

I'm beginning to think that this is a case where the the intent really is that the penalty only applies when you try to wield actual physical weapons (or use natural attacks) with your burnt hands, and that we need to just ignore the rule technicalities/implications of what exactly counts as a weapon.

Edit: Also, I think I should mention one of the bonus spells that this curse grants is Scorching Ray. I think that they wouldn't give you a ray spell if the curse itself made hitting with it much more difficult, though there is a possibility they figured that the BAB of the oracle class made up for it.

I made a thread for errata and typos, so that we can continue our rules discussion there. :)

Isn't there 3 curses? if so, what's the third?

Fredrik - Ah, good call on separating that into another thread ;)

Zerg - Nah there are only 2 curses.

And wolfscarred face? It sounds both very cool and in an odd way dismaying. I already use beast-folk when I can, and it's sad to think that they've got to go everywhere hiding behind a mask (oh well, I can always run games/campaigns in Nex or Varisia or the River Kingdoms, they're used to oddballs there!).

I should have replied to this earlier...

The Wolfscarred face curse suggests that you will need to hide your face in areas that have problems with lycanthropes because you could easily be mistaken for one. So, Ustalav is a very bad area for a Wolfscarred (or any beast race) to travel around in, though I'm not sure how many other areas have that many lycanthrope problems.

I guess a good portion of this simply depends on the GM.

Eric Hinkle wrote:

And wolfscarred face? It sounds both very cool and in an odd way dismaying. I already use beast-folk when I can, and it's sad to think that they've got to go everywhere hiding behind a mask (oh well, I can always run games/campaigns in Nex or Varisia or the River Kingdoms, they're used to oddballs there!).

I should have replied to this earlier...

The Wolfscarred face curse suggests that you will need to hide your face in areas that have problems with lycanthropes because you could easily be mistaken for one. So, Ustalav is a very bad area for a Wolfscarred (or any beast race) to travel around in, though I'm not sure how many other areas have that many lycanthrope problems.

I guess a good portion of this simply depends on the GM.

Thanks for expanding on what's been said. And I seem to recall that rural Andoran has lots of problems with werewolves, and there's that one town in Varisia. Then again, you can always go and live in Kaer Maga, where Lamashtu herself could stroll down the street and no one would blink an eye.

Any one know something about the Martyred Bloodline? If so what spells/feats/arcana/bloodline powers does it get? I'm making a sorcerer for a home game and want to know if I should wait for this product to use this bloodline.

Picked it up at Paizo Con. Awesome.

Impossible to order it from Amazon.fr. :-(

Any one know something about the Martyred Bloodline? If so what spells/feats/arcana/bloodline powers does it get? I'm making a sorcerer for a home game and want to know if I should wait for this product to use this bloodline.

It's all about self-sacrifice, probably need a high con, toughness and favoured class bonus in hit points to play one.

It's a buff bloodline, really.

Thanks for that, you just saved me a week of waiting to make my character.

So... much for Clerics/Paladins?

I wasn't sold on the ARG Paladin - kinda Hippy.

So... much for Clerics/Paladins?

I wasn't sold on the ARG Paladin - kinda Hippy.

The angelkin variant would suit a melee paladin (+2str +2cha), and the musetouched an archer paladin (+2dex, +2cha)... that's about it.

Edit, and there are some fun subdomains:
friendship
loyalty
whimsy

Oh, and the consecrate spell metamagic is great stuff.

kk thanks :)

But the barbarian celestial totems that Mikaze wanted so much? (I too would like them)

But the barbarian celestial totems that Mikaze wanted so much? (I too would like them)

Sorry, the celestial totems are not in the book.

Bardess wrote:

But the barbarian celestial totems that Mikaze wanted so much? (I too would like them)

Sorry, the celestial totems are not in the book.

They've figured out that they can make Mikaze buy evertyhing they ever release by occasionally saying: 'We haven't forgotten about celestial totems.'

You'll note that it's always the freelancers who say that, not the devs :)

Just what are these celestial totems?

Just what are these Celestial Totems?

I think it's some kind of Barbarian stuff.

Oh, I also have a question.

What's a Paladin?

Just what are these celestial totems?

Totems are a type of rage power introduced in the APG, which had a fiendish option, but no celestial one. Mikase has been on a solo quest since to get the celestial version published

Edit, and there are some fun subdomains:
friendship
loyalty
whimsy

Hmm, so Friendship is (divine) magic? And with loyalty and whimsy (humor or laughter)... what, nothing for Applejack, Rarity, and Fluttershy*? XD

Seriously, they sound different in good ways. Arrgh, must wait so long to get this book!

Oh, and the consecrate spell metamagic is great stuff.

Can we get a hint on what it does? I'm guessing it's something like the 3.5 version, which made spells good-aligned.

* -- For those not getting it, in the MLP:FiM show the six main characters each have their own 'Element of Harmony', and three of them are Friendship (which is magic, literally so); loyalty; and laughter.

New question, what are the new celestial inquisitions?

Barong wrote:

Just what are these celestial totems?

Totems are a type of rage power introduced in the APG, which had a fiendish option, but no celestial one. Mikase has been on a solo quest since to get the celestial version published

It's a solo quest no longer! It's not fair to have fiendish and not celestial totems! Are we trying to encourage our players to pick evil options?

what spells does the blackened curse give? I hope that flame blade is among them.

(I too would like them)

It's a solo quest no longer! It's not fair to have fiendish and not celestial totems! Are we trying to encourage our players to pick evil options?

If you want them, or any other options for Team Good that the game currently lacks, Rock The Vote! Even if stuff you'd like has already been mentioned in that thread, let your voice be heard! Especially since that's perhaps the best and last chance to get good flavor support for other classes.

Just got the shipping notice for this book. Really want to see the range of aasimar art present. :)

I reckon there should be a Celestial version too, just as there can be a burning rage, there should equally be COLD FURY!.

If Blood of Angels is the book for characters with celestial blood, will the book for characters with Hound of Tindalos blood be Blood of Angles?

If Blood of Angels is the book for characters with celestial blood, will the book for characters with Hound of Tindalos blood be Blood of Angles?

No no no. Blood of Angles is going to be the Inevitable/Axiomite-touched book.

GeraintElberion wrote:

Oh, and the consecrate spell metamagic is great stuff.

Can we get a hint on what it does? I'm guessing it's something like the 3.5 version, which made spells good-aligned.

It smashes evil in the face!

Maximise effect vs. Evil opponents, no effect on Good or Neutral: 2 spell levels.

Maximise effect vs. Evil opponents, no effect on Good or Neutral: 2 spell levels.

No effect as in 'unmodified spell'?

GeraintElberion wrote:

Maximise effect vs. Evil opponents, no effect on Good or Neutral: 2 spell levels.

No effect as in 'unmodified spell'?

Or no effect as in 'spell does exactly nothing'?

Unmodified.

I miss Sudden Metamagic.

Eric Hinkle wrote:

GeraintElberion wrote:

Oh, and the consecrate spell metamagic is great stuff.

Can we get a hint on what it does? I'm guessing it's something like the 3.5 version, which made spells good-aligned.

It smashes evil in the face!

Maximise effect vs. Evil opponents, no effect on Good or Neutral: 2 spell levels.

Thank you, sir! And now I'm wondering if a 'Desecrate Spell' metamagic feat made along those lines would be workable or too overpowered for the bad guys.

GeraintElberion wrote:

Eric Hinkle wrote:

GeraintElberion wrote:

Oh, and the consecrate spell metamagic is great stuff.

Can we get a hint on what it does? I'm guessing it's something like the 3.5 version, which made spells good-aligned.

It smashes evil in the face!

Maximise effect vs. Evil opponents, no effect on Good or Neutral: 2 spell levels.

Thank you, sir! And now I'm wondering if a 'Desecrate Spell' metamagic feat made along those lines would be workable or too overpowered for the bad guys.

Various Paizo folk have mentioned that they're trying to get away from the good/evil mirror syndrome i.e. no 'good poisons'.

So far that has just meant that Good has less toys than Evil but it must swing the other way at some point, surely?

Shifty wrote:

So... much for Clerics/Paladins?

I wasn't sold on the ARG Paladin - kinda Hippy.

The angelkin variant would suit a melee paladin (+2str +2cha), and the musetouched an archer paladin (+2dex, +2cha)... that's about it.

Edit, and there are some fun subdomains:
friendship
loyalty
whimsy

Oh, and the consecrate spell metamagic is great stuff.

Any new deities to go with the new domains?

GeraintElberion wrote:

Shifty wrote:

So... much for Clerics/Paladins?

I wasn't sold on the ARG Paladin - kinda Hippy.

The angelkin variant would suit a melee paladin (+2str +2cha), and the musetouched an archer paladin (+2dex, +2cha)... that's about it.

Edit, and there are some fun subdomains:
friendship
loyalty
whimsy

Oh, and the consecrate spell metamagic is great stuff.

Any new deities to go with the new domains?

Nope, but the Magnimar book, which also shipped just after Paizocon, has three new Empyreal Lords.

Three ne ones, or information on three of them?

Various Paizo folk have mentioned that they're trying to get away from the good/evil mirror syndrome i.e. no 'good poisons'.

Halle-freaking-lullah. Not everything the heroes have needs an evil opposite.

Three new ones, or information on three of them?

One had a passing mention in The Skinsaw Murders, the others are brand new. All three get holy symbols, areas of concern, domains, favoured weapons and brief fluff.