Part of that realization might require her escaping the toxic culture of Rahadoum first, though.
I've noticed you kinda have it in for that nation (you stated in the Paizocon chat you wanted to "blow it up" like what happened with Lastwall), which has unfortunate implications since it's the only one that's openly atheistic. Especially in a type of setting where they haven't been historically treated very well. As an example, in D&D 2e all atheists got sucked into Asmodeus's body no matter what. When I asked the author he he just did it for horror. Certainly real-world horror, to be sure. Even in Pathfinder, I recall an earlier supplement stating that atheists were buried alive in the afterlife.
I don't go for arresting theists either, and not just because I'm dating one, or that I'd be a casual Arshean in Golarion. And while I don't consider Sarenrae evil I do think Kassi has a point; gods do tend to be negligent. (Also, angels in literature tend to have violent tempers. Even Arshea, to an extent, given the vengeful reason for their favored weapon. Maybe it's a biological thing?)
To phrase this all in the form of a question, how do we reconcile all this?
Like the title asks. I was told to post questions there but it doesn't seem to exist yet. Same thing for Ruby Phoenix, come to think of it. What's going on?
How's Winterhold secretive and unaccepting? The school would like to interact with the public more, but Nords are superstitious yokels. And as for being accepting all I had to do was pass a rubber stamp test with a spell I got on spot discount. Is it something in the lore that the game did a poor job of showing?
I guess it's not. To be honest, the Winterhold part of Skyrim was pretty minor to me in my playthrough; I was doing a rouge/archer type character, so I really didn't pay nearly as much attention to the Winterhold stuff. Got to it late in the game and burned through the quests and found the storyline there to be kind of meh.
The fact that there's about a dozen or so students there also helped to make it feel like it was secretive and unaccepting. I know that's a limitation of the game itself, but the remote locaiton on the map combined with the fact that there were simply not a huge number of people there is kind of the polar opposite to the Magaambya, which is in the heart of a city and is a sprawling campus.
Ah.
If you'll pardon me answering you, Winterhold was phoned in during the rush to release the game on 11/11/11. You'd think they would've polished it a bit with a DLC, but then the narrative did prefer you be a macho viking. And a dozen students? That's a pretty high estimate since I'm guessing there's maybe half that, and I only ever see three of them. Would explain why the teachers just sit on their duffs eating bread, or sleeping.
But right, I'm here for questions. So...
With magical transmutation, whether becoming a giant monster or turning someone to stone, where does the extra mass come from?
So...how's the Magaambya compare to Hogwarts? Or Winterhold?
It's very different from both. It's more grown-up in nature than Hogwart's in that it's more like a research college than a high school, and less secretive/selective than Winterhold.
It's more mature than Hogwart's, and more accepting than Winterhold.
How's Winterhold secretive and unaccepting? The school would like to interact with the public more, but Nords are superstitious yokels. And as for being accepting all I had to do was pass a rubber stamp test with a spell I got on spot discount. Is it something in the lore that the game did a poor job of showing?
I know you stated losing interest in isekai-type adventures (someone from our world in a fantasy one, for those unfamiliar with the term), likely since they've become saturated with cliche, but do you think the genre is redeemable? If so, how? They did use to be interesting back when they were heroines' adventures rather than boys' power (and sex) fantasies. But maybe you have something else in mind?
Honestly in full hindsight, knowing what I know now, I probably would have cut the encounter entirely and had the PCs talking with a solar or something instead, so that if they DO attack or whatever, there's stats to handle the fight and I wouldn't have had to build rules for something we don't normally do rules for in a "just in case" possibility.
Or, since you often mention that deities are beyond stats then have her stop them by pure divine fiat to demonstrate this; no new rules required. I like talking to deities, and don't want to lose that opportunity because of players out of r/rpghorrorstories.
Anyway, what I originally came back to this thread for: given your (and Pharasma's) views of the undead, how do you feel about this article (first entry, about the zombies)? Best (only, really) counterargument I've seen to anyone who just wants to use zombies as labor-saving devices rather than Evil™.
Would there be interest in publishing a product which was all about traveling on Golarion? More about trade routes, shipping lines, etc and including distances between major cities and towns both by land, by sea, and by air, which would be extremely useful when calculating how long it would take getting from point A to point B by different methods of travel? I know I'd buy that, and as a 1st edition player, it might be the first 2E product I'd purchase.
Whether or not there's an interest at the office for a book like that isn't as important is if it is for customers. Traditional wisdom is that books on that subject simply don't sell as well as books with PC options or adventure content.
I, for one, would love a book on the microeconomics of Golarion. : D
For my completely unrelated question: Socothbenoth's areas of concern are pride, perversion, and taboos. The last two are the very obvious sorts I want to be careful asking about, but thankfully I want to know about the first: pride. How does that manifest? I checked Book of the Damned, but it's unclear.
It's been a while since I asked any Sorshen questions. Somebody has to do it. ; p
Nowadays, how is she as a tutor? What sorts of student would she be interested in? On a likely related note, how is she as a partner, both vocationally and romantic?
All right, so far so good. So how do I make NPCs that fit in with the PC's personal story without them being a one-note harem? Especially in the context of interesting/fun/unusual PC/NPC relationships.
That's pretty much up to you. I'd suggest letting the player build up their character and then looking at the rules options they chose and looking at the personalty and history they decide on and then build NPCs to compliment or challenge those choices. How much of this becomes a one-note harem is 100% up to the GM and player. Do what's fun for the table... don't worry about it having to be something that's fun for everyone.
Good to know. : )
In building the NPCs, one thing I like to figure out is "why are they following the PC?" When they're equally powerful, what makes the PC special?
1) What makes the PC special is that they're controlled by someone else, not the GM. What makes them special is that they aren't played by someone who knows what the plot is.
2) And that said, an NPC accompanying a PC is always going to be at a disadvantage because the PC has one person focusing on them, whreas the NPC has to share that focus with everything else. A player will often be better at playing their one character and building the best option for that character over the course of a campaign than a GM who'll have to do the same for EVERY other NPC.
I mean in-setting. In a party of 1st level adventurers, all else being equal regardless of differing capabilities, why would the rest follow this one other person they just met?
If I'm adapting an adventure path for a solo campaign, should I have the player make up other characters or have NPCs tag along?
That's up to you, but when I've run solo campaigns in the past I've always included a few NPC companions for the player character. Not only does this help keep the game's action economy going and help prevent incapacitation or unconsciousness from being unduly punishing, but it helps to give the game a sense of relationship building that's missing if you don't have a group of PCs constantly interacting. In fact, depending on the real world relationship you have with your player, this can let you get into some really interesting/fun/unusual PC/NPC relationships that would be a lot more awkward to roleplay out in a group! (Of course, player and GM consent remain, as always, the number one thing to keep in mind!)
So NPCs instead of multiple PCs for the solo player, correct? What if there aren't any 1st level NPCs?
And yes, I like really interesting/fun/unusual PC/NPC relationships~ : 3
But...how would said introvert work as an adventurer?
I'm not seeing how that makes any difference.
I don't follow; could you explain? Yes, I know an introvert can be an adventurer, Raistlin pulled it off well enough, but I mean what specific things could an introverted Arshean do? Besides follow along with an adventure path's plot, I mean (p.487 of the 2E core notwithstanding). If not as an adventurer, what sort of behind-the-scenes are we talking about here?
I know I ought to keep it simple, but maybe this'll clarify things? Assuming you're familiar with the alignment grid of pop psychology, the MBTI. How would an INTx (i.e., coldly analytical) Arshean go about adventuring, particularly in a way that supports their faith (which comes across as very ESFx, or sociably sentimental)?
I'm not familiar with it beyond only the bare essentials, but I don't think a coldly analytical Arshean would make too much sense to me. That said, often what draws people to play a certain type of character is that they're the exact opposite of the expectation.
I guess an Arshean like that would be like a hedonistic android, perhaps? Someone who understands the theory of passion but doesn't understand it? Dunno. I'm pretty sure I can't answer the question the way you want me to answer it though. Part of the issue is, I guess, that I really don't know that much about Arshea. I didn't invent the character and I've never written about them. I'm not sure who did, initially... I suspect it was Wes though since he did the lion's share of the work on setting up Empyreal Lords.
So I don't really have a lot of hidden insights into Arshea. In fact, I suspect you know more about Arshea than I do.
I've got a better grip on Ashava and Sarenrae and a few others that I've specifically worked on, but I don't know how to answer you question about an introverted Arshean without potentially saying something that would disappoint you. Sorry!
No, that's actually an informative answer. And flattering, too. ^_^
(As proof by example, the old Gods & Magic explained the reason for their favored weapon being the flail: it symbolizes striking back at slavers with their own scourges.)
Appropriate inappropriate wordplay aside, the impression I get from the Arshean faith is that it's very Touched by an Angel; i.e., helping with personal problems and generally being sentimental. So how would a hardcore introvert, like a dark vigilante or mysterious wizard, work as one?
They wouldn't be part of a group of worshipers. And that's not an Ashava thing. That's a organization thing. A hardcore introvert wouldn't be part of any organization, I think, where they'd need to be out there in the public pushing an agenda, be it a religion or a political movement or a mercantile company or the like. An introvert can still certainly worship Ashava, but would not be likely to be part of the organized clergy; a cleric of Ashava who was an introvert would either be a behind-the-scenes member of their church or a lone worshiper who tends a small personal shrine or something like that.
Nothing in Ashava's edicts or anathemas require a devout follower to be part of a big group or to work with large numbers of people. You can still help individual people and be an introvert. Speaking as an introvert, I do this all the time so it's perfectly plausible. ;-)
And...would this apply to Arshea as well? (See Rysky's post below.)
Besides the dragon's pure evil, what stood out to me was how Uguro thought Cirra caring about his town and people was odd. That he also know what nobles are like is also telling.
And I'm pretty sure that accent was an "American" one. ; )
I'm not sure which GoT prediction I mentioned you're talking about. I had a LOT of them. A few came true, a few did not.
Overall I was quite pleased with the last season. My only two regrets is that it's over, and that toxic/entitled fan reactions on the internet have further damaged my faith in humanity.
Don't know. Haven't read it and won't. I'm really not interested at this point in immersing myself in the morass of toxic fan over-reactions, especially this close to PaizoCon when I need to cultivate my positivity and focus on the positive elements of fandom.
As alluded to here, the story used to be one where the characters existed in a world beyond their personal dramas. Contrast that to shows where everything, including morality, is protagonist centered with no thought for external consequences.
But...that's not what I'm here for.
deep breath
I put this off to give you PaizoCon space, then because I wanted to address this as tactfully as possible. I decided to be simple and direct, and hope for the best. How does being highly critical of something make me toxic and entitled?
Maybe you forgot to write it in the first place and are being haunted by an alternate reality? Dunno. I suggest re-asking and if it disappears again... then you might have your answer.
So...does Sorshen have a type? (I'm guessing creative introverts. ; ) )
As in a "Type" of thing she's into? She's bisexual, and isn't into overly masculine people, but otherwise doesn't really have a "type" that she prefers.
Well...that is informative, but I was asking about personality; what sorts interest her in particular?
For a more specific example related to the above, have Sorshen and Nocticula gone basically chaste, or do they still indulge so long as it’s safe, sane, and consensual? Likewise, will Arshea and Lymnieris be “cleaned up” the next time they appear, if they ever do again?
The reason I’m asking these questions is that sex positivity, the notion that sex isn’t inherently bad, is a major component of social justice that often gets neglected for the sake of mainstream respectability.
Absolutely not chaste. You can be sexually active without being ONLY sexually active. Arshea and Lymnieris are fine as-is. It's not so much the sexuality that we wanted to clean up, but the cliche of "sexy woman has to be evil woman" one.
AKA: I hope we can continue to use sexuality and sex as story elements in the game as needed, in ways that won't scandalize a sizable portion of the public BUT also in ways that fight against portraying sex as evil. This is one of the MAIN reasons why I wanted to adjust the Azlanti virtues of rule, to change "chastity" into "love," for example.
That said, it's never going to be a topic we can tackle head on with the attention it deserves, I fear, since the whole fear//hatred of sex that infects the world (including the United States) means that Paizo is pretty timid about facing stories like this. We'll do what we can where and when we can, though, that's for sure.
A pity about the last part, but good to know Paizo's heart is in the right place, and belated thanks for your answer! : )
So, question, question... Ah, how about I get back to the first part?
So...does Sorshen have a type? (I'm guessing creative introverts. ; ) )
If someone could get Superman right for you, how would you do it?
By calling her Captain Marvel and portraying her the way Captain Marvel is portrayed. AKA: Give her a sort of cocky, self-assured attitude, ditch the entire concept of a secret identity, make her have interesting flaws that aren't based around made-up materials, and make her a woman. For starters.
What about Superman as depicted in the 90's animated series?
Boring.
Huh, I thought they did a good job: some witty quips, enemies that didn't need kryptonite, and all while still being the big blue boy scout (who technically didn't even get his first merit badge). Anyhow, why is he boring?
If someone could get Superman right for you, how would you do it?
By calling her Captain Marvel and portraying her the way Captain Marvel is portrayed. AKA: Give her a sort of cocky, self-assured attitude, ditch the entire concept of a secret identity, make her have interesting flaws that aren't based around made-up materials, and make her a woman. For starters.
What about Superman as depicted in the 90's animated series?
Does "Zon-Kuthon's whole deal requires some pretty serious content warnings" preclude the possibility of ever doing an AP set in Nidal? I'd like to see one (I just got the campaign setting book for Nidal and it's great) but it seems especially difficult to pull off.
It absolutely does not. If we did we'd likely treat such an Adventure Path as one of the "experimental" ones, similar to Hell's Vengeance or Reign of Winter or Iron Gods and make sure that more traditional options were before and after, and would put content warnings on the volumes to let folks know, but a Nidal Adventure Path is otherwise certainly doable. We've got LOTS of ideas for Adventure Paths though...
This looks like a good opportunity to ask what's been on my mind for a while. Over the years I've seen Paizo products become less, for lack of a more concise and articulate term, "edgy," particular in regards to sexual content. Why is that?
Good morning, James. How tall is Runelord Sorshen? I'm making a character for Return of the Runelords with the Accidental Clone trait and would like to know. Thanks in advance for your response!
That's not a value I've ever bothered to write down or set in stone. Feel free to set her height at whatever makes sense for you.
In Planescape lore, certain outsiders used to send mephits to each other, with each type of mephit conveying a certain "coded" message by virtue of their quantity or racial type.
Oh neat! The more and more I hear about Planescape the more I adore it. Sadly I've just never gotten to play a game in it.
[Curtailing teleportation] was actually a pretty big component of the adjustment on the outsiders. Also for situations like the pre Wrath of the Righteous Worldwound, with Wardstones protecting a perimeter from teleportation but not preventing physically crossing, the fiends, if they had unlimited planetary teleport, could just barely cross the line at some unguarded point and then go anywhere. There are other examples, but you basically have the gist. With their current setup, they can still absolutely teleport an entire army into your city, but it would need to be a mile away (where you might be able to notice it massing), and that would deny them their get-out-of-jail-free escape route if they did. So they have to think if they want to do that, or if they want to advance normally and keep the easy retreat. They might split the difference with cannon fodder 1 mile-ing in and the big guns, who expect to live to fight another day, saving their retreat, but then they can't strike...
Thank you very much for explaining Paizo's reasons for the change; it's always good to know "what were they thinking?" Of course, the same could be asked about the folks who wrote in planetary teleportation in the first place without thinking about the ramifications.
Probably because each lemure is supposed to become its own devil, rather than the component of one, but that's just me going by Planescape lore.
Was this in reference to the Critical Failure effect or something else?
Yep, the Critical Failure; sorry I wasn't clear earlier. My take is that it's the devil getting caught for "unsanctioned ascension," "meritless promotion," "wasting resources," and likely other offenses.
The Ritual lasts 1 to 9 days, and up to 100 Lemures can be used each day to make one or more Devils (the Lemure cost seems to double as you go up every two levels, with Level 19-20 Devils requiring 512 Lemures). The Devils made are thralls to the Pit Fiend, unless it's another Pit Fiend or other Level 20 Devil. So naturally very few Pit Fiends choose to do that.
On Success the Devil(s) are made, on a Critical Success you are able to work more quickly, being able to use up to double the normal limit of Lemures each day (I love that the book specifies "assuming you have enough Lemures), Failure and you're only able to use half the number of Lemures each day (meaning you can shape any 19-20 Devils), and a Critical Failure means you fail to shape any Devils, and draw the ire of an Archdevil.
Probably because each lemure is supposed to become its own devil, rather than the component of one, but that's just me going by Planescape lore.
Which reminds me, and also bears mentioning: not since the Great 'Loth Conspiracy have fiends gotten such a teleportation nerf. They've only got dimension door now, and it's only 60'. It's as if, to answer the question of "what are the ramifications of a race of malicious teleporters?", the dev team opted for the easiest possible answer and just removed the teleportation.
But anyway, keep up the great work on your thread! It's easy to read, yet informative, which is exactly what bespoke dev team is looking for. :)
What I want to know is why Paizo nerfed the quality of life spells. My guess is "genre considerations," i.e., trying to be more sword & sorcery. Never mind that today's demographic is likely going to think about at least cleanliness first thing...
Glad we're getting to monsters, Mark, because one category is of interest to both of us: demigods. How are they going to be statted differently in 2E? Perhaps...offering an example by way of a particular demigod who's of interest to both of us? ^_^
At this point I kind of hope the paladin blog comes out RIGHT before the playtest: reason? I want to see if HWalsh will explode...
I'm just sick of circular threads with half-cooked justifications based off of assumptions due to one half-piece of information in one blog post.
This is why I barely follow the playtest forum: there's little signal, but a lot of noise. That what's noise to us is likely signal to the devs makes me feel manipulated.
Not as bad as when some of you decide to bully me for having the gall of not being a cheerleader, I suspect.
What I would like is for the devs to step down into the mud with us peasants and be willing to answer questions, like I've seen Mark Seifter and Wayne Reynolds do. Big props to them for that. (:
For Return of the Runelords, will there be a write-up for any thematically-appropriate empyreal lords? Pleeeease?
Just for one of them.
Ooooo...
The one best serving as a foil to Best Runelord? You know the one. ;)
I don't.
It's my favorite Empyreal Lord, after Sarenrae: Ashava.
Well foo, I was hoping for Arshea. I'm a bit surprised though, since I thought for sure it'd be Soralyon given their significance to the region. I'm also surprised you didn't get which runelord I was referring to, given who our favorite is, along with the one I asked all those questions about.
Anyway, question, question, question... (though I would like to see your thoughts re- my comments).
Since we're already talking about Return of the Runelords, what sorts of goodies can we expect from it (that you can talk about)?
Accusation: 2E is sacrificing customizability for for streamlining, likely to chase after the mainstream market share:
Neal Litherland wrote:
To put it bluntly, if Pathfinder picked up the 3.5 pieces and maintained the complexity and customization of 3.5, then 2.0 is doing exactly the opposite. It seems from everything I've seen that the next edition's goal is to strip down your options, simplify the game, and to make it as simple to play as possible. In short, it's chasing all the people who wouldn't play the first edition because of all the reading, math, and complexity involved in it.
Neal Litherland wrote:
As a player, I don't like this. I really, really hope that I'm wrong, but everything I see sends up big, red flags that tells me Paizo is going to make a game that appeals to the 5th edition DND crowd. The problem for me is that 5th edition already exists... if that was the game I wanted to play, then that is what I would play. Don't get me wrong, 5e is perfectly functional, does what it sets out to, and is fun... but to paraphrase a fellow at my table, it's a beer and pretzels RPG. You have a limited number of options, fairly minor customization, and there aren't a lot of rules to remember. I play Pathfinder because it's the game that lets me tweak every aspect of my character, and have those tweaks mean something mechanically. It's the game I stuck with because you could have a single-class party, but every character will be wildly different from one another.
In short, I don't want a game that sacrifices all that customization in the name of streamlining and simplicity.
What evidence do the developers have to disprove this hypothesis?
And no, I haven't gotten to the other Empyreal lords yet. I've...felt kinda "why bother?" about it, mainly due to James taking a dismissive attitude towards my concerns, likely due to toxic criticism burnout in general. Seeing others boldly stating "good is dumb" also didn't help.
Oh, and thanks for the counterargument, Leingod. I'll be sire to link back to it in the future. (:
Look, empyreal lords are supposed to make good look cool, and it's hard to do that with stats that aren't on par with demon lords. Paizo's (infamously) about social justice but that takes more than acknowledging QUILTBAG people exist; we need paragons of righteousness to look admirable rather than repulsive. We'd get a lot less "good is dumb" of we have good represented by characters more likable than practical expys of Tess & Monica.
Touched by an Angel featuring Lym & Arshea looks like much more fun, no?
I believe I asked this question before, but I feel this concern merits clarification. I suspect you will too.
Petitioners in Nirvana get turned into (sapient) animals, yes? What happens to worshipers of Arshea? While there's something to be said for morphological variety, I don't think most of them want to be feralform furries.
Let's say there's a character who's...a 20th level oracle of lore. We're talking not only miracle on tap, but also wish once a day. You can't save money or boost stats with that wish, but I'm guessing a clever user can solve problems that other characters need laborious quests for.
With even one mythic tier, said oracle can potentially have access to every cleric spell.
And then there're all those other oracle abilities which make them the equal to bards in skills.
Finally getting to my question, how would one have an interesting story with such a character as the protagonist? I'm guessing it'd be like Doctor Strange; like any other story, just one where the challenges simply have a higher challenge rating.
Fiction is ripe with stories about wishes and wish-fufillment gone bad. From "The Monkey's Paw" to "Pet Semetary." How do you make it interesting? By making it a horror story.
Heh.
And here's where you get to explain horror to me. How does one have a horror story that isn't the protagonist being helpless as they're maliciously jerked around? Help me expand my understanding of horror, because mine is very limited.
I would say that the "average" alignment for the Inner Sea Region is probably "neutral." Even though that includes Kyonin (chaotic good) and Cheliax (lawful evil) and Andoran (lawful good) and the Worldwound (chaotic evil).
Andoran's neutral good. Where'd you get the idea that they're lawful?
I actually have a question (and follow-up), though. Can petitioners gain class levels? If not, who does the high-level expert work in the afterlife?
Of all the major outsider factions (Angels/Demons/Devils/Qliphoth/etc) which do you find the most engaging and fun to right about and which do you find the least?
thankies :)
Demons are the most engaging and fun to write about.
Archons are the least interesting for me to write about.
What would make archons interesting?
How interesting are angels to write up?
I'll do my best to keep any lists I have short and very related. Sorry if I've been bothersome with them earlier.
