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


Off-Topic Discussions

49,551 to 49,600 of 83,732 << first < prev | 987 | 988 | 989 | 990 | 991 | 992 | 993 | 994 | 995 | 996 | 997 | next > last >>

4 people marked this as a favorite.
James Jacobs wrote:
AlgaeNymph wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
xavier c wrote:
5)What don't you like about Iomedae
5) She's fine, but I'm frustrated that so many people misunderstood her lawful good alignment to be the same as lawful friendly.

I think our main complaint is that you seemed to misunderstand lawful good as mean good.

Oh, right, a question! Okay... What's your reply to the above notion?

No change. There are only 9 alignments, but the number of different personalities each can have is limitless. You can have a friendly lawful good person as much as you can have a stern one. Iomedae's a stern one. And furthermore, as written in that adventure, it's only the troublemaker PCs who really see that side of her.

Actually, as written, anyone that doesn't answer her questions the way she wants gets attacked, in addition to attacking trouble makers. I ran that encounter unchanged and my players failed the second question. The game ground to a halt when they were attacked by, to their understanding, a lawful good god asking for help. I ended up retconning it because no one liked the idea of a lawful good god attacking the people she asked for help, especially since they were all cooperative with her and respectful of her. But it was ten minutes of "Why is a lawful good goddess attacking us, the people who she asked to help, when we answer a question wrong?"

I wouldn't have written this, but honestly I am frustrated with the fact that our issues and feedback with Iomedae keep getting misunderstood or dismissed as "not getting it" by you. We didn't get this much push back about Erastil's misogyny or Torag's genocidal paladin code. Makes it feel like our feedback isn't being taken seriously or is just worthless. It's why I've generally dropped it till now, since it was obvious that no one was going to take our criticism seriously.

No one is asking for a Disney princess paladin goddess. We just think that the idea that a good god attacking her allies when they get a question wrong is not a good thing to do, both from a story stand point and from a GM/Player relationship standpoint.

Silver Crusade

Odraude wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:


No change. There are only 9 alignments, but the number of different personalities each can have is limitless. You can have a friendly lawful good person as much as you can have a stern one. Iomedae's a stern one. And furthermore, as written in that adventure, it's only the troublemaker PCs who really see that side of her.

Actually, as written, anyone that doesn't answer her questions the way she wants gets attacked, in addition to attacking trouble makers. I ran that encounter unchanged and my players failed the second question. The game ground to a halt when they were attacked by, to their understanding, a lawful good god asking for help. I ended up retconning it because no one liked the idea of a lawful good god attacking the people she asked for help, especially since they were all cooperative with her and respectful of her. But it was ten minutes of "Why is a lawful good goddess attacking us, the people who she asked to help, when we answer a question wrong?"

I wouldn't have written this, but honestly I am frustrated with the fact that our issues and feedback with Iomedae keep getting misunderstood or dismissed as "not getting it" by you. We didn't get this much push back about Erastil's misogyny or Torag's genocidal paladin code. Makes it feel like our feedback isn't being taken seriously or is just worthless. It's why I've generally dropped it till now, since it was obvious that no one was going to take our criticism seriously.

No one is asking for a Disney princess paladin goddess. We just think that the idea that a good god attacking her allies when they get a question wrong is not a good thing to do, both from a story stand point and from a GM/Player relationship standpoint.

Spoiler:
Just went and read this section, had been holding off because I'm playing in this campaign and wanted to have an open mind, and she actually only resorts to the Choir if the entire group fails the questions and the optional skill check afterwards, she doesn't single people out when using the Choir.

Spoilers, people!


Rysky wrote:
Odraude wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:


No change. There are only 9 alignments, but the number of different personalities each can have is limitless. You can have a friendly lawful good person as much as you can have a stern one. Iomedae's a stern one. And furthermore, as written in that adventure, it's only the troublemaker PCs who really see that side of her.

Actually, as written, anyone that doesn't answer her questions the way she wants gets attacked, in addition to attacking trouble makers. I ran that encounter unchanged and my players failed the second question. The game ground to a halt when they were attacked by, to their understanding, a lawful good god asking for help. I ended up retconning it because no one liked the idea of a lawful good god attacking the people she asked for help, especially since they were all cooperative with her and respectful of her. But it was ten minutes of "Why is a lawful good goddess attacking us, the people who she asked to help, when we answer a question wrong?"

I wouldn't have written this, but honestly I am frustrated with the fact that our issues and feedback with Iomedae keep getting misunderstood or dismissed as "not getting it" by you. We didn't get this much push back about Erastil's misogyny or Torag's genocidal paladin code. Makes it feel like our feedback isn't being taken seriously or is just worthless. It's why I've generally dropped it till now, since it was obvious that no one was going to take our criticism seriously.

No one is asking for a Disney princess paladin goddess. We just think that the idea that a good god attacking her allies when they get a question wrong is not a good thing to do, both from a story stand point and from a GM/Player relationship standpoint.

Spoiler:
Reread the second questions. It has no skill check. Rather it is based on how the party reacts to the question, rather than the answer. And if they do it too quickly, or take too long bickering, Iomedae summons her Choir to "awaken the heroes" again and blast them. And that's the issue people are having with this. The fact that a lawful good goddess summons a Choir to damage you if you don't answer her questions right isn't exactly good. I get she's supposed to be stern, but this is on the extreme of stern. It's kind of psychotic.

And that's why I don't appreciate our criticism being misrepresented and belittled with derisive comments from JJ every time it is brought up. I mean, why even give any negative feedback if we're just going to have it thrown back in our face? I don't give criticism because I have a bone to pick with Paizo, or because I hate them. Rather, when there is an issue, I want them to know that something they did is something we don't like. Whether it's with Iomedae, or Erastil, or the whole "atheists are tortured" thing, if something feels like it just doesn't work for an adventure or setting, I let it be known as reasonably as I can. But every time Part 5 of WotR is brought up, it's pretty much "we don't understand that good doesn't mean friendly". We get that, we really do. But we understand what being stern is. And what Iomedae is is an extreme version of stern. One that we feel does not represent a good deity. And I'd rather that we be met with the same dialogue that was met during the issues with Torag and Erastil, rather this almost patronizing and insulting comments about how we just "don't get it".

That's the part that disappoints me most. I had a huge respect for JJ as a GM, setting & rules designer, and all around person. But how he's treated criticism for Iomedae since Part 5 came out has really been disappointing. I genuinely liked having these dialogues about issues in the rules or settings because overall, he'd provide a reasonable dialogue to critics and fans alike. And even if I disagreed with him, there was still a respect there I had for someone taking the time out to reasonably talk about the game. Except, apparently, for Iomedae.

Silver Crusade

Spoiler:

Except I can see the "bickering for too long" being up to the GM. Are they arguing but slowly making headway towards an agreeable answer? Let them continue until they work things out. They're just cyclically arguing back and forth with no end or resolution? Blast them. It's usually the only way to end those types of debates.

Basically she's not summoning the Choir if you don't answer the questions right, she summons them if you answer them wrong.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

By the time you get to Book 5, you're pretty dam powerful mythic figures, not the novice heroes she's considerably gentler towards at the end of Book 1. So the kid gloves do come off. She has to make bloody sure that she did not make a mistake in vesting you with this kind of power.

At least she's not calling Sebastion in on you.


Is it possible that Iomedae's actions in the case of Wrath fly directly in the face of the alignment descriptions on purpose? To show a god doesn't always follow the alignment they are assigned?

Quote the core rulebook on good vs. evil: "Good implies altruism, respect for life, and a concern for the dignity of sentient beings... Evil implies hurting, oppressing, and killing others." What she does is literally torture. Stern or not, angry or not, vengeful or not, the definition of torture doesn't change. The question, I suppose, is whether torture is acceptable when done by a lawful good deity.

edit:

Odraude wrote:
We're capable of comprehending the reasoning behind it.

I'd go one step further and say I generally like the scene. But it doesn't work within Pathfinder's rule set as I understand it. Good and evil being cosmic forces and gods being very closely tied to those forces makes it harder to have the morally ambiguous gray characters/gods that James (and I) likes.


All this shows is that even eight months later, this is still an issue on both sides of the argument. And it's better to actually resolve this with a reasonable dialogue than with telling people that they just don't understand. We're capable of comprehending the reasoning behind it. We just think it was poorly done and reflects negatively on a goddess characterized as Good. And I'd rather have a meaningful conversation about it than seeing potshots taken at our criticism every time Iomedae is mentioned.

So actual question time. What type of sources and inspirations are there going to be for Occult Adventures?


Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber

Other than worshipping demon lords instead of Lolth, how would you say Golarion drow differ culturally from Faerunian drow?

Paizo Employee Creative Director

Jose Suarez 916 wrote:

Hello James Jacobs,

The summmoner synthesis says ''The synthesist also gains access to the eidolon’s special abilities and the eidolon’s evolutions''.

Are they refering to the eidolon's original Table Eidolon Base Statistics ? or is refering to the abilities that gives me in the archetype? http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/base-classes/summoner/eidolons

I've seen many people using the synthesist archetype and getting evasion and darkvision from the eidolon's base statistics but my GM says that these abilities are actually replaced by the synthesis abilities shown here http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/base-classes/summoner/archetypes/paizo---su mmoner-archetypes/synthesist

The synthesist archetype is the most easy to mess-up/abuse/overdo archetype for the class that's the easiest to mess-up/abuse/overdo, it seems to me... so the safest bet whenever a question like this comes up is to default to the least-advantageous or least-powerful option.

In any event, this is ABSOLUTELY the type of question that needs to be asked in the rules forum, not here. Sorry!

Paizo Employee Creative Director

Jose Suarez 916 wrote:

Hello James Jacobs,

My half elf summoner synthesis gets targeted by the Sleep spell, my elven immunity says that I'm immune to sleep so I'm supposed to be fine but there is a special sentence in the synthesist archetype that says ''He counts as both his original type and as an outsider for any effect related to type, whichever is worse for the synthesist ''

Does it means that the sleep spell can affect me even tho I got sleep immunity thanks to my elven immunity?

Your elf still has immunity to sleep. That defense has nothing to do with creature types whatsoever. Worst case? You're an elf with the outsider type, but you still have all your elf stuff, like immunity to sleep effects.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

Kajehase wrote:
How many times will you have to refer a question to the rules advice section of the boards, do you think?

That number will continue to grow as long as I answer questions here.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

LazarX wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
claudekennilol wrote:

Can I wield a glaive and simultaneously threaten with armor spikes?

All armor spike questions should be forwarded specifically to Jason Bulmahn.

Did Jason stat up the Iron Maiden for people who ask armor spike questions?

Let's hope so!

Paizo Employee Creative Director

1 person marked this as a favorite.
LazarX wrote:
Kajehase wrote:
How many times will you have to refer a question to the rules advice section of the boards, do you think?
Do you have that response macroed by now?

Nope. The person typed it all out, letter by letter. Least I can do is the same back at them.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Odraude wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
AlgaeNymph wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
xavier c wrote:
5)What don't you like about Iomedae
5) She's fine, but I'm frustrated that so many people misunderstood her lawful good alignment to be the same as lawful friendly.

I think our main complaint is that you seemed to misunderstand lawful good as mean good.

Oh, right, a question! Okay... What's your reply to the above notion?

No change. There are only 9 alignments, but the number of different personalities each can have is limitless. You can have a friendly lawful good person as much as you can have a stern one. Iomedae's a stern one. And furthermore, as written in that adventure, it's only the troublemaker PCs who really see that side of her.

Actually, as written, anyone that doesn't answer her questions the way she wants gets attacked, in addition to attacking trouble makers. I ran that encounter unchanged and my players failed the second question. The game ground to a halt when they were attacked by, to their understanding, a lawful good god asking for help. I ended up retconning it because no one liked the idea of a lawful good god attacking the people she asked for help, especially since they were all cooperative with her and respectful of her. But it was ten minutes of "Why is a lawful good goddess attacking us, the people who she asked to help, when we answer a question wrong?"

I wouldn't have written this, but honestly I am frustrated with the fact that our issues and feedback with Iomedae keep getting misunderstood or dismissed as "not getting it" by you. We didn't get this much push back about Erastil's misogyny or Torag's genocidal paladin code. Makes it feel like our feedback isn't being taken seriously or is just worthless. It's why I've generally dropped it till now, since it was obvious that no one was going to take our criticism seriously.

No one is asking for a Disney princess paladin goddess. We just think that the idea that a good god attacking her allies when they get a question wrong is not a good thing to do, both from a story stand point and from a GM/Player relationship standpoint.

This isn't the proper place to try to resurrect this particular dead horse. I've admitted elsewhere that I should have developed Wolfgang's encounter more aggressively to tone down the punishment language to make it even more apparent that Iomedae does NOT punish those who are legitimately there to help.

And just because I don't agree with this particular feedback does NOT mean that I don't take it seriously. Feedback does not guarantee change.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

Odraude wrote:

That's the part that disappoints me most. I had a huge respect for JJ as a GM, setting & rules designer, and all around person. But how he's treated criticism for Iomedae since Part 5 came out has really been disappointing. I genuinely liked having these dialogues about issues in the rules or settings because overall, he'd provide a reasonable dialogue to critics and fans alike. And even if I disagreed with him, there was still a respect there I had for someone taking the time out to reasonably talk about the game. Except, apparently, for Iomedae.

Folks... let's move the discussion off-thread, please. This isn't the place for this discussion.

But specifically to Odraude...

Spoiler:
I get it that you're disappointed, and I appreciate the respect you give me. I just wish folks were a bit more respectful of this particular decision I made—to keep Iomedae as a hard-ass in a tough spot where she's got very little patience for clowning around. Believe it or not, the version in print IS toned down from its original version, so from my viewpoint, it IS the nicer version of the original. I get that no one else gets to see that fact, since the original text only exists on my computer and the author's computer, and I've admitted I should have toned things down even more in order to maintain her role as a tough deity but soften her impatience a bit...

But at the same point, not all feedback is something I'll use, and sometimes I feel strongly enough about something that I do want to stand by it. I still welcome feedback.. but sometimes that feedback isn't gonna change my mind.

If I grew terse or frustrated or whatever in the original thread, it was likely because the tenor of several people posting to that thread was unnecessarily antagonistic or bordered on trollish activity. It was really no one's finest hour, that thread... including my own.

Anyway... let's let it drop from this thread and move on to questions. If folks want to continue the Iomedae discussion... do it in other threads or PM me, but realize that it's in print as-is and, barring the VERY VERY VERY unlikely event of a reprint of that book, it's not gonna change. I stand by it. I get that some folks don't agree with that stance, but that's not enough in and of itself to convince me to change my mind.

And please spoiler things as appropriate.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

Odraude wrote:
So actual question time. What type of sources and inspirations are there going to be for Occult Adventures?

For me? The psychic characters in Stephen King's stories are a great place to find inspiration. But there's also a HUGE amount of inspiration drawn from real-world mysticism and occultism and the like—things like seances and talking boards and Ailester Crowley and so on and so on.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

j b 200 wrote:
Other than worshipping demon lords instead of Lolth, how would you say Golarion drow differ culturally from Faerunian drow?

They don't really care about the surface world, as a general rule. They might want to wreck it in a few outlying cases, but they don't want to rule it. They don't raid it. They see it as beneath them and not worth their time.


James,

What would you say are the three most important features that define Golarion as it's own setting rather than just being "generic fantasy backdrop #38"? I've always found it hard to make things like the drow stand out as being different from the Faerunian ones, going back to an earlier question.

Franchisee - Game Kastle College Park

James,

Let's bring it all the way back to AP #1...

1) What does an attic whisperer do with a child once it has targeted the child as its playmate?
2) Do attic whisperers want to hurt the child they've chosen or would they function more like possessive evil protectors?
3) How would an attic whisperer deal with an adult? If the attic whisperer's bite knocked an adult out, would the attic whisperer kill the adult or just lose interest in her?

Many thanks in advance!

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

James, is there any chance that we will see a sign language that is legal for PFS play in the future? The thing that most excites me about Oracles is the curse class feature. I would dearly love to have a sign language option for deaf (and non-deaf) players.

Hmm

PS Thanks for creating such a diverse world. I loved reading the player companions to Qadira, Katapesh and Absalom. It's given me a lot of background for rich roleplay.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

Pigtails wrote:

James,

What would you say are the three most important features that define Golarion as it's own setting rather than just being "generic fantasy backdrop #38"? I've always found it hard to make things like the drow stand out as being different from the Faerunian ones, going back to an earlier question.

1) Prophecy is broken (and thus isn't used as a story crutch).

2) The regions of the world are essentially their own mini-settings within the whole.

3) The campaign is supported by regular adventure paths that come out 2 times a year to ensure a constant series of new adventures to go on.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

Gladior wrote:

James,

Let's bring it all the way back to AP #1...

1) What does an attic whisperer do with a child once it has targeted the child as its playmate?
2) Do attic whisperers want to hurt the child they've chosen or would they function more like possessive evil protectors?
3) How would an attic whisperer deal with an adult? If the attic whisperer's bite knocked an adult out, would the attic whisperer kill the adult or just lose interest in her?

Many thanks in advance!

1) It tries to make the child a playmate, but in actually basically just torments and horrifies and eventually kills the kid.

2) They don't protect children. They're jealous of their life and playful souls, and treat them as toys, and like children, they eventually break their toys.

3) It'd kill the adult.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

Hmm wrote:

James, is there any chance that we will see a sign language that is legal for PFS play in the future? The thing that most excites me about Oracles is the curse class feature. I would dearly love to have a sign language option for deaf (and non-deaf) players.

Hmm

PS Thanks for creating such a diverse world. I loved reading the player companions to Qadira, Katapesh and Absalom. It's given me a lot of background for rich roleplay.

There are several sign languages in Golarion, but whether or not PFS eventually picks one of them up for official play isn't my call. But... there's not really anything that's game breaking in allowing sign language into play, so I don't see why not, unless it's just a matter of PFS organizers forgetting there are more language options available (see Into the Darklands).


Hello James jacobs,

Can I climb using my claws?
Can I use a rope and climb down with my claws or do I need hands?

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
James Jacobs wrote:
Hmm wrote:

James, is there any chance that we will see a sign language that is legal for PFS play in the future? The thing that most excites me about Oracles is the curse class feature. I would dearly love to have a sign language option for deaf (and non-deaf) players.

Hmm

PS Thanks for creating such a diverse world. I loved reading the player companions to Qadira, Katapesh and Absalom. It's given me a lot of background for rich roleplay.

There are several sign languages in Golarion, but whether or not PFS eventually picks one of them up for official play isn't my call. But... there's not really anything that's game breaking in allowing sign language into play, so I don't see why not, unless it's just a matter of PFS organizers forgetting there are more language options available (see Into the Darklands).

I have seen Into the Darklands, but it has not made the Additional Resources list. :(

I've been delaying the launch of my oracle character in hopes that sign language would be added as an option. I would be quite happy with Sakvroth, but if I needed to, I would willingly take Flail Snail (and carry a small jar of alchemical slime) if that was the only sign language option available.

Hmm


Now that the attic whisperer has been mentioned, I gotta ask...

1- What do you see as the scariest creature in Golarion? (I mean "creepy-scary" type of scary, not "obviously-dangerous-scary" like a dragon attacking).

2- What is your favorite (non-fantasy, non-sci-fi) adventure movie? How would you build its protagonist? (My dad once asked me if I ever created the protagonist from Streets of Fire in Pathfinder. He really loves that movie)

3- Is there any horror movie villain that you feel would be a particularly interesting/fitting addition to Golarion?

4- Is arcane magic commonly seen as just a different type of science/technology? What about divine magic?

5- What creatures would you like to see as a playable race?

6- If a character has a CMB that can easily beat a giant's CMD, would you allow the player to trip that giant? I feel kinda bad that it's impossible (not just extremely difficult, impossible) for a character to use the classic tactic of tripping the giant.

7- What do you think is the silliest (but mechanically functional) rule in Pathfinder?

8- What's your favorite construct? How common are them in Golarion? (I really like clockwork golems)

9- What was the most fun thing to create in Golarion? What was the most difficult?

Liberty's Edge RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32, 2011 Top 16

James, in many ways, the swashbuckler class is similar to the gunslinger class. Do you think that if the swashbuckler had been created first, that the gunslinger would have still been a separate class rather than a series of new deeds or archetypes?

What do you see as pros and cons on them being separate classes with very similar mechanics (grit vs. panache) rather than a single class that simply focuses on different weapon groups?

Paizo Employee Creative Director

O Fortuna wrote:

Hello James jacobs,

Can I climb using my claws?
Can I use a rope and climb down with my claws or do I need hands?

Claws have no effect on climb speed; they don't make it easier, but they also don't make it tougher.

In order to use a rope while climbing, you need to have hands or other things capable of gripping a rope. Whether or not your claws can do so depends on what you are.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

JoelF847 wrote:

James, in many ways, the swashbuckler class is similar to the gunslinger class. Do you think that if the swashbuckler had been created first, that the gunslinger would have still been a separate class rather than a series of new deeds or archetypes?

What do you see as pros and cons on them being separate classes with very similar mechanics (grit vs. panache) rather than a single class that simply focuses on different weapon groups?

It's a chicken and the egg thing. Had the swashbuckler been created first, though, I suspect the gunslinger would be the hybrid class.

The pros: Lets you play the exact kind of character you want. Lets us put another class in a book that helps us sell more books. Helps to preserve each class's niche and personality—the other option would be to just build fighter archetypes and that's a little boring. As separate classes lets them have their own unique stuff. Lets us build another iconic.

The cons: Too many character creation options can be overwhelming. Too many character options only furthers arguments online about "which one is best."

Dark Archive

What medical schools, if any, are there in Golarion?

How much time would pass before I get expelled from those institutions?

Paizo Employee Creative Director

Lemmy wrote:

Now that the attic whisperer has been mentioned, I gotta ask...

1- What do you see as the scariest creature in Golarion? (I mean "creepy-scary" type of scary, not "obviously-dangerous-scary" like a dragon attacking).

2- What is your favorite (non-fantasy, non-sci-fi) adventure movie? How would you build its protagonist? (My dad once asked me if I ever created the protagonist from Streets of Fire in Pathfinder. He really loves that movie)

3- Is there any horror movie villain that you feel would be a particularly interesting/fitting addition to Golarion?

4- Is arcane magic commonly seen as just a different type of science/technology? What about divine magic?

5- What creatures would you like to see as a playable race?

6- If a character has a CMB that can easily beat a giant's CMD, would you allow the player to trip that giant? I feel kinda bad that it's impossible (not just extremely difficult, impossible) for a character to use the classic tactic of tripping the giant.

7- What do you think is the silliest (but mechanically functional) rule in Pathfinder?

8- What's your favorite construct? How common are them in Golarion? (I really like clockwork golems)

9- What was the most fun thing to create in Golarion? What was the most difficult?

1) The drakainia.

2) Jaws. I'd build Quint as an expert/ranger, favored enemy animals, favored terrain aquatic.

3) Yes... lots! They tend to have versions already in the game, though. (The alien is the xill, for example, and the cenobites from Hellraiser are kytons, etc.)

4) Nope. Science/technology is seen as its own thing.

5) I'm not really sure we need more playable races. I'm actually quite happy with the core races, plus aasimars, tieflings, and tengus. I don't really need any more.

6) Absolutely. That's the whole point for CMB and CMD... to model how one person can perform actions like trip against another.

7) Not really interested in answering this since it's the type of thing folks will use out of context.

8) Retrievers. They're not super common since people can't make them.

9) The Goblin Song was the most fun. The most difficult was Wrath of the Righteous or Dragon Empires.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
James Jacobs wrote:
j b 200 wrote:
Other than worshipping demon lords instead of Lolth, how would you say Golarion drow differ culturally from Faerunian drow?
They don't really care about the surface world, as a general rule. They might want to wreck it in a few outlying cases, but they don't want to rule it. They don't raid it. They see it as beneath them and not worth their time.

Or above them? Is it possible that drow grammar might use the term above us, the way and context we'd use beneath us? After all, the beings they hate the most live above them.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

LazarX wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
j b 200 wrote:
Other than worshipping demon lords instead of Lolth, how would you say Golarion drow differ culturally from Faerunian drow?
They don't really care about the surface world, as a general rule. They might want to wreck it in a few outlying cases, but they don't want to rule it. They don't raid it. They see it as beneath them and not worth their time.
Or above them? Is it possible that drow grammar might use the term above us, the way and context we'd use beneath us? After all, the beings they hate the most live above them.

Nah.


James Jacobs wrote:
6) Nope. Science/technology is seen as its own thing.

But if magic follows consistent rules and its results can be consistently replicated, doesn't the study of the arcane effectively become its own science? (Although a separate field from what we commonly see as science/technology).

James Jacobs wrote:
7) Not really interested in answering this since it's the type of thing folks will use out of context.

Fair enough. I was asking with more of a tongue-in-cheeky tone*, but I do see your point.

*Like Wizards having everything from guano to demon eyes in their spell components pouch because keeping track of every material component would be basically impossible and incredibly tedious. It's a silly rule, but a functional and necessary one.

That reminds me...

In your games, do players have to keep track of arrows? What about food rations and whatnot? I usually assume the characters can find food/water and don't bother to require checks unless the party is in a particularly inhospitable environment, but many players seem to enjoy the micro-managing

Oh, and since I'm already here... How many races have their own sign languages? I only remember seeing drow sign language mentioned in the rules, but they can't possibly be the only ones to have thought of that.

Thanks for the replies. Sorry for the multiple questions. :)

Paizo Employee Creative Director

Lemmy wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
6) Nope. Science/technology is seen as its own thing.
But if magic follows consistent rules and its results can be consistently replicated, doesn't the study of the arcane effectively become its own science? (Although a separate field from what we commonly see as science/technology).

At that point, you're basically arguing semantics, and using two different definitions of the word "science."

Lemmy wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
7) Not really interested in answering this since it's the type of thing folks will use out of context.

Fair enough. I was asking with more of a tongue-in-cheeky tone*, but I do see your point.

*Like Wizards having everything from guano to demon eyes in their spell components pouch because keeping track of every material component would be basically impossible and incredibly tedious. It's a silly rule, but a functional and necessary one.

That reminds me...

In your games, do players have to keep track of arrows? What about food rations and whatnot? I usually assume the characters can find food/water and don't bother to require checks unless the party is in a particularly inhospitable environment, but many players seem to enjoy the micro-managing

Oh, and since I'm already here... How many races have their own sign languages? I only remember seeing drow sign language mentioned in the rules, but they can't possibly be the only ones to have thought of that.

Thanks for the replies. Sorry for the multiple questions. :)

Yes, players keep track of arrows. They keep track of food if the adventure calls for it.

There are only a few sign langauges. One shared by many Darkland races (not just the drow) and one by the vegepygmies.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

James --

Don't forget flail snail!


Two guys get dressed up in armor and demonstrate ancient fighting moves.

Do you think full plate mechanics are an accurate portrayal?


James,

Other than current FAQ's have you guys thought about reworking any class completely? like a massive patch fixing a bunch of unbalanced classes or something like that?


How do you prefer to handle frost and fire resistance in relation to cold or hot environments? Would the creature with the resistance simply ignore as many points of nonlethal damage (assuming they fail their Fortitude save) as their resistance is? Would love your input!

Paizo Employee Creative Director

Tels wrote:

Two guys get dressed up in armor and demonstrate ancient fighting moves.

Do you think full plate mechanics are an accurate portrayal?

No, nor do I think they're supposed to be. They're supposed to balance the "accurate portrayal" with "balanced gameplay options."

Paizo Employee Creative Director

O Fortuna wrote:

James,

Other than current FAQ's have you guys thought about reworking any class completely? like a massive patch fixing a bunch of unbalanced classes or something like that?

That's kind of what the design team is trying out with Unchained.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Nargemn wrote:
How do you prefer to handle frost and fire resistance in relation to cold or hot environments? Would the creature with the resistance simply ignore as many points of nonlethal damage (assuming they fail their Fortitude save) as their resistance is? Would love your input!

I prefer handling it via common sense and logic: cold resistance makes you immune to cold environments. Fire resistance makes you immune to hot environments.

It makes sense. It's logical. It allows for some cool encounter design and world design.


Do you think you'll catch up on all the lost hours of sleep when you're dead? Or will Pharamsa keep you working even then?


James Jacobs wrote:
5) I'm not really sure we need more playable races. I'm actually quite happy with the core races, plus aasimars, tieflings, and tengus. I don't really need any more.

No love for changelings and the elemental-blooded?

The Exchange

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Heya James, been a long time between questions from me.

I took a hiatus from the boards to get my headspace right in real life. Came back recently and seemingly fell straight back into the same traps I did before leaving. <sigh>

Any how, enough of that.

Some questions.

1) I recently pointed out that my experience in the Pathfinder game really hasn't reflected the numerous DPR threads and Class Balance arguments I see in sections of these Forums? Do you have any idea how many people do or don't see this issue?

2) Any idea why the experiences are so disparate for players and GMs?

On a related topic, but less inflammatory I guess.

3) when it comes to making calls on spells and certain actions that players may try, how do you go about making a decision as a DM? Is there a fixed process or just a git thing or something in between? (eg someone tries to make a Simulacrum of the Tarrasque as it seems the rules can let them according to their reading of it)

4) Are you fairly permissive of player actions and try to come up with creative in game or campaign based consequences to keep some control, or are you more in the vein of saying some things just aren't allowed?

5)Divinations spells have the potential to derail a game I've been told. While I've never seen it happen, a number of others have informed me it can happen. How do you go about handling that situation, or divination in general actually?

I'm aware the first two questions are something you might not want to answer in case its buying into some sort of flame war. Thought I'd ask to see if you some sort of answer for me, but feel free to ignore them if you want.

Cheers


What do you think of the idea of combining the Mythic and Kingdom Building rules for a Birthright style campaign?


While going through my collection, I flipped through Dragon Compendium Volume 1. Was a Volume 2 On the drawing board/In the works when WotC pulled the plug?


James, I hope this question has not been asked before. But do constructs have souls, how about intelligent constructs? If they do have souls are they powered by positive energy, negative energy or neither?

49,551 to 49,600 of 83,732 << first < prev | 987 | 988 | 989 | 990 | 991 | 992 | 993 | 994 | 995 | 996 | 997 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Gamer Life / Off-Topic Discussions / >>Ask *James Jacobs* ALL your Questions Here!<< All Messageboards