Crouza's page

Unicore wrote:

I think there is a misconception that casters can’t use weapons at all.

It's not a misconception - it's a statement on the needs of a folklore ninja, which none of the existing options you mention capture on their balance of specific kinds of magic, weapon use and trickery because, well, it's a niche that is very authentically Japanese and everything you've mentioned are all very Western takes on the concept.

Sure, you can cast invisibility on a rogue. The 3.5e ninja is exactly that class, even. It's also not the folklore ninja, and I feel like PF2e should make a better try of capturing the authentic culture - one that's actually fairly tight knit, because it all came out at the tail end of the 19th century and the start of the 20th century - than just saying 'but you can cast magic, stealth and use shurikens, why aren't you happy?'

Paizo can also just not do a ninja, of course, that's their right. But morso than the samurai, the ninja is a bunch of puzzle pieces that don't cohere well (admittedly, we're also missing e.g. the Chinese strategist ala Kongming who controls the weather and constructs formations of the eight elements to coordinate armies, for another example of an Eastern popular character archetype on melding natural magic and warfare that the Western sphere doesn't grok at all)

The difference betwen the ninja/strategist and a rogue/commander witha druid archetype is that the ninja/strategist controls nature to sneak/command, while the archetyped options controls nature and also sneak/command, but they're separate buckets that occasionally synergises. The understanding is very different. It's Eastern philosophy that even the five-element monk is tepidly skimming over because it isn't very prevalant in the West

Which ninja are you trying to be though when you talk about "folklore ninja"? Do you mean like Jiraiya with his affinity for toads and very high magic arts? Do you mean the version of Ninja's from the Iga Clan whose techniques were mostly misdirection, acting, and information gathering with a slant towards religious zealotry? Do you mean like legendary figures like Hattori Hanzo, who was primarily a samurai who used information gathering to help the Tokugawa?

Again, to reiterate what has been covered in this thread already. Everyone has a different bespoke idea of ninja in their head. And just going "Well make the one from folklore" doesn't help with even the original sources and folklore contradict one another and expectations. Hell, one ninja named Sugitani Zenjūbō was famous for camping in a tree for 3 days with a rifle and trying to shoot Oda Nobunaga dead. Does this mean we need ninjas to be skilled in firearms and get bespoke firearm feats as well? Or should we just use existing classes and archetypes to fullfill that fantasy instead, as has been suggested already?

I'm fairly certain the iconic Japanese sword user that does those things use a greatsword... I do agree that a lot of people have attached things to samurai that don't even match how they're 'properly' used, as a catch-all for 'sword thing in East Asia' (extra funny when the katana, like the longsword for knights, wasn't even their main weapon).

Roronoa Zoro comes to mind.

Yeah. I do think iaido can just be handled by an archetype - basic enabling with a minor bonus and then feats for various fancy attacks. (Please?)

Switch-hitting has long been a weakness of the system, but I'd argue it's more keeping multiple weapons up to par where you run into issues with resources. You're always making sacrifices somewhere to get it going. Finesse weapons are weaker, but otherwise you have to double dip STR/DEX and that's even worse, etc.

Ninja type stuff exists in many classes. Monks get wall running and water walking, etc. and can do some of the supernatural agility things. Rogues get a touch of that at high levels, and are fantastic at the assassination angle. I think Kineticist actually touches on some of the more magic ninja stuff, if you want someone who fights by chaining fireballs into faces and such.

The best thing about an iaido focused archetype is it can pull double duty with the quick draw gunslingers, or make Alchemists and thrown builds very happy.

Be aware, all, that this is a debate which has already been hashed out at length several times before, and likely will be again. Some of it is lost because blog posts lost their comments sections, but I can still see evidence in my posting history.

I know it's fun to gripe and feel like been heard, but I don't imagine digital ink spilled here is going to mark a significant footnote in the history of Ninja & Samurai as pertains to PF2e. The question of why they don't currently exist (and probably won't soon) has been addressed.

We are all, of course, free to continue the debate (don't think me hypocritical if I'm still here next week on page 3 of this thread; I just failed the Will save) but I don't think it will have been time well-spent at the end of the day, so here's your complementary check-in before running up that hill to move the flag another inch this way or that.

I'd rather this thread be hijacked by people showing off their concepts for Samurai and Ninja tbh. At least something productive would come out of that.

Since I threw my hat in with the laughing shadow magus ninja, might as well cover a samurai idea I've been itching to make. I'd plant to pick Commander and make an older samurai who was injured in battle, vaguely based on fictionalized shingen takeda, and who uses a war fan as their banner to signal my party members for my tactics.

Also, people in the diaspora are going to have a very different experience than people living in Japan. It's very easy to think ninjas are silly to worry about when you are a Japanese person surrounded by other Japanese people all the time - a Japanese-American nerd who's been the only Asian person in every gaming group they've ever been in is going to have had more bad experiences and times they've felt humiliated or exoticized or just gotten constant little reminders that their favorite hobby was heavily shaped by writers who would have called them a slur if they ever met. There is a lot of writing by Asian-American ttrpg nerds about this exact topic. Because again - no one in this thread is saying "nobody should EVER play a ninja or samurai!", they're saying 'you don't need a special option for playing a ninja or samurai, you can do that already.'

My own play group heard I was making a ronin style drifter for our first pf 2e game and wouldn't stop saying "Honor-Abu!" every chance they got, and doing that specific stereotype voice. These are people I genuinely know are good people, this shit is just that pervasive in the space because it's rare for anyone to call people on this shit, and when they do, they get absolutely drowned out/swarmed by everyone else wanting to do the "rikey-flied-lice" accent because "its' funny" and "its harmless".

I think part of the issue is that Paizo is pretty clear that people with full casting potential shouldn't be that capable in melee combat, just for niche protection for fighters etc. So a Wizard-Ninja runs into that issue, and I'm wondering if you couldn't just do this with a Magus or specifically "what tools would we need to give the Magus for this to work."

Now there's certainly room for wave-casters in Occult, Primal, and Divine but I'm not sure if any of those dip too much into the ninja fantasy.

I don't know man, Laughing Shadow Dex Magus or Vindicator Ranger feel pretty close to what I'd imagine a caster ninja to be like. Laughing shadow for the high magic, teleporting around, slap a person with a chidori type of ninja. And Vindicator for if you want a more skill focused, tricksy, magic-as-a-tool type of pragmatic ninja.

OP really did the equivalent of setting down two towers mid-read to write "Whose replacing aragorn now that he fell off a cliff and died?"

Eagerly looking forward to PF3.5

This time we'll definitely make casters feel strong while also keeping them balanced with non-casters. Trust.

The primary difference is that dnd went through multiple name changes that didn't stick to arrive here. Dndnext, OneDnd, Dnd 2024, and now 5.5, and it's had to go through that painful journey only because it's not simply stuck with a name the fanbase can retain/name that carries traction with the audience.

Pathfinder doesn't have this problem. There's no clarity to be gained from switching from Remaster and Legacy to 2.5. The example you listed is still going to exist of people asking "What does the 2.5 mean? Do I need to multiply it 2 and a half times?" and getting that question answered. Like, it's literally going to be exactly the same thing, and all you're doing is burning money on redoing all the covers and book texts in an environment where you're already needing to raise prices to keep the lights on.

It's good to see this get responded to so quickly. I know one friend of mine who will be particularly happy.

Slayer I'm definitely going to lean into a blood magic angle and make them basically a blood hunter. Maybe with a slant in monster anthropology for some good flavor.

Daredevil is going to be just a really fun kinetic build for me. Someone with a heavy weapon swinging themselves around the battlefield, doing trips and shoves while being extra mobile sounds great.

Im honestly prepared to end up really liking the Daredevil. My reaction to the Guardian was similar when it came out. "This is just the champion again, why is it needed". And lo and behold, it ended up becoming a great class.

I see a lot of potential in the Daredevil to be a class that really increases the value of combat maneuvers. A class that wants to deal a lot of attacks in a turn, instead of the usually "1 big hit" style of many current martial classes.

There's potential there to make something rather underutilized. And if the playtest doesn't provide that, then I see no reason not to leave feedback that pushes in that direction.

Ravingdork wrote:

Started stream. Heard "new classes" instead of "much needed support for existing classes." Closed stream.

It's especially frustrating because these aren't even new thematic/mechanical niches. iPhone behavior.

Like, if they're better than Swash and Ranger, then that's two obsolete classes. But if they're not better, then what's the point? Very lose-lose for Paizo.

Not to bring up that other elfgame or anything, but they might've had the right idea with their pretty robust and modular subclass system.

Pathfinder players will never escape the "Why play X class and not fighter?" discourse.

What could a Shifter archetype or a MC Shifter dedication (if a Class) bring that the Druid MC Dedication (Untamed Form) cannot ?

This might be the biggest point against the return of the Shifter.

Fully focused on shape shifting that works differently than the form spells that druid does. Druid and other similar classes that get access to Form spells require them to balance against the wide array of options being a full casters offers them.

Take that budgetary power, and put it instead entirely upon shapeshifting. Unlimited form and duration at the cost of the same explosive power that a spell rank might offer, as well as feats focused on improving yourself.

Paths that can focus on forms of Elements, Spirits, Eldritch Creatures, and Beasts, to give you a large pool of different ways to full-fill the fantasy of a martial who changes their form to fight.

With the Hellfire Crisis, I think a book on the outer planes might be worth exploring. Plus it'd open up room to finally do a chapter on Planes as they are in Starfinder, once Pathfinder 2E has all of its planes covered in detail.

Though I'm not sure what classes would be thematic for that.

Though I do have one brief idea for a new class idea. So perhaps a divine bounded caster like a magus. Except they are more dependent on an infusion of latent power like a sorcerer or oracle, something that Nephilim might gravitate to. Yet neither would they be godlike like an exemplar. And while Battle Harbinger Cleric does exist, that still requires you to worship a god, whereas in this case, you don't need to follow a god. Limited spell capability, but their powers are in harnessing fiendish, celestial, or other outer powers. Say a celestial nephilim could take the class to basically become like a warrior angel, or warrior fiend. Perhaps it could even be a way for a cambion to fully embrace becoming devil-like while not necessarily becoming unholy sanctified, whereas an empyrean can become full-on angel while remaining a prick.

Though, that can also just be an archetype, where something else can be the proper class. just putting out ideas as they come.

Paizo. Make the Omdura in 2e as the 30th class. It'd be so funny to see.

I'll just say that I very much enjoyed Battlecry, as well as the Draconic Codex. I don't forsee much issues in the future, and I think 1 class getting a lackluster pass through with the remaster is being spun into this portent of doom, which imo is hilarious.

Their store issues do suck though, but that seems to be getting addressed to bring it back to the standard expected. They do deserve to get raked across the coals a bit for it, but with the promise to address the issues I am willing to give them the benefit of the doubt.

Accusing others of invoking abuser tactics over a class discussion? Mods don't get paid enough for this shit.

Reading amps is not an arcane cascade situation where it’s obvious it has to work. Guidance and entropic wheel are (otherwise they don’t do anything), but it’s not literally broken for amps to not work with ready.

Almost certainly an unintentional side effect of their zeal to hammer magus, but they did actually make this change and there’s no obvious “it’s literally broken” cope to justify the change not being binding.

What would a new player think, for one? For literally broken features you can say they should know to let it work, I think they would for arcane cascade, but for readying amps? How the hell would they know that’s not an intentional design choice?

To be honest, if it says it has an amp effect in the description, I'm going to assume I can amp it. Doesn't matter the action restriction in Amp itself.

Unicore wrote:

Is the official language of everything related to the psychic published somewhere publicly yet? It feels premature to have intense debates about things that people have seen one page or one paragraph and not the whole text together on yet. If it is up somewhere, directing people to that would be a great way to get informed feedback instead of pure speculation.

Some people have the new PDF and its coming from them (but most people don't). That makes it hard to reference specific things and is the cause of some of the confusion in terms of the specific wording of changes.

Theaitetos wrote:

No, that's not enough. Not nearly.

They remastered the Psychic and decided to change how Amps work and then did not adapt current Amps to reflect that change.

This affects 11 psi cantrips (Reaction + Readied) in total that can RAW no longer be Amped. Guidance & Entropic Wheel are just those that are completely affected, the others only when readied, e.g. Amped Warp Step or Amped Message.

When you change something as fundamental as Amps on a Psychic, you better take the time to make sure you adapt the old Amps to the new language. Not doing that is incredibly lazy in my books, and smells like bad errata from 1e times. And I don't think it's OK to just gloss over this negligence with "yeah, well, who cares, just ignore it".

I mean... if you're complaining to me about the lack of polish on stuff Paizo has been doing lately, you're preaching to the choir. I survived Remaster Oracle and the gigantic crapstorm surrounding that. :P We're still trying to get clarity on the repertoire size well over a year later, which you'd think is a pretty basic thing that should be easy.

I don't know what is up with Paizo these days, but it really feels like this stuff has gotten worse. Though to be fair, it happened before too. Arcane Cascade RAW flat out didn't work for 3 years. Everyone just went "yep that's silly" and collectively did what it was obviously intended to do while...

lol remember when the rolling mudslide composite impulse had no area for its area of affect move? Good times, good times. Only took 2 years to fix.

PFRPGrognard wrote:

I never subscribed to the notion that first edition PF was broken, rather that the average player doesn't respect the tactical wargaming roots of D&D. This mentality has lead to the average 5e player thinking every PC build should be able to walk into the midst of enemy forces in combat regardless of their build. Really, that should be the purview of the tankier classes like fighter and barbarian, but even then Boromir was brought down by a war party of orcs.

Still playing my Pathfinder First Edition and loving it.

I buy Lost Omens books to support Paizo because I love the lore.

How does this apply to PF1 players who migrated to PF2 and never looked back? I know quite a few, including myself.

It sounds like disparaging PF2 players to uphold PF1.

The group of PF 1e heads were like, mostly casual or themed character builders and 2 optimizers. We played through Strange Aeons and Tyrants Grasp, clamoring over mountains of dead bodies of our PC's to do so, before switching to PF 2e.

Only 1 of the optimizers decided they didn't like it. It's been a profoundly more positive experience all around. There's a lot to be said about character expression, but what I find annoying is 9 times out of 10 "character expression" is just "expressing how big I can get my Attack and Damage numbers".

Crouza wrote:

doortobe wrote:

Crouza wrote:

Paizo has the chance to do the funniest thing and give Magus a 2d8 damage focus spell as a feat.

Congrats you proved that a subclass that is in desperate need of buffs to use its big flashy ability instead got nerfed and youre trying to defend it???

Im just here to discuss impossible magic. Dark Archive is the other thread. And also, it would be incredibly funny.

I meant to reply to someone else in this thread my bad

No worries. For what it's worth, I do find it a shame that Psychic took some hits to Imaginary Weapon. But I'm an Oscillating Wave guy, so I don't got as much skin in that particular game.

All I want is just making Arcane Cascade something you proc on initiative similar to barbarian rage, and whose damage type can change when you cast a spell. It's the only part of magus that, for me, feels pretty hard to use with all the other actions you juggle.

Crouza wrote:

Paizo has the chance to do the funniest thing and give Magus a 2d8 damage focus spell as a feat.

Congrats you proved that a subclass that is in desperate need of buffs to use its big flashy ability instead got nerfed and youre trying to defend it???

Im just here to discuss impossible magic. Dark Archive is the other thread. And also, it would be incredibly funny.

Paizo has the chance to do the funniest thing and give Magus a 2d8 damage focus spell as a feat.

Tridus wrote:

JiCi wrote:

Tridus wrote:

Leshy are really popular so I'm sure it'll happen at some point. But I don't think the thinking is around when it feels right for the character.

But Leshy show up in so much stuff that its bound to happen.

That is if we get more classes. That's also something to consider.

A Leshy iconic can happen, but it's still weird that we haven't seen one ever since they were promoted to core.

AFAIK there's a playtest coming up, and those are almost always new classes. So I think we can expect a couple more classes.

Hmmm...

- Arcanist? rolled into other classes;
- Brawler? that's an archetype;
- Hunter? there's already the ranger;
- Medium? the animist is close to that;
- Mesmerist? I keep thinking that the entire class should be a Conscious Mind for the Psychic;
- Ninja? not necessary;
- Samurai? that can be an archetype;
- Shaman? that's also the animist;
- Shifter? that's the only class I can think of...
- Skald? that should be a "muse" for the Bard;
- Spiritualist? rolled into the Summoner;

Most of these could be exclusive archetypes, just like how we got the Bloodrager, Slayer and Inquisitor.

The Shifter, using Starfinder's evolutionist as its chassis, with various specializations, such as "plant", could work for a Leshy. It's also the only class I can think of ^^;

Does this not assume 1 to 1 parity with 1e, which they haven't been doing for a while now? Guardian and Commander do not have first party PF 1e class equivalents. Runesmith meanwhile has the Mesmerist gimmick of implanting magic into your allies/yourself, and while the name Necromancer has been around a lot this Necromancer in Pf 2e feels way different than any of the ones from PF 1e.

For all we know they could make like an Entropy Mage of Time and make it a Mushroom Leshy. The classes could very well be wildly different from anything we've seen yet and fit Leshy surprisingly well. Or heck, even be something wildly out of left field for what people might expect from a Leshy. Like a full on Mech Suit using class.

A big amount of the issues come from the team having a fundamentally different read on the class when they remastered it. They said curses should be purely negative, but the dual nature of the curses was some of the funnest parts of oracle to play around with. The risk reward of increasing your curse value for bigger buffs felt great to me at least, and removing the positives of the curse is the main reason the class now feels blander. Imo they should have just changed the flavor text of curses to be "drawbacks the oracle has learned to live with and turn into unexpected strengths" so it became about overcoming the bad hand they were dealt with. Then just touch up some of the more troublesome mechanics in certain curses, and it would have been good.

Dragonchess Player wrote:

To be fair, the pre-Remaster oracle had absolutely horrible balance between the mysteries. Much worse than the Remaster oracle; there were literally mysteries that you did not ever want to take because they were so bad.

Ugh, no way. Because the old mysteries had unique benefits as well, even the jankiest mystery (premaster Ancestors) had people willing to try it. Now, though? Nothing except the granted spells and focus spells are unique, and the divine list hardly needs most of them. The bad ones are theoretically less bad but they also are almost strictly worse than just running Cosmos, whereas before they were at least entertainingly bad in a unique way.

I'd rather they staple the 4 slots and the granted spells onto premaster Oracle if they were that rushed.

Arguably, that would have made a better Oracle than the current one we have now.

Given the previews they've shown for dragons thus far, I'm super stoked to see what else they've come up with. Dragons feel way more eldritch and fantastical so stuff like pacts or dragon adjacent class options have me more excited now.

Huh... if the Vorpal Dragon doesn't have a breath weapon, what's gonna be the alternative for any class feature and spell that usually grants one :O ?

Also, why isn't it a Primal Dragon from the Plane of Metal? That would work nicely.

My guess would be because the plane of metal is a recently re-emerged plane, having been able to return after being absorbed by the plane of earth for a while.

Give it a bit of time and I bet we'll see more plane of metal goodness emerge.

Absolute bangers, love just the weirdness that dragons are going with for PF 2e. These designs and flavor for them being way more magically and conceptually influenced make me really excited to run some dragons.

I would shit myself if I saw a despair dragon. My literal reaction was reading the requium dragon's blurb, going "oh that's nice", and scrolling down to get jump scared and actually jump in my seat at this chiansaw man looking freak. 11/10 design honestly, it's neat to see such a extreme departure from classical dragon design.

So if I'm fighting a Rune Dragon, it will open its mouth, nothing will seem to come out, but a glowing symbol will appear on my body and then explode!? Like some Predator targetting laser?

How do you dodge that???

Can't wait for more of these previews!

Dragon using Killer Queen on PCs is going to be a fun encounter to run.

Necromancer hasn't come out yet. Stop using it to rez these threads.

QuidEst wrote:

They're still two different systems.

They're literally not. Like actually and completely the exact same system.

They're foundationally the same but their balance points are intentionally different, as well as sporting a ton of mechanics unique to each other.

The developers have explicitly laid this out, ironically when they were talking about how much more accessible fly was for characters in Starfinder vs Pathfinder and that this is an intentional choice.

I think the things for which a conversion guide will be useful, moreso than ancestries, is classes. A GM can make a quick call based on any ancestry on nothing more than "this isn't really a story featuring people from other planets." But people are going to want to play something like a Mystic in a Pathfinder game and there's no reason this shouldn't work, so some guidance a la "recharge weapon is nonfunctional in Pathfinder so replace the cantrip granted by the Elemental Connection with something else, and you might want to alter Data Bond so you don't give access to Summon Robot in a pathfinder game" would genuinely help people.

Im surprised such a guide is not in the GM Core. Might be a cool book idea to explore in the future. A big old crossover AP with its own player guide and rules on how to convert content for either game.

Please do not force SF 2e and PF 2e to have the exact same balance points. This just leads to nobody winning and a needless edition war to happen for 0 reason.

I find it an amazing indication of how little power creep is in this game if the main example shown is "A person used an ancestry from a different game in pathfinder". And one that specifically tackles the "this is a major divergence from pf 2e" topic that starfinder devs have brought up essentially day 1((ease of access to flight)).

Let us look at Pf 1e for answers. There were about 40 classes, depending on how you count alternative classes or the Omdura. Each of those a variety of archetypes, some even getting close to 50. So let's be conservative and assume every class had about 20 archetypes.

That's about 800 permutations of classes that existed in PF 1e. So to answer your question, yes. We will be getting more classes. Considering that instead of giving a existing class an archetype that completely alters how it plays, Paizo makes a new class to fullfill that radically different class idea, we will probably see more classes than Pf 1e.

I want dedicated Gish classes for Primal and Occult schools. Magus is magus and cleric now has both war cleirc and battle harbinger to help fill the niche. I would like to see similar for primal magic and occult magic.

That's not my point. What I'm saying is that the GM tends to respect Taunt for both thematic and mechanical reasons.

With this in mind, is it really worth investing in feats that expect the GM to try to disrespect Taunt?

There's a high probability that feats like Proud Nail and Ring Their Bell will never be used because the GM can simply make the provoked creatures attack the guardian (what is the main intention of Taunt). Unless there are two guardians in the group, which would effectively make the creature negatively affected by both guardians, these feats would be the only thing preventing it from ignoring them and attacking other PCs, since it will suffer the effects of Taunt anyway.

So, with this in mind, is it really worth investing in feats that will never, or almost never, will have its requirements met?

There are tons of feats like that, and the answer is always "It's useless until it isn't." Rogue for example has Nimble Dodge, which went 12 sessions without ever stopping a hit or crit, and then stopped that "crit by 1" strike from downing me. Likewise, Sly Striker is a very niche feat because you can always flank an enemy, and then we fought an enemy who we couldn't easily make off guard and Sly Striker paid its dues adding extra damage on my strikes.

If I am a GM and there is a sorcerer with low hp whose been hitting me with spells vs the guardian in front of me, I don't see why I wouldn't go after the sorcerer to prioritize threat.

If a rogue is flanking the guardian and pounding my butt, I'm going to kill the rogue first to cut off that high damage and then focus down the guardian afterwards.

Maybe GM's will focus on the Guardian most of the time. But there's going to be those cases where they don't, and that's why you take those feats.

You can argue about the GM not doing that, but I find that to be a unfair steelman tbh. Because a GM can be the source of all kinds of problems. It's like "Don't play a caster because the GM can only pick monsters with high saves and low AC's". Or "Don't build for melee because the GM can always use flying enemies or enemies who use ranged attacks and teleports."

Like, you're right. Fair point by the technical merit that it can happen. But that's not a fair position to start the discussion at, imo. After all, you can also just as easily make the case of the GM always ignoring your taunts, and suddenly those feats become goated.

I think Paizo has made the choice of using new classes to explore new mechanical ideas. This is similar to how they used to include new archetypes for existing classes in their previous works.

Instead of a class getting a new archetype that completely changes how they played, or fulfilled a new niche for that class, instead they are taking that idea and turning it into its own bespoke class.

I don't know how I feel about it, personally. Reducing it down to 1 class and creating more options for existing classes could be fun. But at the same time, I feel like Pathfinder would rather you have 50 classes to pick from, and each class is relatively simple to figure out and play, than to have 30 classes, but each one having an alt mode essentially.

Taunt doesn’t have the emotion or mental trait, so it’s not really a taunt at all. You’re not making the mindless zombie mad at you.

Maybe I'm just MMO brained but I don't see a problem with Taunt being named Taunt as "universal ability that draws aggro to you". Since that is ubiquitously what that kind of ability is called in games.

I haven't seen all of the class but I really like the changes I have seen to Guardian. I'm actually really excited to give it a shot, since I tend to enjoy support characters and, well, they chonk.

Crouza wrote:

The whole region being so far north had me expected it to be cold but it looks like volcanos and geothermal activity are keeping that warmer meditteranian sea feel.

It's to the East of the Isle of Jalmeray, so it's in the tropics. If it was significantly farther South, it would be colder (just with summer and winter seasons occurring at the opposite times as the Northern hemisphere).

I completely misread that map. I thought it was that cluster of islands off the saga lands. My bad lol.

As long as nobody kills any random sheeps or cows than things should be a breeze. Loving Iblydos amd I can't wait to dig in to the city states. The whole region being so far north had me expected it to be cold but it looks like volcanos and geothermal activity are keeping that warmer meditteranian sea feel.

Grimmyr is such a Deku and I really like them for it. The fact he always takes notes of the non-combatants first is such a great detail for him.