keftiu wrote:
Well, even if the theory is right Paizo still wouldn't be expecting everyone buying the core rule book to know or be aware of this in world event. Most people buying the game won't know about all of the supplemental projects, so the deities in the core rule book would still need to be playable as is even if one of them might be getting eliminated in an adventure later on.
I don't know what book it was from, but I love the lore that Cayden Cailean lets orphans without a last name use his. It's such a nice little detail and it improved my opinions of Cayden 1000x when I learned it. I used to think of him as mainly the party god, but that little piece of information is why I now understand that he is firmly Good with a capital G even if Pathfinder is moving away from alignment. In my most recent game of Wrath of the Righteous I'm playing an Azata named Themir Cailean who worships Cayden, with the headcanon that he was an orphan who took the god's name due to his lack of parents.
Aaron Shanks wrote:
I got my refund, thank you. I don't want to be rude, but I do want to be firm about something. I really don't think you should consider this acceptable as a product. It looks really bad. Obviously I can't speak for everybody, but I personally won't be buying any other pdfs that share this similar lack of quality. And previously I would just buy pdfs from here without question, but it's worrying to hear that you consider it okay to sell something which looks like this. It is a big disappointment because I really wanted to read this one, and it was the book I've been looking forward to the most since it was announced. Anyways, I got my money back so I'm going to move on now. There are other books to read. Thank you for your time.
Aaron Shanks wrote:
Is there a way to get a refund then?
I would be surprised if it was Sarenrae because I think she's the element of Pathfinder lore that has the most "reach". Even people who have never heard of Paizo know who she is because of Critical Role and it's a very good "funnel" towards Pathfinder to have her out there. But that foreshadowing is pretty damning, so what do I know. One question I have is, do we know if they planned out this storyline prior to the OLG disaster? Because if they didn't I think that increases the probability of it being Asmodeus.
AJCarrington wrote:
Good idea, I also sent in an email about this. Hopefully they see that this matters a lot to people - I for one would not keep buying pdfs on here if they are all going to be of this low quality going forward.
What I'm really interested in is how much story there will be. I will play an arpg with a really good story, but I can never hold any interest in one that puts all of it's focus into gameplay. Happy this exists for the people who want it, but I probably won't be backing it unless we see something really interesting in the stretch goals or something similar.
This is my first time posting here, so I'm sorry if there are any weird formatting issues. So, I'm a big fan of Golarion, but my biggest issue with the 1E lore was the way atheists* were depicted and treated by the cosmology. Either we were running God's Not Dead esque nations of religious intolerance, or getting sacrificed to the apocalypse god, or else just being left to rot and spend eternity in the boneyard. Nothing as bad as the Wall of Atheists, but that's a low bar and there's really no reason for such ill treatment. I do remember one city in Heaven made up of the souls of atheists that were fighting for recognition, which was nice, but I have no idea why that isn't just the normal situation. I haven't read any new 2E books that cover the River of Souls (not saying they don't exist - just that I haven't read them) so I was just wondering if this was still the case or not. I have always thought it would be such a simple way of doing things to just say that atheists* go to whatever plane of existence matches their alignment like everybody else but just not to any particular god's domain within that plane. This is my first post here, so I hope this doesn't come across as trying to stir up trouble, I'm really just looking for answers. *Atheists in this case referring to people who don't deny the existence of the beings who call themselves gods but at the same time don't believe they deserve worship just for being powerful. I'm aware that this isn't how the word is used in the real world, but it's the closest analogue and commonly used. |