>>Ask *James Jacobs* ALL your Questions Here!<<


Off-Topic Discussions

60,301 to 60,350 of 83,732 << first < prev | 1202 | 1203 | 1204 | 1205 | 1206 | 1207 | 1208 | 1209 | 1210 | 1211 | 1212 | next > last >>
Paizo Employee Creative Director

Samy wrote:
Apparently we've just passed into Chinese year 4714. Is it purely a coincidence that the Chinese calendar is so close to Golarion year, or is it an intentional easter egg?

100% coincidence, since this is the first I've made that connection. If it was intended to be an easter egg, it would have made more sense for this year in Golarion to be 4714, regardless of the fact that a tie to Chinese years makes no real sense anyway in this context.

Liberty's Edge

Are you the one who made up the Golarion year number?

Paizo Employee Creative Director

Samy wrote:
Are you the one who made up the Golarion year number?

Nope. I'm relatively sure that the current year and the super-long history were numbers that came from Erik, but that was like a decade ago so I can't say for 100% sure WHO came up with them. Other than to confirm it wasn't me.


How do you reconcile the Devilbound template available from swearing an infernal contract with the generally much less powerful boons available from infernal contracts listed in The Kintargo Contract? Is your view that the Devilbound template is too powerful and should most be deemphasized (despite it being used by Nox in the first volume), or is there something special about the Devilbound template that it is only offered to a select few?


Curious about your take on a hypothetical scenario:

A good friend of yours wants to run a Pathfinder game and invites you to the group. They insist on having a GMPC in the group (not a non-player character, but their own personal player character as a party member), even though the group doesn't really have any gaps that need to be compensated for (like healing) nor is the group hurting for players. Their insistence is such that if they have to make a choice between having the GMPC or having you, they'd rather have the GMPC.

What is your response?

Paizo Employee Creative Director

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Slithery D wrote:
How do you reconcile the Devilbound template available from swearing an infernal contract with the generally much less powerful boons available from infernal contracts listed in The Kintargo Contract? Is your view that the Devilbound template is too powerful and should most be deemphasized (despite it being used by Nox in the first volume), or is there something special about the Devilbound template that it is only offered to a select few?

I don't need to reconcile this at all. Infernal contracts can cover the entire range of possibility of boons, from relatively minor boosts like some of the minor contracts we give as examples, up to granting a wish or multiple wishes. An infernal contract that grants a creature the devilbound template is absolutely possible; nothing in the article says otherwise.

The devilbound template is a really fun archetype (as evidenced by the fact I had it used twice in this AP, and have been dropping it into Adventure Paths since Crimson Throne). Power has nothing to do with it. Infernal contracts aren't about giving player characters "game balanced options." They're about tempting mortals (be they PC or NPC) into falling from grace and damning themselves to Hell.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

1 person marked this as a favorite.
MythicFox wrote:

Curious about your take on a hypothetical scenario:

A good friend of yours wants to run a Pathfinder game and invites you to the group. They insist on having a GMPC in the group (not a non-player character, but their own personal player character as a party member), even though the group doesn't really have any gaps that need to be compensated for (like healing) nor is the group hurting for players. Their insistence is such that if they have to make a choice between having the GMPC or having you, they'd rather have the GMPC.

What is your response?

I'd still play. Some GMs are very talented at running GM PCs, and done right, a GM PC can be a VERY valuable and useful link between the GM and the players that creates for opportunities for much more immersive plots and storylines.

Of course, done badly, it's lame.

I'd still play, but as soon as it became apparent the GM was only running the game for his own character and treating the rest of the group as co-stars at best or henchfolk at worst... I'd find something else to do with my time.


What happens to the soul of a humanoid who worships one of the Eldest after death? Dissolve into First World energy? Get reincarnated as some sort of fey? Go the outer plane of his alignment and disregard his mortal worship? I guess a similar question applies to Elemental Lords, Outer Gods, and any other material plane or inner plane based deity options.

James Jacobs wrote:


I don't need to reconcile this at all. Infernal contracts can cover the entire range of possibility of boons, from relatively minor boosts like some of the minor contracts we give as examples, up to granting a wish or multiple wishes. An infernal contract that grants a creature the devilbound template is absolutely possible; nothing in the article says otherwise.

The devilbound template is a really fun archetype (as evidenced by the fact I had it used twice in this AP, and have been dropping it into Adventure Paths since Crimson Throne). Power has nothing to do with it. Infernal contracts aren't about giving player characters "game balanced options." They're about tempting mortals (be they PC or NPC) into falling from grace and damning themselves to Hell.

Given the existence of the devilbound template, the contracts in The Kintargo Contract read like, "sure, for the price of your soul we could give you $50,000,000, an adoring supermodel wife, and make you healthy, more handsome, stronger, and smarter, but wouldn't you rather have this brand new Camaro, with an exclusive "Devil Red" paint job that you can't buy anywhere on Earth?" No, I wouldn't, and I can't imagine anyone else would. I suppose there's a place in the world for devils to trick people with obviously inferior options for the same price, it just seems out of place given GM knowledge and the publication order. Anyway, I really like the rules for contracts presented, the rewards just had me wondering WTF in many cases.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

Slithery D wrote:

What happens to the soul of a humanoid who worships one of the Eldest after death? Dissolve into First World energy? Get reincarnated as some sort of fey? Go the outer plane of his alignment and disregard his mortal worship? I guess a similar question applies to Elemental Lords, Outer Gods, and any other material plane or inner plane based deity options.

James Jacobs wrote:


I don't need to reconcile this at all. Infernal contracts can cover the entire range of possibility of boons, from relatively minor boosts like some of the minor contracts we give as examples, up to granting a wish or multiple wishes. An infernal contract that grants a creature the devilbound template is absolutely possible; nothing in the article says otherwise.

The devilbound template is a really fun archetype (as evidenced by the fact I had it used twice in this AP, and have been dropping it into Adventure Paths since Crimson Throne). Power has nothing to do with it. Infernal contracts aren't about giving player characters "game balanced options." They're about tempting mortals (be they PC or NPC) into falling from grace and damning themselves to Hell.

Given the existence of the devilbound template, the contracts in The Kintargo Contract read like, "sure, for the price of your soul we could give you $50,000,000, an adoring supermodel wife, and make you healthy, more handsome, stronger, and smarter, but wouldn't you rather have this brand new Camaro, with an exclusive "Devil Red" paint job that you can't buy anywhere on Earth?" No, I wouldn't, and I can't imagine anyone else would. I suppose there's a place in the world for devils to trick people with obviously inferior options for the same price, it just seems out of place given GM knowledge and the publication order. Anyway, I really like the rules for contracts presented, the rewards just had me wondering WTF in many cases.

As with all who worship deities, someone who worshiped one of the Eldest and is judged worthy to go on to an afterlife in service to their deity would end up on the First World in that deity's realm. In this case, the soul's fate is currently unrevealed in our game—it's unrevealed what happens when a soul becomes a "petitioner" on a plane other than the outer planes, but rest assured, they DO go there. Those who go to the elemental planes I suspect become elementals. Those who go to the First World probably reincarnate as fey, I would guess. And so on.

And not every reward has to appeal to every person, and that holds true for infernal contracts.

Radiant Oath

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

We all know that Sarenrae, as goddess of redemption, and Shelyn, who is all-loving, are pretty tolerant towards penitent evil-doers. Where does Iomedae sit on that scale? How much of a "dark past," so to speak is she willing to forgive before she decides the person's irredeemable scum fit only for smiting?

Paizo Employee Creative Director

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Archpaladin Zousha wrote:
We all know that Sarenrae, as goddess of redemption, and Shelyn, who is all-loving, are pretty tolerant towards penitent evil-doers. Where does Iomedae sit on that scale? How much of a "dark past," so to speak is she willing to forgive before she decides the person's irredeemable scum fit only for smiting?

Iomedae is not super tolerant of this type of thing, as I had assumed Wrath of the Righteous (particularly the start of book 5) made pretty clear. Erastil is the most tolerant of forgiveness among the lawful good deities, but even then... it's my take that the capacity to forgive is a purely good trait and as such is lessened by the influence of law or chaos. And thus, that's my reasoning for setting up the two most forgiving deities as neutral good deities.

Radiant Oath

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

So a Hell's Vengeance PC who becomes worried about the state of their immortal soul when the dust settles is pretty much screwed?

Paizo Employee Creative Director

Archpaladin Zousha wrote:
So a Hell's Vengeance PC who becomes worried about the state of their immortal soul when the dust settles is pretty much screwed?

Why do you think that?

In fact, this is not the case at all. As the AP will describe in detail, particularly at the end of the 4th adventure. Not gonna go into the details here because it's kinda a spoiler and because it's Rob's AP, not mine.

Radiant Oath

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

Well, largely because from the adventure synopses at the back of the first book, the things the PCs are tasked with doing would render them as KILL-ON-SIGHT to Iomedae and her church, even if the Glorious Reclamation is an extremist fringe. And wouldn't Iomedaeans talk to Sarenites if a character came to them seeking redemption, saying "Don't forgive this monster, he's butchered our faithful, consorted with Devils and doomed Cheliax!"


Hey, James!

Out of the seven deadly sins, which one would you say is Graz'zt most guilty of?

Silver Crusade

Hmm, something that I've been wandering about.

Don't knew if you worked on it when 3rd edition came around, but regarding the Ranger's Favored Enemy ability and that it gives it a bonus to Bluff, but not to Intimidate.

Why do think that is?

More to the why they don't get a bonus to Intimidate rather than why they get one to Bluff (I figure being specifically trained to kill a certain creature would help with the whole intimidating thing but that's just me :3).


James, I'm going to be running Wrath of the Righteous for my group when we finish our current campaign. I'm guessing in about a year. I love the AP and I have a ton of enthusiasm for the campaign right now...but I've got a year before we start it. What kids of things would you suggest I could do as preparation to run it when it's still such a long way off?

Paizo Employee Creative Director

Varisian Wanderer wrote:

Hey, James!

Out of the seven deadly sins, which one would you say is Graz'zt most guilty of?

Hmmm... he does pretty good at all of them, so I'd say pride, since that's usually held as the original and most serious of the sins, the one from which all others flow.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Archpaladin Zousha wrote:
Well, largely because from the adventure synopses at the back of the first book, the things the PCs are tasked with doing would render them as KILL-ON-SIGHT to Iomedae and her church, even if the Glorious Reclamation is an extremist fringe. And wouldn't Iomedaeans talk to Sarenites if a character came to them seeking redemption, saying "Don't forgive this monster, he's butchered our faithful, consorted with Devils and doomed Cheliax!"

An evil person who excels at being evil isn't consigning his/her soul to damnation; if you do well enough you CAN earn a place in the afterlife at your deitiy's side or in their domain as a devil or demon or whatever. An evil soul doesn't WANT to be in heaven in paradise, it wants to continue being evil in Hell/the Abyss/Abaddon/wherever.

On top of that, it's important to keep in mind the context. We as readers of Pathfinder rules and content are privy to all sorts of things those who live in the world are not, including what happens after death. Sure, folks have come back from death or explored the outer planes, but their testimony is often contradictory (sometimes deliberately so) and the information isn't well distributed to the masses.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Rysky wrote:

Hmm, something that I've been wandering about.

Don't knew if you worked on it when 3rd edition came around, but regarding the Ranger's Favored Enemy ability and that it gives it a bonus to Bluff, but not to Intimidate.

Why do think that is?

More to the why they don't get a bonus to Intimidate rather than why they get one to Bluff (I figure being specifically trained to kill a certain creature would help with the whole intimidating thing but that's just me :3).

I have no idea. Sounds like either a mistake or an arbitrary call. Maybe Intimidate was a late addition to the game and no one noticed it got ignored by the ranger? Not sure.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

9 people marked this as a favorite.
Wildebob wrote:
James, I'm going to be running Wrath of the Righteous for my group when we finish our current campaign. I'm guessing in about a year. I love the AP and I have a ton of enthusiasm for the campaign right now...but I've got a year before we start it. What kids of things would you suggest I could do as preparation to run it when it's still such a long way off?

Assuming you're going to be running the mythic version of the rules, I have two big bits of advice:

1) Make sure you are more familiar and more comfortable with the mythic rules than your players. They're complex (both the mythic rules AND players) and it's easy to mess things up or forget things, particularly when it comes to managing swift action usages. Use your comfort and skill with the mythic rules to address issues in play (the adventures, particularly at the higher levels, had little to no playtest feedback on how to balance high level mythic characters with encounters, so I was increasingly taking shots in the dark there as the development went on); one way to help there is to enforce time limits and don't let the PCs abuse their opportunities to rest and thus gain back mythic powers (or worse, build the expectation that they'll be able to regain mythic powers whenever they want just by resting). You might even consider a recharge mechanic for mythic powers that doesn't use resting, but instead uses adventure progress. Say, the PCs don't regain their mythic power uses until they finish a part in the adventure or the like, thus forcing them to ration and plan ahead more than just use every single mythic option on the first encounter and then rest and repeat.

2) Make sure you're comfortable with a different style of game play. Non-mythic Pathfinder does great at evoking a gritty swords-and-sorcery fantasy genre. Mythic does not seek to evoke that same feel. Mythic is more like a superhero movie. So if you go into a Mythic game with the idea that your players are going to be more like the Avengers or the Guardians of the Galaxy or the Justice League than they are the Fellowship of the Ring or House Stark, the better off your mindset and emotions will be when the game play of the sessions feel more like a superhero movie that happens to take place in a fantasy setting.

Silver Crusade

James Jacobs wrote:
Rysky wrote:

Hmm, something that I've been wandering about.

Don't knew if you worked on it when 3rd edition came around, but regarding the Ranger's Favored Enemy ability and that it gives it a bonus to Bluff, but not to Intimidate.

Why do think that is?

More to the why they don't get a bonus to Intimidate rather than why they get one to Bluff (I figure being specifically trained to kill a certain creature would help with the whole intimidating thing but that's just me :3).

I have no idea. Sounds like either a mistake or an arbitrary call. Maybe Intimidate was a late addition to the game and no one noticed it got ignored by the ranger? Not sure.

Okies, Thankies for your response ^w^

Radiant Oath

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber
James Jacobs wrote:
Archpaladin Zousha wrote:
Well, largely because from the adventure synopses at the back of the first book, the things the PCs are tasked with doing would render them as KILL-ON-SIGHT to Iomedae and her church, even if the Glorious Reclamation is an extremist fringe. And wouldn't Iomedaeans talk to Sarenites if a character came to them seeking redemption, saying "Don't forgive this monster, he's butchered our faithful, consorted with Devils and doomed Cheliax!"

An evil person who excels at being evil isn't consigning his/her soul to damnation; if you do well enough you CAN earn a place in the afterlife at your deitiy's side or in their domain as a devil or demon or whatever. An evil soul doesn't WANT to be in heaven in paradise, it wants to continue being evil in Hell/the Abyss/Abaddon/wherever.

On top of that, it's important to keep in mind the context. We as readers of Pathfinder rules and content are privy to all sorts of things those who live in the world are not, including what happens after death. Sure, folks have come back from death or explored the outer planes, but their testimony is often contradictory (sometimes deliberately so) and the information isn't well distributed to the masses.

That makes sense, if you're looking to play an evil character who ENJOYS being evil. I'm more interested in characters like Darth Vader or Teyrn Loghain, people who had heroic qualities but fell to evil due to trusting the wrong people and making bad choices and hate themselves for it but keep doing evil because they feel like it's too late for them and they're trapped. Is that doable in Hell's Vengeance at all?

Paizo Employee Creative Director

Archpaladin Zousha wrote:
That makes sense, if you're looking to play an evil character who ENJOYS being evil. I'm more interested in characters like Darth Vader or Teyrn Loghain, people who had heroic qualities but fell to evil due to trusting the wrong people and making bad choices and hate themselves for it but keep doing evil because they feel like it's too late for them and they're trapped. Is that doable in Hell's Vengeance at all?

Those types of characters aren't really appropriate for Hell's Vengeance. Those types of characters ARE appropriate for most every other AP we do, since all of those feature stories that can help to serve as an evil character's redemption.

Liberty's Edge

Which cultures of Golarion have conducted tests like Eratosthenes' (finding the planet's circumference)?

Radiant Oath

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber
James Jacobs wrote:
Archpaladin Zousha wrote:
That makes sense, if you're looking to play an evil character who ENJOYS being evil. I'm more interested in characters like Darth Vader or Teyrn Loghain, people who had heroic qualities but fell to evil due to trusting the wrong people and making bad choices and hate themselves for it but keep doing evil because they feel like it's too late for them and they're trapped. Is that doable in Hell's Vengeance at all?
Those types of characters aren't really appropriate for Hell's Vengeance. Those types of characters ARE appropriate for most every other AP we do, since all of those feature stories that can help to serve as an evil character's redemption.

So what you're saying is Hell's Vengeance really isn't an AP for me?

Paizo Employee Creative Director

Gark the Goblin wrote:
Which cultures of Golarion have conducted tests like Eratosthenes' (finding the planet's circumference)?

Lots of them. Garundis and Keleshites and Tiens for sure, though.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Archpaladin Zousha wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
Archpaladin Zousha wrote:
That makes sense, if you're looking to play an evil character who ENJOYS being evil. I'm more interested in characters like Darth Vader or Teyrn Loghain, people who had heroic qualities but fell to evil due to trusting the wrong people and making bad choices and hate themselves for it but keep doing evil because they feel like it's too late for them and they're trapped. Is that doable in Hell's Vengeance at all?
Those types of characters aren't really appropriate for Hell's Vengeance. Those types of characters ARE appropriate for most every other AP we do, since all of those feature stories that can help to serve as an evil character's redemption.
So what you're saying is Hell's Vengeance really isn't an AP for me?

Sounds like it. Hell's Vengeance is for playing evil characters who are unrepentantly evil and want to STAY evil from start to end. There is no built in "redemption element" and in fact, a PC who goes good in this AP is likely going to be in trouble in the same way a PC who goes evil in a typical good-guy party ends up.

The whole POINT of Hell's Vengeance is to play the bad guy. From start to end.

Radiant Oath

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

But what about AFTER the end?!

Paizo Employee Creative Director

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Archpaladin Zousha wrote:
But what about AFTER the end?!

Why would that change? It wouldn't. The "continuing the campaign" for Hell's Vengeance is all about "continuing to be evil."


I think I remember you saying you like the alignment system (is that right?)

If so, are you able to articulate any specific reasons why you like it?

Full Disclosure:
In the interests of context, I think it's a great feature of RPGs, even though I think it's a lousy model of real-world morality.


Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

In Cheliax tieflings are looked down upon and treated as second class citizens, but in Nidal kyton spawned tieflings are looked upon highly. Nidal and Cheliax have an alliance. How would a kyton spawned tiefling emissary from Nidal be received by the "powers" that be in Cheliax? Sneered at, accepted with reservation, embraced a "mover and shaker" in their home country? Could a Chelaxians predisposition to look down upon tieflings cause an "international incident" with a Nidalese emissary from the Umbral Court?


Adventure Path Charter Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

I know I run the risk of the obscure "unrevealed at this time" answer, but I would like to ask- is the "evil" adventure path a "one and done" we expect more in the future? It certainly seems like the mythic was that way. I know you have mentioned that mythic rules were not well received, but my group that played through Wrath of the Righteous quite enjoyed the rules and felt it really "leveled the playing field" quite nicely between our one power gamer and the rest of the characters who were concept oriented. I also recall one of the core philosophies of Paizo was not to obsolete books consumers bought like Dungeons & Dragons had done time and again (which I appreciate by the way). As a spin off question, how much of your consumer base would have to be interested in a concept for it to be a viable launch for an adventure path (I know you are getting blowback for the evil concept- but I suspect a LOT of people will like it)?


I have a player how wants to play a Drow Anti-paladin in Hell's Vengeance. If he goes the full demon-worshiping mile, how would lawful evil Cheliax react to that? I've read the Hellfire Compact and I fear that a chaotic evil character would be almost as out of play as a lawful good one.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Steve Geddes wrote:

I think I remember you saying you like the alignment system (is that right?)

If so, are you able to articulate any specific reasons why you like it?

** spoiler omitted **

I like it because it allows me to use two letters to sum up a LOT about a creature, deity, spell, NPC, faith, nation, philosophy, planet, or anything else. And I like it because of its tradition. I really don't care that it doesn't model reality; that's not it's job, and applying it to reality is, I think, as silly as trying to decide how many Hit Dice the Hulk has or how many ranks in Knowledge (nature) Les "Surviviorman" Stroud has and so on.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

Jareth Elirae wrote:

In Cheliax tieflings are looked down upon and treated as second class citizens, but in Nidal kyton spawned tieflings are looked upon highly. Nidal and Cheliax have an alliance. How would a kyton spawned tiefling emissary from Nidal be received by the "powers" that be in Cheliax? Sneered at, accepted with reservation, embraced a "mover and shaker" in their home country? Could a Chelaxians predisposition to look down upon tieflings cause an "international incident" with a Nidalese emissary from the Umbral Court?

A Kyton tiefling would be taken less seriously and would be faced with more prejudice, and as such would put diplomacy at risk, and as a result, Nidal wouldn't send one as an emissary.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Jareth Elirae wrote:
I know I run the risk of the obscure "unrevealed at this time" answer, but I would like to ask- is the "evil" adventure path a "one and done" we expect more in the future? It certainly seems like the mythic was that way. I know you have mentioned that mythic rules were not well received, but my group that played through Wrath of the Righteous quite enjoyed the rules and felt it really "leveled the playing field" quite nicely between our one power gamer and the rest of the characters who were concept oriented. I also recall one of the core philosophies of Paizo was not to obsolete books consumers bought like Dungeons & Dragons had done time and again (which I appreciate by the way). As a spin off question, how much of your consumer base would have to be interested in a concept for it to be a viable launch for an adventure path (I know you are getting blowback for the evil concept- but I suspect a LOT of people will like it)?

If folks like the evil AP a lot, we'll do more. There's LOTS more evil PC stories that we could tell. We got blowback from lots of our APs, including Iron Gods ("I don't like Sci-fi!") and Skull & Shackles ("I don't like pirates!") and Mummy's Mask ("I'm tired of dungeons!") and so on. That's why we do APs twice a year. If we do one folks don't like, they don't have to wait a whole year for another one.

As for "interested in a concept," for APs, it's as much about what excites us and intrigues us as it is customer demand. In some cases, we trust our taste and interests enough along with our experience at building things Pathfinder customers like to take risks without any indication from the customers that they want something as well. That was sort of what we did with Hell's Vengeance and Hell's Rebels; two simultaneous APs that tell different sides of a similar story.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Armenius wrote:
I have a player how wants to play a Drow Anti-paladin in Hell's Vengeance. If he goes the full demon-worshiping mile, how would lawful evil Cheliax react to that? I've read the Hellfire Compact and I fear that a chaotic evil character would be almost as out of play as a lawful good one.

The AP will provide advice, but look at it this way. Did the lawful good crusaders in Wrath of the Righteous freak out if chaotic good PCs wanted to help? Nope, they did not.

Hell's Vengeance is the "evil" adventure path first and foremost, not the "Lawful Evil only" AP. Any of the three evil alignments will work quite well in the AP. As long as the PLAYERS want to work for Thrune, and as long as they are okay with their characters working for Thrune (be it patriotism, mercenary loyalty, curiosity, devotion to an ally who works for Thrune, or whatever), Cheliax is fine with all three evil alignments.

And that means you GMs should be too!

And you players should remember that playing a disruptive character who won't work for Thrune and fights against the other PCs isn't a "evil player character problem" but a plain old "player problem." It's no different than playing a lawful character in Skull & Shackles and being a stick in the mud that makes it difficult for the other players to play pirates, or no different than a group playing a bunch of stealth characters and you building a deliberately noisy klutz.


James, have you seen Deadpool yet?

Radiant Oath

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

I overreacted to your responses to my questions, and after sleeping on it (and re-reading the first book) I realize I owe you an apology.

What you're saying when you state a redemption arc isn't something Hell's Vengeance is equipped for as a story, that makes sense. The text doesn't demand the PCs delight in their actions any more than they should show remorse. That's all in how an individual chooses to roleplay their character. And what a GM chooses to do in their version of the AP or the epilogue they desire to create isn't something you can't ever hope to account for.

If I want to play in Hell's Vengeance as a tragic figure haunted by what he/she has done in Thrune's name, that's my choice, and asking for your approval is really not going to accomplish anything.

Besides, it's not like I was planning on the character changing in the middle of the AP. If Anakin Skywalker'd had that kind of self-awareness in the prequel trilogy or in the first two movies, we wouldn't HAVE the Darth Vader we see redeemed in the final act, right?


James Jacobs wrote:
Steve Geddes wrote:

I think I remember you saying you like the alignment system (is that right?)

If so, are you able to articulate any specific reasons why you like it?

** spoiler omitted **

I like it because it allows me to use two letters to sum up a LOT about a creature, deity, spell, NPC, faith, nation, philosophy, planet, or anything else. And I like it because of its tradition. I really don't care that it doesn't model reality; that's not it's job, and applying it to reality is, I think, as silly as trying to decide how many Hit Dice the Hulk has or how many ranks in Knowledge (nature) Les "Surviviorman" Stroud has and so on.

Cheers. I hadn't really considered the efficiency aspect.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

Paladin of Baha-who? wrote:
James, have you seen Deadpool yet?

Nope. I generally don't go see movies in theaters these days UNLESS...

1) It's playing at iPic, which is a premium style theater that costs more but helps weed out chuckleheads, or...

2) The movie is in a limited release and is one that I both REALLY want to see and won't be playing at iPic.

At this point, Deadpool is playing at iPic, but the good seats are sold out all weekend, so I'm waiting. I'll see it during the week or on the weekend. I WILL see it, though.

In the meantime, no spoilers!


James Jacobs wrote:
Varisian Wanderer wrote:

Hey, James!

Out of the seven deadly sins, which one would you say is Graz'zt most guilty of?

Hmmm... he does pretty good at all of them, so I'd say pride, since that's usually held as the original and most serious of the sins, the one from which all others flow.

And if you ever read the Gord books, it's his pride that undoes him in the end.

Silver Crusade

Have you ever played the Stanley Parable?

Paizo Employee Creative Director

Rysky wrote:
Have you ever played the Stanley Parable?

Yup.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Can a wizard with enough strength to carry a construct pick it up and teleport away with it?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I was told you'd be a person to ask about this.

In Runelords Anniversary Edition, is there any specific reason why Jordimandus doesn't have augment summoning? It seems weird to me that a conjuration wizard with a strategy revolving around summoning monsters doesn't have augment summoning.


Do devils ever make intentionally bad contracts to give there minions an edge, presumably to fund some end of goal of theirs. Something along the line of granting the minion a wish in exchange for a prayer or a small amount of gold. If yes is this practice viewed by the higher ranked devils.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

Pauper Princess wrote:
Can a wizard with enough strength to carry a construct pick it up and teleport away with it?

Constructs are creatures, so as long as they fall into the minimum number of allies you can teleport with, and as long as they're not immune to teleport, then it works like teleporting with anyone as a group.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

2 people marked this as a favorite.
wertyou2 wrote:

I was told you'd be a person to ask about this.

In Runelords Anniversary Edition, is there any specific reason why Jordimandus doesn't have augment summoning? It seems weird to me that a conjuration wizard with a strategy revolving around summoning monsters doesn't have augment summoning.

Because he has all those other feats, basically. Not every conjurer should be identical. Some of them have other things they want to spend their feats on instead of Augment Summoning.

(And the meta reason: Augment Summoning makes summon spells more complicated, because it means you can't just run the stat block out of the book. For a PC, this isn't a huge deal, because you're only playing your one character the whole game, and you can thus prepare before hand if you want some pre-augmented stats for summoned monsters. When you're the GM you have to play all the rest, and running that many NPCs and monsters can get complicated. Feats and abilities that make you have to do on-the-fly stat block math in game are not good for the game's speed of play from a GM viewpoint, and thus I generally tend to avoid giving already complex NPCs feats like Augment Summoning or spells like enlarge person that make you have to rebuild stats in the heat of combat.)

60,301 to 60,350 of 83,732 << first < prev | 1202 | 1203 | 1204 | 1205 | 1206 | 1207 | 1208 | 1209 | 1210 | 1211 | 1212 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Gamer Life / Off-Topic Discussions / >>Ask *James Jacobs* ALL your Questions Here!<< All Messageboards