Announcing the War of Immortals

WWHsmackdown wrote:

I'm guessing it's a free archetype-like tack that gives 10 extra feats that you spend exclusively in you're mythic destiny

That would be the most intuitive and straightforward way to do it, for sure. That's where I'm leaning too, though I keep envisioning a progression of fewer feats, say five, that are each chunkier and grant more benefits for the tier you have. They might even grant bonuses to your core numbers, allowing you to punch above your weight class level-wise.

I'm assuming that last bit because the devs said these rules wuldn't bring you above 20th level, if I remember right. Giving you a way to pump your numbers while staying in the normal twenty level progression would mean that you could eventually take on 25+ threats, which feels suitably mythic. It's also just something I want. I want it very very much. I love reading those 25+ statblocks even when I know there's almost no chance of getting that high.

Edit: Oh, oopse. Quoted you before you were totally finished, sorry.

No worries, I'm scatter brained so posting is a 30 minute ordeal for me, lol

Looking forward to all of that, but most especially the releases coming out in the summer; I've been hoping for some beefy Red Mantis content for a while now! I also love the theme of Curtain Call. It's going to be hard to decide between that and Fists of the Ruby Phoenix when our AV campaign wraps up and I take turn as the GM for the 11-20 campaign.

Also, will Godsrain be available in audiobook format?

Perpdepog wrote:

Looking forward to all of that, but most especially the releases coming out in the summer; I've been hoping for some beefy Red Mantis content for a while now! I also love the theme of Curtain Call. It's going to be hard to decide between that and Fists of the Ruby Phoenix when our AV campaign wraps up and I take turn as the GM for the 11-20 campaign.

Also, will Godsrain be available in audiobook format?

Perpdepog wrote:

Looking forward to all of that, but most especially the releases coming out in the summer; I've been hoping for some beefy Red Mantis content for a while now! I also love the theme of Curtain Call. It's going to be hard to decide between that and Fists of the Ruby Phoenix when our AV campaign wraps up and I take turn as the GM for the 11-20 campaign.

Also, will Godsrain be available in audiobook format?

It has been confirmed in the product thread that it will be available as an e-book and an audiobook as well as a hardcover.

I've been kicking around the idea that ALL gods are former mortals of one stripe or another. Maybe combined of one or more mortal souls. It is only over time that they become more alien and detached.

This is baseless speculation for funsies.

Saranrae was an angel created by Ihys before she became a full-fledged goddess (at least according to the Book of the Damned excerpt from 1E), so according to that piece of lore, you're wrong at least about her.

WWHsmackdown wrote:

I'm guessing it's a free archetype-like tack that gives 10 extra feats that you spend exclusively in you're mythic destiny

That would be the most intuitive and straightforward way to do it, for sure. That's where I'm leaning too, though I keep envisioning a progression of fewer feats, say five, that are each chunkier and grant more benefits for the tier you have. They might even grant bonuses to your core numbers, allowing you to punch above your weight class level-wise.

I'm assuming that last bit because the devs said these rules wuldn't bring you above 20th level, if I remember right. Giving you a way to pump your numbers while staying in the normal twenty level progression would mean that you could eventually take on 25+ threats, which feels suitably mythic. It's also just something I want. I want it very very much. I love reading those 25+ statblocks even when I know there's almost no chance of getting that high.

Edit: Oh, oopse. Quoted you before you were totally finished, sorry.

I hope we at least get a proper mythic statblock for Sorshen out of it. :p

Saedar wrote:

I've been kicking around the idea that ALL gods are former mortals of one stripe or another. Maybe combined of one or more mortal souls. It is only over time that they become more alien and detached.

This is baseless speculation for funsies.

Saranrae was an angel created by Ihys before she became a full-fledged goddess (at least according to the Book of the Damned excerpt from 1E), so according to that piece of lore, you're wrong at least about her.

Sarenrae starting as an angel was from Asmodeus. The Windsong Testaments have her as one of the first nine gods. https://paizo.com/community/blog/v5748dyo6sgzu

Perpdepog wrote:

WWHsmackdown wrote:

I'm guessing it's a free archetype-like tack that gives 10 extra feats that you spend exclusively in you're mythic destiny

That would be the most intuitive and straightforward way to do it, for sure. That's where I'm leaning too, though I keep envisioning a progression of fewer feats, say five, that are each chunkier and grant more benefits for the tier you have. They might even grant bonuses to your core numbers, allowing you to punch above your weight class level-wise.

I'm assuming that last bit because the devs said these rules wuldn't bring you above 20th level, if I remember right. Giving you a way to pump your numbers while staying in the normal twenty level progression would mean that you could eventually take on 25+ threats, which feels suitably mythic. It's also just something I want. I want it very very much. I love reading those 25+ statblocks even when I know there's almost no chance of getting that high.

Edit: Oh, oopse. Quoted you before you were totally finished, sorry.

I hope we at least get a proper mythic statblock for Sorshen out of it. :p

I think that we'll get a bunch of statblocks when the time comes, and she's almost a given.

Sigh. I'm still not sure if not doing a playtest for the mythic rules is a good idea.

What is the giant mushroom creature on the cover of Pathfinder Godsrain?

Is Battlecry the name of the book? Have it been announced before? I have never even heard it.

On the cover of Divine Mysteries, are the three deities behind Arazni Sarenrae, Pharasma, and Asmodeus?

I still have no idea when and how Arazni has become a deity. In Tyrant's Grasp, Arazni was not even a demigod, just a powerful mythic character. Now, Tar-Baphon is still a mortal (albeit very powerful), yet Arazni has become a full-fledged deity? Did she touch the Starstone?

Giant "mushroom creature" is Verex-That-Was/Verex the Despoiler. They're an orc god that got too close to Rovagug's prison, and as they crawled away, they were hit with the Godsrain and warped into a new Spawn of Rovagug.

Battlecry! is the first time we've heard about the name, alongside the surprise of the playtest itself. It's possible that the book's name will be Battlecry!, 'cause the name of the other class playtests were the name of their books, too.

Yes, the 3 deities in the stained-glass windows behind Arazni are Sarenrae, Pharasma, and Asmodeus.

And no one knows how Arazni recovered from her previous state to a full god to now a Core 20 god. I'd imagine we'll find out a little about that in Divine Mysteries. Or not. We can only hope.

Sarenrae starting as an angel was from Asmodeus. The Windsong Testaments have her as one of the first nine gods. https://paizo.com/community/blog/v5748dyo6sgzu

Gotta wonder if we are dealing with contradictory mythology here or just the fallen angel dude being an unreliable narrator.

Evan Tarlton wrote:

Sarenrae starting as an angel was from Asmodeus. The Windsong Testaments have her as one of the first nine gods. https://paizo.com/community/blog/v5748dyo6sgzu

Gotta wonder if we are dealing with contradictory mythology here or just the fallen angel dude being an unreliable narrator.

Personally I like to think it's both. At least half of the in-setting myths about the gods are probably more metaphorically true Tham literally true, I feel, but also I extremely wouldn't put it past Asmodeus to lie about or simply overlook anything about the early days that didn't directly relate to himself or his brother. He remembers Sarenrae as just some angel at his brother's shoulder, sweet talking him with sentiments of free will and rights. It doesn't matter that she might technically be their elder (by like 10 cosmic minutes) and is just as powerful as either of them.

Evan Tarlton wrote:

Sarenrae starting as an angel was from Asmodeus. The Windsong Testaments have her as one of the first nine gods. https://paizo.com/community/blog/v5748dyo6sgzu

Gotta wonder if we are dealing with contradictory mythology here or just the fallen angel dude being an unreliable narrator.

Huh? Which fallen angel though? Don't you mix up myths? If you mean Asmodeus, he was never an angel as far as I know.

BTW a concept of angels (or angel-like creatures) doesn't make sense without a great senior deity. If there isn't anyone like it there aren't angels. So if Sarenray was one of the first gods, other angels could be in image of her, but she herself is her own entity. Just a great goddess which has wings (does she always? maybe she just likes wings sometimes?).

Huh? Which fallen angel though?

Tabris

This one- https://pathfinderwiki.com/wiki/Tabris

Errenor wrote:

Huh? Which fallen angel though?

Tabris

This one- https://pathfinderwiki.com/wiki/Tabris

Ah, that one. And there among 'his' books is some creation myth?

Cole Deschain wrote:

Errenor wrote:

Huh? Which fallen angel though?

Tabris

This one- https://pathfinderwiki.com/wiki/Tabris

Ah, that one. And there among 'his' books is some creation myth?

Yep. Or better said, the story of Ihys and Asmodeus, which includes Saranrae as a servitor of Ihys. Pages 264 - 265 of the hardcover Book of the Damned.

Are there even any actual wars going on in the setting at all at this point?

Sure there are adventures but I don't recall if there are actually any actual WAR efforts being waged by nations on other nations anymore. If that's the case it sort of makes sense for War incarnate to keel over, if all the nations are more or less at peace with one another then his entire purpose is kinda pointless.

Are there even any actual wars going on in the setting at all at this point?

Sure there are adventures but I don't recall if there are actually any actual WAR efforts being waged by nations on other nations anymore. If that's the case it sort of makes sense for War incarnate to keel over, if all the nations are more or less at peace with one another then his entire purpose is kinda pointless.

Gen and Nex have been squaring off for the cold war to turn hot ever since rumors of Nex's return broke. Tar Baphon has continued skirmishing with his neighbors. Cheliax would really like to be an Imperial power again. But the Inner Sea region has been kind of quiet. Sort of waiting for the other shoe to drop, which I think it just did.

Are there even any actual wars going on in the setting at all at this point?

Everyone sharing a border with the Gravelands has at least a low-intensity conflict going on.

Only the presence of nastier neighbors keeps Nirmathas and Molthune in cold, rather than hot war.

Linnorm Kings vs. Irrisen is a constant low-grade conflict.

The former Worldwound is a long way from safe, and anyone bordering it has a similar problem to the Gravelands.

Nex and Geb know no real peace.

Belkzen is nobody's idea of a good neighbor.

Kyonin has an ongoing conflict with Treerazer in Tanglebriar.

The Shackles have exactly two kinds of foreign relations- People who pay them protection money and people who don't.

And then you have the "could break out any day now" conflicts-

Vidiran and the Shackles just recently won a naval war with Cheliax, and Ravounel just calved off. Safe to say Abrogail is going to look for a way to flex Chelish muscle at the first opportunity.

Brevoy is always a half-step from open civil war.

Isger is a weak, tottering basket case propped up by Cheliax. Just about anyone sharing its border could get to feeling ambitious, especially if they see Cheliax as on the back foot.

And those are just the obvious rumblings. It's equally possible that recent efforts to normalize, say, Taldan/Qadiri relations could break down, or New Thassilon could have a civil war, or Razmiran could launch a holy crusade into the River Kingdoms...

Just sayin'... "1d6 investigators are swept up into his flabby claws and perish" are rules mechanics.

Hmm, I remember that joke originating from the CoC Starspawn mechanics, not tied to the big guy himself.

At least in older editions, they got d6 tentacle attacks per round with some ridiculous amount of damage.

Mitigated, as our old Keeper used to say, because "it's only a 90% chance to hit".

Themetricsystem wrote:

Are there even any actual wars going on in the setting at all at this point?

The former Worldwound is a long way from safe, and anyone bordering it has a similar problem to the Gravelands.

Indeed. In an outline for a story I'd like to tell, Sarkoris will be a very dangerous for a long time. I'm thinking it will take at AT LEAST 80-100 years to "fix" most of it and that's WITH some very powerful characters and NPCs (including a Sarkorian demigod or two) becoming very involved.

Also, Andoran and Cheliax appear increasingly likely to throw down at some point soon.

Evan Tarlton wrote:

Sarenrae starting as an angel was from Asmodeus. The Windsong Testaments have her as one of the first nine gods. https://paizo.com/community/blog/v5748dyo6sgzu

Gotta wonder if we are dealing with contradictory mythology here or just the fallen angel dude being an unreliable narrator.

Go with the one you prefer. That's kind of what we try to do with the deep mythology of things like this—if we were to say in print "THIS IS FACT" it stops being mythology and starts being history. It's very difficult as a result for us to present the mythology of prehistory in the format of the content we create.

I know my personal preference is for Sarenrae being one of the first nine gods—that's one of her roles from my homebrew before I exported her to Golarion and is why I included that information in MY mythos for that volume of Windsong Testaments, but if you prefer another version in your game (be it an alternate one we publish as a different myth or one you create) then THAT'S the right one in your game.

I suppose that when things like this come up in print we will continue to try to have our proverbial cake and eat it too. That might mean that the deep history of one Adventure Path might not mesh perfectly with another some day, but in a case like this, where we are trying to preserve the mystery and uncertainty and all that of an era before mortal life existed, I'm okay with that.

Evan Tarlton wrote:

Sarenrae starting as an angel was from Asmodeus. The Windsong Testaments have her as one of the first nine gods. https://paizo.com/community/blog/v5748dyo6sgzu

Gotta wonder if we are dealing with contradictory mythology here or just the fallen angel dude being an unreliable narrator.

My impression is that she may be one of the earliest examples of an Empyreal Lord who then achieved true godhood after Ihys died.

Deadlands: If you stat it they will kill it.

I think I've noticed other inconsistencies regarding the gods recently while researching these things- Gorum is believed to have arisen in early conflicts on Golarion, but is also cited as one of the architects of Rovagug's Prison- Something built long before Golarion could support such conflicts.

For that matter, Asmodeus himself also has a very different origin story that claims he's an early empyreal lord.

Personally, I like the contradictions. It's very much the way things are in real life; the various contradictory characterizations and birth stories of Aphrodite drove at least one classical philosopher to inisist she must actually be several different godesses with the same name.

One thing I've said before that I especially like with the mythological inconsistencies is that you're not bound to pick only one myth that's "true". Like, Windsong talks like each of the first gods sprang fully formed, but it's not important to the myth to highlight how exactly each appeared, so maybe Asmodeus' account us accurate about each of them forming out of motes of light, and at one point Sarenrae was both one of the first eight but the first eight were also just a bunch of demigods for the first thousand years while they grew in power.

Meanwhile, that Asmodeus formed in tandem with Hell doesn't necessarily preclude the story that he much later 'discovered' Hell filled with asura and conquered it for his own devices one day while having a disagreement with his brother that even later capitulated into him taking a host of angels with him to become the first devils.

One thing I've said before that I especially like with the mythological inconsistencies is that you're not bound to pick only one myth that's "true". Like, Windsong talks like each of the first gods sprang fully formed, but it's not important to the myth to highlight how exactly each appeared, so maybe Asmodeus' account us accurate about each of them forming out of motes of light, and at one point Sarenrae was both one of the first eight but the first eight were also just a bunch of demigods for the first thousand years while they grew in power.

Meanwhile, that Asmodeus formed in tandem with Hell doesn't necessarily preclude the story that he much later 'discovered' Hell filled with asura and conquered it for his own devices one day while having a disagreement with his brother that even later capitulated into him taking a host of angels with him to become the first devils.

This is 100% exactly the point. Pick the one that works best for you and run with it!

That said, it DOES get tricky when the one picking the one that works best is, say, me, and I'm picking it because I'm developing or writing an adventure that's based on some of that mythology. That sort of thing does, in time, start to lend facts to the mythology, but... that's I guess part of the cost of publishing stuff that builds on previously published stuff.

Sibelius Eos Owm wrote:

One thing I've said before that I especially like with the mythological inconsistencies is that you're not bound to pick only one myth that's "true". Like, Windsong talks like each of the first gods sprang fully formed, but it's not important to the myth to highlight how exactly each appeared, so maybe Asmodeus' account us accurate about each of them forming out of motes of light, and at one point Sarenrae was both one of the first eight but the first eight were also just a bunch of demigods for the first thousand years while they grew in power.

Meanwhile, that Asmodeus formed in tandem with Hell doesn't necessarily preclude the story that he much later 'discovered' Hell filled with asura and conquered it for his own devices one day while having a disagreement with his brother that even later capitulated into him taking a host of angels with him to become the first devils.

This is 100% exactly the point. Pick the one that works best for you and run with it!

That said, it DOES get tricky when the one picking the one that works best is, say, me, and I'm picking it because I'm developing or writing an adventure that's based on some of that mythology. That sort of thing does, in time, start to lend facts to the mythology, but... that's I guess part of the cost of publishing stuff that builds on previously published stuff.

If the fate of the drow has shown us anything, it's that even stuff published in adventures isn't set in stone.

James Jacobs wrote:

Sibelius Eos Owm wrote:

One thing I've said before that I especially like with the mythological inconsistencies is that you're not bound to pick only one myth that's "true". Like, Windsong talks like each of the first gods sprang fully formed, but it's not important to the myth to highlight how exactly each appeared, so maybe Asmodeus' account us accurate about each of them forming out of motes of light, and at one point Sarenrae was both one of the first eight but the first eight were also just a bunch of demigods for the first thousand years while they grew in power.

Meanwhile, that Asmodeus formed in tandem with Hell doesn't necessarily preclude the story that he much later 'discovered' Hell filled with asura and conquered it for his own devices one day while having a disagreement with his brother that even later capitulated into him taking a host of angels with him to become the first devils.

This is 100% exactly the point. Pick the one that works best for you and run with it!

That said, it DOES get tricky when the one picking the one that works best is, say, me, and I'm picking it because I'm developing or writing an adventure that's based on some of that mythology. That sort of thing does, in time, start to lend facts to the mythology, but... that's I guess part of the cost of publishing stuff that builds on previously published stuff.

If the fate of the drow has shown us anything, it's that even stuff published in adventures isn't set in stone.

I think (and hope) Paizo being forced to do this will be a once in a lifetime event.

Ravingdork wrote:

James Jacobs wrote:

Sibelius Eos Owm wrote:

One thing I've said before that I especially like with the mythological inconsistencies is that you're not bound to pick only one myth that's "true". Like, Windsong talks like each of the first gods sprang fully formed, but it's not important to the myth to highlight how exactly each appeared, so maybe Asmodeus' account us accurate about each of them forming out of motes of light, and at one point Sarenrae was both one of the first eight but the first eight were also just a bunch of demigods for the first thousand years while they grew in power.

Meanwhile, that Asmodeus formed in tandem with Hell doesn't necessarily preclude the story that he much later 'discovered' Hell filled with asura and conquered it for his own devices one day while having a disagreement with his brother that even later capitulated into him taking a host of angels with him to become the first devils.

This is 100% exactly the point. Pick the one that works best for you and run with it!

That said, it DOES get tricky when the one picking the one that works best is, say, me, and I'm picking it because I'm developing or writing an adventure that's based on some of that mythology. That sort of thing does, in time, start to lend facts to the mythology, but... that's I guess part of the cost of publishing stuff that builds on previously published stuff.

If the fate of the drow has shown us anything, it's that even stuff published in adventures isn't set in stone.

I think (and hope) Paizo being forced to do this will be a once in a lifetime event.

It's the third time Paizo has had to do a big shift as a result of being dependent on another company, and in the grand scheme of things was the simplest one to pull off (the other two being losing the Dragon and Dungeon magazine licenses resulting in the creation of the Pathfinder brand and Pathfinder Adventure Path, and 4th edition not being friendly to the OGL resulting in the creation of the Pathfinder RPG).

This final switch, with us moving away from all OGL content entirely, is designed to prevent this sort of thing from happening again, but so far it's been a thrice in a lifetime event.

The Raven Black wrote:

Ravingdork wrote:

James Jacobs wrote:

Sibelius Eos Owm wrote:

One thing I've said before that I especially like with the mythological inconsistencies is that you're not bound to pick only one myth that's "true". Like, Windsong talks like each of the first gods sprang fully formed, but it's not important to the myth to highlight how exactly each appeared, so maybe Asmodeus' account us accurate about each of them forming out of motes of light, and at one point Sarenrae was both one of the first eight but the first eight were also just a bunch of demigods for the first thousand years while they grew in power.

Meanwhile, that Asmodeus formed in tandem with Hell doesn't necessarily preclude the story that he much later 'discovered' Hell filled with asura and conquered it for his own devices one day while having a disagreement with his brother that even later capitulated into him taking a host of angels with him to become the first devils.

This is 100% exactly the point. Pick the one that works best for you and run with it!

That said, it DOES get tricky when the one picking the one that works best is, say, me, and I'm picking it because I'm developing or writing an adventure that's based on some of that mythology. That sort of thing does, in time, start to lend facts to the mythology, but... that's I guess part of the cost of publishing stuff that builds on previously published stuff.

If the fate of the drow has shown us anything, it's that even stuff published in adventures isn't set in stone.

I think (and hope) Paizo being forced to do this will be a once in a lifetime event.

It's the third time Paizo has had to do a big shift as a result of being dependent on another company, and in the grand scheme of things was the simplest one to pull off (the other two being losing the Dragon and Dungeon magazine licenses resulting in the creation of the Pathfinder brand and Pathfinder Adventure Path, and 4th edition not being friendly to the...

Let's hope that the third time is the charm.

I remember reading the posts that James Jacobs wrote which dealt with having to eliminate OGL creatures and concepts, especially the drow. This was not easy for him or others at Paizo. (Apparently, something will be done with the drow in Starfinder, but that is a different continuity. Perhaps the results of that can feed back into Pathfinder. The problem is creating a group of "dark elves" - a very old concept in some cultures on our world, such as the Norse culture - that does not look like something that a certain company to be named cannot have their lawyers file a lawsuit over and have the threat of a lawsuit bring Paizo to a grinding halt.)

Fortunately, I see my players and GMs liking the changes in the Remaster. Also, it seems that there will be ample opportunities for players to have their characters experience the impact of the War of the Immortals and shape events. I look forward to not only the books and adventures, but hearing how people are interacting with the events of the Godsrain and beyond.

Frankly, my one hope is that Gorum goes out, y'know, FIGHTING, rather than just getting cosmically-ganked by Achaekek. I'm definitely sad that the "fight for the fight god" is gone, but looking back was there ever really a lot done with him?

I would guess that the module Prey For Death involves what is keeping the Mantis God occupied while Gorum goes down.

Frankly, my one hope is that Gorum goes out, y'know, FIGHTING, rather than just getting cosmically-ganked by Achaekek. I'm definitely sad that the "fight for the fight god" is gone, but looking back was there ever really a lot done with him?

Apparently you don't know what you've got...till it's gone. I'm looking forward to playing adherents of Gorum who just won't stop fighting for the fight god. Cause nothing says fervour like fighting for something you've already lost...

Gorum did get that one thing in Kingmaker and Rusthenge at least, I also recall gorumites showing up occasionally

Ashram Tyrilit wrote:

Frankly, my one hope is that Gorum goes out, y'know, FIGHTING, rather than just getting cosmically-ganked by Achaekek. I'm definitely sad that the "fight for the fight god" is gone, but looking back was there ever really a lot done with him?

Apparently you don't know what you've got...till it's gone. I'm looking forward to playing adherents of Gorum who just won't stop fighting for the fight god. Cause nothing says fervour like fighting for something you've already lost...

Great, now you've got me wanting to play a gorumite bloodrager.

magnuskn wrote:

Evan Tarlton wrote:

Sarenrae starting as an angel was from Asmodeus. The Windsong Testaments have her as one of the first nine gods. https://paizo.com/community/blog/v5748dyo6sgzu

Gotta wonder if we are dealing with contradictory mythology here or just the fallen angel dude being an unreliable narrator.

Huh? Which fallen angel though? Don't you mix up myths? If you mean Asmodeus, he was never an angel as far as I know.

BTW a concept of angels (or angel-like creatures) doesn't make sense without a great senior deity. If there isn't anyone like it there aren't angels. So if Sarenray was one of the first gods, other angels could be in image of her, but she herself is her own entity. Just a great goddess which has wings (does she always? maybe she just likes wings sometimes?).

Dunno. Outer planes beings can serve (or, clearly, serve as) deities if they choose, but in pathfinder they are semi-spontaneously coalesced fragments of their plane, and so make sense as that rather than messengers and lackey's without displacing those roles.

I'm really looking forward to seeing the playtest for Battlecry. I've been hoping for those narrative roles for a while, so eager to see this iteration.

Frankly, my one hope is that Gorum goes out, y'know, FIGHTING, rather than just getting cosmically-ganked by Achaekek. I'm definitely sad that the "fight for the fight god" is gone, but looking back was there ever really a lot done with him?

Per his lore, Achaekek only goes after mortals trying to become gods rather than actual gods, so presumably Gorum would be quite safe from any attempted assassinations from him at least. But yeah, one hopes that Gorum goes down swinging (and hopefully takes out a demigod or two with him...)

Errenor wrote:

magnuskn wrote:

Evan Tarlton wrote:

Sarenrae starting as an angel was from Asmodeus. The Windsong Testaments have her as one of the first nine gods. https://paizo.com/community/blog/v5748dyo6sgzu

Gotta wonder if we are dealing with contradictory mythology here or just the fallen angel dude being an unreliable narrator.

Huh? Which fallen angel though? Don't you mix up myths? If you mean Asmodeus, he was never an angel as far as I know.

BTW a concept of angels (or angel-like creatures) doesn't make sense without a great senior deity. If there isn't anyone like it there aren't angels. So if Sarenray was one of the first gods, other angels could be in image of her, but she herself is her own entity. Just a great goddess which has wings (does she always? maybe she just likes wings sometimes?).

Dunno. Outer planes beings can serve (or, clearly, serve as) deities if they choose, but in pathfinder they are semi-spontaneously coalesced fragments of their plane, and so make sense as that rather than messengers and lackey's without displacing those roles.

Why call them angels then? What's an angel in this case? What's the difference between them and elementals? Them and qlippoths? Yes, you can call just humanoid winged spirits from good spirit planes 'angels'. But then you've lost all the meaning and roots on the way. And I see that PF2 lore now tends to be inspired by mythological roots, not reject and rewrite them completely.

I'm quite sure the idea of what an angel is will survive if they don't specifically serve an over-deity. Certainly no worse off than the abuses the word 'demon' has suffered over the years. Like, demons and daemons are two separate things in Pathfinder and they're both evil. I can't get worked up over angels not having a Big God to serve--they still have the messenger ability to speak any language last I heard (they do, right?) and that's angelos enough for me. I mean, it would be impractical for an entire species to hold public office, yet archons are right there...

AnimatedPaper wrote:

Errenor wrote:

magnuskn wrote:

Evan Tarlton wrote:

Sarenrae starting as an angel was from Asmodeus. The Windsong Testaments have her as one of the first nine gods. https://paizo.com/community/blog/v5748dyo6sgzu

Gotta wonder if we are dealing with contradictory mythology here or just the fallen angel dude being an unreliable narrator.

Huh? Which fallen angel though? Don't you mix up myths? If you mean Asmodeus, he was never an angel as far as I know.

BTW a concept of angels (or angel-like creatures) doesn't make sense without a great senior deity. If there isn't anyone like it there aren't angels. So if Sarenray was one of the first gods, other angels could be in image of her, but she herself is her own entity. Just a great goddess which has wings (does she always? maybe she just likes wings sometimes?).

Dunno. Outer planes beings can serve (or, clearly, serve as) deities if they choose, but in pathfinder they are semi-spontaneously coalesced fragments of their plane, and so make sense as that rather than messengers and lackey's without displacing those roles.

Why call them angels then? What's an angel in this case? What's the difference between them and elementals? Them and qlippoths? Yes, you can call just humanoid winged spirits from good spirit planes 'angels'. But then you've lost all the meaning and roots on the way. And I see that PF2 lore now tends to be inspired by mythological roots, not reject and rewrite them completely.

RPGs and fantasy are sort of infamously bad at differentiating between celestials/fiends (what we'd previously call "outsiders") and deities. Pathfinder does this MUCH better, in general, by making Asmodeus a devil, Sarenrae an angel, Rovagug a qlippoth, and Lamashtu a demon.

Because a lot of fantasy literature tries to draw a dividing line between "the gods" and "angels and demons", and it just doesn't work. Especially when the writers walk into a polytheistic system with literal gods of "murder" and "torture" and try to paint the forces of evil as antithetical to "the gods". Zon-Kuthon is not baby Jesus, or Krishna, or even Zeus. There's no reason he should be all-in on devil smiting with the rest of "the gods", he's more comparable to Satan, Loki, or Apep. Fantasy pantheons aren't a monolith like most real-world religions are.

This artificial differentiation also causes trouble with angels. Because it's pretty darn awkward to have "the angels" and "the gods of good" in entirely separate corners not interacting at all. I can't tell you the number of times I've seen awkward setting design where for some reason the god of sunlight and hope is served by his own special servitors, not angels, definitely not angels! Angels are their own things that have nothing to do with the god of sunlight! His servants are...different...somehow...

So I vastly prefer the solution of Sarenrae being a "powerful angel" who just so happens to also be worshiped as a goddess. It makes way more sense than Sarenrae being a random goddess with zero connection to the angels who spontaneously generated out of nothingness.

"I had wings and a flaming sword before it was cool" - Hipster Saranite

Either that or anything you're looking at is just a form your brain can comprehend without coiling up on itself like a teseract on two divergent tangents to infinity

It's the third time Paizo has had to do a big shift as a result of being dependent on another company, and in the grand scheme of things was the simplest one to pull off (the other two being losing the Dragon and Dungeon magazine licenses resulting in the creation of the Pathfinder brand and Pathfinder Adventure Path, and 4th edition not being friendly to the OGL resulting in the creation of the Pathfinder RPG).

Does that mean, originally Paizo didn't plan to make Pathfinder RPG at all? That if Wizards of the Coast didn't take away the Dragon and Dungeon magazine licenses from Paizo, Paizo would not have created the Lost Omens campaign setting in the first place?

Or if D&D 4th was friendly to the OGL, then Paizo would have used D&D 4th and 5th rules, not creating Pathfinder RPG?

Also, if the OGL crisis didn't happen, would Paizo still have used the OGL?

I ask these because I have always thought that creating its own rules and dumping each and every OGL element (including the OGL monsters like chromatic and metallic dragons, or golems, and the alignment system) entirely are Paizo's eventual goals from the beginning.

I'm pretty sure Paizo's moves were mostly motivated by "keep Paizo in business". Every time something out of their control changed, they had to pivot to adapt to that change.

I figure "would we have Pathfinder if Dragon Magazine was never cancelled" is about as useful to discuss as something like "would Frosted Flakes exist if the Battle Creek Sanitarium never burned down?" I mean, maybe, but also maybe not. It was never inevitable nor necessary but a lot of people put a lot of time and effort into making the best of the circumstances they had.

James Jacobs wrote:

It's the third time Paizo has had to do a big shift as a result of being dependent on another company, and in the grand scheme of things was the simplest one to pull off (the other two being losing the Dragon and Dungeon magazine licenses resulting in the creation of the Pathfinder brand and Pathfinder Adventure Path, and 4th edition not being friendly to the OGL resulting in the creation of the Pathfinder RPG).

Does that mean, originally Paizo didn't plan to make Pathfinder RPG at all? That if Wizards of the Coast didn't take away the Dragon and Dungeon magazine licenses from Paizo, Paizo would not have created the Lost Omens campaign setting in the first place?

Or if D&D 4th was friendly to the OGL, then Paizo would have used D&D 4th and 5th rules, not creating Pathfinder RPG?

Also, if the OGL crisis didn't happen, would Paizo still have used the OGL?

I ask these because I have always thought that creating its own rules and dumping each and every OGL element (including the OGL monsters like chromatic and metallic dragons, or golems, and the alignment system) entirely are Paizo's eventual goals from the beginning.

What PossibleCabbage says in the post just above this one is correct. Here's my take, though (posted as my take, and not trying to be an official Paizo take):

Frankly, my one hope is that Gorum goes out, y'know, FIGHTING, rather than just getting cosmically-ganked by Achaekek. I'm definitely sad that the "fight for the fight god" is gone, but looking back was there ever really a lot done with him?

This feels like the good place and time to share the following as my tribune to Gorum (from Marvel's Ares whom I totally identify with Gorum) :

"No one I select for my squad of shades will ever lose a fight for the rest of their life.
It's just that the rest of your life may be somewhat shorter than you'd expect."

I'm pretty sure Paizo's moves were mostly motivated by "keep Paizo in business". Every time something out of their control changed, they had to pivot to adapt to that change.

I figure "would we have Pathfinder if Dragon Magazine was never cancelled" is about as useful to discuss as something like "would Frosted Flakes exist if the Battle Creek Sanitarium never burned down?" I mean, maybe, but also maybe not. It was never inevitable nor necessary but a lot of people put a lot of time and effort into making the best of the circumstances they had.

There's a movie about that sort of thing.

Marvel made a whole series about the "never happened."

YouTubers talk about it all the time.

"What If" scenarios can be quite a fun mental exercise and are essentially just another form of roleplaying.

Ashram Tyrilit wrote:

Frankly, my one hope is that Gorum goes out, y'know, FIGHTING, rather than just getting cosmically-ganked by Achaekek. I'm definitely sad that the "fight for the fight god" is gone, but looking back was there ever really a lot done with him?

This feels like the good place and time to share the following as my tribune to Gorum (from Marvel's Ares whom I totally identify with Gorum) :

"No one I select for my squad of shades will ever lose a fight for the rest of their life.
It's just that the rest of your life may be somewhat shorter than you'd expect."

I've very much been listening to Manowar's "Die With Honor" on repeat, it's a fitting tribute to Gorum (Who I identify as the "Manowar deity".)

I don't think the Guardian is there to step on the Champion's toes as a defender/tank class, I think it's there for people who want to play a defender/tank style class without any particular moral underpinnings.

Like my playtest Guardian character is going to be a proud son or daughter of Rahadoum.

I know this is somewhat blasphemy here but I hope with the rework I'm gonna be able to be a good smitey vengeance Paladin like in 5e. Not really an option for that kind of character atm which makes me sad.

PossibleCabbage wrote:

I don't think the Guardian is there to step on the Champion's toes as a defender/tank class, I think it's there for people who want to play a defender/tank style class without any particular moral underpinnings.

Like my playtest Guardian character is going to be a proud son or daughter of Rahadoum.

I know this is somewhat blasphemy here but I hope with the rework I'm gonna be able to be a good smitey vengeance Paladin like in 5e. Not really an option for that kind of character atm which makes me sad.

I’m wondering if one of the Unholy Champions will be able to fit that design space in PC2.

Dwarfinator1 wrote:

PossibleCabbage wrote:

I don't think the Guardian is there to step on the Champion's toes as a defender/tank class, I think it's there for people who want to play a defender/tank style class without any particular moral underpinnings.

Like my playtest Guardian character is going to be a proud son or daughter of Rahadoum.

I know this is somewhat blasphemy here but I hope with the rework I'm gonna be able to be a good smitey vengeance Paladin like in 5e. Not really an option for that kind of character atm which makes me sad.

I’m wondering if one of the Unholy Champions will be able to fit that design space in PC2.

I hope you get a choice of being holy or unholy if there is some sort of vengeance based subclass. Don't wanna be forced to be unholy just cause of the vengeance aspect.

I hope you get a choice of being holy or unholy if there is some sort of vengeance based subclass. Don't wanna be forced to be unholy just cause of the vengeance aspect.

What is the thing you crave? "vengeance-based" could mean a lot of things. What is it that you're hoping for here?