Jürgen Hubert's page

By this point, there is an awful lot of material published for both Pathfinder and Starfinder. However, all of it is published under the OGL - which Paizo is unlikely to use once the ORC license is finalized.

Which leaves the question how, when, and if older rules material will be made available under the ORC license so that others can use it.

I mean, I think it's a given that the Pathfinder 2E and the Starfinder rules will be released under the ORC license pretty quickly. But what about rules supplements? Or adventure paths and scenarios? Not all of these might be worth the effort of rereleasing them under the new license.

And Pathfinder 1E material probably won't be rereleased under the ORC license at all, since that would require significant editing work - unless it's done as an update to the Pathfinder 2E rules via a crowdfunding campaign (as it has happened with the Kingmaker campaign, for instance).

Okay, here is my crystal ball gazing and rampant speculation for a possible game plan for Paizo - assuming that the OGL 1.1 is published as leaked.

All 2E products become _temporarily_ unavailable for sale. Then they are aggressively errataed, with the errata clarifying that the OGL is removed (and hopefully replaced with a more suitable license). There will also be all sorts of minor name changes to remove what might be recognized as "iconic elements" of D&D - for example, renaming "magic missile" into "force missile", and so forth (see the Pathfinder Adventure Card Game for examples). This process will start with the core rule books and move out from there. Physical stock will get sheets of paper with the errata added to the packages. Production of new material will temporarily slow down to ensure that the new products will fully comply with the new rules, but hopefully they will soon return to full speed.

All 1E products will remain unavailable for the time being. However, the more popular 1E Adventure Paths will eventually receive Kickstarters so that they can be updated to 2E _and_ be compliant with the new situation.

All this added effort - and loss of back sales - will still hurt Paizo, but hopefully it will be manageable.

I'm about to start playing in the Giantslayer campaign, and I will play a Skald (Spell Warrior) from the Lands of the Linnorm Kings. He insulted the wrong Linnorm King (three guesses which one), and decided that getting out of the region was preferable to an ignoble end by the king's henchmen. Nevertheless, he is searching for an opportunity to witness event worthy of a new saga - hence his presence in Trunau.

As a skald, he should interpret events around him through the lens of Ulfen sagas and folk tales, and constantly make references to these tales. And this is where I could use some ideas and assistance.

- Who are the great culture heroes (and villains) of the Ulfen?
- What were some epic quests and tales of adventure that an Ulfen character might feel worth emulating?
- What are some good Ulfen proverbs and sayings that a skald might quote?

The "Lands of the Linnorm Kings" seems to be a bit light on these topics - so feel free to come up with any ideas of your own!

You need to use the product categories and subcategories.

For example

Store>Pathfinder>Accessories>Maps>Flip Tiles puts you on a page that has an "On Sale" tab with 16 products on sale in the Flip Tiles category.

Store>Exclusives>Apparel and Gifts>Figures And Plush puts you on a page that has an "On Sale" tab with 5 products on sale in the Figures And Plush category

If the Black Friday Sale is truly active, then it doesn't have the PDF sales of previous years as far as I can determine.

Since this is the part I am actually interested in, I will sit this one out.

Because the presumption of innocence is and has been the corner-stone of any enlightened juridical system and society, and has been so since the early Roman Republic and from that moment forward. Only in the darkest reaches of the medieval era did we fall back into the presumption of the inherent guilt of accused.

This is not a judicial trial, and none of us are in a courtroom. And in fact, most cases of sexual harassment never get this far because the victims are pressured to keep quiet.

We've heard the statements of the victims and witnesses, and I believe we should take their statements seriously. Meanwhile, the other side has made no comment, or joked about the incidents without bothering to do something fiendishly difficult like an outright denial.

The current attitude seems to be that all allegations are true, the only way for the accused to react that doesn't make things worse is to admit and apologize, being accused means someone is a worthless human being (if that), shunning someone who has been accused makes you complicit, and claiming "innocent until proven guilty" is a microaggression.

I thought America had learnt from the days of random accusations and published lists of suspected communists.

Guess not.

The problem with looking at the incidents like this is that the alleged perpetrators haven't even bothered to deny what happened - instead they deny that what they did was anything worthy of censure. Indeed, some of them are even joking about it.

So this doesn't appear to be a "witch hunt". Instead it has become apparent that some of thr most prominent members of our hobby cannot tell right from wrong.

I almost never post here (or anywhere for that matter), but this topic has made me delurk.

I absolutely believe Jessica Price and Robert Brookes.

And what they say about Mentzer and Webb is damning enough. But there is another thing that I have to speak up about:

That a volunteer was silenced from reporting the abuse or harassment they suffered while participating as a volunteer because they were under NDA.

That is absolutely not what NDAs are for. An NDA exists to protect trade secrets and business practices, not to silence victims. If terrible anti-harassment policies are a trade secret or business practice that Paizo has to protect itself from with an NDA, then Paizo is not the publisher I thought they were and are unworthy of our support, monetarily or as volunteers.

And while Paizo might be reluctant to comment on these incident before some further internal investigation, it would be useful for them in public to clarify precisely this - that their NDAs are not intended to prevent victims of harassment from speaking about their experiences, and that they won't pursue actions (legal or otherwise) against those who do speak out.

Burroughs' Red Martians did lay eggs, they also could live a thousand years. Starfinders version are just humans with red skin.

Sadly, they are also very underrepresented in the art (as in, is there any art of them at all in the Starfinder publications?), despite presumably representing much of what is left of humanity outside of Golarion.

In science fiction, too. I mean, is there a "half anything" character in Star Trek who isn't half human?

And from a meta perspective, it's useful to have some enemy species around that the PCs can just shoot without worrying about the legalities.

That would be an interesting character concept. A Priest of Oras whose ultimate goal is to ensure that everyone in the universe can love whoever they want to love, no matter what shape that love takes.

Or to be more precise, that they can produce viable, fertile offspring.

What could possibly go wrong?

Not necessarily. I mean, humans evolved and adapted on the same planet as dolphins and we can't exactly make fertile offspring with those.

Not for lack of trying... on both sides. To "successfully copulate" depends on your definition of "success", after all.

And hybrids might be created with a little genetic engineering if they don't come "naturally".

Now have a romance between a human and a sentient mobile fortress.

All the fortress needs is a robotic avatar with certain... enhancements.

I wonder if there are going to be any changes to Stamina Points. I mean, undead technically don't have any stamina to speak of...

I think you are in luck. From the description of the upcoming Pact Worlds Guide:

"New playable alien races, from undead Eoxians to Castrovellian plant-people."

In general I would say as long as the entities involved have erogenous zones [1], they can have recreational sex unless said zones are somewhere really inaccessible without a highly specific anatomy (and even then there will probably be technological workarounds).

[1]Hopefully all of the entities have erogenous zones, but in a pinch one will do.

Tarik Blackhands wrote:

This is Hanar love erasure.

No human would want to procreate with a big, stupid jellyfish.

...you just had to invoke Rule 34, didn't you?

I think the OP mixed up a lot of concepts and got lost on the way.

Whether a being is a "person" vs whether they can be a citizen are different concepts.

In this case, I explicitly refer to "legal personhood", which pretty much means "can be citizens under the law".

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_person

Whether individuals or groups consider someone a "person" is not addressed here, nor whether the Starfinder rules consider someone to be a "person". This only addresses the legal perspective of the Pact Worlds governments and their courts.

As an offshoot from the discussion whether or not androids are "alive", let's consider who gets to be a "legal person" in the Pact Worlds - someone who is either a citizen or a non-citizen who could become one. And for that, the question whether someone is alive cannot possibly matter - because the bone sages of Eox are very much "people" as far as the Pact Worlds are concerned, yet very much "not alive".

My suspicion is that this decision is made by a committee staffed with representatives of the Pact Worlds governments, and they make this decision based on a number of criteria.

The first one is that members of the species must be intelligent enough to understand the general laws and customs of the Pact World - they need not be lawyers, but they must be able to figure out what is and what is not appropriate on the member worlds with some coaching. In game terms, this probably means at least an average Intelligence of 7.

Furthermore, they must be willing and capable of respecting those customs. Members of the Dominion of the Black, for instance, are certainly intelligent enough - but their intelligence is extremely alien and they show unrelenting hostility to the Pact Worlds. Thus, no citizenship for them. And then there are outsiders and aliens that evolved in extremely alien environment whose society is just not comparable with that of the Pact Worlds and who have just as much difficulty grasping Pact World society as humans have grasping theirs - though considering some of the Pact Worlds species (such as Brethedans), they must be very alien indeed.

Beyond that, there are further criteria on whose importance each Committee member will have a different opinion.

One of these is whether the species in question has souls - indeed, this is said to be the main reason why Androids are accepted as citizens in their writeup. There are several effects that refer to souls in the Starfinder Core Rules - raise dead, reincarnate, and the Soul Upload Trap. Other effects presumably exist within the setting even if they are not explicitly mentioned - for instance, divination effects that contact souls in the afterlife. If one or more of these effects work on member of the species, then they can be said to fulfill this criterium. However, note that fulfilling this criterium will not impress the representative from Aballon.

Another one is whether the species in question has free will - that is to say, are capable of making autonomous decisions for themselves. A slave species (whether biological or machine) cannot be held responsible for its action - but that also means it does not have a choice whether or not it can adhere to Pact World laws and customs. Note that "slave species" has a different meaning from "species that has been enslaved" - individuals of the latter may rebel and flee their masters, while the former is genuinely incapable of doing so.

Further criteria depend on the individual Committee members' biases and prejudices - most will generally try to look for things in the alien species that has some resemblance to their own species or culture. Great cultural works, recognizable worship of deities, an aptitude for tinkering... any of these and more can sway the verdict of council members. Conversely, anything that evokes similarities to traditional enemies (the Swarm or the Dominion of the Black, for instance) might sway a Committee member against the species.

Once the Committee members have deliberated, they will eventually make their decision and assign the new species a status from the following list:

Legal Person: Members of this species will be fully recognized as people and may not be harmed without clear justification, nor may their property be arbitrarily seized. They may apply for citizenship in whatever Pact Worlds entity is willing to take them in (though Pact Worlds members might give citizenship even to members of species that don't fall into this category, this probably won't be recognized by most other jurisdictions). Their governments may establish full diplomatic relationships with the Pact Worlds. Citizens and organizations operating out of Pact Worlds space may not wage campaigns of aggression or even genocide against them.

Protected: They aren't fully recognized as legal entities of their own right, but it was a fairly close thing - they impressed several Committee members enough that they are given some weak protections (this will likely require fewer votes than "Legal Person" status - perhaps "Legal Person" requires a majority vote, while "Protected" requires only one-third). Citizens and organizations operating out of Pact Worlds may not kill them for their body parts or make gross alterations to their habitats - in effect, the Pact Worlds governments designate their environment a "nature preserve". In practice, this means little - Pact Worlds citizens may still kill individual members without repercussions back home, and some limited resource extraction remains permissible, with a fair amount of flexibility on what precisely is considered "limited". However, if there is a big enough stink back home there may be legal sanctions. Which can be effectively evaded by just creating a new company that doesn't operate within Pact Worlds space (the Pact Worlds governments have better things to do than trying to patrol worlds outside their system), in which case any repercussions must come from locals - or outside activists (most prominently the Xenowardens).

Not protected: The species in question receives no protection at all from the Pact Worlds governments, and may be freely killed or enslaved.

Belligerent, redeemable: The species might qualify as "Legal People", but it is currently hostile to the Pact Worlds. However, there is hope that this state of affairs may cease at some point in the future. Obvious military forces may be engaged at will, but attacks and atrocities against recognizable "civilian" populations and installations should be avoided. The military forces of the Pact Worlds governments are held to the highest standards here (though even so, the rules for "collateral damage" remain very generous), while mercenary forces and private adventurers will hardly monitored at all. Still, the (admittedly low) possibility to be charged for "war crimes" remain, especially if they interrupt delicate peace negotiations. The Pact Worlds government might accept individual members of the species as refugees, or even as representatives of a "government in exile" (and smuggling such people out makes for an excellent adventure hook), though such refugees will be watched closely and may face prejudices from the local population.

Belligerent, irredeemable: The species is considered hostile and may be engaged at will with any and all means, and erradication would be seen as a positive goal by the Pact Worlds governments - examples include the Dominion of the Black and the Swarm. It would require extraordinary evidence to change this status.

So, what does all this mean in practice?

Whenever there is a report of a new, apparently intelligent species coming in - whether from the Starfinder Society, colonists, assorted organizations, or individual explorers and adventurers - the employees of the Committee will take note of it and add it to a list of species to investigate for possible legal personhood.

This list is very, very long, and getting longer all the time.

But there are ways of fast-tracking this process. The simplest way is for a member of the species to show up on Absalom Station and declare: "My species wants to establish diplomatic relations with the Pact Worlds." Even then there will likely a bunch of interviews (possibly involving requests for further information and all sorts of medical and magical examinations) and a waiting period of a few days until the Committee can make its decision. Gee, I hope the alien diplomats have some good local guides and bodyguards (i.e. player characters) who can protect them during this time!

It also helps if a Committee member strongly supports the application of a particular species, which usually means that their government has some sort of interest in the species or their world that would benefit from establishing diplomatic relations. To a lesser degree, this is also true for corporations and other organizations - if they hope to make trade deals with them or otherwise see something beneficial to their agenda, they can make an effort to convince the Committee members of it and fast-track the process. Sometimes the Committee members' government benefit from the trade and will be easily convinced, while sometimes the convincing needs a little push (bribery is such an ugly word...). However, sometimes rival corporations and organizations will oppose the fast-track process for their own reasons (usually because they want to exploit the world on their own terms) and work behind the scenes to slow it down.

Very occasionally, lone individuals or small groups manage to get the fast-track process started on their own, without the backing of governments or large corporations - usually by making a huge PR splash. Player characters with the Icon theme (and possibly the Envoy class) will have the best chance at this. It's not easy, but if they get enough public attention those Pact Worlds governments who are responsive to public opinion might get behind their efforts.

If there is no fast-track process (and truthfully, these tend to clog the Committee's agenda), then the assorted sub-committees will gradually gather more and more information and have their experts evaluate it until they are confident about the quantity and quality of their data and the analysis of the data. Worlds colonized by Pact Worlds members that see frequent trade will almost inevitably accumulate the most data, while lone accounts of explorers will be filed in the archives until more information comes up. Very occasionally they might send one of their experts to an alien world to evaluate a local species, especially if the world might feature other things of interest (such as tradable or extractable resources), but for the most part they will leave such exploration to the Starfinder Society with whom they have a good working relationship - many Starfinders report their encounters with alien species to the Committee, while the Committee is generally happy to share its information about species in its archives with Society members.

Well, these are my thoughts on this issue. What are yours?

Ravingdork wrote:

Sentience is not one of the qualifications of life.

According to the Pact World, it is :)

I think the Pact Worlds will have a definition of "legal personhood" that is at best only tangentially related to any definition of "alive". I mean, the bone sages of Eox are definitely people with rights in the Pact Worlds, but calling them "alive" would be stretching things.

And then you have to consider cases like Outsiders - which get legal personhood and which do not? Then there are all those aloens out there - which should be treated as people, and which are okay to shoot on sight?

I suspect that ultimately who gets to be a "legal person" and who does not will be decided by a committee, possibly based on some kind of "point system" factoring in things like intelligence, social behavior, and a willingness to respect the aithority of the Pact Worlds legal framework.

And I suspect the politics behind these decisions would be fascinating.

I've cleaned up my earlier thoughts about arms control in the Starfinder setting and published them as a blog post. I hope you will find them useful!

110) An Ysoki Mechanic with the Icon theme who has transformed their starship cabin into a custom kitchen and runs a vlog kitchen show from it.

The section on Drift Navigation distinguishes between five different categories:

- Travel In-System
- Travel to Absalom Station
- Travel to Near Space (regions with lots of Drift Beacons)
- Travel to the Vast (regions without lots of Drift Beacons)
- Travel beyond the (Galactic) Rim

Actual, physical distance only matters in two cases: If you are traveling within the same star system (which takes 1d6 days), or if you attempt to travel beyond the Galaxy (which is effectively impossible). For all other Drift journeys only the Near Space/Vast qualification matters, which is determined by the number of Drift Beacons. Physical distance seems to be irrelevant - it doesn't matter whether you want to travel to a star system a few light years away or on the other side of the galaxy.

This obviously has a few implications.

For starters, it is largely pointless to maintain a spatially coherent interstellar empire. Other settings might have "sectors" controlled by a particular polity, but these "sectors" are usually organized this way because their internal travel times are relatively short. In Starfinder, interstellar closeness has no advantages for an interstellar empire, so its individual worlds are likely to be scattered pretty much everywhere.

Furthermore, attacks by invaders can come from pretty much anywhere - they can assemble in any star system and (unless you spotted their scouts) you will have no advance warning until the invasion fleet shows up. They don't have to pass through neighboring star systems or sectors first (where you could stop them) and you can't head them off at strategic "chokepoints".

Which means that each world must be ready to defend itself against the initial onslaught until reinforcements arrive - which takes 1-6 days if there is a significant military base in the same star system, 3-18 days if the attacked star system is in "Near Space", and 5-30 days if it is in the Vast. Which implies that Near Space systems are more attractive for Stellar Empires, since they can be reinforced more quickly against attackers.

Finally, since attacks could come from pretty much anywhere, it is vitally important that you gather information about pretty much anything in the galaxy. The more worlds you have explored, the more star systems you stay in contact with, the higher the odds that you will eventually stumble across aggressive and/or expansionist species which might one day threaten your own star system. And if you know about them, you can prepare for them.

In other words, the Starfinder Society is one of the most vital organizations for the military defense of the Pact Worlds system, and I am sure all their military forces make sure to stay out-to-date on their latest findings.

What do you think of this analysis? Agree/disagree?

I wonder what the Gap looked like?

I mean, assuming that the speed of light works the same as in our universe (and it does mention "light speed"), then it should be possible to build a large telescope array about 300 light years away from the Pact Worlds system and watch as Golarion vanishes.

The Hardness of a steel wall in this game is 30. Skimming through the weapons tables the first weapon that can overcome the hardness with its maximum damage is the advanced swoop hammer when wielded by someone with any strength bonus(3d10 + Str). It is a level 9 item. Most other weapons that can overcome hardness 30 with their maximum damage are around level 13 items.

So if Absalom Station made its bulkheads out of the weakest space worthy materials(not stone, wood, ceramic, etc.) it would take a fairly advanced and well connected terrorist to even begin threatening the station.

While they are not explicitly listed, I think the existence of "shaped charge"-type explosives in the setting would make a lot of sense.

Mechanically, I'd give them about the same level and base damage as a frag grenade, but also add the "Penetration" tag and make the damage directed against the object the charge is fixed to. Thus, a level 10 shape charge with 6d6 base damage and Penetration would make 1 point of damage on an average roll. A level 14 shaped charge would make 19 damage against the bulkhead. This is not exactly cheap, but doable for well-connected groups.

Note that this is far from insufficient to "threaten the station" considering its size - for that, you need nukes or the equivalent. But localized attacks are another matter.

Not necessarily, since the outer walls of the station are pretty much unbreachable by small arms. It's a level 20 construct, at least, requiring a minimum of 45(+1) points of damage just to scratch it. This is assuming that there isn't a shift in effect from Hit Points to Hull Points.

Plus a space station that size should be seriously compartmentalized - even if you get a localized hull breach through some suitably heroic effort, the main effect will be that the bulkheads will close and the rest of the station will be unaffected. Sucks to be those close to the breach, but the rest is safe.

That being said, two things will be very strongly frowned upon on a space station:

- Plasma weapons and anything that can start start large fires in a hurry. Fires are bad enough in an urban environment, but you really don't want them in enclosed habitats like space stations. (For a fun comparison, read up on outbreaks of fire on submarines - these are among a submariner's worst nightmares.)

- Chemical or biological volatiles released into the space station's atmosphere. Nerve gases, airborne disease and the like can spread really fast, really quickly in such an enclosed environment - even if the life support systems can detect and clean them, there will still be a lot of spillover from opened doors.

Anyone playing around with these should have the local authorities coming down on them quickly.

Here is what I recommend to the GM: Keep notes on any public firefights the players get involved, especially if there were any cameras or (surviving) bystanders (if there weren't surviving bystanders and it's the PCs' fault, it was a massacre and someone will probably cast Speak With Dead in order to find the culprits...).

If they acted fairly responsibly and took care to minimize collateral damage, then all is well - they likely have a good reputation and people will trust them with even military-grade weapons. On the other hand, if they always caused lots of explosions then the customs or security officers should ask them lots of pointed questions about past incidents, how they justified the seemingly rather excessive use of force during these incidents, and if they plan on perpetrating similar amounts of mayhem in whatever place they want to enter.

Make them squirm as they relive past embarrassing incidents! After all, the GM is a player too and ought to have some fun as well from time to time. :D

After a bit of that, the official should frown at them and say something like:

"Okay, I am willing to allow you to carry your weapons beyond this point. However, considering your track record I must ask you to place a deposit of 5,000 credits [1] with us as an insurance against future property damage. If you leave again without causing any incidents, you will get your money back."

This way the PCs won't be deprived of their toys, but they will be encouraged to be on good behavior - and if the situation goes downhill they need to weigh the loss of their deposit against the danger they face (they might be able to fast-talk the officials into returning the full amount if they can make a convincing case that the fight was not their fault, but make them sweat for it).

[1] Scale this with the characters' level and/or notoriety.

Probably for the best. I mean, D&D 4E was very controversial for a lot of reasons (some valid, some less so), but one big change was that "NPCs and creatures do not need to be built like PCs", and I am glad that Starfinder made the same change. Makes for a lot less work when you come up with NPCs.

Here are my thoughts on this:

The Pact Worlds have, within living memory, fought a number of fairly devastating wars, and the outbreaks of new wars are entirely possible. Thus, most governments will probably encourage citizens to be proficient with weapons and practice with them on a regular basis - this gives them a greater reserve of people they can draft once the shooting does start. That being said, not all weapons are equal and not all are equally acceptable in all circumstances. Here is my best guess:

Ranged Weapons:

Single-shot sidearms (pistols and the like): Unexceptionable under most circumstances, except in ultra-secure or ultra-formal settings or where there is a real danger of damaging highly sensitive equipment (the bulkheads of most space stations - including Absalom Station should not be easily penetrable by random shots, but the guts of the local life support systems might be another matter). Plasma and similar weapons might also be restricted in areas with fire hazards.

Single-shot longarms (rifles and the like): Unproblematic in "frontiers" and similar areas where attacks by monsters, bandits and the like might not be necessarily common, but are always a possibility.

Automatic weapons: Generally only acceptable in military-controlled regions or where attacks by hostile entities occur on a regular basis, since there is a lot of risk for collateral damage. Plasma weapons will be seen with suspicion for much the same reason.

Explosives: Like automatic weapons, acceptable only in areas where attacks are frequent - since those can cause a lot of collateral damage.

Melee weapons: Knifes can be classified similar to sidearms - besides using them for protection, they are also common tools (especially in frontier regions) Larger melee weapons (such as swords) generally say one of two things about their user:

- "I have put in serious work at dealing out violence up close and personal" (since it takes a lot more training to become proficient with them than simple sidearms), or
- "I am a violent thug who relishes carving up others up close".

Such melee weapons likely have a similar legal standing to single-shot longarms, but wearers will be viewed with more suspicion since they might belong into the second category. It probably helps to wear a "uniform" of sorts - whether of some formal military, knightly order, or something that says "I am a professional bodyguard", since that will make people more inclined to believe the former of them.

So, how should GMs use weapon control in their game? Here are my thoughts on this:

- First of all, don't use weapon control to screw the PCs over! If the PCs have to hand over their weapons before being allowed into a certain facility, then restrict the weapons the bad guys have access to as well. Perhaps their attempt at smuggling weapons in can be discovered by the PCs (in which case they get to use the contraband for the fight), or they might be as limited in what they can bear as the PCs. Furthermore, if the PCs hand their weapons over, make sure that they get them back from the owners afterwards. Otherwise the PCs will constantly focus on how to smuggle their favorite toys into adventure locations, which will likely derail the adventures.

- Secondly, make the past actions of the PCs count how much this is enforced. If the PCs constantly use weapons to defend others, then the authorities should cut them a lot more slack:

"Grenades are not allowed in here!

Oh, wait, it's you! I saw that vid of you blowing up that purple worm threatening our colony with them! Oh sure, go ahead - I am sure you won't misuse them!"

(Of course, that means that the authorities will likely come to the PCs with their problems - to which I say: "Adventure plots!")

On the other hand, if the PCs constantly show poor impulse control and constantly cause large-scale mayhem (like, say, the average Shadowrun player character), then the authorities will be a lot less forgiving and ask them a lot of questions about what precisely they intend to use those weapons for.

My personal preferred approach would not be to deny the PCs their weapons, but force the more "respectable" player characters to sign papers stating that they are held liable for the actions of their more impulsive comrades. This way, the party can police its own.

To sum it up: Yes, some form of weapon control will exist in various places, but it should be used appropriately - it can make for interesting complications, but not deprive the PCs of their toys all the time.

Okay, I have added entries for Bestiary 4 and 5 (I don't have Bestiary 6 yet, since I am waiting for the PDF). I don't have much time to work on this until the end of the next week, since I have to prepare for a job interview - but feel free to both append existing entries and add further entries for creatures from Adventure Paths or third party publications.

Here is what I have so far - it's still in view-only mode, since I want to nail the basic formatting down before opening it up for general editing.

Your thoughts?

Good idea! Get on it!

Okay, here is what I can do.

I think I will create a Google Sheet for this purpose - basically, an online spreadsheet that (with the right settings) can be edited by anyone. I will put in the monsters from all the published Bestiaries (well, Bestiary 6 will have to wait until the PDF becomes available) and add the mythological origins I know for any mythological creatures I know, including sources - and others can fill in the rest.

Does this sound like a plan?

Many of the monsters from the Pathfinder Bestiaries are explicitly inspired by real world mythology. Greek, Japanese, Inuit... the list goes on.

However, has anyone created an actual list of which Pathfinder monster comes from which mythology? Many fantasy settings have "fantasy counterparts" to real world regions and cultures on Earth, and finding the right "regional monsters" would be useful for maintaining the proper atmosphere.

to feature cthulhu properly (as anend boss of book 6) it'd have to go to same power as WotR - lvl 20 MT10, end boss of that (+minions) is close to CR30 (about 60% of the way from CR29-30) and chtulhu is CR30

"Cthulhuesque" campaigns should not necessarily about fighting and defeating Cthulhu as a boss monster. In fact, I'd argue that this would counter to the campaign being "Cthulhuesque".

This does not mean that I consider beating up Cthulhu as BadWrongFun. But that's a very different style of play.

Though combining the Cthulhu Mythos with Mythic Adventures could be fascinating in its own right - in that case, I would emphasize Mythic Ascension as a Transhuman or Posthuman experience.

"The time would be easy to know, for then mankind would have become as the Great Old Ones; free and wild and beyond good and evil, with laws and morals thrown aside and all men shouting and killing and revelling in joy."

I am currently reading through a number of Adventure Paths, and have recently started on Skull & Shackles (still reading through the appendices of the Wormwood Mutiny). And this had let me to contemplate the overall political-economical context of the Shackles.

I get that they - and the entire Skull & Shackles campaign - are intended to emulate the "Golden Age of Piracy" of the Carribean (plus assorted fiction about the same). But the piracy of the Carribean was fueled by the following:

- The Spanish extracted massive amounts of gold and silver from South America, especially the Potosí region (which is a really fascinating location in its own right which deserves an RPG treatment).

- Several other European colonial powers tried to get in on the action and not only supported efforts to sabotage the Spanish, but also each other.

So if the Shackles are equally rife with opportunities for piracy, then there must be some truly spectacular trade routes which makes the risk of passing through the Shackles worthwhile. This despite the fact that the ports of the Shackles are not only friendly to pirates, but actively ruled by them.

Yet the largest trade opportunities south of the Shackles seem to be with Sargava - which apparently bribes the Free Captains of the Shackles for protection from Cheliax. Which presumably also includes a sub-clause to leave some of their trading partners alone from time (pretty please?) since Sargava needs that trade to survive.

So, what other trade could be going on through the region that justifies the risk? Mind you, my goal here is not just to nit-pick the setting but to provide some added consistency and flavour for the stuff they plunder - "Spanish Silver" meant something in the Age of Piracy, and I'd like to have similar iconic types of plunder for a Skull & Shackles campaign. Furthermore, if there are merchant ships from particular nations or companies that brave these waters again and again, then saying so will make the raids against them more interesting.

While the standard district map for Kingdom Builder settlements - 3x3 blocks subdivided into 2x2 lots - suffices for rules purposes, it bugs me that the square grid looks like no street map of any European town I've ever visited (and being German, I've seen quite a few). Most European towns - and the typical D&Desque fantasy settings that derive many of their tropes from European history - look much more organic, gradually growing out from a town center along a hub-and-spoke model (if you have never been to Europe, I recommend looking at a few city maps of European cities).

As it happens, my Cold Frontier campaign is nearing the phase where the player characters will found their first settlement. Thus, while I plan to keep the standard district grid for game mechanical/administrative purposes (mainly for the adjacency rules), I will also permit the player characters to map their settlements in additional way:

First, take a hex grid. Each hex has a side-to-side distance of 200 yards. Then, once you start building something, designate an arrangement of approximately 10 hexes as a "block". Feel free to vary that number a bit - wealthier areas might have more hexes while poorer areas will have less - but they should have an average of 10 hexes or so. Then you can start putting the "official buildings" from the normal district map into these hexes - but also minor buildings, streets, small rivulets, and anything else that strikes your fancy. Then, if you are starting on a new block, you can designate a new 10 hex configuration as a neighboring block - and so on.

The end result should be a settlement that grows much more organically, is more interesting to look at, and should be more atmospheric for encounters staged within the settlement. And frankly, if I could figure out a way of using the "adjacent building" rules with this map, I'd do away with the normal district grid entirely.

What do you think?