Inner Sea Gods: Deities

Tuesday, April 8, 2014

The release of the Pathfinder Campaign Setting hardcover, Inner Sea Gods, is fast approaching, and that means it's time for some previews. The art team already did a preview of some of the amazing illustrations to grace this 336-page tome, so I'll talk a bit more about the words that accompany the book's incredible art.

The bulk of Inner Sea Gods are flavor-filled write-ups of all 20 core deities of the Inner Sea region. These articles go into divine detail about the gods' personalities, relations with other deities, their appearances, and home realms, as well as overviews of their churches' organization, typical temples and shrines, a priest's role, holy texts, holidays, and summonable planar allies.


Illustrations by Mark Molnar and Ben Wootten

Beyond the core deities, Inner Sea Gods also explores many of the region's minor deities to a deeper degree than ever before in the history of the Pathfinder campaign setting. Among the deities covered in this section are Achaekek, Alseta, Ghlaunder, Kurgess, Naderi, Razmir (yup), Sivanah, and Zyphus. Even more deities of all sorts are presented as complete pantheons, both of racial deities (like those worshiped by dwarves, elves, orcs, and other monstrous races) as well as the Outer Gods, demigods, and forgotten and dead deities.


Illustrations by Cheng Hong and Yuriy Georgiev

If that doesn't seem like a lot of gods, check out this spread from the appendix. This is only 1/7 of the content in this massive table of just about every being you can worship in the Inner Sea.

Check the blog soon for another look inside Inner Sea Gods, in which we'll examine some of the new rules elements available in the book (and yes, we'll show off some more art). Inner Sea Gods will be shipping to subscribers and game stores in April, and is available for preorder now.

Mark Moreland
Developer

More Paizo Blog.
Tags: Ben Wootten Cheng Hong Gods and Magic Mark Molnar Pathfinder Campaign Setting Yuriy Georgiev
101 to 140 of 140 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>

137ben wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
Victor Zajic wrote:

That's a shame, I always thought it was a really cool idea, and it has caused some very interesting dicussions in game when people from different societies meet and discuss their takes on the godly powers they worship.

There's already the precident of Oracles not needing the direct intervention of a deity to grant them divine magic, so it doesn't seemed to far fetched to me that an orc cleric praying to the blood god might be getting a little bit of power from Gorum, and a little bit of power from Gozreh.

Of course, I also really liked the "first worlder natives have no souls" idea(to the point where I had player a character who I played not to be ressurectable), so maybe I just like philosophical corner cases.

And in fact that's one of the primary reasons we added oracles to the game—to fill that exact niche. Religious leaders of groups that follow faiths other than specific gods are led by pretty much anything other than clerics. Oracles for the most part, but paladins, rangers, inquisitors, and so on work just as good as religious leaders.

Except that clerics already fill that niche, with clerics of concepts/ideals.

So basically you are saying you added oracles to the game so that they could fill a niche that was already in core to sell more books. So now you are trying to retcon a niche OUT of core, to increase the demand for non-core classes.

The oracle as written is a great class--I really like the oracle mysteries/revelations, and the curse mechanic. Those make the oracle a great class! It's a huge improvement over the favored soul. But it sounds really disingenuous when you try to say that the oracle is needed to fill a niche that a core-only cleric already fills.

Clerics on Golarion can't worship a concept, they must worship a Deity.


James Jacobs wrote:

You do recall correctly, and that's something we've specifically retconned with Inner Sea Gods. The orc gods are actual deities with names and personalities. The idea of a society making a new god of their own by worshiping bits and pieces here and there is fine... but not if that society has clerics who worship those "gods." Once a god exists and a cleric can gain domains from it... it's a god. Full stop.

In the future if we do societies who worship ideals pulled together from multiple gods or faiths, then we need to make sure that society doesn't include clerics, and that their faiths don't grant domains.

Is that Mwangi god described as a fusion of Desna and Gozreh now also a distinct god?

And where do the spirits of the Juju religion (from the article in bk3 of Serpent's Skull) stand? Are they now minor gods, or are they still something different?


Tels wrote:
137ben wrote:

Except that clerics already fill that niche, with clerics of concepts/ideals.

So basically you are saying you added oracles to the game so that they could fill a niche that was already in core to sell more books. So now you are trying to retcon a niche OUT of core, to increase the demand for non-core classes.

The oracle as written is a great class--I really like the oracle mysteries/revelations, and the curse mechanic. Those make the oracle a great class! It's a huge improvement over the favored soul. But it sounds really disingenuous when you try to say that the oracle is needed to fill a niche that a core-only cleric already fills.

Clerics on Golarion can't worship a concept, they must worship a Deity.
The same post you quoted wrote:
So now you are trying to retcon a niche OUT of core, to increase the demand for non-core classes.


137ben wrote:
Tels wrote:
137ben wrote:

Except that clerics already fill that niche, with clerics of concepts/ideals.

So basically you are saying you added oracles to the game so that they could fill a niche that was already in core to sell more books. So now you are trying to retcon a niche OUT of core, to increase the demand for non-core classes.

The oracle as written is a great class--I really like the oracle mysteries/revelations, and the curse mechanic. Those make the oracle a great class! It's a huge improvement over the favored soul. But it sounds really disingenuous when you try to say that the oracle is needed to fill a niche that a core-only cleric already fills.

Clerics on Golarion can't worship a concept, they must worship a Deity.
The same post you quoted wrote:
So now you are trying to retcon a niche OUT of core, to increase the demand for non-core classes.

To be honest, I think the decision to force clerics to worship a deity was made because Paizo felt it fits best with their setting, and not so much to increase demand for non-core classes.

Designer, RPG Superstar Judge

3 people marked this as a favorite.
137ben wrote:
So now you are trying to retcon a niche OUT of core, to increase the demand for non-core classes.

Or maybe Paizo is okay with the idea that Paizo's rules are the tools Paizo uses to build the official Paizo setting, but the official Paizo setting doesn't have to use all of the rules Paizo publishes.

Also, some rules in the core books are there for backwards-compatibility with older 3E products, and not something Paizo ever wanted to use in its own setting. Because a lot of people use the PF rules to play in their own campaign worlds, and just because Paizo doesn't want godless clerics in their campaign doesn't mean that they think that no campaign should have godless clerics.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

Secane wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
Secane wrote:

I see that many of the minior gods have their subdomains listed.

In Chronicles of the Righteous, it is stated that clerics of Empyreal Lords gain access to all subdomians options available to them from their empyreal lord's domains.

Would the release of Inner Sea Gods: Deities over right or change this access?
Asking more in view of PFS gameplay.

PS: If the Empyreal lords are not appearing in Inner Sea Gods: Deities, then I guess that nullify the above question.

The Empyreal lords are all listed in Inner Sea Gods. And they do indeed list specific subdomains for them. So it would indeed overwrite the notion that a cleric of an empyreal lord has more options than any other cleric. That's not really something we should have done.

When I saw the line on any sub-domain, I assumed it was for the purpose of simplicity and keeping the word count down.

This may have quite an effect on PFS players playing divine classes characters.

Players that own only the Chronicles of the Righteous and APG, may be confused over sudden restrictions on sub-domain on their characters that worship an Empyreal lord. Or may have to be retrained(?)

I hope that this would be look into before and when Inner Sea Gods: Deities is release. To give players some warning about such a change.

Hope someone from the PFS side is reading this.

PFS players need to be able to and willing to adjust characters as the rules are adjusted though. It's kinda the way things are and kinda the way they have to be.

That said, it's really frustrating to me when we don't have all our rules in a row; we never should have said that in Chronicles of the Righteous, since it's not the way subdomains work for any other religion.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

Jeven wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:

You do recall correctly, and that's something we've specifically retconned with Inner Sea Gods. The orc gods are actual deities with names and personalities. The idea of a society making a new god of their own by worshiping bits and pieces here and there is fine... but not if that society has clerics who worship those "gods." Once a god exists and a cleric can gain domains from it... it's a god. Full stop.

In the future if we do societies who worship ideals pulled together from multiple gods or faiths, then we need to make sure that society doesn't include clerics, and that their faiths don't grant domains.

Is that Mwangi god described as a fusion of Desna and Gozreh now also a distinct god?

And where do the spirits of the Juju religion (from the article in bk3 of Serpent's Skull) stand? Are they now minor gods, or are they still something different?

Those religions still exist. They're better suited for oracles is all.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

Heine Stick wrote:
137ben wrote:
Tels wrote:
137ben wrote:

Except that clerics already fill that niche, with clerics of concepts/ideals.

So basically you are saying you added oracles to the game so that they could fill a niche that was already in core to sell more books. So now you are trying to retcon a niche OUT of core, to increase the demand for non-core classes.

The oracle as written is a great class--I really like the oracle mysteries/revelations, and the curse mechanic. Those make the oracle a great class! It's a huge improvement over the favored soul. But it sounds really disingenuous when you try to say that the oracle is needed to fill a niche that a core-only cleric already fills.

Clerics on Golarion can't worship a concept, they must worship a Deity.
The same post you quoted wrote:
So now you are trying to retcon a niche OUT of core, to increase the demand for non-core classes.
To be honest, I think the decision to force clerics to worship a deity was made because Paizo felt it fits best with their setting, and not so much to increase demand for non-core classes.

And what's wrong with hoping and wanting the rules we publish to work well with the setting we publish? Nothing, considering we also always take the stance that any GM can change the rules as he/she wishes to match his/her setting.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

137ben wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
Victor Zajic wrote:

That's a shame, I always thought it was a really cool idea, and it has caused some very interesting dicussions in game when people from different societies meet and discuss their takes on the godly powers they worship.

There's already the precident of Oracles not needing the direct intervention of a deity to grant them divine magic, so it doesn't seemed to far fetched to me that an orc cleric praying to the blood god might be getting a little bit of power from Gorum, and a little bit of power from Gozreh.

Of course, I also really liked the "first worlder natives have no souls" idea(to the point where I had player a character who I played not to be ressurectable), so maybe I just like philosophical corner cases.

And in fact that's one of the primary reasons we added oracles to the game—to fill that exact niche. Religious leaders of groups that follow faiths other than specific gods are led by pretty much anything other than clerics. Oracles for the most part, but paladins, rangers, inquisitors, and so on work just as good as religious leaders.

Except that clerics already fill that niche, with clerics of concepts/ideals.

So basically you are saying you added oracles to the game so that they could fill a niche that was already in core to sell more books. So now you are trying to retcon a niche OUT of core, to increase the demand for non-core classes.

The oracle as written is a great class--I really like the oracle mysteries/revelations, and the curse mechanic. Those make the oracle a great class! It's a huge improvement over the favored soul. But it sounds really disingenuous when you try to say that the oracle is needed to fill a niche that a core-only cleric already fills.

We added oracles for several reasons. The BIGGEST was that we didn't have a spontaneous divine caster, though. Another was that we wanted to give Charisma more attention. And another is that we wanted to do some fun stuff with mysteries, and to experiment with some disadvantage type stuff. The fact that they gave us a class that can worship non-deity stuff and cast divine spells in Golarion is only one of those reasons.

Feel free to let clerics work how you want in your game. In Golarion, they've ALWAYS required deities, and the fact that the world team and the rules team had some miscommunications doesn't change that. We try to keep the rule books in sync with Golarion's expectations... but it's not always possible, alas.

And "clerics of concepts/niches" is something from 3.5 D&D that I argued hard for the removal of in the core game, but for various reasons, it stayed in the core book, even though we'd already established an opposing setup in Golarion (which we did before Pathfinder RPG came out). I knew it'd cause confusion and disconnects like this, but that ship sailed half a decade ago, alas...

Paizo Employee Creative Director

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Just to be clear.

I'm not saying, and NEVER claimed, you can't play a cleric of a concept or niche or ideal who doesn't worship a deity in your game, even if that game is set in Goalrion.

What I'm saying is that's not the official way it works in Golarion, and when we publish cleric NPCs, they worship deities, and when we run campaigns (such as PFS) we ask player character clerics to comply by that rule, in the same way we ask player character paladins to be lawful good, or player characters of any class to not be evil.

It's kind of the way it works. When you play in a game, you play by the GM's rules. And in PFS... Paizo is the primary GM.


James Jacobs wrote:

Just to be clear.

I'm not saying, and NEVER claimed, you can't play a cleric of a concept or niche or ideal who doesn't worship a deity in your game, even if that game is set in Goalrion.

What I'm saying is that's not the official way it works in Golarion, and when we publish cleric NPCs, they worship deities, and when we run campaigns (such as PFS) we ask player character clerics to comply by that rule, in the same way we ask player character paladins to be lawful good, or player characters of any class to not be evil.

It's kind of the way it works. When you play in a game, you play by the GM's rules. And in PFS... Paizo is the primary GM.

Tyrants, all of you. :P

Silver Crusade

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Tels wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:

Just to be clear.

I'm not saying, and NEVER claimed, you can't play a cleric of a concept or niche or ideal who doesn't worship a deity in your game, even if that game is set in Goalrion.

What I'm saying is that's not the official way it works in Golarion, and when we publish cleric NPCs, they worship deities, and when we run campaigns (such as PFS) we ask player character clerics to comply by that rule, in the same way we ask player character paladins to be lawful good, or player characters of any class to not be evil.

It's kind of the way it works. When you play in a game, you play by the GM's rules. And in PFS... Paizo is the primary GM.

Tyrants, all of you. :P

Tyrannosaurus to be precise :3


James Jacobs wrote:
Goalrion.

[Insert sports joke here.]

Shadow Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
John Compton wrote:
Mark Moreland wrote:
Kadasbrass wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
doc the grey wrote:
Also does that mean we can follow the Outer Gods in PFS now?!
This book doesn't change anything regarding what is and isn't legal in PFS.
I cried a little bit at this. My plans of making an Cleric of Azathoth and saving the world from destruction today so Azathoth could destroy it tomorrow (or at a later date) have been foiled again.
You should really ask Mike (or John) what will and won't be legal from this book. As James isn't the final arbiter of what appears in the Additional Resources list for the campaign, he's in no position to foil your plans.
I'm sure that Mike and I will examine the contents closely and discuss what is appropriate to include in the organized play campaign.

That's great to hear! I know I've had so many players itching to take a crack at the outer gods since I started playing pfs (hell my first cleric was built as a follower of Azathoth until I found the ruling) and I know I've had to tell players at least once at Gen con that their current character was invalid because they had built something that followed a banned god. I am so ready to see this ban revisited and maybe lifted and see what people come up with.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

1 person marked this as a favorite.

My take: The ban on worshiping certain deities preserves adventure plot lines. In a home game, if you buy an adventure like

Spoiler:
Carrion Crown
that's all about fighting against the machinations of Yog-Sothoth and you happen to have a devotee of Yog-Sothoth in your group, you as the GM know both how to adjust the adventure to still work, or whether or not your Yog-Sothoth worshiping PC will be comfortable working against his faith or not. You have the luxury of adjusting the adventure as needed.

PFS GMs do not have that luxury, and like it or not, there are players out there who deliberately build characters to give them chances to bend and stretch and skirt the rules that say "No PVP" in PFS. Playing worshipers of evil gods or of gods who are classically utilized as enemies in adventures (such as ALL of the Great Old Ones and Outer Gods) is one way to do so, unfortunately. Also, if and when we DO do a scenario that has a plot, say, of "Raid this temple of Yog-Sothoth, kill its cultists, and destroy the ritual they were attempting to perfect on their unholy day," and you have a player who worships Yog-Sothoth... that's a recipie for unhappy player(s) all around.

Not allowing certain types of characters, in other words, allows us greater latitude and freedom in designing adventures that are more appropriate for a campaign of the size and scope of PFS.

Not every character is an appropriate build or concept for every campaign, and PFS is no exception.


Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Lost Omens Subscriber
137ben wrote:

Except that clerics already fill that niche, with clerics of concepts/ideals.

So basically you are saying you added oracles to the game so that they could fill a niche that was already in core to sell more books. So now you are trying to retcon a niche OUT of core, to increase the demand for non-core classes.

The restriction on clerics needing deities in Golarion existed long before the Oracle. It was effectively before Pathfinder Core was even released. It really only existed in Core because of backwards compatibility so people running non-Golarion games could continue as they liked. And it's been debated on the forums sporadically ever since.

But as has been said, you can still house rule it any way you like in your game.

Liberty's Edge

Curious question (very relevant to my home champaign): on page 129, why was Chalmus Col moved from Vainbride Asylum in Tamrivena (AP 23, page 67) across Ustalav to Havenguard Asylun in Chalmus?
Was there an AP, Module, or Scinario in which he was moved?

I assume it was simply because Chalmus is a larger city.

Sovereign Court

Pathfinder Pawns Subscriber
James Jacobs wrote:
Playing worshipers of evil gods or of gods who are classically utilized as enemies in adventures (such as ALL of the Great Old Ones and Outer Gods) is one way to do so, unfortunately.

I've allowed a PC to do this once, and I made sign an agreement on a napkin saying something along these lines "I will be playing my evil cleric by pretending to be a neutral cleric of another religion, akin to how the antipaladin code allows for long-term good deep cover to allow for greater evil. I will not attempt contact with any evil NPCs operating within the boundaries of this adventure: in essence, your deep cover is so deep that no one in your faith knows about it. If the players discover my true identity in any way, I agree to retire this character the moment an hostile action is done against my PC. I agree that this is a risky character build, but those risks come with no additional rewards."


Old thread, but I figured I'd post it here. How come Paizo didn't put an Anti-Paladin Code in Gorum's section? Does that mean Gorum no longer allows anti-paladins into his faith?

Contributor

It means there's not an organized order of antipaladins for him, just as there isn't an organized order of paladins for (LN, individualistic) Irori.


...Then why did you put Rovagug's code in there?

Contributor

Well, that'll teach me to not post late at night when I haven't double-checked the source material...

When I wrote that post last night, I had assumed (from the context of the post, which is "how come the other evil gods have one and Gorum doesn't?") that there wasn't an official antipaladin code for Gorum, but it turns out there is one in Faiths of Corruption. Honestly, until I looked at FoC just now, I had forgotten there was a Gorum antipaladin code, because I didn't write FoC and haven't looked at it since it was new.

I don't know why the antipaladin code of Gorum wasn't included in Inner Sea Gods, as they were added to the book later. Missing the Gorum one probably was just an oversight, or that one was cut cut due to space constraints in his god writeup. But that's just speculation on my part, and I of course defer to the answer from anyone who still works at Paizo.

Sovereign Court

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Pawns Subscriber

having not read Faiths of Corruption yet, I would however assume that a 'Gorum antipaladin code' would be something along the lines of "flex your muscles hard and kick that karate kid's ass boy! remember that's why you learned KA-RA-TE!!! to show them weaklings who's boss!!!"

(i.e. perhaps being one of the less 'subtle' antipaladins orders would fit here, with emphasis on displaying their strength and power and scaring the heck out of everyone?)

:)


3 people marked this as a favorite.

The Paladin of Irori smiles at the Anti-Paladin of Gorum and says, "Wax on, wax off, Gorum-san."


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

It has been a while since I read it & of course I don't have it with me at the moment, but I noticed both the Gorumite Anti-Paladin & Calistrian Anti-Paladin codes were among the most lenient in terms of 'teh evuls'.
Which is not to say you couldn't be really damn evil playing one, but you didn't seem to need nearly as much justification for non-evil behavior.
As far as the Gorumite 'Code', basically, you promote war, conflict, bloodshed; you don't care why, or who gets hurt, or if there is even an end, other than the simple fact that the only reason you might want an end would be that your body simply gave out. I can easily see a Gorumite Anti-Paladin's third favorite thing being their wand of lesser Restoration, simply because it allows them to fight longer without having to go to sleep...


IIRC, a Gorumite A-P is required not only to promote war but to end peace. That's pretty evuls.

RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32

Irnk, Dead-Eye's Prodigal wrote:
I can easily see a Gorumite Anti-Paladin's third favorite thing being their wand of lesser Restoration, simply because it allows them to fight longer without having to go to sleep...

I'm assuming the first and second are 'My effing huge sword' and 'my spiky iron armor'.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Evil Midnight Lurker wrote:
IIRC, a Gorumite A-P is required not only to promote war but to end peace. That's pretty evuls.

Is starting an insurrection against the corrupt, Infernally-aligned power structure of Cheliax evil? What about Nidal or Irresen?


James Jacobs wrote:

PFS GMs do not have that luxury, and like it or not, there are players out there who deliberately build characters to give them chances to bend and stretch and skirt the rules that say

Not allowing certain types of characters, in other words, allows us greater latitude and freedom in designing adventures that are more appropriate for a campaign of the size and scope of PFS.

Not every character is an appropriate build or concept for every campaign, and PFS is no exception.

When you put in a spoiler tag it's a good idea to title it so I at least have some idea what you might be giving away before I click on it. Otherwise the curiosity gets the better of me.

Thanks.


Irnk, Dead-Eye's Prodigal wrote:
Evil Midnight Lurker wrote:
IIRC, a Gorumite A-P is required not only to promote war but to end peace. That's pretty evuls.
Is starting an insurrection against the corrupt, Infernally-aligned power structure of Cheliax evil? What about Nidal or Irresen?

Point. But let's have a look at the actual code:

• Peace is death. Conflict is life. I will not let anyone take the easy way out.
• Battle defines me. Without battle I am empty. I make my purpose with blade and brand.
• I will bathe in blood and breathe in iron. Where there is no conflict, I will create it. Where there are skirmishes, I will make war.
• The sword is the answer to any question.
• If there is peace ahead of me, I leave struggle in my wake.
• Poison is for the weak. Ambush is for the cowardly. Plague is a consequence of slaughter.
• Aggression is not foolishness. If I cannot stand against a foe, I will find another, and mark the first for later.

Seriously, anyone striving to hold to that code, particularly the first, third, fourth, and fifth points, has to be stopped. This is a person who has sworn to force everyone around him/her to solve all problems and conflicts with violence, and to create problems and conflicts where none exist. Does this sound like someone who could walk through a city or even a small town without either doing horrible evil or falling out of grace with Gorum?


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Evil Midnight Lurker wrote:

Point. But let's have a look at the actual code:

• Peace is death. Conflict is life. I will not let anyone take the easy way out.
• Battle defines me. Without battle I am empty. I make my purpose with blade and brand.
• I will bathe in blood and breathe in iron. Where there is no conflict, I will create it. Where there are skirmishes, I will make war.
• The sword is the answer to any question.
• If there is peace ahead of me, I leave struggle in my wake.
• Poison is for the weak. Ambush is for the cowardly. Plague is a consequence of slaughter.
• Aggression is not foolishness. If I cannot stand against a foe, I will find another, and mark the first for later.

Seriously, anyone striving to hold to that code, particularly the first, third, fourth, and fifth points, has to be stopped. This is a person who has sworn to force everyone around him/her to solve all problems and conflicts with violence, and to create problems and conflicts where none exist. Does this sound like someone who could walk through a city or even a small town without either doing horrible evil or falling out of grace with Gorum?

That sounds like a really frickin' awesome BBEG monologue.


Maybe it's just me being a romantic, but all and all Gorum seems a fairly reasonable and practical War God. Excluding Anti-Paladins, for the most part he just wants his followers to fight so they get stronger to live longer and fight some more to repeat the cycle. He honestly wants his faithful to survive their fights as long as they do so in a non-cowardly fashion. Also he prefers his followers to fight in a somewhat honorable and straight forward fashion. If you hire the average Gorumite for border patrol, or as a mercenary you can somewhat trust them to do their job.

In comparison, followers of Szuriel the Horseman of War are much less scrupulous. Her faithful win anyway they can or die trying. Just disposable tools that she can replace with some other fool. Unless you can finagle them into a ironclad I definitely wouldn't trust a band of mercs who fly her symbol.

RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32

Suma3da wrote:
Maybe it's just me being a romantic, but all and all Gorum seems a fairly reasonable and practical War God. Excluding Anti-Paladins, for the most part he just wants his followers to fight so they get stronger to live longer and fight some more to repeat the cycle. He honestly wants his faithful to survive their fights as long as they do so in a non-cowardly fashion. Also he prefers his followers to fight in a somewhat honorable and straight forward fashion. If you hire the average Gorumite for border patrol, or as a mercenary you can somewhat trust them to do their job.

That's because Gorum is CN, and Szuriel is NE. An antipaladin of Gorum is going to differ from Gorum's core philosphy to the degree necessary to make it Evil.

(Similarly, an antipaladin of Szuriel is going to differ from Szuriel enough to make it Chaotic. It might be hard to tell the difference between an antipaladin of Szuriel and one of Gorum.


This is good news then. It means my Aasimar Angelkin Anti-Paladin of Gorum who hails from Lastwall is still valid.


Ross Byers wrote:
Suma3da wrote:
Maybe it's just me being a romantic, but all and all Gorum seems a fairly reasonable and practical War God. Excluding Anti-Paladins, for the most part he just wants his followers to fight so they get stronger to live longer and fight some more to repeat the cycle. He honestly wants his faithful to survive their fights as long as they do so in a non-cowardly fashion. Also he prefers his followers to fight in a somewhat honorable and straight forward fashion. If you hire the average Gorumite for border patrol, or as a mercenary you can somewhat trust them to do their job.

That's because Gorum is CN, and Szuriel is NE. An antipaladin of Gorum is going to differ from Gorum's core philosphy to the degree necessary to make it Evil.

(Similarly, an antipaladin of Szuriel is going to differ from Szuriel enough to make it Chaotic. It might be hard to tell the difference between an antipaladin of Szuriel and one of Gorum.

I meant to show my viewpoint on the standard relationship of Gorum and his followers compared to his Anti-Paladins. When some people see a Paladin/AntiPaladin Code, they tend to think, "This is what it means to be an true follower of this Entity." They don't differentiate between the agenda of a Pally/APally versus the common practices of a normal adherent of the faith.

Shadow Lodge

Kieviel wrote:
Rogue Eidolon wrote:
Kieviel wrote:
Why does Nyralothotep have a double entry?
He's tricksy and appears in many guises.
Touché!

Where are Nyarlathotep's other 998 entries?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Kthulhu wrote:
Kieviel wrote:
Rogue Eidolon wrote:
Kieviel wrote:
Why does Nyralothotep have a double entry?
He's tricksy and appears in many guises.
Touché!
Where are Nyarlathotep's other 998 entries?

A bunch are in there, but not all of them.

Many guises.

Nethys. Oh look, there's one!

Paizo Employee Creative Director

Kthulhu wrote:
Kieviel wrote:
Rogue Eidolon wrote:
Kieviel wrote:
Why does Nyralothotep have a double entry?
He's tricksy and appears in many guises.
Touché!
Where are Nyarlathotep's other 998 entries?

Waiting for 998 individual adventures to be written about them, probably.

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Well get ta cracking', Mr. Creative Director!


Pathfinder Maps, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
James Jacobs wrote:
Kthulhu wrote:
Kieviel wrote:
Rogue Eidolon wrote:
Kieviel wrote:
Why does Nyralothotep have a double entry?
He's tricksy and appears in many guises.
Touché!
Where are Nyarlathotep's other 998 entries?
Waiting for 998 individual adventures to be written about them, probably.

He's got 99 problems...but Nyarlathotep ain't one.

101 to 140 of 140 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Lost Omens Campaign Setting / Lost Omens Products / Paizo Blog: Inner Sea Gods: Deities All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in Lost Omens Products