Creator of Darknoth Chronicles's page

I appreciate everyone's response. When writing your own world there is a stopping point on what new or recycled content one can add in before the pages are no longer in order, so I was checking the opinions of others to get a feel of what people expect to see down the road for Remastered Pathfinder. Given that Player Core added more dragons are we likely to see more dragonblood lineages and if so how is Paizo likely to handle updating that content? In the previous editions how many dragonblood lineages have been available?

Something to replace the Ancestry Guide seems somewhat likely since people love ancestries and there's tons of them that could use moving to the remaster (and also having some stuff added). Beyond that I doubt we'll get a "Player Core 3" since the biggest candidates for that are going to be in Impossible Magic.

.

Can you tell me anything about the Ancestry Guide?
I had not heard about that book before. I just looked it up and understood that it was a Glorian specific book but obviously ancestries, heritages, etc. could get pulled into a separate book for more general use. I see several of the listed ancestries made it already into the Remastered Player Core 2 book.

Given that I don't know a lot about the Pathfinder system, how book releases have been done over the years, company goals, and so forth I am trying to remain open without writing myself into a corner too much. I don't need to include everything in my world, but I want to be able to consider as much as possible before I can't go back and redo my efforts.

The format they have expressed other player options would come out would be Rules books such as Guns & Gears, Dark Archive, Howl of the Wild, and Rage of Elements type books that would have a theme and would have a host of player options, along with information on how to run such themed campaigns. They will assuredly continue to make new classes as time goes on, so you may want/need to keep that in mind for your setting, but you could easily need to have some sort of supplement explaining how that class fits into your campaign setting, especially if your campaign setting has some different mechanics that might be baselines for that universe, which might be a little different than Golarion.

Even the rulebooks have a lot of Lost Omens setting information in them, but it isn't the focus of it. There will also be plenty of player options in many of the Lost Omen lines of books that comes out, including things like Ancestries, Equipment, Spells, Schools, Domains, Feats, Archetypes and such.

Implications was that Players Core 1 & 2, and the GM Core and Monster Core are going to be the COREs. It wouldn't surprise me to potentially see them keep coming out with Monster Cores perhaps, but I'm not positive that is their intent, or not.

I know we will always have the themed books and for the right people and the right campaign they are nice. For myself, when I played D&D I found myself never using the theme books except for the basics (spells, classes, that sort of thing). The more specific themed ideas were rarely applied. Given that I am working on a world setting I find that theme books are simply not going to be useful and I chose to break away from the extra expense of buying books I would rarely use, a choice I made when I stop playing D&D and started playing Pathfinder (shortly after the Remaster version came out).

I am sure we will see more monster core books and I do like to purchase and use them. It is easy to swap monsters out and update encounter tables, add them to wilderness descriptions, that sort of thing since I use a spiral bind which enables pages to be removed and added at will, great for correcting typos.

Eventually I will print in hardcover and with that the deal is sealed, I can't go back and change, add, or remove things which makes me think ahead about things.

I hope your right, it would add a serious complication to my book layout.

I would like the opinion of others on this topic. I have the Remastered Player Core and Player Core 2 rulebooks and am working on a world book of my own creation. Given the vast amount of books available for past editions is there the likelihood that a 3rd Player Core book or its equivalent of more general information such as more backgrounds, ancestries, heritages, lineages, classes, and archetypes would appear later on enabling the Remastered version to catch-up with previous editions? Since more backgrounds, ancestries, heritages, lineages, classes, and archetypes appear in more specific topic books, is Paizo likely to mine them and put out a 3rd Player Core book or its equivalent? I ask because I will have to figure out how to include space in my documents for additional Player Core books. I am not interested in buying topic specific books to get all classes, archetypes, backgrounds, heritages, lineages, etc. to acquire everything, but rather the general all scoping books are my preference. Your thoughts are appreciated!

FROM THE STORE PAGE FOR PLAYER CORE 2:

Quote:

Expanded ancestry options include the catfolk, gnoll, hobgoblin, kobold, lizardfolk, ratfolk, and tengu, alongside three versatile heritages—the dhampir, duskwalker, and an all-new heritage debuting in this volume!

I HOPE THIS IS HELPFUL.

Yes, it was helpful, thank you.

Creator of Darknoth Chronicles wrote:

Dancing Wind wrote:

WHY ARE YOU SHOUTING?

How was I shouting?

Your thread title is in all capitals. Harkening back to old-school bulletin board chat rooms of the mid 90's, typing in all caps is considered shouting.

Well that's pretty stupid. It capitalized because its the title of the thread. Some people have too much time on their hands if this is what they have to complain about.

PC2 Description wrote:

Expanded ancestry options include the catfolk, gnoll, hobgoblin, kobold, lizardfolk, ratfolk, and tengu, alongside three versatile heritages—the dhampir, duskwalker, and an all-new heritage debuting in this volume!

So those are all going to be included at a minimum, it may not be the full list of options but those at a minimum will be part of the PC2 though I suspect we shouldn't expect any additional ones despite the wording not being airtight that these will be the only ones published with it.

Thank you very much.

WHY ARE YOU SHOUTING?

How was I shouting?

Do we have any word on which ancestries will appear (if any) in the Remastered Player's Core 2 book? In the GM Core, chapter 3, entitled Age of Lost Omens they mention the following ancestries: Catfolk, Kholo, kobolds, Lizardfolk, Ratfolk, and Tengu. Did any of these or any other ancestries for that matter make a big enough impact to be included in the Remastered books? I am making some changes from D&D to Pathfinder for my world and am trying to get ahead of things by determining which ancestries have settled in different regions.

Are there any REMASTERED versions of the Mirror Image or Stinking Cloud spells?

The number of random encounters for Remastered Pathfinder can be found on page 209, under Random Encounters.

You roll at the beginning of the day, it lists the flat check DC you roll against. If you get a critical success, they have another encounter. You roll for the type of encounter (harmless, hazard, or creature). You use the table of encounters you made, or you choose/make on up.

I take this to mean you have one encounter per day, and a second encounter if the result is a critical success.

It does not address factors such as the time of day, nor if the characters are in a civilized area or the wilderness. I used their rules as a base idea, then modified it according to other factors such as the region (realm, wilderness) further subdivided those areas, and modified by the time of day.

Page 206 in the GM Core Remastered book mentions harmless encounters. A very brief suggestion of what these would be is given. This thread serves as a place for everyone to chime in and list their ideas of harmless encounters that benefit the game. The few harmless encounters mentioned in the book include:

Roadside shrine
Taking to strangers
distant electrical storm

Please add to this list.

Awesome sounds like I made the right decision a couple of weeks ago to switch to Pathfinder. I'm loving the Player Core and GM Core so far and am switching my D&D files over to Pathfinder. I have to wait on my random encounter tables to some degree until the Monster Core arrives.

I understand that there will be a second Remastered Players Core eventually coming out. Does anyone know when? How about the monster books other than the first, will they get the Remastered treatment as well?

With the assistance of other posters the dragon people ancestry is 90% complete and a huge success extending beyond my expectation. Thank you in particular goes out to Teridax for solving the primary obstacle.

Removed some baiting and harassing posts. Please be civil to each or this thread will get locked.

I understand completely, however please remove the post that began things.

It may not necessarily be pleasant to hear, but I'm siding fully with WatersLethe on this. To address the feat directly, casting dragon form once per day as an innate arcane spell I think would be a simple and appropriate 17th-level ancestry feat for a humanoid dragon ancestry, and when trying to come up with a new game element, I'd recommend looking for existing game mechanics that fit the bill first. Pathfinder 2e generally avoids modifying player character ability scores beyond the usual ability boosts, because doing so is generally messy and breaks part of the game's math, chiefly by suddenly making a character extremely good at many kinds of skill checks, attack rolls, and saving throws for the comparatively small investment of a single feat in this case.

To answer the questions in the OP directly:

As shown above, dragon form uses roughly the damage of a young dragon's jaws, claws, tail, and breath weapon, so that should be fine for a dragon transformation (at 17th level).

Temporarily becoming Large is completely fine and exists for many existing effects, including spells like enlarge.

I would say most characters would actually see some pretty significant changes to their ability scores: any caster or non-Strength character would suddenly find themselves with an absolutely massive Strength increase, whereas Strength-based characters who often dump Dexterity would instead gain a lot of Dex.

As shown with dragon form, a base Speed of 40 feet and a fly Speed of 100 feet should be perfectly fine.

Once more, I would strongly recommend an innate 1/day dragon form for the suggested feat, as I believe it is a perfect fit for what the feat is trying to do. The spell comes pre-packaged with modified AC, temporary hit points, damage resistance, speeds, enhanced senses, and tailor-made attacks, breath weapons, and special abilities for every single current...

Thank you very much, that was the answer I was looking for. Very much appreciated.

1. How long does the dragon transformation last?

Probably useable only once a week and lasting a specific number of rounds, maybe between 5-10 something like that. Also I made it clear that it would be a 13th or 17th level ancestry feat, most likely a 17th level feat.

2. I cannot emphasize enough how much I do not recommend going down the route of replacing ability scores. This type of transformation should be handled by a Battle Form type ability. See Dragon Form for reference. If the feat gave you a 1/day Dragon Form casting at 17th level that would be about on par with other 17th level ancestry feats.

Yet, it makes no sense to have the build of a dragon and not the physical stats. Given that we are talking about ancestry feat available at either 13th or 17th level (leaning towards 17th level), and probably useable once a week, and the fact that a 17th level character is probably NOT GOING TO BENEFIT from the attributes, I don't see follow your reasoning. Also, I have no idea what you mean by a Battle Form type of Ability or Dragon Form, as I'm new to the game.

3. Look into the Battlezoo Dragon Ancestry to see how they handled playable dragons. In fact, you would likely be better off just using Battlezoo Dragons as a base and reflavoring as necessary. This ancestry was written by Mark Seifter who was one of the lead developers of PF2, and is well balanced.

I have no idea what the Battlezoo Dragon Ancestry is that your talking about or where to find it.

4. If you're looking to pack a lot of power into an ancestry, you should strongly consider making an Archetype to go with it so you can buy powerful abilities with Class Feats. Ancestries have an upper limit of power that they can grant.

Well first I have to find out what an Archytype is.

Sibelius Eos Owm, thank you for your time and comments, they have been useful. I have pretty much finished the first draft of the feats and once I get the Monster Core Remastered I will do some rewriting to make sure that things match up with that, plus make some small alterations here and there.

After reviewing the claw and jaw damage between white and red dragons I feel there is to far of a spread between them and will propbably opt to have a standard amount of damage for characters beginning with the low end of the white dragons. The character's that take this ancestry will NEVER be true dragons afterall and as you have read it is a momentary feat ability, probably useable once per week to begin with. Then as play testing ensues I can see if there is room to increase damage based on the type that the PCs are doing with their fighter types and attack spells.

Again thank you for your time.

This is a very cool idea! Personally, I feel like one-to-one replacing character stats with monster stats is not a design philosophy I would prefer, but it's not up to me what kind of odd rules interactions you embrace in your homebrew. It does create some niche interactions (like what happens when you add handwraps to that claw damage?)

I like the monster stat design as it gave me a lot to work with when coming up with feats for the ancestry. It also fits the world quite well.

One potential problem I notice is that the attribute replacement strangely disincentivises players from leveling up in Str if they can get away with it--a wizard becoming a dragon stands to gain a lot more power than a fighter (admittedly ignoring for now how likely they are to use the stat). As you say, though, I would be surprised if these attributes gave a notable boost to anything but Str (especially at 17th level).

The use of the feat would be like once a week and then only for a limited time. As soon as the ability ends or they end it they return to their normal dragon person. I'm sure someone would want to use it strictly for the boost in attribute (like Strength) say to carry or lift something temporarily.

On the other hand, the strength bonus likely doesn't matter much because the jaw and claw attacks you're giving don't use the Str score (since monsters stat block math is different from player math).

As you can tell, I took the stats straight from the monster. The attribute bonus would be already worked into the stats.

Somebody else can do the math what a dedicated martial's typical weapon damage numbers look like compared to these attacks, but be aware that a character dedicated to using their dragon attacks would likely stop at two, since by this level they should have other tactics than throwing 3rd iterative attacks at MAP-10 (though if those claws are agile, maybe...)

My experiences with the game are minimal at this point because I am busy rewriting files from D&D to Pathfinder. Thus, I am really uncertain how much damage a high level fighter or wizard would do. If anyone has experienced high level play in Pathfinder, please speak up and let me know if the damage listed is not close to what a high level character can dish out in one round. Is it to low, to high, or reasonably close to the mark?

I did not understand what you meant by MAP -10. The claws are not intended to be overly agile compared to a normal character. I do not want players doubling up on held magical items plus dragon attacks at the same time. I'd like it to be one or the other. Spells would also be out of the question as they would require gestures in which the dragon form could not accomplish since the spell they will have is not innate.

Finally probably my biggest, concern only because I don't have a survey of all the dragon numbers in front of me, but it's likely that some dragons will be just stronger than others--i.e. same as how the mighty red dragon is much more powerful than the white dragon is now--and a player who chooses the wrong dragon colour/type would simply end up with inferior benefits from this feat.

Yes, there definitely is a difference in damage that claw and jaw attacks do. The range I gave with chromatic dragons is from the weakest dragon (white to the most powerful (red). My choices are to go with the damage the actual dragon type does for claw and jaw attacks, change the damage if it is too powerful, or make it the same all across the board regardless of which type of dragon you model your character after. Game balance favors giving everyone the same damage regardless of dragon type. Game thematic favors making them more like the dragon itself and thus damage varies. Also bear in mind all the other feats are centered around the dragons as well, and only some of these feats are available to certain types of dragons. For example, ice climbing is a feat for characters modeled after white dragon while amphibious is strictly a feat one could take only if you modeled the character after the black dragon. Other feats are more universal because the abilities are that way for the dragons, such as Arcane Innate Spells or frightful Presence f

My preference would be that the dragon type dictates things like elemental types and the available choices of movement speeds, but the actual numbers are homogenized between dragons so that each play on an equal footing.

Yea, I don't know which is more important, equal footing with damage or making each character more like the individualist dragons. Players would be well aware that certain dragon types are going to be able to score greater claw and jaw damage.

White dragons do: Jaw Damage of 2d8+9 piercing plus 1d6 cold; and claw damage of e 2d6+9 slashing.

It might be possible to give the feat sooner to characters that want a weaker dragon color and those wanting the more powerful dragon have to wait until their higher level. At this point I am only considering this feat to be available at 13th or 17th level, depending upon how much it needs nerfing or boosting as compared to characters fighting with magical weapons, armor, etc. I'm uncertain of the usage dragons can have for magical items. Probably some things work, others do not, maybe a case-by-case call depending upon the magical item. For example, armor, shields, swords are not going to be useable in dragon form but a ring?

To replace the dragonborn in my world I am developing my own race of humanoid dragons to fill the necessary gap. Dragonborn were particularly important in my world and thus need to be redone. I'm not interested in doing a quick redo of the same creature but rather something far more interesting and world focused. The description is complete and now I am concentrating on ancestral feats. Being new to the game I am questioning my game balance and ideas and am interested in community opinions.

The feat in particular that I am looking at is currently intended for 17th level but depending upon opinions given it could be for 13th level. It likely would be the only feat available for the level. I fully expect to have to make adjustments once the Monster Core Remastered book comes out and we know more about dragons. If a dragon PC ancestry is eventually published in Players Core 2 then I would most likely use that or keep both.

So far here is what I have for the 13th or 17th level ancestry feat. I am only showing stats for 2nd edition chromatic dragons. Modifications are expected based on whatever dragon types they will give us in the Monster Core Remastered book. But for now, this is something to work off of.

DRAGON TRANSFORMATION
FEAT 13th or 17

As your ancestors were once able to do, you can transform into a young dragon corresponding with your draconic heritage. You acquire the dragon’s attributes of Str, Dex, and Con, however if you already have a modifier equal to or higher, than that given below, it remains unchanged. Your Int, Wis, and Cha is unaffected by the transformation. Your size increases to large and you gain the dragon’s speed, and damage for jaws and claw attacks as shown below.

So here are my concerns that I'm looking for opinions on. Basically, are they too weak overpowered, and what can be done to make them balanced. The feat below would probably be offered at 17th level, but maybe 13th level depending upon community feedback.

1. Using the dragon colors (which I realize may be completely changed in the Monster Core Remastered book) the type of dragon your heritage corresponds to makes a difference in your dragon stats. Thus, not every character will receive exactly the same benefit from this feat.

2. Is the damage output for 1 bite and 2 claw attacks too much at 13th or 17th level?

3. When the character transforms into a dragon their size becomes large. Will this be problematic?

4. Their strength modifier becomes +5 or +6, Dexterity modifier becomes +1, +2, or +3, and Constitution modifier becomes +3 or +4. My opinion is that most characters around 13th or 17th level will see very little change in their attribute scores (except probably strength. So, you see any problems here?

5. Speed, there are the following speeds for dragons. Speed (foot), Burrow, Fly, Swim, Ice Climb. Foot, burrow, and ice speeds are 30 or 40. Flying speed is 80, 100, or 120.

6. Jaw damage ranges between 2d8+9 P plus 1d6 cold to 2d12+12 P 2d6 fire. Any problems here for a 13th or 17th level character? Keep in mind I assume they would get 2 claw attacks and one bite per round. It would be possible to say they get less, or each takes more than one action to maintain game balance. I am debating if I should remove the extra damage for cold, fire, poison, etc.

7. Claw damage ranges between 2d6+9 S to 2d10+12 S, again any problems here for a 13th or 17th level character? Keep in mind I assume they would get 2 claw attacks and one bite per round. It would be possible to say they get less or each takes more than one action to maintain game balance.

At this point I thought it best to not give tail, wing, and horn damage. Other dragon related abilities such as resistance, frightful presence, heightened smell, would be offered as lower-level ancestry feats. Low light vision would be offered as part of the ancestry abilities. They would receive 10 hit points.

What are the names of the eight dragons they have mentioned for Remastered?

Ok, so it should be 10+proficiency (which is your level in addition to +2 trained, +4 expert etc.), plus your attribute bonus.

Ancestry feats DCs generally scale with either class DC or spell DC, whichever is higher.

Can you be more specific on how this is calculated? Like a few examples?

Going from D&D to Pathfinder I am having to relearn a lot of things. Today I am reimagining the dragonborn and making them dragonfolk. I have come up with a description and very pleased with the outcome. However, as I work on Ancestral feats for them, I am unsure of how to calculate the DC necessary.

At this point my understanding is that it is 10 plus the appropriate ability modifier. I see the GM Cor Remastered book has charts for Simple DC's, those by level, and DC adjustments as well.

The particular ancestry feat I am developing is to create something similar to a dragon's Frightful Appearance ability. Given that dragonfolk will be a PC race, would the DC be calculated as 10 plus ability modifier? Or am I missing something here?

Creator of Darknoth Chronicles wrote:

Can someone enlighten me a bit more on this topic. I certainly can see how the Crafting skill would apply to traps.

Well, it's definitely not an arcane knowledge and is open to all as most of the game rules:

Snarecrafter Dedication
Snare Crafting
Snares
And yes, players definitely can use snares to protect their hideouts (but mostly permanent ones, from the Snare Crafting feat/normal Craft activity).

Are these official rules or homebrew someone put together? Just curious. Looks like someone put some thought into it.

Creator of Darknoth Chronicles wrote:

Each dwarven ancestry gets one ability and these particular dwarves are good at building traps of mechanical nature to protect their home valuables, businesses, and mines. These dwarves will be available as PCs.

Also, this sounds a lot like the Kobold: Snare Setter ancestry feat.

Which is a good thing. You can use that as a basis for creating a similar ability for your Dwarves. Though, you might pick one - either make it have a prerequisite of already being trained in Crafting, or have taking the feat give trained proficiency in Crafting.

Thank you, I will look into the kobold snare ability. It might transfer quite well to the dwarves. As of now I simply stated the DC for making, setting, noticing, and disarming traps/snares is reduced by -2.

When I think of a snare, I imagine a fairly simple woodland traps. Can someone tell the difference between Pathfinder snares and traps> Being new to Pathfinder I only have the two Remastered books, in which snares are not discussed.

I am rewriting the dwarven races that I created to make them work for Pathfinder ancestry rules rather than D&D races. Each dwarven ancestry gets one ability and these particular dwarves are good at building traps of mechanical nature to protect their home valuables, businesses, and mines. These dwarves will be available as PCs.

As I transfer my documents from D&D to Pathfinder, I am looking for ways to retain as much of my lore and rules as possible, thus I'm looking for compatible Pathfinder rules for traps or snares. I find it disturbing if PCs cannot create traps to protect their castles or other places of importance.

Can someone enlighten me a bit more on this topic. I certainly can see how the Crafting skill would apply to traps.

So, I read the section in the GM Core about hazards, particularly that regarding traps. No where can I find guidelines on how characters or NPCs actually go about constructing a mechanical trap. I searched skills and feats and could not find anything either.

I am likely to require an INT check with an appropriate DC to allow a PC or NPC actually go about constructing a mechanical trap. However, if this is covered in the rules and I overlooked it, I would love to know. Is there something I overlooked in my reading?

Ok thanks, I saw the heading of the thread and took it to mean that if a person was making 3rd party products its where to ask about legal details.

I take it that this is a completely ignored area of the message boards. It's a shame. This part of the message boards is so valuable to people wanting to create compliant products that support the Pathfinder game at the same time.

Thank you.

Using the REMASTERED RULES, does a Dromaar (half-orc) gain an orcish heritage at character creation? The rules say.....

"Orcish strength emboldens your bloodline, you have a green tinge to your skin and OTHER INDICATORS of orc heritage. You gain the orc trait, and low light vision,. When you gain an ancestry feat, you can choose from dromaar and orc feats in addition to those from your ancestry."

Does the phrase "OTHER INDICATORS" mean they have an orc heritage or does is it just referencing non-mechanical features such as appearance?

Creator of Darknoth Chronicles wrote:

It just seems wrong to have a XP system that doesn't progressively slow down between levels. I have to house rule this one because I want characters to be played for 5+ years before maxing out in levels. Finishing a character off in 1-2 years (potentially reaching 20th level) is just not for me. My players invest in their characters way to much to come to an early retirement. If they want to retire a character on their own, that's up to them, but I came from the old AD&D XP system where we played characters for 3 years before reaching 12th level, and that was playing a minimum of 1-2 times a week, consistently since it was back in junior high/high school.

Actually it does slow down because an Extreme encounter at level 1 will not be an Extreme encounter anymore at higher levels and thus will not contribute the same amount of XP to reaching the next level.

Not so sure about that. If I understand the XP system in Pathfinder the awards given scale with how challenged the characters are. An extreme encounter (say Party level +4) at 1st level is worth 160 XP per character.

An extreme encounter (again Party level +4) at 16th level is worth 160 XP per character. You still need 1,000 XP per level whether your 1st level or 16th level, so the value and thus rate of advancement is EXACTLY the same. The variability comes in what other type of awards are given for accomplishments and hazards, and whether or not the GM gives out the same number of encounters valued at the same rate as previous levels, which is extremely UNLIKELY to happen unless the Gm really likes to keep it math focused and control EVERYTHING related to advancement. Which as a DM (soon to be GM) I DO NOT like controlling things to that extent. I enjoy some randomness to my game.

I'm not criticizing the Pathfinder system, just pointing out my understanding of how the rules work after reading them. Play styles have changed over the years for some people and those that never played the slow advancement of AD&D and 2nd edition don't have a point of reference. Times change, styles change, but not all people change with the times. Those that played may or may not like the crawl speed of advancement.

Financial awards are also based on the same GM control which is way too much for my style. I'll be incorporating random treasure charts based on the Pathfinder 2 rules. It will have to remain balanced with my house ruling XP like we had in the old days.

I designed a new XP chart for my upcoming Pathfinder game which uses the idea of each level taking longer with greater amounts required between levels (like D&D). However, I'm retaining the idea Pathfinder 2 has regarding subtracting the amount of XP required for a level, thus reverting back to zero XP plus anything extra that was carried over for the new level, like the Player Core book provides. I did like that part of the system.

I will use the XP values for encounters given in the GM Core book as well. Thus, my house rule XP system will not utilize the extremes XP values D&D uses for encounters. The advancement between levels will become noticeably slowed down and if the numbers I put in place on my XP chart don't work quite at the right pace they will get adjusted until I get the desired pace.

In my experience with 2e APs, 3-5 sessions per level. Where sessions are generally in the 3.5-4.5 hour range has been consistent with multiple GMs/groups across 5 APs, also matchers experience with stand alone adventures.

Heavily RP focused groups will be a the slower end of that estimate, heavily min/max combated focus groups at the shorter end.

Yes, I believe that's about what the books say to expect as well. I hated it when in 3rd edition WOTC changed the expectations of level advancement.

Creator of Darknoth Chronicles wrote:

It just seems wrong to have a XP system that doesn't progressively slow down between levels. I have to house rule this one because I want characters to be played for 5+ years before maxing out in levels. Finishing a character off in 1-2 years (potentially reaching 20th level) is just not for me. My players invest in their characters way to much to come to an early retirement. If they want to retire a character on their own, that's up to them, but I came from the old AD&D XP system where we played characters for 3 years before reaching 12th level, and that was playing a minimum of 1-2 times a week, consistently since it was back in junior high/high school.

Actually it does slow down because an Extreme encounter at level 1 will not be an Extreme encounter anymore at higher levels and thus will not contribute the same amount of XP to reaching the next level.

I find it unlikely that it would slow down enough to suit my style of play given the descriptions in the books. If a campaign was played once a week for 4-6 hours per game, for a group of four characters, how long do you estimate they would reach level 5, 10, 15, and 20? Just curious about other people's play experience compared to mine.

It just seems wrong to have a XP system that doesn't progressively slow down between levels. I have to house rule this one because I want characters to be played for 5+ years before maxing out in levels. Finishing a character off in 1-2 years (potentially reaching 20th level) is just not for me. My players invest in their characters way to much to come to an early retirement. If they want to retire a character on their own, that's up to them, but I came from the old AD&D XP system where we played characters for 3 years before reaching 12th level, and that was playing a minimum of 1-2 times a week, consistently since it was back in junior high/high school.

Divine attributes are used for exactly one background (raised by belief) to determine the attribute bonus it gives.

Awesome, thanks for clearing that up for me. I can continue without any difficulty, appreciate it.

The deities in the 2nd edition Pathfinder Remastered book pages 35-39 each have a stat block and in that they list a divine attribute. No where in the books can I find what that means, affect it has on the game, if any. Can someone explain to me what these are, their purpose and hopefully where to read about them. I am rewriting my deities for my world and am following the format provided, however without knowing what divine attributes are...well it makes it kind of hard.

You might email licensing@paizo.com.

As is recommended in the Pathfinder Compatibility licensing information.

Most of that page still looks like it is referencing the OGL license and needs updated, but the email address should be accurate.

I did send them an email a few weeks ago, they never responded back.

My understanding is that any reference to Golorian, Age of Lost Worlds is not open game content. No problem. However, in the Pathfinder 2 GM Core book chapter 3 is about AGE OF LOST OMENS and this is where Paizo lists the planes: ex. Plane of Fire, Plane of Air, Astral Plane, Ethereal Plane, Elysium, Abaddon, Hell, Heaven, Nirvana, and so on.

Are the names (titles) of these planes copyrighted and therefore cannot be mentioned at all in a 3rd party publishing based on the Pathfinder rules? I find it difficult to believe that anyone can copyright these names given that they appear in ancient texts and religions throughout the real world that have existed for centuries. For example, Christianity uses the terms Heaven, Hell, and Abaddon within the context of their religion. Yet these appear under the Glorian Age of Lost Omens section of the book.

As a planned to be third party publisher, using Pathfinder rules for my world, what legal use do I have of the planes provided in the Pathfinder game system?

My goal is to produce a product and write it in a way that is 100% COMPATIBLE with Paizo licensing but I have specific questions about things. So is there a place on the message board forums that the Pathfinder STAFF MEMBERS answer specific questions to avoid copyright infringement.

Question: With the ORC and Pathfinder 2 license where can I go to ask SPECIFIC questions about what material is open game content and what is not?

For example, my understanding is that any reference to Golorian , Age of Lost Worlds is not open game content. No problem. However, in the Pathfinder 2 GM Core book chapter 3 is about AGE OF LOST OMENS and this is where Paizo lists the planes: ex. Plane of Fire, Plane of Air, Astral Plane, Ethereal Plane, Elysium, Abaddon, Hell, Heaven, Nirvana, and so on.

Are the names (titles) of these planes copyrighted and therefore cannot be mentioned at all? I find it difficult to believe that any company can copyright these names given that they appear in ancient texts and religions throughout the real world that have existed for centuries. For example, Christianity uses the terms Heaven, Hell, and Abaddon within the context of their religion. Yet these appear under the Glorian Age of Lost Omens section of the book.

My goal is to produce a product and write it in a way that is 100% COMPATIBLE with Paizo licensing but I have specific questions about things. So is there a place on the message board forums that the Pathfinder STAFF MEMBERS answer specific questions to avoid copyright infringement.

Is this the appropriate place to ask specific questions of Pathfinder 2 licensing material? Such as what is useable and what is not? If not, can someone direct me to the correct place?

I would probably just give her occultism or arcana, giving a specific lore as a divine skill doesn't feel great because of how narrow it is. To give you an idea there is one thing you can worship to get a lore skill and its whatever lore you want and even then it lets you pick performance instead.

I looked through the deities in the Players Core book and didn't see any that gave Lore as a divine skill. Which being are you referring to? I'd like to read on it.

Is there anything in Pathfinder that is the equivalent to knowledge of Geography? If there is not using the Lore skill is simple enough. However it just seems like Geography would have been covered in the skills or feats. Am I overlooking a rule or ability regarding Geography Knowledge?

No, you cannot upgrade a trained skill to expert with those free trained skill options. "Trained" is what you get

Ok, thank you very much.