Doktor Weasel's page

AceofMoxen wrote:

Even with Hasbro (seeming to) back down, the ORC is still important!

I mean, there's no guarantee they won't try it again when the dust settles. That's why the ORC being managed by an independent entity is important.

And recall that this isn't even the first time they've tried this. Back in 2008 they tried to stop people from using the OGL with the GSL, and a clause in it that anyone using the GSL couldn't make any OGL content. This part was stripped after outcry, but the GSL was still more restrictive. And now 15 years later they pull a similar stunt. WotC in control means there will always be an incentive to try to do this again. Having something universal and not controlled by any company with a profit motive in it will be useful.

Ironfang Invasion changed things up a bit and got us an erotic statue of two male hobgoblins, that might be someone else's work. Maybe inspired by these. "an erotic onyx statuette of two hobgoblin men embracing (worth 630 gp)"

I did love this little long running Easter-egg, and how it ties into a major plot point in the setting. Succubus porn as plot foreshadowing. Who'd have thunk it?

And now I got curious so I'm searching for them. I've found five scattered among the adventure paths:

Curse of the Crimson Throne Book 1 Edge of Anarchy:

I really thought there were more of these. There may be some with different wording I didn't catch.

I'm thinking of an all doppelganger party. Nobody realizes that anyone else is a doppelganger. They think they're being sneaky and infiltrating a group of other races. Wackiness ensues. At one point they try to impersonate each other, and they still have the same party. A impersonates B, B impersonates C, C impersonates D and D impersonates A. Nobody says anything because they don't want to give away that they're impersonating someone else.

Or there's a sword, in a chest, in a dungeon, but all three are PCs. It's like a Turducken party.

I had to go back and reverse-engineer where i got that from. You're correct that it's not in the current OGL, it's part of Paizo's compatibility license.

Quote:

4. Usage Restrictions

The license granted hereunder is expressly limited to use of the Compatibility Logo and Font in printed books, electronic books, and freely available websites that are compatible with Pathfinder Second Edition. Anyone seeking a license for any other use should contact Paizo at licensing@paizo.com.

You may not use the Compatibility Logo or Font in a way that suggests Paizo owns, endorses, or is in any way responsible for any part of your Product, or for any conduct of your business, or that suggests that you have any relationship beyond a mere license with us, unless we have a separate agreement that lets you do so. You also may not state or suggest that we guarantee your Product's compatibility with Pathfinder Second Edition.

The titles of your Products may not include any Paizo trademarked terms (or marks confusingly similar thereto), including "Pathfinder," "Pathfinder Second Edition," or "Pathfinder Roleplaying Game."

You may not use Paizo's trade dress for your Products or advertisements—that is, you may not design your Products or advertisements to look confusingly similar to Paizo's products or advertisements.

You may not do anything illegal in or with your Products.

You must use your best efforts to preserve the high standard of our trademarks. You may not use this License for material that the general public would classify as "adult content," offensive, or inappropriate for minors.

You may not release any Products under this License until August 1, 2019 (the release date for Pathfinder Second Edition).

I also like the wording on this better than WotC's. You must make your best effort, so trying and screwing up isn't grounds for termination, intent is important. One example I'm thinking of was some of the concept art for PF2, showing Orcs with very gorilla like features, such as knuckle walking. This was apparently intended to be a way to make PF's style unique, like they did with Goblins and Ogres in Rise of the Runelords and Kobolds in the new edition. But it was brought up that it was kind of getting into Unfortunate Implications territory with all the racial baggage around orcs and the history of depicting other races as more like apes, so was scrapped. So I'd say if that wasn't caught and scrapped, it wouldn't be a violation. It'd be an embarrassment and probably get an apology and ceasing to use the style when it was called out later, but the intent wasn't malicious, so wouldn't result in a license termination.

I also like how instead of making Paizo the sole arbiter of what is offensive, it defines it as what "the general public would classify as "adult content," offensive or inappropriate for minors." Which makes it so it's not as easy to use as a loophole to terminate a company's license unless they actually did intentionally do some awful stuff (like the case with Star Frontiers, which is being used as the justification for this clause).

So I'd hope any morality clause in the ORC would be more like the one in the Pathfinder Compatibility License and not the WotC one. But I'm not sure it really should have a restriction on Adult Content. That's fair to not want associated with the Pathfinder brand, but having an actual open license I think should be open for exploring more mature themes (Paizo of course leaned into this a bit early on). So would probably be more appropriate to be left to the individual companies and their brand licensing.

I'm pretty sure I was aware of "Tolkien had some pretty problematic ideas on race" (which includes his conception of Orcs from which all fantasy orcs derive) well before there even was a twitter.

Just the idea that there are sapient species who form societies, use tools, create art, etc. that are okay to murder without conscience because of what kind of thing they are is the hobby's original sin.

In my group, I often joke about how eating or making things like clothing out of the bodies of sentient creatures is universally regarded as evil... except if it's a dragon, in which case it's tradition, that makes it ok! Crunch all you want, they'll make more! We'll get entire pages on how to butcher dragons for armor and magic components, etc. It's kind of a weird moral loophole that just got grandfathered in due to the murderhobo mindset that came with the game in the 70s (as Oceanshieldwolf says above, most likely due to the war-gaming roots of the game and combat focus). There's a lot of baggage that's been grandfathered into the hobby that's still being unpacked.

Paizo has been pretty good about this, especially recently, even though they stumble at times. The early Paizo material certainly went hard on the evil orc trope. But since then they've been working to give them much more nuance, with orcs telling Tar-Baphon to pound sand and the write-up of Mwangi orcs who generally get along fairly well with their human neighbors. With the Belkzan Orcs being a particularly nasty orc culture, much like how Cheliax is a particularly nasty human culture.

Of course this is getting rather off topic. Which is the license. It is great to see so many companies and individual creators coming together to create a universal open license for the hobby to thrive with. I would like to see more companies that aren't even involved in OGL or D20 etc getting involved, to really turn this into a truly universal license.

And on the other hand I do have a question, are there any companies sticking with WotC and the OGL 1.1, 1.2 or whatever numbering they're going to use for the restrictive stuff they're pushing?

Worms is clearly a reference to using worms as fishing bait. They're teasing the new Bassfinder AP. PCs will have to brave treacherous rivers, with hoards of stirges while trying to reel in "The Big One." Special rules for other hazards including sunburn and the dreaded Running out of Beer.

More seriously, I really don't have much clue. Worm the Walks villain?

Rust I likewise don't have much clue, could be early encounters have rust monsters, but that's not really much of a theme, just something that exists. Rust does bring to mind Numeria, but apparently that's been ruled out. It kind of brings to mind Alkenstar too, but we've just had something there.

Spiders makes me think of Grandmother Spider and the Anadi, maybe something set in their homeland of Nurvatcha? I think they've shown up in a few things lately, but they're cool so deserve some more love. And going to southern Garund, off the standard Inner Sea map would be fun. I'm sure they'd weave some great nets for the Bassfinders at least.

mikeawmids wrote:

You can't have drow as the bad guys anymore cos' of Racism,

This is pretty reductive and inflammatory. It’s also wrong; there’s Evil drow in Extinction Curse and the Bestiary, and the lore about the Great Houses being demon-worshipers didn’t go anywhere. There’s still cruel fleshwarpers lurking beneath our feet, if that’s a story you want to tell.

The issue has always been presenting *all* drow as irredeemable villains, something Abomination Vaults has touched on, and several other sources have worked to scaffold (the reformed Twilight Lanterns, Nocticula’s redemption) for the future. If an AP gave us drow victims and allies alongside the baddies, I can’t imagine anyone being much too mad.

While Paizo has been certainly trying to get away from the whole "Always evil" thing for ancestries, there might be some resistance to applying it to drow, at least in significant numbers. There's been a lot of backlash against the "Drizzt Syndrome" where so many Drow were the good rebels against the evil drow society, and people got tired of it. I think this is part of why Second Darkness really emphasized the evil. Of course that's not a non-negotiable reason to oppose non-evil drow, and certainly can be reevaluated. The way ancestries are done in PF2 also removes the problem of PF1 and D&D where Drow were straight up unbalanced compared to most PC races, which might have been another reason.

Maybe. Second Darkness is not exactly beloved of the community and I recall reading somewhere that the creative team would like another bite of the elf apple. You can't have drow as the bad guys anymore cos' of Racism, but an AP where you all play as dark elves and adjacent ancestries, focused on GoT style political maneuvering/backstabbery could be interesting, but is maybe too similar to the underlying themes of Blood Lords to happen anytime soon.

I've had a similar idea for a while, which I'd love to see. Darklands adventure, where all the PCs take darklands ancestries instead of the standard core ones, Caligni instead of Human, Drow instead of Elf, Duergar instead of Dwarves, Snirfivlin for Gnomes and maybe Derro(?) for halflings (only one without a direct counterpart in the darklands). Could go multiple ways, like exiles and rejects trying to escape the worst aspects of their home civilizations, or like you mentioned focus on political skullduggery, or even maybe raiding the topside as an inversion of being surface dwellers delving into the Darklands. Lots of potential in that, and considering Paizo is doing more and more "themed" parties, it could fit with that.

Sooo... This mean kobold plushies are definitely happening right?

Right?

:P

Plushies!? Plushies are for cute things. Kobolds are fierce and terrifying little draconic warriors, not cute. I mean does this bloodthirsty brute look cute?

...oh. He totally does. Absolutely adorable. Ok, plushy time. ;)

Kobolds will be core in PF3. The end will be upon us. All hail Groetus.

Kobolds will be core in PF3, and the Free RPG Day adventures will be focused on Flumphs. Who will be core for PF4. Flumphapalooza!

I just found out that this book has a Bag of Weasels as a magic item.
So I think it's officially the best book ever.

Dwarven Throwing Axes that can be used as a hand axe or throwing axe, and not require two different weapons with minutely different stats, would be cool.

It's already there, just not dwarven. The Hatchet now combines the throwing axe and hand-axe into a single weapon (as it always should have been).

While I do like having a lot of weapons, I'm also hoping that things don't bloat up too much. PF1 started to get a few too many weapons which were basically the same thing with arbitrarily different stats. The springblade and switchblade knife are two different versions of the exact same thing. Do we really need a gladius? It's just a specific type of short-sword. Bec-de-corbin and Lucerne hammer were basically the same thing. They're both variations on the pollaxe with a hammer and spike on either side of the head instead of an axe-blade on one and spike or hammer on the other as was common. They just came from different regions and the Lucerne hammer had longer prongs on it's hammer head (the prongs are to help give purchase into armor, not pierce as spikes, same with a mace's flanges). In fact, most polearms are pretty much just variations on a theme: blade, hook, spike and sometimes hammer. There are only so many ways you can make those functionally different. Should a volgue and a halbard have different stats? No, the dividing line between the two is pretty thin, A bardiche is just a specific type of greataxe, bills and glaives aren't really different enough to justify different stats etc. We don't need to go the route of Fantasy Imperium, which had 63 pages of illustrations of it's bloated weapons list and another 10 of armor (I rechecked). Most were slight style differences of the same weapons and various regional names were slapped onto them arbitrarily.

Likewise I'd like to avoid the habit of some later PF1 weapons which were just plain better weapons. The falcata was a longsword and battleaxe in one (I do rather like falcatas, and forward curved swords in general, but it's not a super-weapon). The Orc Butchering Axe is an even greater greataxe, the horn-bow just an even stronger bow. It was like an arms race (well I guess in a way it literally was). Weapons had to top what came before.

There's room for new weapons. But let them be actually new weapons, not just different stat blocks for slight variations.

I'd kind of like to see something sort of like those weird German dueling shields that show up in so many old fencing texts. They're just bizarre, and would fit a fantasy niche of shields with offensive capabilities. As far as I know they were really only used for judicial duels aka Trial by Combat (notice the odd clothing most of these people are wearing, it's at least partly ceremonial). But they're usable one-handed with a weapon (either a club or sword was used depending on the region), in which case it is basically used like a large shield. They're also usable in both hands as an offensive weapon in their own right. Rules for this could be a bit weird though. Maybe something like: When used with a weapon, it functions as a standard heavy shield. When used in two-hands it has the weapon stats of <insert stat block here>.

As for stats, I'd say when used as a weapon it's probably a 2-handed piercing weapon, maybe with Versitile S, likely with Grapple and/or Trip (they are often shown with hocked parts that can used to snag someone. Probably have the Parry trait due to being a literal shield.

For one-handed offensive shields. There is this thing. The text calls it a Hungarian Shield, but this image is about all I've seen on it. There is a known style of shield known as the Hungarian Shield but they're a bit different in shape and don't have the blade.

I'm throwing my hat into the ring for a plant humanoid. We haven't seen one, and with the Sylvari from Guild Wars 2 being so popular, I think it's time.

Well we are getting leshys. A return of Ghorans from PF1 would also be nice.

The only reason Oprak needs to exist is "to have a Hobgoblin nation in the inner sea." If you don't want that, just leave that particular mountainous region that the Nirmathi weren't using as part of Nirmathas.

Both "replacing Azaersi with a different Hobgoblin" or "Wiping Oprak off the map" are really easy edits, I feel.

Yeah, those are fairly easy to do. Different hob would be my bet. The big problem is the assumption that they still control the artifact. Having it seems to be a major feature of the country, so removing it is more difficult. That's the part that really requires the PCs to be holding the idiot-ball. "Hey, this invading army has a super weapon that allowed them to take over almost two entire countries in a short span of time and was being planned to be used to nuke-level effect... after we defeat them lets just let them keep it and hope they decide not to be naughty with it. Again." What?

Edit: Yeah, sorry that this has gotten a bit spoilery. But it's basically already being spoiled by the core material. At least it's not like Tyrant's Grasp, the most recent complete AP is spoiled by the core book.

The biggies would most likely be things that were popular in PF1; the various 'mostly human' races (but doable for other base ancestries, all the plane touched, dhampir, changelings etc. Also kitsune, ratfolk and tengu. Maybe a few of the weirder PF1 races too, like Ghorans and some aliens for adventures elsewhere in the solar system, lashunta, kasatha, triaxian, etc.

Beyond that, I'd kind of like some more non-human ancestries. But I'm concerned about how things will balance with the current ancestry system. I don't want watered down things that kind of resemble the base creature. For example, a strix that can't fly from level 1, isn't a strix. Some kind of sentient ooze creature could be fun, and it's an unfilled niche. Mezlans are really cool, but are a bit high-powered for a playable ancestry, and again run into the watered down problem. Appallies might be doable, but being amorphous is a problem.

Also, it needs to be said, flumph. And I'm not really joking (much) on that either. They're fun, they're friendly, they're all sorts of weird. All big pluses. The PF1 Kineticist writeup always reminded me of flumphs by mentioning "or a grasping appendage" when referring to having a free hand.

And while I'm being a bit on the silly side, skittermanders. Maybe the Divinity had a population of them onboard and they were recently set loose and are now out to help an entire world of nufriends?

Honestly more I think about it (and more I re-read the ironfang invasion stuff because I had honestly forgot about things like human skin tents) the more I dislike the way they have gone with it especially the part where they just let her keep the onyx key and the stone roads.

Yeah, the more I think about it, the more it just doesn't sit right with me. It kind if feels like they're assuming the PCs were frankly, really stupid, and inept negotiators. When I first heard about Oprak, I figured is was probably less the less militant people in the defeated remnants of the army that set it up. But Azaersi still in charge and in command of her stolen super weapon? Uh no. By the time negotiation was possible, she has basically lost. She has no leverage, and the PCs have all of it. And she already proved she can't be trusted when she launched an unprovoked invasion with intent on genocide. So why decide to give the store away? Did they pay her war reparations and formally apologize for being invaded too?

Maybe there are more details to it that I haven't seen yet. I haven't read the Lost Omens World Guide yet, so maybe there's something that makes this less of a boneheaded move by the PCs than it seems.

It's great to know that my particular campaign, in which we lost everything and fought back tooth-and-nail to restore peace to the land and free the people that were being oppressed in the Vault of the Onyx Citadel, is utterly invalidated.

Seriously, how can you just up and decide that one particular ending of an AP is just categorically wrong? And moreover, why on earth would people fighting for a free nation suddenly take pity on a woman who took everything from them and would continue to run a tyrannical regime on a plane with indigenous cultures?

This is honestly one of the biggest reasons I'm not playing 2E. This was an awful, awful way to handle this, and a big middle finger to anyone who played Ironfang Invasion and didn't show 11th-hour compassion for seemingly no reason.

Any canonical ending will invalidate all other endings, so unless the timeline was stuck and the earlier APs never mentioned, some games were going to be invalidated.

That said, I do agree that parts of this ending don't really sit right. When my group played it, we certainly took Azaersi out and reclaimed the artifact. Playing as an all dwarf party (which works really well for that campaign) might have had something to do with it, but I think we'd make the same decisions anyway. She had a stolen artifact and used it to murder and enslave people wholesale. That's not something you can just go "Oh, well you've had a bad life so we'll let it slide." We might have agreed to some kind of peace settlement, but removing Azersi from power, abolishing slavery and most importantly not keeping the artifact would most likely be non-negotiable positions. And at that point we'd be negotiating as victors. She's a bloody-handed butcher who's people were doing things like making tents out of human skin. I think Oprak is an interesting idea, and kind of cool. But assuming the PCs just let the butcher walk and keep her stolen war-machine just doesn't make a lot of sense to me, especially since she was beaten by that point. Although some of this might also be due to GM interpretation. I haven't read the modules, I just played them. So a lot of the GM facing material didn't reach me.

Oprak can still exist even if Azersei is taken out though. If she's gone, than a less militant leader could take the remnants of the army and fall back to the mountainous regions. Nirmanthis and Molthune might then agree to a peace deal that allows them to keep existing instead of having to go and dislodge them from the harsh area where they could easily wage guerilla warfare. Them having control of the Onyx Citidel is problematic though.

My group has gone fully laptop based for PF1. We even do more than just the sheets, we use a virtual tabletop and a projector to handle maps and movement as well as show character art and such. Maybe I've just gotten lazy and complacient, but I'm not sure I could do PF1 with a paper sheet anymore. There are just too many moving parts. Using auto calculations is incredibly helpful, as is having basically an infinite amount of room to write all the info needed.

I was at one point kind of looking forward to going back to a simpler paper sheet for the PF2 playtest, in large part because of the distractions issue. But quickly I broke down and went digital again. Every level you have to change basically every number on the sheet, and that gets to be a bit much. Also probably some of that laziness I mentioned earlier.

Having the electronic devices can certainly contribute to distractions, the whole group is guilty of this and I know I'm one of the bigger offenders. "Ooh, shiny!" But in the end, for us I think it's the right choice. We go about 12 hours a week, so maintaining a laser focus is probably not going to happen anyway. And most of the distractions are about people chatting than the electronics anyway. Since part of the game is for us to hang out, we take that as an acceptable loss. A group with less time will likely want to keep tighter discipline. But digitization does really help with a lot of things. We can keep an accurate record of where each of those numerical modifiers are coming from, not just using some number you have on your sheet that you no longer even remember what's taken into account and what isn't. Apps like Combat Manager really help make the GMs job easier, with initiative and condition tracking and easy access to monster stats. Hopefully there will be a PF2 version coming soon. Using online resources for rules lookups is also much easier than hunting around for just which book something was in. PF2 might be easier to run without the assistance, but it still helps.

Make shoes not war!

I can't help but wonder whether a new Ancestry was necessary for the Hobgoblin. Surely a Goblin Heritage could have sufficed considering Half-Elves and Half-Orcs?

The different size category is a pretty big incentive to make them a distinct ancestry. Plus they're very distinct and not just a breed of goblin. I doubt they can even interbreed (although a hybrid goblin/hobgoblin would be interesting).

I like the new design. It shows a common gobliniod heritage. While a lot of the PF1 artwork tended to look more like blue-grey orcs with longer ears and no tusks. And I don't think Orcs have been gobliniods since AD&D 2nd, and they certainly are separate in Pathfinder. So they should look more like their actual relatives (especially with the lore that they were created from goblins) and not something they're unrelated to.

I figure the GM approval part of being Uncommon can also cut down on the "But I'm the hob who likes magic!" characters. They're already subject to GM approval for their suitability to the campaign, and hobgoblin wizards could be given more scrutiny. Plus the INT bonus makes them good alchemists as well as wizards. And hobgoblins do like alchemy quite a bit.

Generally speaking, class names, spell names, and such are player facing, not necessarily in-world terminology. Going around calling every angry warrior you meet a barbarian is likely to get you hung from a lamp post or prickly tree in some places, and it's pretty unlikely that anyone is going to self-referentially call themselves a rogue or champion (and much more likely that someone who does self-reference themselves by either of those names isn't actually a member of either class).

*Starts tilting at windmills*

Monk is likewise terrible. Again, it's not what the class is about. The class is about punching people in the face and doing wire-fu stunts. Nothing at all about monasticism. And it introduces confusion where monks aren't all Monks and Monks aren't usually monks. Whenever there is mention of a Monastery I have to wonder if it's for religious ascetics or face-punchers, or is there a weird situation where they're all the same.

While I'm at it, spell levels really should have been renamed. The unified presentation of everything makes it worse in this edition than previously. Item 3, monster 3, feat 3 are all things appropriate for a 3rd level character, Spell 3 is a spell that requires a 5th level character...
*rides off to go fight against the uselessness of the letter C*

THere have been quite a few changes, not just to spells. Are you going to come up with an in universe reason why characters need a feat to get attack of opportunity? Why wands work differently? Why 10th level magic exists? Why shield block is a thing now, but nobody for thousands of years prior thought to block with their shields?

To each their own, I suppose, but for me, “ it’s a new edition of the game and some things work differently” is a perfectly servicable reason, and far simpler than trying to come up with in-universe explanations for all of that.

Yeah, I figure most of these things are abstractions anyway. So there's a bit of room to mess with things. Kind of like how prices have changed. The exact pricing of things isn't really important world lore, same with exact spell effects. But I do think Deadmanwalking is right about how these spells will likely be done if they return, and that it's very possible that they will.

I'm hoping a lot of classic spells and items do come back in later books. I miss the Portable Hole, and this joke being relevant. Also fun crazy spells like Mad Monkeys (seriously, how can anyone not think that spell is awesome, everything is funnier with monkeys) and Explode Head (it even does area of effect damage from the head-shrapnel! HEAD-SHRAPNEL!!) Also more serious spells like the whole Create Pit line (great combat control, at least in theory, almost every time I saw it used they saved or were able to climb right out. I'm still a bit bitter that the magus didn't get those, so they could make a pit and then shove someone into them, seems perfect for the Magus. There's some potential for that kind of use with the new action system), or Blood Biography (great for investigations, it might need some refinement to keep it from being a plot-destroyer though).

I don't think its too bad that a Undead Army needs generals to command it. For me it adds to the flavour and gives the players opportunity for fun roleplay with their undead subordinates.

One general per 4 soldiers is a pretty high ratio though. That's a lot of subordinate casters. Even in PF1 the hit die limits meant true armies were basically impossible without an absurd number of high-level subordinates commanding them. A 20th level character could have 80 1 hd skeletons or zombies. Hardly an army. Tar Baphon required a unique mythic ability to ignore the limit. Sentient undead are both easier and harder. Since they're not directly controlled, there is no limit, but they can also tell you to pound sand.

Doktor Weasel wrote:

Yeah, Dwarves should really get their clan dagger for free. 2gp might not be a lot in the grand scheme of things, but that's 2/15 or 13.33% of the starting wealth. It's probably not a weapon most PCs are going to use much, so that's a sizable chunk for something that's almost entirely flavor.

Also, why are they peircing with versitile blunt? That seems really weird for a dagger. Is it just a heavy spike with no edge? If it cut's umbilical cords, it's probably got an edge, so why blunt and not slashing? Is the dagger on page 284 (right next to the clan dagger entry and looking very dwarfy) supposed to be a clan dagger? That's a choppy looking knife. I supose the blunt is coming from the gem on the pommel. This is not the most vital thing, but I like to know how things are supposed to work. And the current description doesn't explain it.

Slashing before cutting. Blunt forever after ;-D

Dwarves have addamantine umbilical cords. It blunts the blade permanently. :)

how do you "seed" a dungeon with consumables when crafting the consumables in the first place is, economy-wise, a TERRIBLE decision by the crafter.

Not specifically consumables, but I've always had a similar issue. There are a lot of items that are just bad, so who is making them? Where are these Rods of Wonder coming from? There can't be any significant demand for them, they're useless items that only gets printed because it's iconic and produced a few chuckles back in the 70s. Or my favorite punching bag for this edition, the Bracers of Missile Deflection. They're crap, a mundane shield is much better, who would want one? So who's making all the stuff that your party immediately says "It's useless, sell it," and who's buying it?

Yeah, Dwarves should really get their clan dagger for free. 2gp might not be a lot in the grand scheme of things, but that's 2/15 or 13.33% of the starting wealth. It's probably not a weapon most PCs are going to use much, so that's a sizable chunk for something that's almost entirely flavor.

Also, why are they peircing with versitile blunt? That seems really weird for a dagger. Is it just a heavy spike with no edge? If it cut's umbilical cords, it's probably got an edge, so why blunt and not slashing? Is the dagger on page 284 (right next to the clan dagger entry and looking very dwarfy) supposed to be a clan dagger? That's a choppy looking knife. I supose the blunt is coming from the gem on the pommel. This is not the most vital thing, but I like to know how things are supposed to work. And the current description doesn't explain it.

Longstrider is a status bonus, which stacks with Boots of Bounding which are an item bonus. The monk speed bonus is also a status bonus, so still the fastest rocket elf-monk that I can see off the top of my head is still 85 foot movement speed with permanent 4 actions a turn at 20th level (38.6 mph Zoom!). But this can bump the speed of non-monks decently.

And as for alchemists and consumables... Yeah, the consumable pricing is just absurd. The only reason to ever use any higher level alchemical items is if you have an alchemist in the party making them for free. Non-infused alchemical items are just a waste of money.

And from what I've seen, consumables are worse than even in the playtest. The terrible pricing was commented on at the time, so it wasn't just an oversight but a conscious decision to make the pricing so bad. My guess is that's a consequence of taking out resonance (an idea that should never have gotten as far as the playtest. Yeah, I'm still bitter about Resonance. It will forever give me pause that Paizo thought it was worth trying). It really looks like the main thing they were looking at for consumables was how to prevent 'abuse' but giving less thought to what would make something that you actually want to use.

The price scaling of healing potions is particularly bad. And it doesn't need to be, considering free healing is easily available with focus based healing and Treat Wounds. But it does encourage guzzling lots of cheap potions instead of a single higher level version. The price her HP healed on average scales like so:

Minor: 0.89 gp/hp
Lesser: 0.85 gp/hp
Moderate: 2.13 gp/hp
Greater: 8.51 gp/hp
Major: 75.76 gp/hp

That's absurd. Particularly the Major. The playtest had bad scaling, but it was much better than this. The playtest ratios were: 0.67, 0.62, 0.93, 1.74, 4.85, 17.01 respectively (there was one more potion and the levels varied a bit from the final).

The one thing that starts to make healing potions and other consumable prices start to make some sense is looking at them from the point of view of percentage of total expected lifetime party wealth at the level of the item. Here's the numbers for that:

Minor: 2.29%
Lesser: 1.23%
Moderate: 0.97%
Greater: 0.75%
Major: 1.98%

So the major is still overpriced even using this metric. I'm hoping it will get fixed in the errata. Dropping it's price to 1500 gp would make it fit into the progression much better by being 0.59%, and continuing the trend of parties being able to afford more potions of an appropriate level as they go up in level. Makes the GP/HP ratio less obscene too (but still pretty bad at 22.73 gp/hp). It still feels dramatically overpriced, but there would at least be some justification for it. I haven't run the numbers adjusted for how much HP characters would have at those levels. So if the higher level potions don't give as much of a percentage of the total HP as the cheaper ones at the level of the potion, then it'd go back to being bad scaling.

I think shroudb's batch pricing is also a good idea. Especially combined with the repricing of the Major, it might actually be kind of worth using.

Only Grenade that looks useful is the one Soldiers can make as that's at least 'reusable' and you can splice some effects to it later I think.

But is this just wands being king again or are staffs also up there too? Playtest looked to try to improve staffs but I haven't really checked that section too much.

From my read, staves don't look too great. They still require 1 charge per spell level, and each day gain a number of charges equal to your highest spell level, and you can only prepare one staff. So effectively it's a wand if you use the highest level spell. Although there is a bit more, prepared casters can spend a spell slot to get that many charges extra (only doable once a day, so you can get double by expending a top level spell), while spontaneous casters can cast any spell for 1 charge plus using a spell slot of that level. It looks a bit better for spontaneous casters, in that they can supplement their spell repertoire with the staff. There's also an added benefit each staff gives, for the school staves it's generally a +2 on rolls to identify magic of that school.

Roswynn wrote:

My girl says back in her day all this multiclassing b@##@*!$ didn't even exist, and the classes were something like man-at-arms, cleric, magic user, thief, elf, dwarf and halfling. I asked her if she's f%!+ing with me and she just laughed O___O

Your girl is right, although they were always called "Fighter" - the man-at-arms category is from Palladium, if memory serves.

I think the very earliest version of D&D (the 1974 set) had the class called 'Fighting-Man.' Although I also think classes and races were separate in that version. This was actually before my time. I started with the Red Box Basic Set (the 1983 version with the Larry Elmore cover) where the demi-humans were classes. I think the races as class was an invention of the "Basic" line, when they split AD&D and the boxed sets in 1977 (the year before I was born). All of this is to say, D&D has a really convoluted history. I still kind of boggle at the idea of making AD&D and Basic D&D as incompatible games that evolved separately. It's a really weird way of doing things.

I feel like the biggest impediment (for me at least) to taking ancient elf for that sweet sweet optimization is trying to come up with a backstory for how I didn't gain a single class level in the last 280ish years.

Like Goblins who are 8 years old have picked up as many trained skills as I have...

I had a hard enough time justifying that for a 136 year old elf. Especially since I reject the idea that they physically mature that much slower. Someone who's an infant for decades is just a bit too absurd for me. I went for having to save up a lot of money for magical college (she's an Arcanist) after her parents cut her off, and then getting distracted a lot by life along the way.

But I've always had a hard time visualizing pre-1st level characters. Before 1st level they're kind of in this nebulous state where they don't really have any stats. Back in AD&D you had 0-level characters, but with 3rd ed that got replaced by NPC classes. I think there's a 3rd party pathfinder supplement with different classes for non-adult characters that get changed into a standard class at 1st level after they mature. I never did get around to checking it out (and don't recall what it was called or who made it), but I thought the concept sounded interesting.

Of course I think the starting ages of elves will be closer to humans now with PF2. It no longer has the starting age table where you can't start younger than 114 if you're doing it all by the table. And it's explicitly stated in the core book that elves reach maturity by 20 (so slightly slower than humans, but not absurd). So I figure starting in their 20s and 30s might be more the norm going forward, which is much easier to justify.

I miss slutty Succubus, inbreed Ogers and childrien-eaters Goblins.

All are still around, just not quite so explicit. A lot of the 'toning down' of pathfinder is simply making such things implicit instead of explicit. This also allows for easy customization at your table. Pathfinder Baseline is just that, a baseline. A group that wants content outside of it can easily have it by simply giving more details.

It's a smart move on Paizo's part to have the baseline be something acceptable to the widest audience. The grit is still there under the surface.

To be fair, we've been doing this all along, for the most part. Many of these nonhuman ethnicities have existed for a while, but they've been sprinkled around here and there over the course of more than a decade. This was a great chance to gather everyone together in one place right at the start, while at the same time giving the same attention to other ancestries that didn't get that specific attention.

That's true. I didn't mean to dump on you guys too hard. I was more thinking of the whole D&D lineage and other fiction with non-human races. You have at least mentioned these other groups, they just didn't get a whole lot of coverage. But now it looks like they're really getting a chance to shine.

Shame the book doesn't come out until October (I think?) since the character I want to play in Age of Ashes is 100% a Fell Gnome. I don't even know what it does yet (it could do nothing for all it matters) I just know they're a Fell Gnome.

There was a Fell Gnome heritage in the playtest, so it might be similar to that one. At the very least you could maybe use that until the book comes out with the final version.

Unlike most gnomes, you have a connection to some of the darker fey, such as gremlins and redcaps. You can cast chill touch as an innate primal spell at will. The cantrip is heightened to a spell level equal to half your level rounded up.

So there you go. Related to nasty fey, and gives chill touch. I think the final heritages give a little more than the playtest versions, so it might be a bit more than that. Alternately they could decide to go a different direction.

I, for one, welcome our new monkey goblin overlords.

I think you mean monkey goblin pirate overlords. Bit to revive an old meme, they'll probably have to contend with ninja goblins (because they must exist) for overlord status.

And because I'm a sophisticated adult with mature tastes, I kind of want monkey goblins to have some poo flinging ability. I'm just classy that way.

Ok, this is looking pretty awesome. It's long been a bit of an annoyance that only humans seem to have any real cultural/ethnic divisions while non-humans tended to be mono-cultures (well with the exception of elves in previous editions of D&D, where they were always sub-races with their own stat-blocks. Creating elf sub-races seems to be a common game designer hobby). This is common across fiction, how often do you see an alien species in sci-fi with more than one language and culture? Almost never. So this is certainly welcome. It's also good for representation. We've got non-white dwarves now. Awesome. The art is also great.

I'm also liking the rarity gating. There were issues with feats and other options with cultural connections to certain region were taken solely for mechanical benefit. This should help curb the tendency to use options intended to spice up a culture as a power grab-bag.

I think that a book like this could very well become a series. You're clearly not going to be able to cover everything in a single book. And when new ancestries are introduced, they won't have the benefit of this kind of regional treatment. So later installments could fill that in.

An all aquatic races AP, with a party of sea elves, gillmen, deep one hybrids, merfolk, locathah, etc. (do they even have koapoacinth/aquatic hobgoblins in Golarion? Or Merrow/aquatic ogres? I don't even know...) could be fun. For me, anyway. :)

That sounds cool. Also reminds me of an idea I had. Mine was a Darklands game with all Darklander races: Caligni instead of Humans, Drow instead of elves, Duergar for Dwarves and Svifneblin for Gnomes. There isn't an exact counterpart for Halflings, but Derro might work. For a non-evil game, the PCs will likely be outcasts of some type, because of the evil lean of several of those cultures. Paizo does seem to be experimenting with themed parties with Extinction Curse featuring an all circus party and I believe Agents of Edgewatch being all city guard. So Something like all aquatics or all darklanders might be something they'd do.

I don't miss gratuitous use of the word 'whore' to describe women who aren't actual prostitutes (like the newly-renamed 'Night Queens' of Hell, or the 'Harlot-Queen of Geb,' so-called by the colossal misogynistic losers who A) got her killed in the first place by summoning her to fight something even her boss and elder god couldn't decisively destroy, and B) picked a fight with the guy who retaliated by looting the tomb of the goddess they'd gotten killed and raised her up to be his undying queen in the first place).

Oh yeah, that was a really unfortunate set of name choices, and I'm happy to see them go. I think the intent for the Whore Queens was partly to show the misogyny of Hell. It's Hell, having negative traits like that is to be expected. But it was a bit much. Arazni's title was much worse. She's the victim there, multiple times over (including a non-consensual 'marriage') and to top it off she's the one who gets an insulting title.

The tricky thing is that this is kind of two different questions, and the two tables given are for different things, and work differently. That's something that threw me off at first.

Table 10-10 (the one mentioned above by Ravingdork) shows what characters should start with if starting at a certain level. Permanent items would be anything not consumable, held items, worn items, weapons, armor, wands, staves, mundane gear, etc. Not all of it will be magic, especially the 1st level items will often just be mundane gear like standard weapons and armor. Non-magical full plate would be 2nd level.

But for how much is recommended to give out at each level is table 10-9. This is done by 4 member party instead of individually. And in this chart each level listing is how much is given out at that level. So A standard 4 person party should be getting 175 gp worth of stuff from when they start to when they hit 2nd level, with the breakdown by items and currency given in other columns (40 gp would be in currency with the rest in items, 2 permanent 2nd level and 2 permanent 1st level items as well as 2 2nd level consumables and 3 1st). Lifetime treasure for the party would be the sum of all levels up to the level they're at. So when starting 5th level for example, a standard 4 person party should have been given about 175 + 300 + 500 + 850 = 1825 gp worth of total treasure from the beginning of the game up until the time they hit level 5. This is different than the starting treasure listed on 10-10. For starting at 5th level a character would have 270 gp total value, far less than the quarter share of the total lifetime party treasure up to that point (1825/4=456.25gp). I assume this is because some of that wealth is expected to have been used up instead of hoarded.

I can't say the following are my favorite cities YET, because I haven't seen enough of them, but I am looking forward to seeing more about Almas and/or Augustana . . . of course, I am looking forward to seeing more about Andoran.

On the perverse side, I want to see more about Isarn, because I want to see more about Galt.

I'm curious how many revolutions they've had in Galt since the Inner Sea World Guide was published.

I like how the various cities tend to have some serious distinguishing features and local quirks, giving them all a unique feel. I'm rather fond of Lepidstadt, partly because my first real GMing experience (not counting the rather half-assed games I did as a kid) was an attempt at Carrion Crown some years ago that stopped after the second book (Players all said they were enjoying it, but I was stressing out and wasn't feeling good about it, I had a lot of other stuff going on at the time which contributed). Now years later, some of the players were asking me to give it a second shot, so I did. We're currently at the beginning of the final book and I'm enjoying myself much more than last time, although I certainly will appreciate a rest when it's done. (I've also called tentative dibs on running Tyrant's Grasp eventually). My prep for this involved a lot of focus on the first two books in particular, and so Lepidstadt really made an impression. I like the university town feel and the early-modern humanist feel to it (most of Ustalav feels more like 17th-19th centuries than medieval, but Lepidstadt especially).

Carrion Hill seems to have a lot of promise too (I ran the module named after the city as part of the AP). It's bigger than Lepidstadt, so gives more room to fit things in. The atmosphere is great for a horror game. It feels oppressively crowded, with a lot of decay and the remnants of the earlier cities beneath. We also found this great fan made side view of the city which really helps you understand the verticality of the city, which is referred to in the text a lot, but is hard to get form the maps (not that the maps are bad, they're rather good. But the format of a flat top-down map is hard to really get a feel for the towering mound that the city is described as). The city also has purple cockroach cement, so that's a plus.

Korvosa has the Imps and Pseudodragons, like gangs of dueling pigeons. And that's just awesome.

Kaer Maga doesn't just have quirks, it is a quirk. That's the city of weird. It's awesome.

Riddleport is a lot of fun. A chaotic hive of scum and villany with all of it's hooks for criminal plot-lines. And it's got the Cypher Guild and arch to add a magical angle on top of the criminal one. This could be a fun town for a street-level game dealing with the various criminal factions.

Getting the Elixir would be the best chance if he does not want to become undead. But I would try to buy it. Trying to steal it would not only get the seller on his case, but the other bidders, too. And that could get too much even for him.

Well, he doesn't have to steal it from the seller. Stealing it from the buyer might be an easier thing. And pin the whole thing on some convenient stooges (like the PCs) to take the blame instead of him.

Of course there is the very real possibility that Razmir isn't the same Razmir who started the country. Dude wears a mask whenever he's seen. Who would notice if he was replaced by another dude in a mask? I call this the "Dread Pirate Razmir" theory. Another could be that there never was a Razmir, that it's a persona used by an organization, or even some non-human entity.

There's also the possibility of him actually taking the test of the Starstone (assuming he's one person). If he gets desperate enough, he might chance it. He's got some real power, and already being worshiped as a god, and that might help somehow. It's possible he's been studying it and preparing for years. Or because he's got a cult / organized crime ring with lots of magic, he might pull some other shenanigans. Like stealing the Starstone itself. Get all Carmaen Sandiego on that thing.

Doktor Weasel wrote:

lowfyr01 wrote:

Until old age catches up to him^^

He should have hit 20th level and taken Immortality as an arcane discovery while it was available.

Too late, that's a 1E thing.

Well yeah, that was what I meant by "when it was available."

Here's an example of a level 9 character with double class feats

Looks like the extra feats went to allow some basic rogue abilities while maintaining a good sword and board build. Seems reasonable and fun. Certainly no cause for alarm. So yeah, a feat a level is preobably perfectly reasonable. If an when my group moves to PF2, I might very well suggest it, but we'll probably try to play it by the book first.

I rather like that sheet too, it's clean and well organized (the official one seems a bit busy for my tastes).

THE ultimate point of the game is for the PC's to defeat every single one of your bad guys and then queue up for the next lot that comes along.

I disagree pretty strongly. Some of these big bads looming in the background is a big part of the setting's feel. Tar Baphon's point is to be a constant lurking menance. I'm undecided on if his breaking free was a good move or not in that regard. But taking him out removes so much more from the setting than the satisfaction of killing him provides. He shapes the history of nations, and is a name known to everyone. Killing him leaves a big hole in the setting. Same with other big threats like Razmir, Geb, The House of Thrune etc. The setting is richer for having them around. Replacing them with new villains that just kind of pop up gets pretty silly rather quickly. But it is a bit tricky to keep the threats around without it becoming a tedious "Dr. Claw always gets away" kind of situation.

I had this concern too. I'm still not certain if it's an issue or not, but it's a possible one. Mostly because class feats are pulling double duty for customization and class abilities.

Thankfully, I'm pretty sure it was confirmed that the GMG will include class feats at every level as an official optional rule. Yeah, you can house rule it now, but sometimes having it printed is what helps convince a GM to allow it. My main concern with a class feat every level is that it will kind of encourage everyone to multiclass all the time, because you'll often find it where you've taken all the good looking class feats, so you might as well multiclass. As more class feats are released though, this will probably become less of an issue, but the ease of multiclassing will make it very attractive. Whether that's a pro or con depends on the individual. I personally want a sweet spot of multiclassing being very doable, but not so easy that it's the default for everyone to have multiple multiclass dedications.

How about not only not in the Inner Sea, but not on Golarion? I've been wanting a planet-hopping Sword and Planet style AP for a while. It's probably less likely to happen with Starfinder around though. I was figuring the Dominion of the Black would likely be the big enemies (I was originally thinking this would be around the rundown of the doomsday clocks, but that's done now). You could start on Golarion, but early in the first book, find a portal to the moon and uncover the main plot. Then from there it's generally one planet for each book. Going to Castroval to team up with amazon dino-riders, then to Akiton for some four-armed shenanigans. Book four would probably be on Eox with some undead action. Not entirely certain about book 5. Eventually ending up on Aucturn for the final battle to prevent the evil invasion of evil. There's lots of room here for pulpy fun, the planets were made for it, so lets use them for it. The portal hopping thing is being used for Age of Ashes though, so that is another strike against this.

Also, bonus points if they fit flumphs into this. Because flumphs (yes, they're their own reason). Relatedly, if there isn't some filk out there about flumphs to the tune of The Presidents of the United States of America's Lump, then I'll be very disappointed in nerd culture. It can exist, so it must exist.

Including evil of that nature was one thing, but giving player options concerning said evil was a whole nother beast.

All deities were established to have obedience bonuses for some time before that. Simply not including evil deities would be odd, especially since the way NPCs and PCs operated on the same rules meant that you need those there for evil NPCs to have bonuses. And horrible gods will have horrible dedications. Some of the previously published ones included human sacrifice and cannibalism. It wasn't until Folca's was published that there was really an outcry. It is a sensitive subject, and one that they probably didn't handle as delicately as they should have. But I think the reaction was disproportionate and deprived the setting of a truly disturbing villain.

Note that if you want to put a little more of an "edge" into what's going on, the material and implications are usually there.

Yeah, this is my thought too. There's plenty of edgy material around, but it's now usually implied more than outright stated. Although I do miss some of the more explicit examples. I did appreciate that Pathfinder was a game written for adults. But that can be a bit limiting for it's growth.

I do think that getting rid of Folca is unfortunate. It seems to have come from an overreaction by people who took things out of context. Folca was a literal boogieman. It totally makes sense that one of the daemon harbingers would A disgustingly horrible daemon. The fact that he's disgustingly horrible is kind of the point. The kind of things he was responsible for and encouraged were shocking. But isn't that kind of what extra-planer evil is all about?

Oh, I was way off. Looks like there is a different style of Knuckle Knife on the same page as the description, subtler with a less pronounced main blade, much smaller pommel spike, and less obvious knuckle cage. It looks a lot more like a traditional knife someone attached a knuckleduster to.

Yeah, the core book has a more normal knuckle-duster knife on the page, so some confusion is going to occur. And to make it even more confusing, there is yet a third design that I think is supposed to be the orc knuckle-dagger in the original orc concept art (which was not ultimately used, so this might have also been an earlier non-used form of the knife). It's got the blades on each side and a katar like blade coming out the front instead of the meat-tenderizer style spikes from the bestiary. But the core book does mention they sometimes have this, so I think it's a variant.

I think the guy on the right of that concept art has the original design for the Orc Necksplitter, which in the playtest was a knife. But for the final book it's been changed to an axe. Possibly because there were just too many knives in the playtest, and both the orc weapons being knives was kind of odd.

I seem to remember reading somewhere that a medieval Pope (Innocent?) banned the use of crossbows by Christians in warfare against other Christians because they were too effective.

Canon 29 of The Second Lateran Council. This is an often repeated fact, and it's true to a point, but it's usually forgotten that the same canon also banned normal bows. It's likely it was intended to ban all missile weapons. "We prohibit under anathema that murderous art of crossbowmen and archers, which is hateful to God, to be employed against Christians and Catholics from now on." It was of course completely ignored. Canon 14 banned tournaments and jousts. It was also ignored. This was in the 12th century, when crossbows were suplanting standard bows as military bows in most of Europe, with the exception of England where they liked their Longbows. Not that the English didn't use crossbows, or mainlanders didn't use longbows. They did, just not as commonly. A lot of cities in the Holy Roman Empire (mostly modern Germany, Austria and the Czech Republic, but also other parts of central Europe) and Italy relied on militia for their defense, and crossbows were quite useful for them.

The bit about crossbows requiring less training is a point that's usually made to mention their popularity. But there are a few other details too. It's not so much the skill training that was easier than traditional archery, but the strength training. Bows used for warfare tended to have a much higher draw weight than those used for hunting. (The draw weight is the weight hung from the string that would draw it to full). The extra strength was to ensure penetration of thick cloth and mail, as well as longer ranges. The issue on whether bows can puncture plate armor is highly controversial with a lot of bad testing going on. From what I've seen it looks like the answer is probably: not usually, at least not the strong parts like the breastplate, but possibly getting into a gap or weak point like side of the visor or piecing cheaply made armor. But with a large mass of arrows, it's more likely that a few will find gaps in the enemy's armor. 50-60 pounds makes for a good hunting bow, but the range for war bows seems to be 90-200 pounds. They also shot much heavier and thicker arrows. That's specifically for the English longbow (particularly based on the Mary Rose finds), but from what I've been able to see, it's also the general range for other war bows, like the recurve bows used by the Turks, Arabs, Mongols, Chinese etc. That's a very heavy bow, there are few archers in the world today that are able to repeatedly draw and acurately shoot a traditional weight war bow, but the skill is starting to come back. It requires muscle groups that aren't used in some other activities, so just lifting weights isn't necessarily enough to get you there. It's to the point that archeologists can easily identify the skeletons of archers because of the bone deformation caused by constantly drawing that heavy bow. So that's why the English had laws that every man had to train with the Longbow every Sunday after church, and why it was much easier to train crossbowmen.

But the idea that longbowmen were the elite and crossbowmen were all untrained slobs is also a myth. Standard pay for a good mercenary crossbowman was actually higher than a longbowman, which wouldn't be the case if that was true. It's just the barrier to entry is lower in terms of training. In areas where crossbows were popular, they trained with them a lot, and had frequent shooting competitions (I saw some bits about how some of the German Cities actually had women competing fairly often, but I also heard about on in particular where the top prize, was a woman, and the winner got to marry her. She volunteered and ended up marrying a merchant who won). Some of those same areas sill have crossbow competitions as part of their cultural heritage. While slower than longbows, crossbows are more accurate.

Crossbows usually had a much higher draw weight than even the heavy warbows, but used mechanical devises to make spanning it easier. From stirrups and spanning belts, to levers cranequins and windlasses. That upper end 200 pounds for war bows is near the lower ends for medieval crossbows, some got up to 1,000 pound draw weight or even higher. That doesn't mean they were much stronger though. Draw weight is only one part of the equation, there is also draw length, how far back the string is drawn. This is also known as the Power Stroke, how much distance the force is applied over. Longer is better. Longbows draw from the outstreached left hand, across the body to the base of the right cheek, 30 inches was a common length. Crossbows on the other hand only drew back like 10 inches or so. A longer length given the high draw would have increased the risk of breaking, which could seriously injure or kill the user. This loses a lot of efficiency, so they don't hit with quite as much energy as would be expected for the high weight. Earlier crossbows were less powerful with shorter range than the longbows, but as time went on, they got higher and higher draw weights and became more powerful and longer ranged than the longbows, especially some of the big cranequin or windlass drawn crossbows.

There's a lot of mythology and half-truths out there with regard to bows and crossbows, it's really a more nuanced topic than it's often treated as. Early guns too.

CorvusMask wrote:

In general though, I can't think of many straight examples of Paizo adventure assuming you attack a tribe of people without provocation just because you assume they are evil :P

Like, that is a D&D trope, but in Paizo's adventures you usually attack someone who has already attacked someone or they have big bloody "We are evil look at this mutilated body hanging over the wall" type signs :p

(I think closest examples might have been in ironfang somewhere or kingmaker? I can't really remember, but I recall it possibly happening in some wilderness adventure)

Playing Kingmaker now. Our party's "battle cry" (later became our national motto) is to wave and call out "HELLO, FRIEND!" as soon as we're close enough to see anything that might have language skills.

So far, we've made friends with four faeries, two tribes of kobolds, a tribe of mites, a boggard, a ghost, a werewolf, and a group of travelling gnomes. I think the gnomes were actually the shiftiest of the bunch, and we didn't quite trust them.

My character is a total nerd who spent years preparing for this expedition (elf with high int). He heard that there might be fae, kobolds, and/or mites in the area (info from the Kingmaker Player's Guide), so he made a point of learning the sylvan, draconic, and undercommon languages in advance, just to be prepared. So the fact that we could talk to all these critters, and tried to make peace, was something the printed adventure didn't anticipate in all cases, but we managed to do it.

Of course, we've killed plenty of non-friendlies along the way, as well, including other werewolves, boggards, and even humans.

Sounds like a fun group, and one that fits in with my own style. For the past few years our games have been in a shared world around our Wrath of the Righteous campaign. Drezen is basically an Island of Misfit toys were all sorts of weirdos can come live in peace. We've got an Otyugh shopkeeper (canonical character from another AP who got directed there by another party), friendly tentacle monsters form the shadow plane, a CN Qlipoth cleric of Desna. He figures if more people worshiped Desna, they wouldn't become demons, so then he can have the Abyss back. Converting demons an even higher priority because it makes them non-demons Yeah, he's nuts, but fun. Said Qlipoth has also had a lot of successes. There is a choir of redeemed Quasits and even a massive siege demon who now just wants to build things in peace. And more recently a bunch of skittermanders have been unleashed in the area. Cheerful technicolor chaos will ensue.

And this style of play apparently isn't even uncommon. I remember when the devs talked about the survey results from the playtest, they found that the majority of parties in Part 4, Mirrored Moon, peacefully negotiated with the Cyclops tribe (normally an evil race) and became allies. This is a strong data-point against the idea that most Pathfinder players are murderhobos (at least among playtest survey participants). I don't recall if the percentage was mentioned or not, but I think it was a strong majority.

Appletree wrote:

For what little it counts, my players, most of them previously from 5e only, don't appear to have had much trouble picking up the rules.

Liar! Pf2 is the most obscure tpg since Eclipse Phase. If you think it's easy you must be a blinded fanboy.

I wish I could get my group interested in Eclipse Phase. So much cool stuff, although the system might be a little lot clunky. The concepts are awesome though with resleeving tech, cortical stacks, post scarcity economies, uplifts and lots of semi-hard SF. And also more gonzo things that result from that like Meathab, the Scum with stuff like their Swarm Cat races and RMGCNN.

The ShadowShackleton wrote:

It feels like a lot of things people don’t like will be resolved in a book or two. I saw a lot of the same with early pathfinder where it took a few years before many groups switched over from 3.5.

It’s early days.

For what it’s worth I think the new system will be a tremendous boon for introducing new players to the game.

I do not think PF2 is new player friendly; it's very dense, byzantine, seems more like an advanced RPG.

I really don't see it. I'd say PF1 was much more byzantine. Lots of things that all work slightly differently and weird edge-case rules. After a decade my group still runs into weird situations where we have to look things up and then argue over them for way longer than it should take. PF2 is rather dense, with a lot of options, but the base rules are pretty simple and straight forward in comparison. Everything works in a consistant fashion everywhere (well Spell Levels are an odd man out, working differently from all other levels, but I'll leave that old Hobby Horse for another day). It's probably harder for old players to pick up than new ones, because you've got to get over how it used to be done and lose your initial assumptions. I think it was mentioned that the playtest data showed exactly that, new players were catching on very quickly, faster than the experienced ones.