|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Do you mean this one? The one directly after your WoW comment, or a different retort?Nah this was my post. A few posts down they respond that my viewpoint is "really weird" and explains why I'm wrong in my flavour reasons (quote: "Seriously?") of not using the occult classes.
Not the whole world, just a little bit interesting why. Daw gave a plausible explanation above though, I could buy that.
Oh, okay. Missed that the first go around.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, it's called a pack mule or two, if you needed an alter for all of them
You can carry relevant shrines, GM permitting.Sure can. It's 40 lbs. for an alter so if that the average for the portable site, that 240 lbs for every one. I'm sure the average medium has that much carry capacity...
Which is kind of my point when people say 'it's NO problem, you can just...'.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Medium Favored Locations: The medium class says that spirits can be channeled from any appropriate location, not just from the list of favored locations, but is that true, or can I only channel from one of the favored locations?Referencing my post above that states HOW you make the location you want in the morning. If you were really interested in finding the source for reference to show a GM later we can probably find the post. So basically if you have a spirit that is your primary main spirit (very normal for the class to do this) then you just need to talk with your GM about what it'll take to create/carry a place to summon it.We crossposted. I'd be interested in seeing that post. Both for any DM I meet but for for my own knowledge. I'd like to see the how and why of how it's meant to work.
As the class says, you can channel from any appropriate location, and the favored locations are just a place to start. There might be times where you don’t have access to all six legends, but a medium, either PC or NPC, should generally be able to access a legend if they can come up with a good conceptual tie between the legend and a location he can find or even set up himself. For instance, a medium could go hunt a deer and then use that location to channel a champion spirit of a legendary hunter.
The medium "should generally" be able to access their spirit of choice. So if you have a GM talk what thing they'd like for you to do, knowing that it should be fairly simple.
Not really in the same way and to the same extent. The game plays the same it you alter the fluff while there are mechanical repercussions with altering the rules.
Not for us. If I would alter the flavour and backstory of the setting it would change much more than if I changed some rules. If Barzillai Thrune suddenly was a gnome woman from Cheliax' new neighbour country Flipenflapen, it would have a larger effect than if we suddenly ditched Vancian magic for a spell point system mid campaign, or banned the Inquisitor class.
We would play the game practically the same if we used Paizo's APs with, for example 5:th edition DD, or GURPS, or whatever. Changing game world would have a much larger effect.
We care about the cool and exciting stories from the APs, the laughs from silly situations, awesome character development (as in story-wise development), that stuff. The thing you would appreciate in a good film. We do not care if the fighter gets some new, really OP feat in a splat book. Or if Paizo changed the rules for AoO while doing Spell Combat. We wouldn't even notice that. We only used the Core book until our last AP, (and expanding what rules to use meant we looked at Occult Adventures) and we might go back to that in our next.
We have a post from Mark Moreland that reflavoring is fine. "No, that's just flavor text and one possible explanation for the mechanical benefits the trait grants." The mechanics matter, the flavor is just "one possible explanation for the mechanical benefit". As such, you can reflavor in PFS: just show em the post.
OK, I would maybe not equal my example of Desna to the change of a flavor text description. But all right, so changing "fluff" like the gods of Golarion at the DM's whim is fine in PFS - good I don't play PFS then! :-)
Sure, who doesn't... So? Fluff is nice to give you ideas but it seems like a total lack of imagination think it's tied to the mechanics like a weight around it's neck.
Actually, we often play the opposite way. We do the mechanics last. "I guess he would be a... druid/rogue maybe?".
I don't get this at all. The mechanics can can cover a multitude of "fun, cool and inventive" ideas while the fluff only covers one... As long as the mechanics are solid, the possibilities are endless. There is no need to be shackled to the author's fluff.
"shackled to the author's fluff", huh. Well, what I can say. I guess we play role playing games very differently.
Sure, I understand that... But that's not this. I understand "I don't like the fluff". What I don't understand is "the fluff doesn't fit X": what that means is you already have an idea what fluff you THINK will fit and if that's the case then you really don't NEED the book to tell you what you already know.
It's like reading a great book, you know? 'Wow, what a great character.' Or 'what an awesome turn of events', or 'what a fantastic scene'. I know I like it, but that doesn't mean I could come up with it myself. And the opposite - just because I read a bad book and can identify it as such doesn't mean I could improve it. Good ideas don't grow on trees. So Paizo creating a great NPC, or an awesome country, or a fantastic story, doesn't mean I can, without time and effort, make better ones where and when I find them lacking. If I had the option I would make my own world, and my own adventures, as I did back in the Eighties. In my experience, that's the best way I've found to play TRPG's. But I don't have that time. So 'll save that for the retirement home :-)
|
Each spirit has a favored location it usually inhabits, though spirits may also be present at other locations appropriate to their legends;You can keep a library and altar on your ship, or channel from the aftcastle, mainmast, or galley.
You just need to know which place on a ship is most like the suggested locations.
" though spirits may also be present at other locations appropriate to their legends" = random at best IMO.
...it's not like they go away after. Once you've found or built a location, you can keep using it to channel that spirit.
The intent is that you have access to the spirits unless there is a good reason for you not to.
Redelia: I understand what they are saying. However, nothing in the book indicates that doing so is simple, easy, time efficient or even guaranteed to work. I agree you can build a keep to get a spirit or carry around an altar: neither is ideal, possible in every game or forces the DM to allow it.
Chess Pwn: That really didn't make a rule though. It's STILL 100% DM fiat. The DM has to agree to the conceptual link works and is possible at the location. It goes beyond a general "should generally be able to access a legend". If I'm playing with a new DM, I have NO way of knowing what will or will not work to use a spirit outside the listed locations.
The example seems oddly easy which makes me wonder if it's valid. If reading a book works for archmage, sparring with a friend works for a Champion or holding a holy symbol for a Hierophant, then what is the point of having the locations in the first place?
EDIT/PS: Thanks for the link. Now I understand what people are talking about. I don't really agree with the conclusion drawn from it but at least I understand where they are coming from. ;)
...it's not like they go away after.
We're talking about adventurers... Most time it's the PC that the one that's going away.
The intent is that you have access to the spirits unless there is a good reason for you not to.
Now if it only said that. It would have been SUPER easy for the FAQ to say that and then stop... What it essentially says is that if you can come up with a good enough reason for it to work the DM can allow it. That's different than 'it just works'. It take a meeting of the minds about what you're doing/looking at that isn't guaranteed.
Redelia: I understand what they are saying. However, nothing in the book indicates that doing so is simple, easy, time efficient or even guaranteed to work. I agree you can build a keep to get a spirit or carry around an altar: neither is ideal, possible in every game or forces the DM to allow it.
Chess Pwn: That really didn't make a rule though. It's STILL 100% DM fiat. The DM has to agree to the conceptual link works and is possible at the location. It goes beyond a general "should generally be able to access a legend". If I'm playing with a new DM, I have NO way of knowing what will or will not work to use a spirit outside the listed locations.
The example seems oddly easy which makes me wonder if it's valid. If reading a book works for archmage, sparring with a friend works for a Champion or holding a holy symbol for a Hierophant, then what is the point of having the locations in the first place?
If the PDT are posting an example of something that counts and you're viewing it as "oddly easy" that should be a frame of reference for how easy it should be and why most of us here are trying to convey that the spirits availability shouldn't be an issue.
So if you're playing with a new GM and wanted to play a medium/have a medium you just talk with him about what he wants for stuff to count to get your spirit. Be like "GM I want to have the champion, are you cool with a 15 minute sparring match to count? Or would you rather a dc 10 survival check to hunt something quickly? etc."
The point of them at all are probably 2 fold, first and foremost is flavor, it's just there to be interesting.
second, it's that if you have your gear stolen, don't have time to spar/hunt to set up the right place, are in a jail, or some situation the GM can say you can't access some spirits.
Similar to a wizard losing a spellbook or a cleric losing a divine focus, mainly just a flavor thing that can be disrupted but shouldn't be disrupted often if ever.
Redelia: I understand what they are saying. However, nothing in the book indicates that doing so is simple, easy, time efficient or even guaranteed to work. I agree you can build a keep to get a spirit or carry around an altar: neither is ideal, possible in every game or forces the DM to allow it.
Chess Pwn: That really didn't make a rule though. It's STILL 100% DM fiat. The DM has to agree to the conceptual link works and is possible at the location. It goes beyond a general "should generally be able to access a legend". If I'm playing with a new DM, I have NO way of knowing what will or will not work to use a spirit outside the listed locations.
The example seems oddly easy which makes me wonder if it's valid. If reading a book works for archmage, sparring with a friend works for a Champion or holding a holy symbol for a Hierophant, then what is the point of having the locations in the first place?
If the PDT are posting an example of something that counts and you're viewing it as "oddly easy" that should be a frame of reference for how easy it should be and why most of us here are trying to convey that the spirits availability shouldn't be an issue.
So if you're playing with a new GM and wanted to play a medium/have a medium you just talk with him about what he wants for stuff to count to get your spirit. Be like "GM I want to have the champion, are you cool with a 15 minute sparring match to count? Or would you rather a dc 10 survival check to hunt something quickly? etc."
The point of them at all are probably 2 fold, first and foremost is flavor, it's just there to be interesting.
second, it's that if you have your gear stolen, don't have time to spar/hunt to set up the right place, are in a jail, or some situation the GM can say you can't access some spirits.Similar to a wizard losing a spellbook or a cleric losing a divine focus, mainly just a flavor thing that can be disrupted but shouldn't be disrupted often if ever.
I play online most time so I regularly have new DM's. It seems easier to avoid the class than kill a lot of set up messages over what I need for each spirit in non-standard locations. I normally don't have to have a talk about losing spellbooks/holy symbols/familiars/ect but those classes don't tell me I have to go to a certain place to use them. And it's not truly the same, as the medium CAN summon a random spirit while a wizard can't summon a random spellbook and a cleric can't get a random holy symbol. Adventurers often move around but rarely do so without their important equipment...
Conclusion: I'm not seeing the FAQ as 'the DM is forced to give you get the spirit you want'. It's more 'it's possible to use other places if appropriate'. It seems pointless otherwise.
Flavor: That may be, but then there is no reason to attach it to mechanics... Overall, locations just seems either frustrating or pointless [depending how it's ruled] instead of interesting.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The intent is that you have access to the spirits unless there is a good reason for you not to.
If this is the case, then what is the point of the Relic Channeler archetype?
I get the sense that the medium was designed so that one cost of its flexibility was its dependence on specific location types for its various legends. Removing this dependence is akin to letting wizards memorize spells without their spell books or clerics do their thing without holy symbols.
|
|
The intent is that you have access to the spirits unless there is a good reason for you not to.If this is the case, then what is the point of the Relic Channeler archetype?
I get the sense that the medium was designed so that one cost of its flexibility was its dependence on specific location types for its various legends. Removing this dependence is akin to letting wizards memorize spells without their spell books or clerics do their thing without holy symbols.
I was not removing the dependence, I was equating it to a wizard's spellbook. The idea is that a wizard is generally assumed to have their spellbook unless there is a good reason that they don't.
Do you not see the parallel?
Nah this was my post. A few posts down they respond that my viewpoint is "really weird" and explains why I'm wrong in my flavour reasons (quote: "Seriously?") of not using the occult classes.
I was unaware that it was considered aggressive to state that a viewpoint you consider confusing to be "really weird to me". I shall aim to be clearer in my intended tone.
I was aiming to show the inconsistency in the viewpoint of the classes not fitting the setting flavourwise. (Note I think it's fine to not like the flavour of occult adventures, I'm fine with people not having the time to read the book or feeling they already have enough classes for their game).
If we were just talking about some of the archetypes of occult adventures, then sure you'd have a leg to stand on as some of them are based around alchemy stuff and phrenology, but the actual occult classes themselves don't have that issue.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I was not removing the dependence, I was equating it to a wizard's spellbook. The idea is that a wizard is generally assumed to have their spellbook unless there is a good reason that they don't.
Do you not see the parallel?
I think they are very apples and oranges. A spellbook or holy symbol is something that a wizard or cleric can carry around. One can have it anywhere. A medium is dependent on specific locations/types of locations. By definition, this is not something one can have anywhere.
I play online most time so I regularly have new DM's. It seems easier to avoid the class than kill a lot of set up messages over what I need for each spirit in non-standard locations. I normally don't have to have a talk about losing spellbooks/holy symbols/familiars/ect but those classes don't tell me I have to go to a certain place to use them. And it's not truly the same, as the medium CAN summon a random spirit while a wizard can't summon a random spellbook and a cleric can't get a random holy symbol. Adventurers often move around but rarely do so without their important equipment...
Then just don't make it a big deal. You now know that you should be able to channel your spirit, if you think it makes sense then do so. I bet in 99/100 times the GM won't even care at all and that 99/100 that are left will agree with whatever explanation you give along with the FAQ.
Now I don't play all that much online so I could be way off. It just seems like it's a non-issue. Like being a mystic theurge that needs to spend 2 hours to prepare their spells. No one should care, and those that do won't change anything because of it.| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You can find locations anywhere. That's kind of the definition of anywhere.
You can not find SPECIFIC locations anywhere. That’s kind of the definition of specific.
|
You can find locations anywhere. That's kind of the definition of anywhere.You can not find SPECIFIC locations anywhere. That’s kind of the definition of specific.
You don't have to find specific locations though, just anything with a decent thematic tie. It's pretty clear from the FAQ that you can fairly easily make your own locations too. Instead of a library you could just spend time in the morning studiously reading books and annotating, for the battlegrounds you go hunting, light some incense and pray to create a holy place.
It's not very restrictive at all unless the GM is trying to actively harm you.
And to Greystone, I agree that it was not handled well as printed. Luckily we have the this FAQ that ChessPwn liked to clarify.
|
|
You can find locations anywhere. That's kind of the definition of anywhere.You can not find SPECIFIC locations anywhere. That’s kind of the definition of specific.
You're looking for thematic locations, not specific ones. Any location worth playing at is going to have a story, and stories mean access to the legend spirits.
If you really are slogging through the woods for half your career, the can still rely on the FAQ to make your own.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's pretty clear from the FAQ that you can fairly easily make your own locations too. Instead of a library you could just spend time in the morning studiously reading books and annotating, for the battlegrounds you go hunting, light some incense and pray to create a holy place.
It's not very restrictive at all unless the GM is trying to actively harm you.
OK, I get it. For "City walls, forts, gates, keeps," I let the player make a nice sand castle. To do otherwise would be an attempt to "actively harm" such a character.
I gotta say that I started ambivalent/neutral about occult classes, but the more I learn, the less I like them.
I play online most time so I regularly have new DM's. It seems easier to avoid the class than kill a lot of set up messages over what I need for each spirit in non-standard locations. I normally don't have to have a talk about losing spellbooks/holy symbols/familiars/ect but those classes don't tell me I have to go to a certain place to use them. And it's not truly the same, as the medium CAN summon a random spirit while a wizard can't summon a random spellbook and a cleric can't get a random holy symbol. Adventurers often move around but rarely do so without their important equipment...Then just don't make it a big deal. You now know that you should be able to channel your spirit, if you think it makes sense then do so. I bet in 99/100 times the GM won't even care at all and that 99/100 that are left will agree with whatever explanation you give along with the FAQ.
Now I don't play all that much online so I could be way off. It just seems like it's a non-issue. Like being a mystic theurge that needs to spend 2 hours to prepare their spells. No one should care, and those that do won't change anything because of it.
It's funny you should say this as the only time I've seen the class played, it wasn't one of those 99% that could just get any spirit at the drop of a hat. :P
Online: see, even if I agree with you on the point of the FAQ, I have no way to enforce that. It's even worse as I see good reason to NOT have it work that way. The general tone of the book added to the Relic Channeler are very much at odds with the lackadaisical nature of the FAQ's 'ignore the class feature requirements as long as you give the DM a wink/nudge'...
Quite honestly, a cost/benefit analysis of the class by me ends up with my bypassing the class altogether in favor for one that has less nebulous features that don't need to come to an understanding about before we even start the character...
PS: I think I'm done debating the medium and locations. Feel free to continue but I don't think there is anything else I can add or gain from continuing.
pjrogers: I understand what you mean. If I can throw a book into any random field and call it a library, it makes the feature meaningless. :(
|
|
OK, I get it. For "City walls, forts, gates, keeps," I let the player make a nice sand castle. To do otherwise would be an attempt to "actively harm" such a character.
Or you could not strawman my position and allow a properly maintained campsite with defined boundries, regular patrols/watches, and well built tent/lean-to as an alternative.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The general tone of the book added to the Relic Channeler are very much at odds with the lackadaisical nature of the FAQ's 'ignore the class feature requirements as long as you give the DM a wink/nudge...
I mean, I'd say the relic channeler has a a slightly different theme and gets different abilities related to that, but to each their own.
No worries if you don't want to include it. I'm not trying to convince you to use it, was just trying to explain why it appealed to me.
The general tone of the book added to the Relic Channeler are very much at odds with the lackadaisical nature of the FAQ's 'ignore the class feature requirements as long as you give the DM a wink/nudge...I mean, I'd say the relic channeler has a a slightly different theme and gets different abilities related to that, but to each their own.
No worries if you don't want to include it. I'm not trying to convince you to use it, was just trying to explain why it appealed to me.
Oh, the same for me. I'm not trying to get you [the generic you] to not use it. In fact, for someone in a static group and a known DM I could see the issues I see with it not being a problem.
|
|
I cannot help a scratch my head at all the uncertainty, debate, and considerations or interpretations being offered. I guess personally I never found the occult classes to be all that overly complex or confusing. When I browsed through the classes one originally having a chance to see them nothing really stood out is not making sense. Shrugs
