I had a lot of problem coming up with my own gods. If you're wanting to base your gods off of real world deities as I did, this list will be invaluable in getting inspiration.
As to you god of power, is it strength-type power or magical power you're going for? Here is my god of justice and valor...
I don't have a god of magic in my homebrew. Magic in my setting is just another natural law of physics. My reasoning for this is that if there was a god of magic, and he was slain, what would happen to the magic? Wanting a steady source of magic in my setting (which is a high magic setting), I elected to run with a god of spellcraft. Accordingly, people blessed by him directly, tend to be sorcerers.
I've only stolen/destroyed loot from the player characters when I've messed up and given them something I shouldn't have.
DMs do make mistakes. Thankfully, disenchanters and rust monsters help correct those mistakes.
Flavor wise, its what I'm trying to reinforce with my players. They're all newbies and I'm trying to get them to role play vs roll play. So far, stuff like this encourages them.
I'm running a homebrew world with adaptations from the Forgotten Realms. My adaptations are using the regional system. I've changed regional traits to regional feats. Every character at creation gets a regional feat as a bonus feat. In accordance, I've buffed a lot of regional traits I liked to feat level and copied a few regional feats from Eberron as well as a few of my own I've written.
I've followed the math from the rich parents trait, which gives the character 900 gold. I've turned it into a feat, at request of one of my players with limitations from his request. I wanted to see what you all think.
Ancestral Arms and Armor [regional]
As a DM that has ran custom home-brewed worlds in 3.5, Arcana Evolved, and Pathfinder, I love Pathfinder. Compared to the 80 books I needed for everyone to play what they wanted, when they wanted, I have the Core Rulebook, the Advanced Player's Guide, the Gamemastery Guide, the Ultimate Combat and the Ultimate Magic books and two bestiaries. That's seven books.
Compared to what I needed in 3.5: The Player's Handbook, the DMG, Complete Arcane, Complete Divine, Complete Champion, Complete Scoundrel, Complete Warrior, Races of Destiny, Races of Eberron, Races of Faerun, Races of Stone, Races of the Dragon, Races of the Wild, Savage Species, and four bestiaries. That total's to 18 books.
Seven books vs eighteen books. You do the math. Also, when confronted with new to newish players, I only have to convince them to buy one $50 rulebook as opposed to spending $80 to buy their own copies of the PHB and the DMG.
The conversion guide (which has been previously mentioned), plus the conversion sub-forum hosted here is immensely helpful. As DM, I've flatout ruled that unless it comes from the core rules from Pathfinder, it's banned. If you want something from an older book, I'll work with you and either find the Pathfinder equivalent or work with you to convert the feat, spell, etc.
I believe James Jacobs said that Pazio wasn't going even consider upgrading Pathfinder for 10+ years and that was a year ago. They feel they're system is fine and won't upgrade it unless it's needed. New editions don't fund their company. As also previously mentioned above, the Adventure Paths fund their company. So you don't have to worry about new rules every four to five years.
All in all, I give Pathfinder five out of five stars. It's everything I wanted from the 3.5 edition ruleset. There a few things I wish they would have taken from Monte Cook's Arcana Evolved, but I can deal with out those features.
My two coppers.
I really liked Monte Cook's approach to alignment in Arcana Evolved.
"...Characters should decide for themselves what is good and what is evil, the way real people do. ... Very few characters think of themselves as evil. The truth is, such concepts are relative.
Yet even without alignments, villains still do terrible things to further their own goals. Heroes still make great sacrifices to stop them. The classic conflicts all remain. But now there are even more. Two noble and altruistic characters might oppose each other, for example. Their personal ideologies might even cause each of them to define the other as 'evil.'
Characters with a conscience still act responsibly, and those with a code of conduct still adhere to it: Having no alignment is not an excuse for all characters to act wantonly. As in the real world, things are much more interesting if there are not nine alignments but, in fact, an infinite number of them—each character becomes his own alignment."
I have really mixed feelings about this. Having played role-playing games for years and MMO's off and on for the same amount of time, I'm really skeptical. Combine that with my job experience in the game industry, I would really hate to see you guys at Paizo venture down the path of Atari's DDO and the ill-fated Cryptic Studios.
I'll be watching the topics about this, but to be frank, this kind of announcement is out of the blue. I hope you're prepared for an eye-opener. Game development is expensive. Video game develop is more expensive. MMO development is a world of hurt. If it works out though, it usually only takes six months for a decent MMO to make back its production costs.
I'm probably rambling and worrying over nothing. I really hope this works out.
Oh and a footnote... Please don't try to make a game and have it cater to everyone. That's what destroyed WoW.
James Wilber aka The Magus wrote:
I believe this thread needs to be renamed to "I Don't Need No Epic Content," with a subtitle of "Please Teach Me Proper Grammar."
As a GM and a player, I would love to see epic rules. My players want epic rules and they're not 'rules monkies.' They want to keep playing the characters that they have invested in.
Keep your broad generalizations to yourself. They make you seem more uneducated.
I'm gonna be honest: I didn't read all the replies due to time constraints.
I'm a long-time old school Realms fan myself. I've read all the books, prior to 4th Edition and made the switch to Golarion after the 4th Edition nonsense.
My two favorite comparisons:
Changes that I like between the two settings:
I'd love to see a book on the denizens of the Shadow Plane. I love the background on Zon-Kuthon and would gladly give up the soul of my first born child to be able to delve deeper into his dark secrets.
...Kansas City, MO...
I'm in Kansas City and I run games. I'd love a chance to get to play. Email me? My email is jstead2 at gmail.com. At the minimum, we should compare notes.
If you're having problems getting your "share," I agree with the general consensus: keep track of the loot yourself. Don't initiate party drama though. I'd start keeping campaign notes, which I suggest every player do, and keep track of the loot there.
Okay, I was just thinking if I could use this in a Pathfinder game instead of just slapping the Half-Fiend template on my elf necromancer. However, I do recall now that the Fey'ri were explicitly half-DEMON and not half-devil, but would that fact affect the Nephilim stats in any way? (Doubt they should, but still wanted to ask)
Nope. They're just regular half-elf, half-demons. It's not specified in the racial breakdown. What's important though, is if you get banished, you'll return to your native plane, Golarion.
Let me know how your test goes. I want to know how they work. I've not gotten to thought one at my party yet.
Yup. That's why I gave them Humanoid (Elf), coupled with Outsider (Native). Fey'ri were ridiculously powerful in the Forgotten Realms. I think I've managed do do them a little justice, while keeping them more streamlined with the Noble Drow powerhouse (which I still think is a little ridiculous when it comes to an "advanced" race).
It's your Golarion. It can be whatever you want it to be. For example, there's a fifth player in Varisia in my Golarion, vying for power outside of Riddleport, Magnimar, Korvosa and Kaer Maga. It is a city of my own design and I dropped it into the setting. I've also dropped in a few of my favorite dungeon crawls from 3.5 D&D into the world, especially since Pathfinder presently is lacking in the sprawling dungeon crawl department.
You can do whatever you want with the setting. If you're wanting to run an "official" Golarion, I think most of the changes and GM additions should be kept to a minimum, especially game-changing ones, but in the end its your Golarion.
I'm working on a Forgotten Realms translation to Golarion. I don't want the conversion to be 100% copy-cat, but would like to maintain some of the flavor. The race in question is the Fey'ri. Following Paizo's tradition of following modern/classical mythology, I'm calling my race the Nephilim.
For those interested, I'll post racial background information later, working them in more completely with a more "Golarion" theme ignoring most of their current FR fluff.
What I need assistance with is my template.
Constant – Detect Magic
Obviously, I'm following the Drow Noble template. I felt they were closer to the Fey'ri than any other templated race. However, I do not agree with their spells available. I was thinking of the following changes, and would like input from my fellow GMs out there.
Dancing Lights and Faerie Fire is sacked for Charm Person.
Divine Favor is sacked for Darkness.
What would the RP costs involve change to for Spell-Like abilities? I think the cost should drop to 4 RP from 6 RP for the loss of Dispel Magic. I believe the other changes are comparable for the costs provided and followed from the template provided.
Many thanks. Feedback appreciated.
I have a player who wanted to play a gunslinger, and I let him, but under the caveat that we're using the "guns are virtually nonexistant" version of the rules.
This works really well when considering the whole scope of Golarion. Outside of Alkenstar, as gbonehead said, no one knows really what a gun is. I believe that something less than twenty are made in a year, yet Alkenstar can make exponentially increase their production in times of war for territory defense.
I don't like guns either in a fantasy setting. I run with the "guns are virtually nonexistent" rule listed in the Ultimate Combat supplement. One player is interested in a gunslinger in my group and I've told him no and told him why. He understood my reasoning and elected to play a craft-mage instead.
Lincoln Hills wrote:
I think TOZ is just sad because his/her players don't show the same degree of "let's solve this problem together" cooperation. In fact, I'm picturing TOZ facepalming while two of his players are strangling each other and the third one says, "Since they're not paying attention, I'm going to shave their characters bald as they sleep, OK?"
The group I run has this problem. There's only one level-headed player in the group, and he never speaks up.
As to the OP:
This has been a huge problem for my group. They don't even go out seeking much adventure. They're more interested in running the Goblin than in being adventurers.
First of all, my party is all relatively new to role-playing games. The party consists of a cleric/mage, a sorcerer, a fighter and a rogue. I've managed fairly well, to keep them from wandering over much and they've done a good job connecting to Saul and the Gold Goblin.
My party just finished the attack on the Foamrunner encounter. They finished off the Zincher's lackeys rather quickly. Upon returning the casks of liquor to the Gold Goblin, they decide they wanna take up what happened with Zincher himself.
Using some amazing diplomacy, the party is granted an audience with Zincher. Instead of continuing to use diplomacy, they switch tactics and attempt to intimidate Zincher. Zincher doesn't back down and lets the party leave.
At this point, I figure they should learn a lesson, don't piss off crimelords who are more powerful than you. So I pull up the trusty Riddleport Encounters sheet and the party runs across a press ganger. Before initiative is rolled, the press ganger sneers, "Zincher sends his regards."
In the ensuing fight, the whole party is knocked unconscious due to non-lethal damage. Now we enter my conundrum. What should happen to the party? Are the fed to Zincher's Arena and have to fight their way out? Are they sold to slavers?
I already had the Raid encounter scheduled to happen the next night. I'm going to have the raid continue on schedule and the party with have to deal with the consequences of the Raid going off without a hitch. Saul will be slain and the Gold Goblin burnt to the ground. But how do I redirect everything after these events?
The anti-paladin is coming too.
"Sharing love with beautiful humans is a common enough experience in elven life that half-elves are an inevitable consequence." - page 10.
I seem to remember a more in depth explanation. I might be getting my sourcebooks mixed up. Regardless, I know there's more in there. Also, if she falls in love with a human, she's going to have to be a Forlorn.
Is it in the SRD? I am not familiar with that.
No. It was a system written by the god, Monte Cook, similar to Pathfinder, in so far as it being the next step beyond 3.5. It would be compatible with Pathfinder with minimal changes needed.
On the flip-side, I have a class I could email you if you'd like.
James Jacobs wrote:
I'll just have to respect your writing and sheer awesomeness and try to forget you play Alliance.
Dungeon Grrrl wrote:
I was thinking of something similar for my explanation to my players. I love this answer and you worded way better than I would have. I'm going to be borrowing this and expanding upon it.
Second, we have no intention of making a "psionic cleric" or "psionic wizard". Our intent is to make the psionic classes unique, and even the different forms of psion unique, but there will inevitably be some form of overlap with other classes. Our goal is to make the system unique, but also have it fit in overall.
That's what I was talking about. The psionic wizard and psionic cleric is what I'm staunchly against. Overlap is unavoidable at a point, even arcane and divine overlap, and psionic overlap I can understand if it fits the type of psionic, such as a pyrokinetic doing a psionic version of a fireball.
So, if you want to think that Dreamscarred Press doesn't like Pathfinder, when we've chosen one of the largest undertaking in our company history to support the system, then I don't really know what to tell you.
Best wishes with that, honestly. If you pull it off well, you'll win my cash.
Finally, as for Paizo endorsing it, we approached Paizo about us doing Psionics over a year ago. Erik gave us some initial ear time, then forwarded the email off to Jason and, frankly, we never heard back, despite follow-ups. If it was a rejection, I'd admit so, but we were simply met with silence.
That's kinda crappy on their part.
James Jacobs wrote:
Perhaps... but the fact that Warcraft does with dark-skinned elves exactly what you wanted to be done with the drow is worth mentioning anyway.
I for one, don't like good Drow. I don't think it's possible. Is it possible for non-evil Drow. Yes. You guys did it.
I liked what they did with Night Elves vs High Elves vs Blood Elves because it changed a dynamic of the old light-skinned elf vs dark-skinned elf.
Off topic: I still hate Night Elves because they're Alliance scum.
Eric Hinkle wrote:
That said, I'm curious myself to see what anyone might have done with old Kuthy's followers in-game. They certainly do give off a very strong Hellraiser vibe.
I adapted the Mord-Sith from the Sword of Truth series to follow the Umbral Court of Nidal. I'm finishing the PrC for it now.
James Jacobs wrote:
So Cenobite it is then.