Paizo Top Nav Branding
  • Hello, Guest! |
  • Sign In |
  • My Account |
  • Shopping Cart |
  • Help/FAQ
About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game
Pathfinder Society

Pathfinder Beginner Box

Pathfinder Adventure Card Game

Pathfinder Comics

Pathfinder Legends

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


Off-Topic Discussions

20,851 to 20,900 of 49,196 << first < prev | 413 | 414 | 415 | 416 | 417 | 418 | 419 | 420 | 421 | 422 | 423 | next > last >>
Paizo Employee Creative Director

Azten wrote:
Why has Paizo stopped doing as many playtests for their books, like Ultimate Equipment? I was just on another thread were it was pointed out this could be a cause for the vitriol(the word actually used) of the community towards the devs.

We haven't stopped. We did a playtest for Advanced Race Guide, after all.

We've never done a playtest for a compilation product, though. Until Ultimate Equipment, we'd only done one type of compilation product—the bestiaries. We didn't playtest those either. Since there are no new rules in Ultimate Equipment, a playtest would have merely been us posting some new magic items on the boards and then artificially slowing our development process to get playtest feedback on things we already know how to build.

We know how to build monsters and magic items. We don't need to playtest them. Especially since adding a playtest stage vastly complicates a product. In order for a playtest to be viable and not a waste of time, it needs to focus on NEW things that we're not yet sure exactly how they'll interact with the game rules. Things like new rules (Core Rulebook), new base classes, new subsystems (like Words of Power or the race creation rules), and so on.

There are none of those in Ultimate Equipment, so no playtest is needed.

There are also none of those in NPC Codex, so no playtest of THAT will be needed.

Beyond that, I'll respectfully request that folks have patience for a few more weeks before we talk about what kind of public playtesting opportunities we have planned for our 2013 products.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

Odraude wrote:
Azten wrote:
Why has Paizo stopped doing as many playtests for their books, like Ultimate Equipment? I was just on another thread were it was pointed out this could be a cause for the vitriol(the word actually used) of the community towards the devs.
If you mean my post here, I said that it was because of the incivility and vitriol during playtests that probably caused fewer playtests. Not the other way around. Ultimate Combat's playtest in particular was nasty, given the nature of adding the samurai, ninja, and gunslinger class.

That's not a good reason for us to stop public playtesting.

We've got thick skin here.

We can take grievers and vitrol and the like. The main problem that kind of negative chatter causes is that it makes it more difficult to see the actual honest playtest results—that kind of feedback adds a lot of clutter to the boards. They're like weeds–they don't let you see if the plants you've invented and planted are able to grow.

I've answered the reason in the previous post, in any case, but I'll summarize here:

We do playtests of new rules that we want feedback on because they're NEW. We don't playtest things that aren't new. Like monsters, NPC stat blocks, or magic items. We already know how to do that.

Sczarni

Does the Vicious Weapon enhancement for a Magical weapon function against Constructs? It being a Moderate Necromancy effect and constructs being immune to necromancy effects. Thank you for your response.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

2 people marked this as a favorite.
LazarX wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
since a Vudra AP would require us to answer the "how do psionics work in Pathfinder" question.
Or it would be the opportunity to simply bury psionics altogether and dismiss the old material as a 3.5 legacy mistake.

Nope.

Thing is, several of us here, me included, actually REALLY LIKE the idea of a new type of magic called psychic magic, mentalism, psionics, or whatever. That's why we put psionics into Golarion in the first place, giving them a home in Vudra and in certain themes in the Darklands.

Burying psionics isn't something I want to do.

They ARE something that I want us to do right, and that requires a lot of effort and planning ahead. On a scale of time involving years.

Good news there is we're several years into that plan already. No one outside of Paizo really knows how many years we want to take before we dive into the Psychic Magic pool though.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Hey there, James!

Question regarding the AP cartographers.

I really enjoy both Lazzaretti and Blando. I like Lazzaretti's clean, easily readable maps, and I like Blando's more fanciful (though still readable) renditions.

I was just curious as to how you go about assigning which cartographer is going to do each AP. Blando did Carrion Crown and Jade Regent, then Lazzaretti did Skull & Shackles and now Shattered Star. Is that 2 then 2 alternating pattern deliberate? Is it based on each's strengths depending on the overall AP?

To be honest, I was kind of hoping for a return of Blando on Shattered Star, as I really love the way he depicts dungeons. Not that I'm really disappointed at all. Shards of Sin looks gorgeous, and Rob knocks it out of the park as usual. It's mostly an aesthetic thing for me, and it made me curious as to the process.

Thanks for answering in advance! :-)

Paizo Employee Creative Director

Azten wrote:
LazarX wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
since a Vudra AP would require us to answer the "how do psionics work in Pathfinder" question.
Or it would be the opportunity to simply bury psionics altogether and dismiss the old material as a 3.5 legacy mistake.
And thus alienate a significant portion of the fan base, who actually liked psionics because they worked? Not likely.

I'm 99% certain that we'll alienate a bunch of existing psionics fans anyway, since the power point system is something I can almost guarantee we will NOT use for psychic magic if and when we go there.

My hope is that what we do with psychic magic will bring in enough new fans AND appease enough existing fans that we'll have a net gain... but it's tricky, and that trickiness has played into the reason why we've not done more with psychic magic yet.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

malkavgod wrote:

Are you guys planning of changing the spell Calcific touch? I still believe it to be a little bit broken.

Make a post in the appropriate rulebook forum and hit the FAQ button for it. I don't personally track all that stuff.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

Azten wrote:
Barely one playtest round for the ARG though, and none of the others were as long as the Core or the APG playtests were.

And because generating flavorful information about races, and becasue building new feats, new spells, new archetypes, and all the other stuff in the rest of Advanced Race Guide is NOT new types of rules, but expansions on existing rules we already know how to do.

The race builder in Advanced Race Guide is the only part of that book that presented new types of rules worth playtesting. Therefore, that's all we playtested.

It's worth keeping in mind that when we do a public playtest... that generates THOUSANDS of posts and MANY MORE individual words of feedback. We only have a few designers at Paizo, and they're the ones who get to wade through the playtest feedback and make sense of it... while at the same time doing the rest of their jobs.

Again: Playtests are complex, and if we don't need to do them, we won't, because unnecessary complexity in the process is bad.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

1 person marked this as a favorite.
malebranche wrote:

Hey, James,

What would you do about a ghost NPC with an animal companion/familiar/mount? I want to make a ghost cavalier who rides a ghostly horse, but I don't know how to do it. Do I give the horse the ghost template too? Treat it as a phantom steed? Something else?
Thanks in advance.

Build the animal companion or mount as you would normally, then give it the ghost template.

OR

Simply say that the mount portion of the ghost is a cosmetic extension of the rider's body, and never have him dismount.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

Coraith wrote:
Does the Vicious Weapon enhancement for a Magical weapon function against Constructs? It being a Moderate Necromancy effect and constructs being immune to necromancy effects. Thank you for your response.

The extra damage caused by a vicious weapon affects all creatures that can take damage. It's not any specific type of damage. If anything, it's additional damage of the type your weapon inflicts.

Vicious weapons radiate necromancy, but that's more a result of the spells used to craft it than it is a result of its actual effect.

Sczarni

James Jacobs wrote:
Coraith wrote:
Does the Vicious Weapon enhancement for a Magical weapon function against Constructs? It being a Moderate Necromancy effect and constructs being immune to necromancy effects. Thank you for your response.

The extra damage caused by a vicious weapon affects all creatures that can take damage. It's not any specific type of damage. If anything, it's additional damage of the type your weapon inflicts.

Vicious weapons radiate necromancy, but that's more a result of the spells used to craft it than it is a result of its actual effect.

Thank you.


Thanks for all the replies. :)

Paizo Employee Creative Director

Joseph Wilson wrote:

Hey there, James!

Question regarding the AP cartographers.

I really enjoy both Lazzaretti and Blando. I like Lazzaretti's clean, easily readable maps, and I like Blando's more fanciful (though still readable) renditions.

I was just curious as to how you go about assigning which cartographer is going to do each AP. Blando did Carrion Crown and Jade Regent, then Lazzaretti did Skull & Shackles and now Shattered Star. Is that 2 then 2 alternating pattern deliberate? Is it based on each's strengths depending on the overall AP?

To be honest, I was kind of hoping for a return of Blando on Shattered Star, as I really love the way he depicts dungeons. Not that I'm really disappointed at all. Shards of Sin looks gorgeous, and Rob knocks it out of the park as usual. It's mostly an aesthetic thing for me, and it made me curious as to the process.

Thanks for answering in advance! :-)

I don't assign the cartographers—the art directors do. They assign them based on their preferences and cartographer availability, as far as I know. And if you see us use a cartographer more often than others, that's a sure indication that (as in the case with authors and artists) the cartographer has the right mix of skill, dedication, deadline awareness, ease to work with, and other traits that make them the right person for the job.

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Question about RotRL AE:

Spoiler:
I plan on giving Nualia a potion of cat's grace to overcome the fact that she Is not able to cast that spell, but I would like to know what spell you recommend to fill that empty second-level slot?


I have a few questions...

Quote:

Divine Focus (DF)

A divine focus component is an item of spiritual significance. The divine focus for a cleric or a paladin is a holy symbol appropriate to the character's faith. The divine focus for a druid or a ranger is a sprig of holly, or some other sacred plant.

If the Components line includes F/DF or M/DF, the arcane version of the spell has a focus component or a material component (the abbreviation before the slash) and the divine version has a divine focus component (the abbreviation after the slash).

(Most importantly is that the current wording?)

Does that mean Inquisitors have no Divine Focus? I know Oracles don't require them but that's mentioned in the class.

If an arcane caster casts a spell with a F/DF or M/DF it uses a F or M instead of a DF. If the spell lists DF are they free from having to supply the DF/replace it with something?

EDIT: Since a Divine Focus is mentioned for specific classes does that mean that classes not mentioned can never have a Divine Focus?


Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

As an addendum to the previous question, does an oracle of life need a holy symbol to channel positive energy? I've seen it argued that they still have to present a holy symbol of some deity, since they channel "like a cleric."


I recently say a trailer for Samsara and I was wondering if you saw Baraka. If so is it worth finding?

Taldor

Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Tales Subscriber
James Jacobs wrote:


...psychic magic...psychic magic...psychic magic...psychic magic...

James, do you ever see this thread as a place in which to sow tiny lingustic acorns which might one day grow into mighty rpg oaks?

Silver Crusade

James, I asked the boards this question in another thread, but I'd really like to hear your opinion:

Assuming you had the time and space to design the ideal pre-gens for the Rise of the Runelords AP, what would you make, at least as far as race/class/(archetype, if any)?

The game I'm about to run has some players who just want to jump in with first level pre-gens, and I'm doing some mental "casting" for what protagonists best fit the themes and challenges.

As always, thanks for you input, and being and doing this thread.


OooOoOOoOoo looking good so far

Paizo Employee Creative Director

HangarFlying wrote:

Question about RotRL AE:

** spoiler omitted **

Sound burst, probably. That's a good spell to give lone NPC clerics since it can stun PCs and thus even up the odds for a round.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

Aioran wrote:

I have a few questions...

Quote:

Divine Focus (DF)

A divine focus component is an item of spiritual significance. The divine focus for a cleric or a paladin is a holy symbol appropriate to the character's faith. The divine focus for a druid or a ranger is a sprig of holly, or some other sacred plant.

If the Components line includes F/DF or M/DF, the arcane version of the spell has a focus component or a material component (the abbreviation before the slash) and the divine version has a divine focus component (the abbreviation after the slash).

(Most importantly is that the current wording?)

Does that mean Inquisitors have no Divine Focus? I know Oracles don't require them but that's mentioned in the class.

If an arcane caster casts a spell with a F/DF or M/DF it uses a F or M instead of a DF. If the spell lists DF are they free from having to supply the DF/replace it with something?

EDIT: Since a Divine Focus is mentioned for specific classes does that mean that classes not mentioned can never have a Divine Focus?

An inquisitor who worships a deity has a divine focus that is identical to the holy symbol of the deity she worships. One who doesn't worship a deity DOES belong to some sort of organization, and therefore uses a divine focus symbol that is appropriate for that organization.

Same goes for any divine spellcaster who doesn't actually worship a deity. Faith is all about belief and symbols, so even a divine spellcaster who's truly some sort of loner with no support structure would have their own divine focus—it would just be something they built themselves.

Arcane spellcasters ignore the DF part of the spell entirely. They don't have to replace it with anything.

Any class that casts divine spells needs a divine focus for a spell that requires a divine focus.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

Joana wrote:
As an addendum to the previous question, does an oracle of life need a holy symbol to channel positive energy? I've seen it argued that they still have to present a holy symbol of some deity, since they channel "like a cleric."

Yes. What that holy symbol is could be the symbol of a deity they worship, or a more generic symbol for their pantheon, or a symbol of whatever belief they have.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

Glutton wrote:
I recently say a trailer for Samsara and I was wondering if you saw Baraka. If so is it worth finding?

Absolutely.

It and Koyanisqatsi/Powasqatsi/Naqoysatsi (spelling issues there, no doubt) are very good movies. Very hypnotic. Very interesting.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

GeraintElberion wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:


...psychic magic...psychic magic...psychic magic...psychic magic...
James, do you ever see this thread as a place in which to sow tiny lingustic acorns which might one day grow into mighty rpg oaks?

Ha.

Yup.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

uriel222 wrote:

James, I asked the boards this question in another thread, but I'd really like to hear your opinion:

Assuming you had the time and space to design the ideal pre-gens for the Rise of the Runelords AP, what would you make, at least as far as race/class/(archetype, if any)?

The game I'm about to run has some players who just want to jump in with first level pre-gens, and I'm doing some mental "casting" for what protagonists best fit the themes and challenges.

As always, thanks for you input, and being and doing this thread.

I'd wait for NPC Codex to come out and use the 1st level iconics from that book. AKA: the players would play Valeros, Seoni, Kyra, and Merisiel.

I would NOT optimize them. They'd be 20 point characters, and I would give each one of them a fun little quirk that gives them a flavorful bonus and roleplaying bit. Like, for example, I'd say Valeros has a lucky tankard that grants a +1 luck bonus to the next saving throw he makes during the next 24 hours after he drinks from it. I'd make sure that each boon was significant but not overpowering, and would be relatively equal in power to each other so that no one character is overpowered.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

Glutton wrote:
OooOoOOoOoo looking good so far

This movie is VERY MUCH one that works better if you see it on a huge high-res screen with surround sound. I own a blu-ray copy of it that's been super-remastered or something and it looks great. Watching it on youtube kinda defeats the purpose to a certain extent unless you're running it on a giant monitor with great speakers, I guess...


James Jacobs wrote:
Any class that casts divine spells needs a divine focus for a spell that requires a divine focus.

How does that work with Oracles?

Quote:
Oracles do not need to provide a divine focus to cast spells that list divine focus (DF) as part of the components.

They have one but they don't need to get it out when they cast?

Paizo Employee Creative Director

Aioran wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
Any class that casts divine spells needs a divine focus for a spell that requires a divine focus.

How does that work with Oracles?

Quote:
Oracles do not need to provide a divine focus to cast spells that list divine focus (DF) as part of the components.
They have one but they don't need to get it out when they cast?

If the oracle worships a deity, then it uses that symbol. If it worships a pantheon, she can use any of that group's symbols. If she worships "fire" then she can use a little flame symbol. If she worships bone, maybe it's a birdskull fetish. If she worships nature, maybe one of those stick-man Blair Witch dolls.

Then I double checked the last line of the spells entry in the oracle writeup and made the stinky face. Don't like that rule.

So. The rule's right there in black and white if you care to follow it. Oracles don't use divine foci. Which, in my opinion, dilutes and sterilizes a chunk of the flavor of the class that helps them not feel like sorcerers who can heal you.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
James Jacobs wrote:
Glutton wrote:
OooOoOOoOoo looking good so far
This movie is VERY MUCH one that works better if you see it on a huge high-res screen with surround sound. I own a blu-ray copy of it that's been super-remastered or something and it looks great. Watching it on youtube kinda defeats the purpose to a certain extent unless you're running it on a giant monitor with great speakers, I guess...

Sorry chief I live in a basement with the finest TV 1989 had to offer. My computer however is pretty nice.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
James Jacobs wrote:
2) There's not really a pre-established role for them in Golarion—this isn't the case for witches (Irrisen), oracles (all over), cavaliers (Mendev and Taldor), alchemists (all over, but particularly Thuvia and anywhere that has a poisoner vibe, like the River Kingdoms), magi (Kyonin), gunslingers (mana wastes), and inquisitors (Cheliax). Lost Kingdom's entry on Sarkoris talks a little bit about where summoners might have once been found, but unlike the other classes I mention above, if you go back to books we published before the Advanced Player's Guide, you won't really see a lot of places in Golarion products that talk about summoners by name or role (the closest you'll get would be things like demonoligists, diabolists, conjurer wizards, and the like—and you won't see ANYTHING about eidolons).

That has changed since APG, mind you. I think there are something like five named summoners in Isles of the Shackles alone.

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
James Jacobs wrote:
HangarFlying wrote:

Question about RotRL AE:

** spoiler omitted **

Sound burst, probably. That's a good spell to give lone NPC clerics since it can stun PCs and thus even up the odds for a round.

Awesome, thanks!

Osirion

James Jacobs wrote:
The problem arises not from the summoner, but from the eidolon. Before APG, there was no such thing as an eidolon, and all the "summoners" in the world summoned elementals or demons or angels or whatever. They summoned established creatures. The summoner's main thing is that they summon up a brand new creature that is not only not part of any game world, but it's not even created by the game world's designer OR the GM.

It would indeed by funky to see some sort of templates for an Elemental or Genie or Angel or Devil or Demon or Protean or Axiomite to replace the Eidolon class feature, stripped down into a basic chassis (sort of like how the animal companion of a druid isn't statistically identical to an actual animal of that type), and with each chassis having its own list of 'evolutions' appropriate to that type (like 'aura of menace' for angels, or 'warp wave' for proteans). They could start with only the most basic features, like senses and immunities / resistances, and have to 'buy' the rest (like truespeech or whatever) as 'evolutions.'

While I'm not in love with the idea of 'summoner demons' being statistically different from 'bestiary demons,' it's still more palatable a choice than custom critters that have whatever hodgepodge of powers the summoner player thought was optimal (and seem to often result in six to eight armed sword wielding 'Shiva builds').

Would actual outsider types, stripped down a la Druid 'animal' companions, have been more in keeping with your own preferences?

The customizable Eidolons *could* have been worked into Golarion-lore by simply referring to them as 'proto-Proteans' from the great Maelstrom, or something, chaos given form by the will of the Summoner, but the setting-neutral APG obviously didn't go that route, and left them feeling, IMO, disconnected from the setting.

Lantern Lodge

Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Cards Subscriber

G'day James
I was just wondering if you had any suggestions for ways to fool magical truthtelling? I'm running Curse of the Crimson Thone, and my PCs have captured Trinia, and one of them (A paladin of Shelyn) took a liking to the girl and doesn't trust the guard yet, and won't relent until Trinia is given a proper fair trial. As she's a cousin of Zenobia Xanderholm, the cheif arbiter, I have a figure she can trust, but i'm stuck on ways to rig the trial so that an impartial judge woudn't just be able to automatically discern that she's innocent with magic.
Any help you could suggest would be wonderful:)

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game, Tales Subscriber
James Jacobs wrote:
LazarX wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
since a Vudra AP would require us to answer the "how do psionics work in Pathfinder" question.
Or it would be the opportunity to simply bury psionics altogether and dismiss the old material as a 3.5 legacy mistake.

Nope.

Thing is, several of us here, me included, actually REALLY LIKE the idea of a new type of magic called psychic magic, mentalism, psionics, or whatever. That's why we put psionics into Golarion in the first place, giving them a home in Vudra and in certain themes in the Darklands.

Burying psionics isn't something I want to do.

They ARE something that I want us to do right, and that requires a lot of effort and planning ahead. On a scale of time involving years.

Good news there is we're several years into that plan already. No one outside of Paizo really knows how many years we want to take before we dive into the Psychic Magic pool though.

Thing is I could see psionics in Golarion, but Vudra is not the place that where it would make the greatest impact. If psionics existed especially psionic healers there is at least one place in Golarion that would move heaven and earth to attract them once their existence became known.... the Godless Land of Rahadoum which is described as paying a heavy price for denying themselves the services that divine healers provide Or even Razmiran for reasons that are not that different as well as more sinister uses in mind control.

But for Rahadoum, psionics would be a figurative godsend. No ties to deities and it fits very well with the self reliance precepts of the Kingdom of Man.

Andoran

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Card Game, Companion, Modules, Pawns, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
LazarX wrote:


But for Rahadoum, psionics would be a figurative godsend. No ties to deities and it fits very well with the self reliance precepts of the Kingdom of Man.

Witches can already cover most of the problems that arise from a lack of clerics but probably the patron thing is suspect in Rahadoum.

James, what is the Rahadoum opinion on witches?


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
LazarX wrote:
But for Rahadoum, psionics would be a figurative godsend. No ties to deities and it fits very well with the self reliance precepts of the Kingdom of Man.

Alchemists. They were fully detailed well after Rahadoum.

Chirurgeon alchemists are really all Rahadoum needs, if they can be trained in sufficient numbers.

Shadow Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion Subscriber

In ultimate equipment a lot of the adventurers kits as written seem to have some weights that are quite off from the actual combine weight of all the gear. Is there something reducing the weight or is the amount of gear quoted within off?

Grand Lodge

sorry too bother you with something that may be simple.
However, the Merciful Healer (Archetype) states in the Merciful Healing discription that "Feats and effects that affect a paladin's mercy also affect this ability." Does this mean that I do not have to have lay on hands to get the two feats? Greater mercy and ultamate mercy are also the only two feats I found that apply to mercy for paladins. I have been told I have to take two levels of paladin to get lay of hands to be able to get the feats to work for my channels mercy.
Is this true or is this a wording issue for a later arche type?

Shadow Lodge

You said you liked Binders; did you ever try out Secrets of Pact Magic or the newer release Pact Magic Unbound? If so what did you think of them?

Paizo Employee Creative Director

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Evil Midnight Lurker wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
2) There's not really a pre-established role for them in Golarion—this isn't the case for witches (Irrisen), oracles (all over), cavaliers (Mendev and Taldor), alchemists (all over, but particularly Thuvia and anywhere that has a poisoner vibe, like the River Kingdoms), magi (Kyonin), gunslingers (mana wastes), and inquisitors (Cheliax). Lost Kingdom's entry on Sarkoris talks a little bit about where summoners might have once been found, but unlike the other classes I mention above, if you go back to books we published before the Advanced Player's Guide, you won't really see a lot of places in Golarion products that talk about summoners by name or role (the closest you'll get would be things like demonoligists, diabolists, conjurer wizards, and the like—and you won't see ANYTHING about eidolons).
That has changed since APG, mind you. I think there are something like five named summoners in Isles of the Shackles alone.

That's changed BECAUSE of the Advanced Player's Guide. Still doesn't change the fact that summoners remain the most awkward class to fit into the world. That, combined with the fact that they're probably the most unbalanced class AND the most complicated class means AND the class that takes up the most room in an adventure when we stat them up that they've got a lot stacked against them.


Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Dear JJ

Any chance of having any more modules or even an AP in the Darkmoon Vale?

The Darkmoon Vale module series are really well done, and would like to see that part of the game world built up a bit more.

Signed AZ

Paizo Employee Creative Director

Dave Godwin wrote:

G'day James

I was just wondering if you had any suggestions for ways to fool magical truthtelling? I'm running Curse of the Crimson Thone, and my PCs have captured Trinia, and one of them (A paladin of Shelyn) took a liking to the girl and doesn't trust the guard yet, and won't relent until Trinia is given a proper fair trial. As she's a cousin of Zenobia Xanderholm, the cheif arbiter, I have a figure she can trust, but i'm stuck on ways to rig the trial so that an impartial judge woudn't just be able to automatically discern that she's innocent with magic.
Any help you could suggest would be wonderful:)

First: If the PCs have access to things like zone of truth or discern lies, don't punish them when they manage to capture an enemy.

Second: re-read spells like zone of truth and discern lies. You get saving throws to resist them. And you can be evasive.

Third: Trinia's innocent, but she knows that she's in trouble. The fact that there's all this chaos and anarchy in the city doesn't escape her attention, and she likely suspects that the REAL reason she's been arrested is something other than a case of mistaken identity or false accusations. In other words, she's super scared and nervous and frightened, and as such, those emotions can be misinterpreted as guilt.

Fourth: The queen doesn't play fair, and she is VERY well informed. If you need to rig the trial, the best solution I can think of is one that will also let you start portraying the situation in the city as truly being on the edge of anarchy—have something happen to Zenobia Xanderholm. Either she gets fired, vanishes, or gets assassinated. Of course, the reason behind this is that just as the PCs know she's trustworthy... so does the Queen. She has PLENTY of agents she can send to take care of someone like Zenobia, and presto, suddenly the NEW person who takes Zenobia's place is someone that the paladin PC knows is trouble.


Do you think reflavoring the Summoner as a shapeshifter could work in a setting where summoning isn't a particularly common art, but the GM likes designing eidolons and wants that mechanic around?

Paizo Employee Creative Director

Diego Rossi wrote:
LazarX wrote:


But for Rahadoum, psionics would be a figurative godsend. No ties to deities and it fits very well with the self reliance precepts of the Kingdom of Man.

Witches can already cover most of the problems that arise from a lack of clerics but probably the patron thing is suspect in Rahadoum.

James, what is the Rahadoum opinion on witches?

I'm pretty sure there's not a lot of witches in Rahadoum, but I suspect that they regard them pretty much as they do bards, which are another arcane class capable of casting healing magic. They'd treat both with suspicion, since they could be divine casters who are just good at telling stories.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

doc the grey wrote:
In ultimate equipment a lot of the adventurers kits as written seem to have some weights that are quite off from the actual combine weight of all the gear. Is there something reducing the weight or is the amount of gear quoted within off?

I have no idea. Sounds like a calculation error to me and should be fixed in an errata. Or if it's something that's like "This kit is packed well so that it reduces encumbrance a bit," but then doesn't actually SAY that in the text, then THAT needs to be fixed in an errata.

I've not really had the chance to look through the book yet so I can't say for sure. Sounds like something that should be posted over on the book's thread and then tagged with a FAQ button push.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

Xyllen wrote:

sorry too bother you with something that may be simple.

However, the Merciful Healer (Archetype) states in the Merciful Healing discription that "Feats and effects that affect a paladin's mercy also affect this ability." Does this mean that I do not have to have lay on hands to get the two feats? Greater mercy and ultamate mercy are also the only two feats I found that apply to mercy for paladins. I have been told I have to take two levels of paladin to get lay of hands to be able to get the feats to work for my channels mercy.
Is this true or is this a wording issue for a later arche type?

Merciful healer is a cleric archetype. As such, it's not meant to play well with paladins... it's for clerics.

If your character is a multiclassed cleric/paladin with the Merciful Healer class, and if that character has enough levels in paladin to be able to take feats that augment a paladin's lay on hands ability, she can also apply her Merciful Healing ability to that.

That does nothing to the fact that those feats still require lay on hands. You still need lay on hands to get those feats.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

Orthos wrote:
You said you liked Binders; did you ever try out Secrets of Pact Magic or the newer release Pact Magic Unbound? If so what did you think of them?

I've never used either of those books. I only played one binder, and I wanted to use the core binder rules for the most part... although Erik let me invent a brand new vestige for the class...

Had I kept playing D&D games, and had I built a second binder or had I kept playing Tyralandi, I might have looked to other books for more toys to play with, but I never got to that point.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

Azure_Zero wrote:

Dear JJ

Any chance of having any more modules or even an AP in the Darkmoon Vale?

The Darkmoon Vale module series are really well done, and would like to see that part of the game world built up a bit more.

Signed AZ

We've pretty much finished that semi-linked arc of adventures for Darkmoon Vale, but there's always a chance of going back there. Alas, with only 6 modules a year, and with them needing to serve several masters... it's kinda tricky.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

Kelsey MacAilbert wrote:
Do you think reflavoring the Summoner as a shapeshifter could work in a setting where summoning isn't a particularly common art, but the GM likes designing eidolons and wants that mechanic around?

Judging on the feedback and problems with the synthesist summoner, I would be VERY wary about anything that grants a player character eidolon powers.

Furthermore, while shapeshifting is a fun fantasy trope... the rules involving shapeshifting are really complex, since they require you to rebuild your character. If I were building a shapeshifter class, I would probably build it in a way that when you use your power, you just put your character sheet aside, pick up a Bestiary, turn to the page where the monster you're turning into has its stats, and use that page as your character sheet. Allowing a PC shapeshifter to mix and match what he turns into sounds like a really good way to grind a game to a halt, alas.

20,851 to 20,900 of 49,196 << first < prev | 413 | 414 | 415 | 416 | 417 | 418 | 419 | 420 | 421 | 422 | 423 | next > last >>
Paizo / Messageboards / Paizo Community / Off-Topic Discussions / >>Ask *James Jacobs* ALL your Questions Here!<< All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.

©2002–2014 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours: Monday–Friday, 10 AM–5 PM Pacific Time. View our privacy policy. Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc., and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Online, 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.