I have two characters that I've been itching to see play, so I'm very interested in this. One's a aldori front-line (swashbuckler) striker and the other an arcane caster (witch) that can also do some emergency healing in a pinch.
Unfortunately, the former is from a class in Advanced Class Guide while the archetype is from Adventurer's Guide. Both are Core books but both were released after the anniversary edition. That means their not permissible, correct?
Do mundane spell-less Disguise roll effects have any duration? For instance, say you make an extraordinarily good Disguise roll that stumps every NPC's Perception. Can you just maintain that Disguise indefinitely for the rest of the game, or would you have to reapply your makeup (aka roll Disguise again) after a certain amount of time?
Realistically I would assume that you'd have to roll again once a day at least to represent you putting back on or adjusting your fatsuit, mask, makeup or whatever, but the rules seem to say nothing about that.
EDIT: I believe I accidentally put this in the wrong forum. My apologies if that is the case.
Hello, hello. Just want to start off by saying thank you for giving a lot of people here their first opportunity to really try out Pathfinder 2E, myself included! I really appreciate that, especially for a system so new. With that out of the way... Here's Aurelia Landon.
Ancestry - Half-Elf
Aurelia came to Isger, and eventually the town of Breachill, after hearing news of a gold dragon sighting in the area but quickly found herself adrift as the rumors, and her money, started to dry up. The simple fact is Aurelia needs more coin if she wants to continue her studies and travels, and the Call for Heroes seems like just the solution for her financial woes.
Character is coming under way. I have a human fey sorcerer specialized in enhancement spells in mind.
Got a few more questions:
I don't see the problem. If there's some new development in the lore that clashes with your preferred ideas or the outcomes of your group's AP than just ignore it at your table.
I don't see why that's so hard. Perhaps this is just a thing unique to the people that I play with, but in most of the instances when we've used a AP the story diverges to such a radical degree that by the third book that whatever "How to Continue the Campaign" or "Here's the New Status Quo" options became useless anyway.
So if your players didn't trust Sorshen and miraculously managed to kill her I don't see how Paizo taking another direction genuinely harms or inconveniences your table? Fine, Paizo won't be supporting that outcome. So what? Keep following your own timeline and didn't feel pressured by "canon" when it comes to telling the stories that you want to tell.
I don't want this to devolve into a miserable political debate, but Dany is absolutist monarch whose claim to power derives from her bloodline. That's as far away from leftist sentiment as one can get, in my opinion.
Furthermore, the only thing about her that can arguably pass as leftist is her consistent anti-slavery actions and rhetoric, which SHOULD NOT BE CONSIDERED A LEFTIST ONLY POSITION. That is a decent human being position that shouldn't exclusive fit any one side of the political axis. Liberals and conservatives should both equally despise slavery as vile institution. Oh my God.
I think there's a difference between threatening to burn a city because your people will starve to death in the desert if they don't get in, to burning a city even after its already surrendered to you. The former is a very morally ambiguous decision born from sympathetic desperation that the audience can somewhat relate to, while the other is blatantly Stupid Evil act made by a crazy person.
I can't speak for anyone else but I think most peoples problem with Dany's turn isn't necessary because they wanted her to be a conventional heroine at the end of the show, but more to do with them being annoyed with how rushed her turn is and how it seems to exist solely to make Dany a pitch-black antagonist that needs to be stopped.
I think most people would have been satisfied with the turn if Dany started burning the city indiscriminately when it became apparent that Cersei's men weren't going to surrender no matter what, which would have made her decision slightly more ambigoius if still on the dark side. Then again, that still wouldn't explain why Dany and Drogon couldn't just burn and/or tear apart the Red Keep to get the Cersei to avoid destroying the rest of King's Landing, but hey, that's been an issue since Season 7 so why bring it up now, right. :)
Iomedae: *Saluting* - "Reporting for duty, ma'am!"
I think that's a fair criticism, xenocrat. Paizo isn't immune to using tired tropes like that. The whole redeeming the sexy baddie is a staple of the fantasy genre and we see it everywhere nowadays. I mean, half of Kylo Ren's appeal in the Star Wars fandom is this strange desire by fans for Rey to redeem him since he looks like Adam Driver, ignoring the fact he's an insane manchild. :P
That aside, I am more or less confident that Paizo will likely start turning away from this trope after awhile. Most people are unaware of the cliche and Paizo has used it enough that I'm sure even they're getting tired of it. Redemption stories are great! They can even work for horrific demon lords and runelords who probably violated and sexually exploited thousands upon thousands of people... I think? But when they come with the trappings of less than stellar genre conventions "Only beautiful people deserve the chance at redemption" they get stale and predictable rather quickly.
But Paizo has to know all that, so I'm sure we'll see less of it over time. Hell, maybe we already have there have been a bunch of "ugly" male baddies that have gotten their chance to be better?
Sorshen's motivation to change is practical, if not exactly a riveting narrative of self-analysis and repentance for several lifetimes of evil. Not that I'm knocking it. It makes sense, especially since she's only going from Chaotic Evil to Chaotic Neutral. I mean, if Gorum and Calistria prove anything its that Chaotic Neutral isn't that high of a bar to reach. :P
I still sort of wish there was more of an inciting incident for Nocticula's change other than "Being evil has gotten boring after countless eons." Arueshalae redemption was great because it had a sizable backstory and her continuing to make an active effort to undo some of the horrible things she's done. But just like in Sorshen's case, Nocticula's only going from Chaotic Evil to Chaotic Neutral, so her not needing that great or weighty of a push might make sense. Still, it would have been nice to have a story of Sarenrae or Shelyn reaching out to her and getting her to realize the futility of evil, or maybe her just looking at brother and realizing how much of a freak he is and how she doesn't want any part of that depravity anymore.
Of course, I still haven't read the this last adventure yet, so who knows what extra bits of lore gets dropped in them! He's to hoping there's a lot.
Also, thanks CorvusMask for dropping all this info for us. I really appreciate it.
Well my kingdom has freedom of religion as part of its Constitution, so baby-eating Lamashtu worshipers must be tolerated, I say!
Basically what the subject title says. With the new edition being a thing, it seems like a great opportunity to talk about changes that could be made to flavor of some the core deities.
So far it seems many of them more still pretty much exactly the same, but I think that some could use an update. Like Erastil not only caring about rural communities and being mad when adventurers go out to fight
Those are my pet peeves anyone else have any ideas or suggestions?
I don't see how having hard alignment restrictions removes nuance in games. Sure the Cleric of Asmodeus has Lawful Evil on his sheet but that doesn't mean that his character can't have complicated reasons for why he follows Asmodeus. Furthermore, the Cleric may not see his actions or deity as Evil whatsoever.
Maybe he believes that the only way to create an ordered society is by enslaving the unworthy or ensuring that the masses don't have a say in anything. Yeah, that seems pretty Evil to us and likely the party of heroes trying to take him down but that doesn't mean he has to be a BWAHAHA villain. The nuance can still be expressed even through his arguments for why he sees the slavery of others as Good. The players can ultimately call him out on his b~~$#$+!, but that still doesn't mean that the character doesn't have nuance in sense of having character motivations that go beyond just being an a!*%!#! who worships a bigger a!+@*&*.
I don't see Goblins being Neutral Evil psychos makes them unplayable and undeserving of being in Core. Not all campaigns are Good-aligned or even take place in Golarion.
Just because they're in the book doesn't mean you have to use them. Besides, I think having an "Evil" race in Core will help out tables that just want to play murderhobos. They deserve attention too after all.
Seems to me that taking away Goblins murderous attitudes waters them down to point that there largely no different from Halflings or Gnomes when it comes to their wackiness.
Why take that away? Let them stay psychotic pyromaniacs. It might not work for some tables, but I think you still have them in Core while still retaining most of their original flavor without pulling a "Well, some tribes are Good or friendly" retcon.
Tarik Blackhands wrote:
Can't we just write her out of the story entirely? I think Star Wars can only handle so many characters and Rose is one to many.
This new trilogy should be about Rey, Finn, Kylo and maybe Poe. That's it. We don't need three different storylines and multiple arcs occurring all at once.
Creon Vizcarra wrote:
Does that logic even still apply in a universe where people can be constantly resurrected from death and have their lifespan lengthened considerably?
Why bother fathering/mothering a bunch of brats to continue the dynasty when I can just live forever as an Immortal God-King/Queen.
Death is poor people after all.
Well since men have been kissing,hugging,groping women for so long in movies, turn about is fair play.
Not really. It was horrible and gross when dudes thought they could get away with (looking at you Han) and its horrible when woman try to get away with it. We should break the cycle because there is no such thing as fair play when it comes to this.
Just watched the film again with my brother and I got to admit I liked it a lot more. Well, actually I just loced everything with Rey and Ren a lot more. I idea that Rey wanted to redeem Ren not only because she felt it was necessary but also because she was on some level attracted to him really added a lot more dimension (and sexuality) to the story. That said, I give even less of a s&$~ about Poe, Finn and Rose's stories. They really feel like distractions from a much better story and the themes in them are cookie cutter and obvious. But, hey, Daisy Ridley's "your breaking my heart face" was still awesome.
I actually really appreciated that rey's parents where nobodies all the endless speculation about it irritated the tar out of me.
I like that Rey's parent were nobodies but I really don't see how that twist is all that worthy of praise. Rey still is essentially a magical chosen one with abilities that only a small amount of people have and if Snoke is to believed she's has been chosen by the Light to bring down the Dark of the First Order.
The Star Wars story is still about metahumans with magic swords empowered by an all-powerful Force being at the center of an intergalactic conflict. Sure Finn, Rose and Poe are around but the narrative of the Last Jedi marginalizes them compared to all the Force users.
Really, if the sequel wanted to really change things Rey wouldn't be a Force user at all and would kick Kylo Ren's just using a blaster like a normal person.
Black Dougal wrote:
Isn't that a microcosm of the problem of the whole film? Twists that actually aren't twists but predictable 180s. Rey parents are no nobodies instead of someone important. Snoke isn't the main villain instead its Kylo Ren. Luke doesn't really train Rey to be a Jedi instead she's supposed to chart her own path or something. Kylo Ren isn't redeemed but instead takes over the First Order.
Did those twists really surprise anyone? I guess they did. Honestly, going into this film I just assumed that the plot would either play things straight or just do the opposite and thats what happened.
Sort of wish they did something really shocking and had Rey join the First Order or something. Wouldn't make a lot of sense but it would be interesting.
Bill Dunn wrote:
Agreed. That arc has a lot of potential. I just wish they executed it better.
The more I think about it the more this movie reminds me of Batman v Superman. It's nowhere near as bad as B v S but it has the same problem of having a lot of interesting themes and ideas, but ultimately bad execution.
Laura Dern is a great actor and probably would have made Holdo a fan favorite if her character wasn't badly written.
I hate to say this yet again, but I really think its a shame that they killed her just so Poe can a leader. She could have been a replacement for Leia and the next film as the strong female leader of the Resistance with Poe as her right-hand man.
But no she gets fridged. It's made even worst by the fact that I think Holdo is supposed to be a lesbian in the books.
I think if Admiral Holdo had instead been played by Admiral Ackbar everyone would have just got on board and been “what a strategic genius”. But because Vice Admiral Amelyn Holdo is new to the audience, feminine and doesn’t acquiesce to the handsome flyboy nerds everywhere feel the need to pick apart her plan and sacrifice.
I dunno. Holdo only looks bad back because the script demands that she make convoluted decisions and sacrifices because Poe needs to learn a lesson about leadership. Really won't matter if it's her or Ackbar.
Than again, I might have been less frustrated if was Ackbar because at least than a female character won't be fridged for a male character's development.