| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
That mystery had SO MUCH going for it!
It TOTALLY invalidates one of my favorite characters. Now my GM will either disallow the character, or force me to change it to the new rule set, which will make her COMPLETELY UNRECOGNIZABLE from the original concept. It doesn't even scream "juju" anymore. Now it's more like a lazy shaman concept.
*distraught* -_-
Please, please, please tell me that the new mystery abilities are IN ADDITION TO the old ones, and not meant to replace them. Please...please...please...
EDIT: The subject line's question is largely rhetorical. I know why they changed it, and have disagreed with Paizo's logic since long before the actual change.
Nope. Errata was applied, some revelations are new, some are gone. Some are changed.
Possibly to take Mikaze off of cloud 9, as being up there for too long is not good for your health.
Wait, what, what happened? I JUST got finished making a JuJu Oracle I was gonna play in 2 days, I'ma be pissed if there's some change that f***s that up.
They went WAY too far.
If they wanted undead to remain evil, then all they needed to do was change a few words, not the entire archetype.
have disagreed with Paizo's logic since long before the actual change.
Your not the only one.
What kind of GM makes you retcon something because it was completely rewritten for fluff? The new JuJu oracle doesn't resemble theold one at all. Some of its abilities are silly or just downright nerfed, and its loaded with once per day abilities. Is he going to make you roleplay chanting while you keep up spiritual defence too?(2 and a half hours of chanting everything you say... ouch.)
What kind of GM makes you retcon something because it was completely rewritten for fluff?
Literally every GM I've ever played with, including myself, MrSin.
Link to changes please?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Wait, what, what happened? I JUST got finished making a JuJu Oracle I was gonna play in 2 days, I'ma be pissed if there's some change that f$@!s that up.
Faiths and Philosophies has a Juju mystery. It has nothing to do with undead. You can still use your old one, unless your DM hates you I guess. To be honest they're so different you could just call it 'the other juju'.
Are we talking about the Juju mystery that was printed in Faiths & Philosophies? Has it changed from there, or is that version different than a previous version?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Haha. Does your oracle have Good Juju or Bad Juju? lol.
What kind of GM makes you retcon something because it was completely rewritten for fluff?Literally every GM I've ever played with, including myself, MrSin.
Not me! But maybe I'm weird. I just see them as two separate mysteries who share a name.
Are we talking about the Juju mystery that was printed in Faiths & Philosophies? Has it changed from there, or is that version different than a previous version?
It was originally an article in one of the Serpent's Skull APs.
I love that Dork rants and raves about a change but does not link to what he's actually talking about, despite multiple requests to do so.
Love it :/
Why, I really don't know what you're talking about.
|
Why, I really don't know what you're talking about.I love that Dork rants and raves about a change but does not link to what he's actually talking about, despite multiple requests to do so.
Love it :/
Cute ...
Of course, that just links to an unofficial site and doesn't really specify what you are ranting about, unless the person reading is already very familiar with the mystery, I guess.
Any chance you can provide a link to an official source or even better, just tell everyone what you are talking about?
I don't see any change there...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Although you seem to have linked to the old one. New one's up here: Juju
Oh. Well that thing kinda sucks. There were few good Revelations in JuJu as it was, and now it looks like they've removed them. =/
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
Posts like the OP contribute to the idea that outraged, inflammatory posts are the proper way to express concern about rules changes.
Remember the most important rule (aka, RTMIR).
Posts like the OP contribute to the idea that outraged, inflammatory posts are the proper way to express concern about rules changes.
Remember the most important rule (aka, RTMIR).
Aside from flavor reasons (i.e. "no good-aligned undead/necromancers"), could you elucidate some of the reasons behind the changes to the Revelations for this Mystery? It looks like most of the undead-related stuff for the Juju Mystery were removed.
Posts like the OP contribute to the idea that outraged, inflammatory posts are the proper way to express concern about rules changes.
Remember the most important rule (aka, RTMIR).
Less "inflammatory" and more "distraught."
| 17 people marked this as a favorite. |
1) Shadowcat, if you're "outraged" that someone changed something you liked in a game you play, you need to go outside and get some fresh air. It's a game. It's not racism, it's not sex crime laws, it's not murder, it's a game. A game rule changed. You're outraged? Give me a break.
2) I had nothing to do with this change and don't even know what the change is, so I don't have any input about why it was done, What I do know is the OP has a history of getting upset about corner cases and loopholes "breaking his character," and his style of posts contributes to the general atmosphere of jerkiness that is becoming prevalent on the boards.
RTMIR.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Goota agree with ShadowcatX here. While "outraged" might be too strong a word, being upset is understandable.
These were huge changes, and they invalidate what was the only way of creating non-evil undead. It's a cool character concept that was removed because someone didn't like it's flavor.
If it this change was made for balance reasons, I could understand, but doing so just because of preference seems unnecessary in a rule set that is meant to be setting-neutral.
It'd have worked better if there was a note saying "In Golarion, all undead are evil, so this is how this ability works..." instead. This would allow for players who use different settings and/or like the idea of non-evil undead to play how they want, and still keep Golarion's undead alignment.
On a related note, I don't understand why make it impossible to have non-evil undead. The reformed monster trying to make it up for its past evil deeds is a classic trope, seen in lots of series, movies and books.
| 14 people marked this as a favorite. |
3) Distraught? Dictionary:
dis·traught [dih-strawt]
adjective
1.
distracted; deeply agitated.
2.
mentally deranged; crazed.
A friend of mine's brother stepped on an anthill Saturday and died of an allergic reaction to the ant bites. She's distraught. You're merely put out. It's just a game.
Admittedly, "outraged" or "distraught" might be hyperbole. But I can understand why Oracle players would be upset with this change.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Goota agree with ShadowcatX here. While "outraged" might be too strong a word, being upset is understandable.
These were huge changes, and they invalidate what was the only way of creating non-evil undead. It's a cool character concept that was removed because someone didn't like it's flavor.
If it this change was made for balance reasons, I could understand, but doing so just because of preference seems unnecessary in a rule set that is meant to be setting-neutral.
It'd have worked better if there was a note saying "In Golarion, all undead are evil, so this is how this ability works..." instead. This would allow for players who use different settings and/or like the idea of non-evil undead to play how they want, and still keep Golarion's undead alignment.
On a related note, I don't understand why make it impossible to have non-evil undead. The reformed monster trying to make it up for its past evil deeds is a classic trope, seen in lots of series, movies and books.
It was clarified that the ability to create non-evil undead was an oversight as early as January 2012. This probably shouldn't come as a surprise. The old Juju Mystery was never legal for PFS, AFAIK.
Has it been clarified anywhere that one supersedes the other? I know that's the convention for PFS, but there are also two legal Dueling weapon enhancements. No reason why non-PFS GMs can't allow one or the other.
And if your GM is using the RAW to withhold it from you, then I can only imagine there's a history of players using RAW to force broken builds on the campaigns.
People probably got tired of saying "No, you can't play a necromancer. You can't be a good one" only to hear "JU JU ORACLE!!" as if that one utterance completely nullifies any of the myriad of reasons why a GM wouldn't want one PC in control of a horde of undead, regardless of their alignment.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
While I'm actually okay with keeping most undead evil, and totally okay with making fun of RavingDork's Molehill to Mountain Transmutation spells...
I actually do not like this change. This is a very large change and invalidates what people have considered to be a good and flavorful archetype. And if you didn't like the class, you could tweak it or just not have it. Changing flavor of classes should be a GM's job. If a GM wants good undead, let them. It'd be like reprinting the gunslinger but replacing firearms with crossbows because people hate firearms. I think this is a bad precedent, as now I'm pretty much worried about any class the team may not like than I love. Like, the summoner.
I say ignore this archetype if you are a GM. If you are a player, talk with your GM about it ahead of time and let them know how you feel. I won't be getting this book anymore. Vote with your wallet.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Any chance you can provide a link to an official source or even better, just tell everyone what you are talking about?
How about the note on the very page he linked?
Spirit Vessels' ability to create non-evil undead was an oversight, and this behavior is not intended. The ability has been edited to reflect the intentions of the ability. For archival purposes, the full text removed is as follows:"Necromancy spells that create undead lose the evil descriptor when you cast them. Mindless undead created by your magic are of neutral alignment, while thinking undead possess your alignment. "
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Don't like the errata, don't use it. Not that complicated.
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
The change had to do with the fact that the previous text of the Spirit Vessels revelation allowed for the creation of non-evil undead, something that clashes with the default core assumptions of the game rules. (Raving Dork and a particular subset of posters on the board are rather attached to the idea of necromancers that remain socially acceptable while animating hordes of undead as they avoid the "evil" tag on them.)
2) I had nothing to do with this change and don't even know what the change is, so I don't have any input about why it was done or if the person who made the "change" isn't guilty of accidental parallel design. What I do know is the OP has a history of getting upset about corner cases and loopholes "breaking his character," and his tsyle of posts contributes to the general atmosphere of jerkiness that is becoming prevalent on the boards.
RTMIR.
This sort of exaggeration and misrepresentation of gamers that like the flavor and stories non-evil undead offer should be beneath you, LazarX.
Both "sides" here could stand to use a bit less vilification.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Possibly to take Mikaze off of cloud 9, as being up there for too long is not good for your health.
Eh, I still got the original and the White Necromancer. :)
That and Dragon's Demand and Chronicle of the Righteous already established a beachhead for non-evil undead and their stories. :D(<3 Ashava)
|
Don't like the errata, don't use it. Not that complicated.
SO much this. If you don't like the Juju Oracle from Faiths and Philosophies, just use the old one for your home games.
Considering that the GM gets final say on what rules and products are/are not allowed in his game, this seems like a bit of a non-issue.
I don't get how they made it worse, looks pretty good to me, better even then from AP#39.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
People probably got tired of saying "No, you can't play a necromancer. You can't be a good one" only to hear "JU JU ORACLE!!" as if that one utterance completely nullifies any of the myriad of reasons why a GM wouldn't want one PC in control of a horde of undead, regardless of their alignment.
Well, the best way to keep someone from using an army of undead is probably to say 'no armies of undead please'.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
3) Distraught? Dictionary:
dis·traught [dih-strawt]
adjective
1.
distracted; deeply agitated.
2.
mentally deranged; crazed.A friend of mine's brother stepped on an anthill Saturday and died of an allergic reaction to the ant bites. She's distraught. You're merely put out. It's just a game.
[/old south female accent]
I do declare that this news has just given him a case of the vapors.
[/end accent]
*vigorously fans with lacy hand fan*
I don't get how they made it worse, looks pretty good to me, better even then from AP#39.
How is it better? Its loaded with 1/day abilities and it lost its command undead.
Don't like the errata, don't use it. Not that complicated.SO much this. If you don't like the Juju Oracle from Faiths and Philosophies, just use the old one for your home games.
Considering that the GM gets final say on what rules and products are/are not allowed in his game, this seems like a bit of a non-issue.
Doesn't work if you play PFS.
Although I don't think the Juju Oracle was ever a valid choice in PFS.
I don't get how they made it worse, looks pretty good to me, better even then from AP#39.How is it better? Its loaded with 1/day abilities and it lost its command undead.
why does it need command undead? who honestly other then NPCs needs undead fodder? you still get summon natures ally for fodder
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Don't like the errata, don't use it. Not that complicated.
That's a pointless argument (one that is suspiciously used almost exclusively by those who happen to agree with whatever FAQ/errata/ruling they are discussing).
You can say that about anything. Should we not care at all about what the designers say about the rules because we can choose to ignore them?
Sometimes a player wants to play a PFS game. Other times, he is joining a new group. In both cases, RAW is the basis for what to expect. There'll always be house-rules, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't share our thoughts on whatever rule we are debating.
There is no problem in debating rules as saying why you like them or not. As long as you're polite about it, these discussions are a good thing.
why does it need command undead? who honestly other then NPCs needs undead fodder? you still get summon natures ally for fodderI don't get how they made it worse, looks pretty good to me, better even then from AP#39.How is it better? Its loaded with 1/day abilities and it lost its command undead.
You can use summon nature's ally once per day. The other juju had channel to command undead. There's a pretty big difference between those two.
You can't just say something is better and give no reasons. If I said pizza was better than hot dogs I better give a good reason, such as me enjoying feta or having a belief pizza could be made of higher quality and have a larger variety of taste.