Castilliano's page

I'd imagine Nethys priests blowing crap up, much like a science demonstration focused on the showy effects & power more than the principles (to study for one's personal edification as everyone's at a different level). Use them spell slots! Followers who've developed higher Rank abilities might demonstrate them sort of as a coming-of-age ritual or the mark of moving up to another order (like with fellowship societies) so they can wear a cooler sash w/ a new color or more badges or something.

I hope Iomedae's sermons aren't so ritualistic and so centered on her deeds & the past instead of her principles & the crowd's calling for the future. Probably depends more on the priest and other context...much like Catholicism. OMG, she does call for crusades, doesn't she? Hmm. Big difference when there are actual demons, not just demonized victims.

I wonder if Abadar followers actually know how to share. :) It could be like the trading floor of the stock market, or a big haggle-fest (or maybe that's their day-to-day life?). Or hmm, maybe like some business guru from the humanism/Good of Simon Sinek empowering the crowd to the duplicitous Evil of MLMs & pyramid schemes manipulating them. I so dislike Abadar's indifference to such variance. Can't trust 'em, but kinda have to rely on them?? Yikes. I can imagine the strife within the church itself.

It doesn't say generated by actions, does it? It applies to all effects, there are no qualifiers there. Yes, there is a rules gap re: when does one choose where to center ongoing effects, but it's obvious that one's auras are effects that are generated by oneself so fall under this rule. You have to choose which one of your selves is the source.

IMO Thaum w/ mirror creating two aura sources makes it too strong for the investment, even if not unbalancing (a difficult bar in PF2's well-balanced world). Compare it with Expand Aura (6th) which is costly until 10th and lacks all the tricks mirrors give you.

That's awesome, I've long wanted to adapt Age of Worms (though can't expect to with my limited time). Yeah, that'll take you all the way to 20th I'd think and Con should serve better vs. the thematic threats (though all of your defenses will be challenged at some point so you'll want an 18-20 in all of your save stats by the end if not 10th/15th). Your warriors should be able to protect you from melee enemies through the earliest adventures and sounds like the Witch can cover you in an emergency (and vice-versa...since I suspect the Witch will be significantly more vulnerable than you, and maybe more than their players suspects.)

There's a cap on how much Dex will help AC, but not on how much Con will help h.p., so it depends on if you'll be playing to the levels where you'll reach that cap (which depends on armor proficiency). (Though do note that having high Reflex saves matters a lot too.)

A hefty amount of which is preferred depends also on what type of campaign you're in. In one where you face a lot of AoEs (dragons & blaster casters), then you'll want more Dex than if facing poisons & diseases in an undead campaign. Are you underground and indoors a lot where it's easy to cut enemies off from reaching you or outdoors where you'll get attacked nearly as much as the warriors?

And are you taking Reach Spell so you can safely stay back? Is there a Champion who can defend you well vs. melee, but not so much vs. ranged? Or are the melee PCs skirmishers leaving you to fend for yourself? Is there another healer?

In a low-level one-shot, I'd go Dex, maybe leave Wis a little low instead of Con. But as Power128 pointed out, if going to higher levels I'd likely favor Con if I had to choose. On casters (light or no armor), I prefer 14 in each, but I am thinking long term and relying on defensive positioning/teamwork.

Everything you say is true and agreed upon by the majority of GMs (I'd think), but the OP didn't ask for general boss advice, rather for favorite duos. A lot could be gained by covering the broadest varieties of dynamic boss fights, but this thread only addresses one subset.

If you want to start another thread regarding all types of bosses, especially unusual combinations within active settings, you'll likely find a lot of the posters here participating there too.

Lot of houserules being proposed for a rules thread.

So they're not considered 12L for a Large character then.

Okay.

Yes, because Bulk rules (beyond typical equipment) quickly devolve into irrational conundrums. Interpreting them rationally requires more intuition and stopgap solutions than logic and rigor, even in the Rules Forum. Sadly, depending.

Hell no. Yes, each item of 1 Bulk converts to one L, but Bulk rules defy algebra (see above). Each unit of Bulk for larger items converting into 1 L Bulk would be ridiculous, and I'm shocked you'd suggest it.

Setting oddness aside, RAW seems clear: Being Large only changes Bulk for items of one Bulk (become L) and items of L Bulk (become negligible). A 2 Bulk item remains 2 Bulk, and gaining extra Bulk capacity addresses that.
So, your companions (none weighing 1 Bulk or less) remain the same Bulk to your Large PC, but your Large PC (despite having mediocre Str) can still carry three of them (Encumbered) or two (not).

In a party, swapping some 1 Bulk gear over to your PC might open up enough carrying weight for someone else to pick up one of the Small creatures for you. Cheesy, but it is what it is.

Oh, there are some good ideas here, but I don’t think you are looking for just boss encounters, correct? I’m trying to think up some encounters that aren’t necessarily end of the chapter or section duo combinations. Instead you can have memorable encounters that embody something more, such as an elaborate kobold trap that leverages a specific type of hazard with a particular creature. Hmm. I’ll have to think about this a bit more.

I think the OP does indicate they want just boss encounters, or at least "two equally strong buddies with synergy". I don't think having one of the buddies be a trap or hazard qualifies (as interesting as that is).

One other consideration for the "humans on different planets (and even in different galaxies)" issue: It's really hard to create entirely new fictional species and societies (to include history and cultural subgroups) in a consistent and believable manner. And then gamers would have to actually study the material to create characters that don't violate the setting expectations; you can even see this in RPGs that are based on real world historical areas.

That's the primary reason that humans are so often the "baseline" for most RPGs. Even if it doesn't "make sense" for settings not on Earth.

Yeah, that's the same reason so many (arguably TOO many) stories start with an Earthling the audience can identify with and who can use Earth slang/references/analogies. Then when thrust into a bizarre situation the narrator has touchstones for audience comprehension, a human mind which can comment on behalf of them.

That's not convergent evolution. Not saying this faux cousin isn't a viable solution, just that I'd recommend a new sparkly name rather than the actual term for a lesser phenomenon. Assuming one doesn't want to go the 60s sci-fi/superhero route of mangling science out of laziness, i.e. Radiation=magical plot device. Hmm. Or modern too I suppose by those tagging "quantum", "aura", or some esoteric biological term on unfounded beliefs.

So one might call it a Primary Evolution Track for the most common forms w/ other tiers based on commonality. Since so many planar creatures have a similar form (and often can mate with humanoids) one could add some divine lingo if preferred, like Exalted Evolution (if that class hadn't existed!), maybe Divine Image Evolution (where evolution "naturally" leads towards these duplicates of planar creatures). Mirrored Evolutionary Pressure causes DNA-Level Hyperevolution (where mirrored and hyper mean little to nothing, but have that zing).

I also find it a stretch to operate as if humanoids are best-case scenarios re: evolutionary outcomes, and some less common Ancestries might argue here. Obviously it's dragons, just ask a Kobold. :-)

Though, Dominate being uncommon is that you can use it on NPCs to absolutely break some narrative models, Right? Because to my knowledge every source of applying Controlled to a creature as part of a spell is uncommon or rare. With feats that apply controlled being very specific.

I know Lust runelords have it, But they themselves are rare. Other than that I cant think of any other character option outside of Animist with Monarch of the Fey Courts

Yes, plus some tables are uncomfortable with effects that strip away agency, especially in the hands of "heroes". It's easier to opt-in and allow them than it'd be to opt-out if they weren't Uncommon/Rare.

One might also argue that mechanically these effects can have disproportionate impact depending on a party's composition (including enemy mobs).

I'm reminded of some brutal creatures in Baldur's Gate that could destroy a small party, but were manageable for large parties and near powerless against solo heroes who had no allies to attack so could wait out the control, attack monster, get controlled, and repeat. AI hadn't factored in that option. Leveled up really fast soloing the game.

There's no canon answer to your question re: multiple planets, so any of the answers above work if you want them to, even simultaneously to explain the different lore/time frames and interbreeding. Ultimately I find it difficult to rectify "evolution of humans on real Earth" with any of it. But PF-verse Earth isn't real Earth anyway so IMO the best (until a narrative requires otherwise) would be First World templates seeded throughout the PF-verse w/o too much deviation/speciation for those from separation, but unlimited extra species that arise via evolution, magic, planar energies, & the hordes of powers prone to tampering.

Much of Golarion comes from staff campaign worlds (especially JJ's), so there's no one source or methodology. A contributor friend of mine was free to create his own names for his scenarios, then got caught trying to sneak in German wordplay (not quite puns, but close). So there is oversight, yet there have also been accidents like duplication or names so similar they must be related (but aren't). I recall a situation where Orc names seemed racist to speakers of one Earth language because their names shared similarities, unintentionally I must add.
So yeah, I'm pretty sure it's the "sounds cool" method, now coupled with a Paizo database & Google to double check.

I love the idea of the fire giant w/ fire wall caster defending a corridor at the start of a dungeon, being basically unapproachable by a lower-level party. But by maneuvering around the dungeon, the players can get behind them and fight them in a more favorable open area.

Yeah, that's one where preparation (or stealth) would make a big difference. Heightened Resist Elements, some cold spells, maybe an effect to get a flanker through or break a wall, all would be strong tactics a party might not have available on first contact. So the party gets rewarded when it returns.

At least one previous version of Dominate explicitly had a minor telepathic link. Perhaps PF2 left it out because that implies mental faculties or linguistic capabilities (even if sharing a language isn't required) or even the subject's interpretation of the imparted dictates (which may or may not be desired by the controller). Leaving out the particulars IMO cuts out the legalistic loopholes and cuts right to the spirit of "how such things work in the fantasy genre", which yes, involves some severe consequences, but we are at the same Rank as Petrify so yeah, crit fails can end careers.

Morhek, an Andoran resistance feels...right somehow, like it gives Cheliax cred, and revives a similar feel to the Bellflowers. Definitely makes the region more dynamic, and with the Whispering Tyrant pressing in the North, it's up to heroes to rise up more than crusades.

One would have to determine how grim wants to get, but it is a war AP and Golarion's steeped in grim elements, it's just nice to have sanctuaries too (though maybe nicer if PCs had to carve them out).

That reminds me of a combo I built with a Dark Naga & Flesh Golem where the golem holds the doorway while the naga fires lightning bolts through it. And if the naga hastes itself, it can move in line of sight, cast, and move out of line of sight each round.
Similar could be done with an electric breath weapon, storm-themed Sorcerer, or of course the Shambler could work as the blocker. Heck, somebody to the side w/ Electric Arc who can only see the front PC could also work (perhaps a Druid w/ Heal for the Shambler and some Lightning Bolts too).

Similarly one could cast a Wall of Fire (or two) down a corridor blocked by a Fire Giant whose Flaming Stroke also likes corridors.

Corridors can be rough, and I'd say use sparingly, but maybe have it depend on how defense-minded one's monsters are or if PCs triggered/allowed an alarm. And similar effects can be had with doorways anyway. I had one PFS player (playing above their level so perhaps wise more than paranoid) who hung back like 100' in an extremely long corridor because of fear of line effects.

Castilliano wrote:

Yet as much as I loathe ID for its underhanded subversion of the Constitution & scientific progress, there's ample evidence for it in the PF-verse, namely the exact same species developing on so many worlds (though teleportation/migration could also account for this).

I only have a VERY base level of understanding of biology, so I'm sure my contribution is practically nil compared to yours, but I think the concept of parallel (or even convergent) evolution is also interesting. Maybe similar/the same species appear on different worlds because it's just the ideal shape for that world. Maybe it's just inherent in any environment with a similar atmosphere to Earth/Golarion that humans will pop up eventually. Are we just a happy coincidence, or if we did this experiment a million times, will humanity come up every single time? (Insert "everything turns to crabs eventually"-meme.)

I suspected convergent evolution (CE) might arise. :-)

In my headcanon I like to imagine Golarion humanoids as having a magically infused evolution that allows them to perform superhuman feats and that they're only called "human" for our RPing benefit, not because of genetics. Except then Irrisen's connection to Earth throws a wrench in that (though arguably that's not Earth since it has magic).
OR...
Maybe PF-verse evolution does work like you suggest right down to the genetic level, guided by an invisible pressure/force so that impossible odds are actually near certain. L. Ron Hubbard proposed a nearly-100% rate of human development for his Mission Earth series (as he wanted aliens to fit right in, though maybe it served a pro-human Scientology mindset too). While very handy for one's narrative simplicity and character relatability, I think that raises more mystery than it supplies fantasy-narrative usefulness. But if one wanted forces beyond the deities that's one way to go, like genetic fate/karma. This could account for the anthropomorphic nature of PF-verse deities, though it seems simpler to say we fit their mold than that there's an uber-mold from even higher up. Of course that would overwrite at least our evolution and JJ himself said there's evolution so how did all these duplicate species appear so distant from each other (which is one of the primary drivers of speciation, so we can't have split too long ago)?

Maybe better left loose so as to allow the most narrative possibility/flexibility for tables since it's unlikely to be necessary to establish a rigorous answer for any AP.

Clerics with Share Life (Shield Other), so that it's difficult to focus fire on either, plus they can Heal so it's likely they'll both survive until the end. Combine this with Fast Healing/Regeneration creatures, i.e. Onidoshi (Ogre Magi), as in I had a pair of twin Ogre Magi High Priests with this in 3.X, but it'd be even simpler to build in PF2 since you only want select spells.

Another thing you can do with Onidoshi twins is to pretend there's only one, with them swapping who's invisible (perhaps while the other Regenerates) and maybe they pretend they can teleport. Though yeah, blood might give the ruse away, it only needs to work short while so one pull the frontline away from the fragiles so their buddy can sneak in.

--
Amphisbaena w/ Medusa, but yeah a 3 level difference so that needs balancing for a double-boss role, but I like the imagery of her wearing the snake like a boa.

--
Shapeshifters with each other, so party thinks there's one type of creature hiding as another, but there are two (or more) different types, maybe even swapping places perhaps so they use silver on the one who hates cold iron and vice versa. Many creatures can become animals (and fight with their own stats) if that suits the adventure.

Desalination would be an excellent route, though I think if that (or similar level of control) was normal for Absalom they would've cleaned out the briny, flooded neighborhoods.

I wouldn't mind finessing the interpretation for mechanical balance, but as it is now the order to "kill the wizard" vs. "fight all these guys to the best of your ability" vs. "scout 100' and report back" vs. "find the chalice in these ruins" are all singular commands with multiple steps so it becomes difficult to differentiate them or to determine how many steps/saves occur along the way. Could the controller step out of the room and leave the Controlled target on auto-pilot?

And the phrasing for getting a new save is explicitly for a "new order", yet there's no example of how these orders are actually conveyed, so are they coming in as a single datum per action, overarching ones, vibes of the controller's will, or what? I imagine there could easily be non-lingual creatures that can cast this (or otherwise establish the Controlled condition). Do we really have to analyze the definition of "dictate" to understand these mechanics? Oy.

It's funny that we have two dinosaur avatars discussing evolution, and hairless ones splitting hairs.

To split dino-hairs even finer, ID comes in different degrees depending on which proponent one talks with; each concedes a different amount of ground to evolutionary theory w/ "created whole cloth" being one of the rarer extremes (not that they're uncommon in the USA, just that they're typically overt Creationists, and Young Earth at that). Most of ID's spokespeople/authors prefer to avoid the larger argument (vs. a mountain of evidence) and point at the Cambrian Explosion or specific mechanisms (the eye being a favorite) and cry "Irreducible Complexity" (IC) to support that evolution had needed "an intelligence" (read: their god) behind it to function. Trouble is IC has zero evidence, relying more on gaps in knowledge. And all such examples (especially the eye) have had their development scientifically explained. But that knowledge is far from common and IDers can exploit that ignorance (and I imagine are busy searching for more esoteric mechanisms). Of course this has led them to address abiogenesis since there are still gaps in our naturalistic understanding (even though, as mentioned above, it's not a part of evolutionary theory). Except again, there's no evidence for ID or any facet of it like IC, just an unanswered question they want to exploit.

IMO it's also funny that ID was explicitly created to mask creationism to slip it into schools (and was rejected in court as religious/non-scientific). Yet ID's so flawed it doesn't fly in an actual created universe which instead has both creationism and evolution side by side (depending on one's narrative desires). Yet as much as I loathe ID for its underhanded subversion of the Constitution & scientific progress, there's ample evidence for it in the PF-verse, namely the exact same species developing on so many worlds (though teleportation/migration could also account for this). Lots of creatures have been created by "an intelligence" and many have been bred/shepherded by deities (or a certain Gold Dragon in a smaller example). So Intelligent Design exists in a sense, but an actual ID proponent might get jealous that such machinations to support the divine are unnecessary in the PF-verse.

So no in that evolution functions fine w/o intelligence guiding it in the PF-verse and also no in that the ID political agenda would be unnecessary in a universe with obvious intelligent creators, but yes, in that much such designing has occurred (at many degrees/power levels).

Still hoping that PFS/ previously known as Good PCs can empathize with the Cheliax side at some point on some topic.

I find one-dimensional good or evil sides absolutely boring as far as mortals are concerned.

It should be simple much like one might differentiate the Kremlin vs. the Russian populace (especially east of Moscow). In many populations there's an idle majority eking out their lives. Adding Chelaxian NPCs who just want to get by/survive the draft/escape the front/or otherwise be sympathetic should be expected. I think the more difficult part will be the PCs keeping their humanity vs. so many human(-ish) enemies. Most conscript troops (unless facing an existential threat or driven by ideological fervor) resist engaging with enemies or killing, with their main loyalty being to the soldiers beside them. And then there's the major role of morale, where troops often break far before typical RPG kill levels. Not sure where Paizo will draw such lines or how many die-hard or non-human substitutes will be feasible.

I'm now thinking about the former slaves and Chelaxian members of the Bellflowers (esp. those w/ status) and what roles they'll play. And who knows what corrupt entities might fester within Andoran ranks (especially those of allies).

And there's the major hurdle of making this about (recurring) individuals. Are we looking at a Skull & Shackles situation?

One funny side effect of this is that an 8th level NPC is almost always more skilled than an 8th level PC because the PC needs their equipment to hold their own vs. the NPC. Which is to say both of their numbers are competitive, but one side's kinda cheatin'. :-)

Also, NPCs tend to have a smoother progression in damage and get magical weapons later. Peaks and valleys, like when getting Weapon Specialization, are something to be aware of if using the PC classes to make NPCs. And of course, one's attack bonus matters too; most NPCs have higher attacks, i.e. like a Fighter's even if they more closely resemble a Rogue (or Wizard!), but less damage. The higher attacks let them remain threats when fighting higher level PCs and lessens the swinginess of having poor attack/awesome damage (esp. w/ crits).

Some brutes attack like Fighters w/ damage like a Fighter w/ Barb MCD & full set of expected damage Runes! That's where PC breadth/trickery/consumables & party tactics/debuffs/resilience have to compensate.

Why wouldn't Charlie control Bob to exert control over Alice?
Seems pretty straightforward, that is if Charlie knows the situation in order to dictate* to Bob to do this.

Could Bob still control Alice if Charlie neglects to dictate to him what to dictate to her? Tricky there, as one's "had (their) will subverted" which gives the controller use of one's actions (et al), but doesn't make them an automaton (though I suppose they could command that if desired). On one hand Dominate lasts to the next day (which can be extended by expending the slot again/or Unlimited at 10th), and one would expect the subject could perform daily functions without their controller dictating every step along the way, but on the other hand it'd be odd if there were diabolic lawyer loopholes that every controller had to address when sending a Controlled entity out on missions, i.e. "Don't inform people of your mission, that you're controlled, that you need help that might subvert your own mission, don't make a scene, (etc. etc)". That would soon get ridiculous.

So I think a good baseline is that the Controlled person acts with the will of the controller (to the best of their abilities), and since Bob's will is subverted to Charlie's, so is Alice's, albeit indirectly, and Bob wouldn't be able to use his control of Alice as a loophole any more (or less) than he could use his not-dictated-to time to act against Charlie's will.

*From the spell's wording.
"You have been commanded, magically dominated, or otherwise had your will subverted. The controller dictates how you act and can make you use any of your actions, including attacks, reactions, or even Delay. The controller usually doesn't have to spend their own actions when controlling you."

Yeah, I think the bookkeeping aspect plays a major factor in this choice. At higher levels in 3.X/PF1 I would often have a player assigned the role of duration tracker because there could be dozens of active effects running. PF2 seems to emphasize simplicity, i.e. shorter duration on pre-buffs & enemies relying (A LOT) less on having active spells to maintain CR-competitive stats.

If analyzed rigorously on a purely in-world mechanical basis, sure, in PF2 one should track initiative count for each spell effect, esp. w/ Reactions, Delay, & Dying. But the two overarching questions IMO are whether that rigor pays off in a better play experience and is the difference enough to overturn RAW/rewrite the rules (which as noted could lead to a cumbersome explanation to even communicate).

I think at many tables, they're going to prefer RAW (at least for this) because play > precision. I also think this makes the better default setting for PF2. Then, if a table wants to take on the extra effort they can, perhaps as an optional rule in a sidebar. Paizo cares only that you enjoy yourself, not stick to their rules as if intended to be strict (which internally they disagree about anyway).

If I had a table where such off-rhythm 1-round effects were common, I'd gauge the effect on a practical level before implementing this (and a major factor in that would be how severe the combats were that PCs need to eke out every advantage).

Given the atrocities of ongoing wars, I wonder how grim Paizo will go. And part of me wonders if killing off Gorum was a comment on NOT glorifying war like he did. Having GMed a PF1 scenario where an accompanying lauded NPC hero has severe PTSD that shapes the whole storyline makes me think this war might go quite bleak.

(The NPC's situation was such that a new player whispered to one of my regulars he was friends with to check on my well-being. He'd thought he'd disturbed me personally.)

I think the fact it is two simple steps presented as if complex enough to require a chart that's the problem. The chart interferes with rather than aids the comparison part because it's trying to include Levels too which makes a visual storm. Converting levels to Rank should be distinct step.

Roll this proficiency vs. X, PF2 standard mechanic CS/S/F/CF gives result.
Compare result + the number based on Rank (of the effect you're applying)
with the Rank of target effect to see if you Counteract or not.
Done.
Footnote: You may have to convert Level to Rank if no Rank is given, here's how...

The flow chart would be very short, wouldn't it? Smaller than the chart, somewhat analogous to the Success/Failure list, and demonstrating what's getting compared to what (as w/ DCs/ACs) rather than skipping to the answers without sharing the underlying principles. Imagine Strikes using a chart like...Ugh.
I included flow chart as an alternative to a formula which I'd have preferred because those have baggage.

(Fun fact (so I've heard), Stephen Hawking was told he'd lose X% of readers for every formula he included in A Brief History of Time, which led him to only include E=MC(squared) as a must-have.)

Note that as awkward as Counteracting can be at first (for me too, and I'm a math/DnD nerd), it's somewhat of a universal mechanic in PF2 for one effect vs. another effect. So it's worth learning, and underneath all the charts it's kinda simple (and I wish Paizo had given a formula or flow chart rather than a messy table, so people could see what to plug in where).

So... work on this has stalled somewhat, but I am considering replacing an Allip with a (Weak) Shadow. Would that be too much for a first level party, even with some mitigating factors?

CR 3 makes for a solid boss (especially at 1st when resources and breadth are minimal), so mitigating factors matter a whole lot. If the party regularly travels with the Light Cantrip and use big weapons, Force Barrage, and spirit damage, then no big deal. But if they rely on Precision damage and other types the Shadow's immune to, then that could backfire in a big way if/when a Shadow Spawn arrives (perhaps blocking for its boss or focusing fire on the one Enfeebled so they die and both can Steal Shadow). Also matters if they have ranged attacks or Reactive Strike, as a flyer can do hit and run tactics, avoiding anybody who looks Readied (even if they can't really do that with Steal Shadow unless it's every other round, which works well with going in walls).

Which is to say, yeah, be wary. It's not a generic CR 3 bag of meat most any party can handle fine.

In a meta sense, the players via PCs are pitting their agency vs. the agency of the baddies exemplified in the BBEG. (Plus other obstacles, hopefully tied to that main conflict or subplot). So if the BBEG plays an "I'm immune to your agency" card to auto-escape (which means auto-win if that was their primary goal), that feels different than an "I'm capable of escape/made plans" card even if the results resemble each other.

IMO, the NPCs ability to escape should be accounted for in their capabilities-budget (which includes favorable terrain, henchman, etc.). For example, I had a speed focused PC in PFS1, and chased down several escaping villains, one a BBEG who would've escaped (and likely would've killed me if he'd tried, shhh). That was very satisfying as I'd invested a lot in doing exactly that. If an otherwise normal NPC out of nowhere became faster simply so they could escape, that'd be gross. But if chasing say a Quickling, I'd tip my hat to the superior speedster, as their abilities do reflect a steep cost to getting such speed.

Similarly if a party came built to catch a BBEG, with spells and counterspells invested in that at a cost to direct combat abilities, it'd be gross to overwrite that with a casual, "Nah, BBEG escapes".

On the flip side, if the players/PCs are negligent, like perhaps they're told the BBEG has an escape boat and they don't address the boat or chasing on water, then maybe a BBEG meant to be caught does get away, maybe along with important clues/resources the PCs have to struggle without. I'd be offended too if a GM handwaved it so we caught them anyway despite our errors. That victory would be hollow, even if we otherwise won the battles.

In short, "Your abilities don't work here" or "Your agency's being overwritten by the plot" are terrible GM tricks, while "BBEG paid good gold from their equipment budget/invested key spell slots/etc. to do X and I'll still give you a chance to stop them if you've invested in countering X" feels legit.

One unexpected source I've used for names is the Spelling Bee game online by the NY Times. Here are seven letters, kinda random, but kinda not because it leans toward more useful letters. How about this viable syllable with this one? Not a word, so maybe a good NPC name. Because yeah, it's easy to fall into one's linguistic habits.

I've also used a d20 for consonants and d6 for vowels (including Y as a vowel). Pick which type likely follows next (in the given language) and reroll if unsatisfied. Just occurred to me the Japanese "alphabet" would also be a good table to roll off of, especially for Minkai names (though double check for unintended meanings). Could also be used in reverse.

I don’t think players need a guaranteed chance of success in every scenario they face to ‘have agency’. A no win scenario is a thing. And how you react to it is still agency.

And forcing the big bad to flee is still a victory.

That's all context dependent. Sometimes, like in the horror genre, survival means you won, yes, (at who knows what cost). But in a light, escapist genre, that's a draw or even loss. Expectations change responses.

Similarly, if you force a BBEG to flee, undermining their plans, then that's a victory (except for that whole RPG "losing BBEG's equipment/loot" aspect). But if the BBEG's plans are to escape, then no, there's no victory in them succeeding because your goal was (probably) to catch/kill them. Ex. It's more important for Bond to stop Blofeld's plans than kill Blofeld (and escaping mastermind villains in the spy genre's kinda a trope). While letting a serial killer escape will probably feel like utter failure, especially if the PCs didn't unmask them or save anyone. Or like in Seven, where the cops "win", but the villain wins far more. Powerful as a movie, and the MCs have plenty of agency, but in an RPG that conclusion would reflect PC failure despite even catching the BBEG.

...wait for it to happen naturally with random bad guy 47 who becomes the returning bad guy because of chance. ...it becomes a shared spontaneous story element and people tend to enjoy that.

I have had these kinds of NPCs, and they do add to the RPing.

Had several prisoners among many who stepped up to accept equipment to fight on the flanks of the PCs in an escape. Most maybe hit one enemy, but one guy rolled several nat 20s so obviously he got a name, and labeled with an implied level of ability in the eyes of PCs (even if the players knew better). While of course he didn't join the party itself, he joined their team in a back-at-base capacity.

The inverse is true with BBEGs that fall early. That just means they weren't really the BBEGs, right? Not big enough, nor bad enough. Even if statistics & plan/intent would've said otherwise, the dice & fate disagreed. (And wouldn't the GM have to advance them anyway to keep pace?)

Sounds trite to say "Roll with it" or more specifically "Roll with the rolls", yet gotta advocate what works.

Batman stuff...
There's a great dialogue between Jason Todd (long after the Joker "killed" him) and Batman re: killing the Joker as a uniquely irredeemable murderer who will perpetually escape and kill.* Batman played the moral card, but Todd pressured Batman into revealing he feared killing at all, even the Joker, because then he wouldn't be able to stop killing the others too. He had to bottle that vengeance in. Powerful stuff, that is if one chooses to ignore that Batman has killed many times albeit nearly all in his earliest incarnations. And kills non-human sapient beings often (as has no-kill Spiderman).

*I'd posed this situation to a pacifist, and they'd struggled to grasp the premises of irredeemable and guaranteed-escapes, which isn't a knock against him because we're not in comic book with plot paradigms.

---
In a combat-kill RPG w/ player agency, comic book and real world sensibilities just don't factor in unless the players buy into it too, and that'll vary too much for simple solutions.

That's one reason APs often use an organization as the BBEG, perhaps with a figurehead whose proxies the party can fight. "Oh, we've killed this unique lieutenant of the BBEG's. That oughta hurt." Moreso if that NPC had a specific role/ability the organization loses. "No more X's are going to serve them anymore." (Perhaps because X's are too weak to toss against the party anyway or have been run dry plotwise, but still.)

Not that the figurehead's always visible, but sometimes, like in the Dragon's Demand megamodule, the villain overshadows everything even when offstage. Even fighting completely unrelated villains it's for the sake of fighting the dragon. (And the dragon doesn't make any appearances when the party might get lucky prematurely.)

The point being one can feature a recurring adversarial element without any escaping going on. Putting all one's plot eggs in one BBEG basket doesn't jive well in RPGs where plot armor can lean toward heavy-handed authorial (GM) interference. "Because I'm Batman!" doesn't fly (except in certain genres I suppose.)

Speaking of which, I don't necessarily enjoy Batman having recurring villains (and have long hated the Joker being his primary adversary with such better ones in his gallery). It's just with decades of churning out content, it's quite difficult not to resort to it. Many "new" villains would resemble the old too much anyway or fall into the flavor-of-the-month trap. While I've heard of tables that blitz through material (i.e. Gygax's original players), how much story does an RPG villain need to occupy/cover for?

ETA: I'd only intended a brief note re: Claxon's comment...

"In PF2, I find enlarge to not really be worth the actions to cast, especially in combat. The damage bonus isn't great, the main attraction is reach. But the increased "aggro" from being large and the reduced AC make it not worth it to me." - Claxon

This.
Coupled with fewer AoOs/RS's per round for Reach to mesh with, and the primacy of each round's first Strike attempt making movement less costly (esp. vs. its cost to 3.X/PF1 Full Attacks).

I wonder what the player's expectations are (or how many hordes they're fighting w/o party AoEs).

Are Serpentfolk redeemable in your interpretation? Or are their ties to evil as much metaphysical/innate as cultural/learned?

That said, there should be mundane methods to keep the prisoners isolated, and as long as their numbers match, all's good in cell block S.

If that's too difficult (or they're too cunning, which they kinda are) and it's the 1st level version of the Zyss, then one might coordinate something involving worn and/or held items. All creatures in the prison might wear items they cannot remove, but which get removed when exiting or entering key zones (then replaced). If disguised as a guard, their item will revert to a prisoner's version when removed during the check. (And of course, one would want to prevent being able to attack it to oneself after killing a guard too.)

One might also use guards of very dissimilar height and/or weight to the Zyss, beyond the spell's ability. Maybe even Small or Large.

Maybe dangle a mouse in front of them and see how they respond. :)

I think the more troublesome aspect is Suggestion. You'd kinda need to ferry them through checkpoints in numbers much smaller than the guard count, or maybe with hoods so they can't target. Hoods might also be necessary because of their bite attacks.

So Dwarves.

Castilliano wrote:

You can spam pre-buffs of a 1st level spell much easier, like before most every door (another issue w/ Huge, going through doors.)

Wait, which 1st level spell gets you large size?

Lol. The one in a previous edition. :P

Escapes are difficult to force because players have agency. As WoM suggests, a guaranteed escape undermines player agency...which IMO undermines the game and the GM/Player social contract.

If the enemy needs to escape to fight another day, they need to be or have a clone, followers that will Raise them, or an identical twin (etc). Even 1st ed DnD with all its instant escapes and DM plot control often used these tricks in modules. Plus there's the pain of losing the boss's loot! (No, seriously, it hurts, and will often drive players to extremes to catch them more than the plot does.)

Also consider trap doors or a door which opens instantly when they run toward them, but lock behind them automatically, a wave of fresh enemies that guard the escape route (pre-balanced!), or many other solutions that speak of a cunning enemy rather than a "GM says they have to live" enemy. (Not that the results are different...)

And take care that the players feel like there's a victory, not a draw or even loss because the enemy attempting to escape succeeded at their goal. So thwarted plan, big treasure looted, NPC saved, some goal where the enemy's the obstacle, not the target...yet.

ETA: I'd forgotten until a second after I posted that you're running published adventures...so make of it what you can. I've found 3PP often lack such finesse and simply brute force a route (with much reason to, given the amount of directions a party could otherwise take which a published adventure can't dare cover). But take ownership for the sake of player agency. I've left a campaign because the GM didn't do that for a campaign path with predetermined outcomes. Why's my PC here if all the story needs are her stats?

Also consider timing and positioning.
It's great when you can go in pre-buffed, but PF2 buffs have such short durations that more often one would need to buff in the first round, and that's kinda costly. Even worse if a Barbarian trying to self-buff via spells.

And while it's easy (and AWESOME!) to imagine a Huge Barbarian attacking a horde via Whirlwind, in play any bunched-up minions will already be fireball bait. So are you going to plant yourself in the middle? Better have Haste to get to attack them all in round one because you're intentionally surrounding yourself...and cutting off allies who'd love to launch their AoE attacks w/o you there.
That is if there's a path to get there, and if they've left you room.

Whirlwind's still worthwhile holding the line, not surrounded, if you can hit two or more, but one has to consider the party's spatial needs too. While battle sites do get larger with higher levels (yay!), so do the enemies, so they can't bunch up that well, and w/ Reach often won't.

Large size (with a Reach weapon) provides most of the benefits with much less investment. You can spam pre-buffs of a 1st level spell much easier, like before most every door (another issue w/ Huge, going through doors.) And as noted there are other routes to Large, not so much Huge.

Miraklu wrote:

Why is Besmara not just Unholy?

For the same reason the average Bandit and Pirate NPC isn't Unholy.

Barely anything that was Evil in Premaster is Unholy in Remaster.
Sanctification is the exception, not the rule for anything "formerly Evil".
I like to explain Unholy as "Extreme Evil" and Holy as "Extreme Good", because that highlights that it is an exceptional thing.

Mortals can be plenty evil without needing Fiends to worship or convince them.
Mortals can do plenty good without Celestials egging them on.

The contrast wasn't optional Unholy vs. just/forced Unholy, as you're evaluating. It's rather why not just optional Unholy vs. optional Unholy + optional Holy. As in, why's Holy an option instead of Unholy being the only option (if wanting to be Sanctified).

*pun detected afterward...subconscious at work.

It would be interesting, and realistic, if there were some minor dispute that the PCs took part in that escalated until full war so that they were involved every step along the way. Uncertain how much agency they would have over the war itself or side they given the extra labor involved, but I'd prefer watching it unfold around me (and grow with it) even w/o said agency over the war having already unfolded and low-level PCs somehow contributing during every step of their development (in the shadow of thousands of superior characters).

So maybe PCs help with a romantic entanglement in Book 1 involving warring houses (yeah, Romeo & Juliet unintentionally springs to mind) where the houses use either success or failure of the romance as an excuse to escalate tensions...right into book 2 where the houses fight more openly, yet have allies, or even mutual enemies that mean the houses have to reconcile to survive. Put said houses near a contentious border, give them diplomatic/marital links that pull in third parties (who as noted above might simply be waiting for a pseudo-righteous banner to fly for their cause).

"Could we have done anything to stop this?!" vs.
"Wow, we were sure lucky to have been in the right place at the right time so consecutively."

If divine magic works, that means religious paths deliver.
How?
The believers can be wrong about this, but you need to determine this. And to factor in for the other divine casters too. That answer (answers?) should inform most other questions.

So if it's because sticking to Edicts & Anathema provides a personal power to tap into it, cool. Or maybe they're illusory too, and simply help w/ the caster's self-confidence or connection to their community & cultural heritage. Then if personal, that might make being religious resemble how Monks have divine focus spells. If illusory, it might act more like Arcane magic, being about lore which one's Edicts & Anathema help keep organized in one's mind. Both lend themselves to philosophies also unlocking divine magic, but not if the magic comes from some cosmic karma/fortune wheel (or maybe deistic or capricious deity). Fate as an answer would make Clerics more like Oracles & Sorcerers, simply using a different mental (empathic, perceptive) path to tap/control it, which then implies even extreme faith & belief won't deliver magic to some (or most?)...though maybe that unlocks something else??

So yeah, answer that question for yourself, and its impact should follow with extrapolation.

Plus, what do the angels (etc) say, and why? And wouldn't they (and others one step down from gods in the hierarchy) simply become the targets of worship? Or two steps, etc. down to what highest peak?

Yeah, I'd look at the battle's intended difficulty rather than a set norm so you balance at the group/narrative level rather than individual. So you might create two (maybe more?) translations per creature (and a lot of the humanoids in PF2 do have two types of peons for that). A generic, rigorous rule would break down as one gets into CR 1/6 creatures or classes that differed in power from each other or some of the bosses who'd become more legitimate threats in PF2. Also PF2's level 1 PCs are chunkier than ever in several comparisons.

And I'd look at what Paizo did with a lot of "PC class" NPCs, where most are not built using a player's chassis. They cast with similar power to a PC, but have unique, signature abilities, higher attack/lower damage, and more h.p./less AC (sometimes much more h.p./defensive abilities in the case of those similar to 6hp/level casters). NPCs also have less breadth in most ways, yet some will be able to perform in two different roles better than any PC can (like a caster w/ a Fighter's attack proficiency or maximum expertise in multiple skills). Lastly, PF2 NPCs seldom rely on synergy, tactics, or pre-buffs (unlike PCs do or tons of NPCs from previous editions did). Those numbers have been baked into their stats.

I don't know if it's still online, but years ago I'd printed out a list of Greyhawk deities for 3.X that listed their domains (and more). It's quite long, about the size a Golarion list would be. PF2's altered or subtracted many of the domains, but it'd lay a foundation since Greyhawk's the source of most if not all Planescape deities (among those that survived moving from 2nd to 3.X). Not sure how much Forgotten Realms influenced.

Pretty sure the list was on the Wizards website since it has their logo, though one likely has to dig into the archives if they haven't made a specific effort to erase such things. It's been years since I've visited there, but they'd had material dating back into 1st edition available, so maybe it persists.

That said, reskinning the Golarion deities works too. Reskinning worked for Rome.

---
And yeah, converting creatures should be simple w/ PF2's charts, but be keen on how accurate PF2 levels/CRs are. Some Planescape stuff played loose w/ an already loose system (because one could).

Let me clarify my positions a bit. There's been confusion, thanks:
-I do find life, spirit, mind, & matter to be useful concepts conversationally whether they're real or metaphorical. Chewy.
-I find arcane = mind+matter, or the other combinations that create traditions, to be useless even as metaphors, whether discussing philosophy or worldviews, in game or out. (And as other threads have pointed out, the soundness fades when analyzed.)
-PCs interact with the traditions far more than the essences, so I don't think PF magical metaphysics are useful in discussions.

Meanwhile...

-The Edicts & Anathema provide lots of fodder to chew on, as might the deities, their histories, and their personalities. Coo beans.
-I do think RPGs can provide a safe space for exploring outside one's comfort zone, cultural bubble, and much, much more. Heck yea, therapists use RPing.
-From that, yes, Golarion/PF w/ its Edicts & Anathema (et al) can provide a proper venue for such exploration.

Yay!

-Except most tables won't bother with this stuff and at many it'd be counterproductive to try, so it's an iffy option.
-There's a limit to how much safety & distance RPing can provide, right? And when trauma or being triggered surfaces, it's time to step back from encouraging them forward. I read SDJenn's words as being in that league. IMO, such impact kinda washes away the earlier points. Time to subtract triggers from one's RPing and play on.

Cheers

Edit: fix spoiler tag
Edit 2: tagS :-)

Claxon wrote:

zimmerwald1915 wrote:

Claxon wrote:

chromatic and metallic dragons

What and what?

I can't tell if you're being sarcastic or not.

Chromatic Dragons

Metallic Dragons

VERY sarcastic as Paizo is phasing out "chromatic" and "metallic" dragons.

I caught your vibe. :-)

The individuals with specific stats or names will remain in Golarion, but yeah, as generic stats & types, they'll be replaced by newer species. Of course all of it remains available for personal use, and it's a matter of no longer being published about more than being erased from the setting (like much of the non-Drow 3.x material, Drows having been specifically retconned out).

I think alignment is too integral to Planescape to extract from the setting, though maybe okay from the PCs. The whole ring geography, the factions in Sigil, and most cultural elements are based on alignment. But like suggested above, it might be converted to a Holy/Unholy system, though I'd add an Axiomatic/Anarchic dichotomy too (and think more so upon reflection re: the Blood War). Then PCs can opt whether they want to participate in such cosmic conflict, much like they do in PF2/Golarion. So the default PC position would be "none" or "insignificant", rather than neutral (which in Planescape might be its own Santification!). Then I'd measure how much of an obstacle alignment-themed environments are meant to be and find some balance, i.e. even a non-aligned PC should suffer a bit in a hazardous to non-Evil (non-Unholy) region.

Did anybody comment on science? I suppose it was the elephant in the room. Hmm. Arguably whether one accepts science (as tentative as its results are) is a better benchmark of well-being than faith/no faith. But both pale in comparison to having community, expressing gratitude, and doing charity. If one's faith delivers those traits, it's a net positive (at least for those criteria alone, negative elements might corrupt that).

I felt you didn't think the magical essences exist in a magical sense, but it seemed you were positing them as existing as part of ourselves. But whether those (conversationally useful) essences are tangible or metaphorical is tertiary to my point about how PF blends them, i.e. mind + matter = arcane. Those are contrived and make a poor template for self discovery (much less knowledge beyond oneself). And it's those blendings and dry numerical mechanics that PCs interact with. Absent any emphasis on blendings, I agree RPing is a good place to investigate different outlooks, much like reading and acting can be. (I may be biased as an avid reader w/ a Drama degree.)

But let's refocus: SDJenn mentioned trauma from faith. I'm operating with her lived experiences. And trauma requires a therapeutic approach (often with a lot of time) that PF can't provide. Stepping away from the source of trauma seems crucial. Dabbling feels dangerous, at least without a real-life mentor that few if any tables would provide.

And for the record, I had positive religious experiences, and as an atheist have hosted dozens of multi-belief discussion groups at a nearby megachurch (which funnily enough has its own internal struggle between the toxic and healthy factions). So yeah, not operating out of a competing dogma, but am suggesting SDJenn step away from faith and its pitfalls until she can get her bearings and emotional stamina to navigate around those, if such paths remain fruitful after investigating alternatives.

I'm unsure where you saw conflation between Golarion & Earth religions. I've posted about those first points (though maybe not on this thread), and a majority of my PF PCs (to my surprise upon reflection) have had Clerical or Druidic aspects. And the rest I feel I addressed above.

Cheers to you for your empathic engagement.