Master Han Del of the Web's page

Master Han Del of the Web wrote:

What a deeply unpleasant way to make your case.

I don't give a rat's ass about how pleasant people feel about technology. 99% of people dislike nuclear weapons – did it matter?

AI is the future. It's as inevitable as death, and the anti-AI crowd is a collective mass psychosis going through the stages of grief:

• Denial: Numbness, shock, and refusing to accept reality to help pace the emotional pain.
• Anger: Frustration and helplessness directed outward or inward when reality sets in.
• Bargaining: "What if" or "if only" thoughts trying to negotiate or undo the loss.
• Depression: Deep sadness, isolation, and quiet despair as the full weight of the loss hits.
• Acceptance: Coming to terms with the reality of the situation and learning how to move forward.

It's pretty obvious once you see it, e.g. the "slop"-claimers still being at stage one, while most have moved to stage two, and some already trying stage three.

Most people will catch up eventually, and so there's no reason for Paizo to be stuck in there, instead embracing the future ahead of time.

Master Han Del of the Web wrote:

I've got a suggestion. If the anti-AI stance is so onerous, why not go and prompt an AI to make you a game? I'm sure it will be just as mechanically sound and artistically consistent and you'll be free of the 'hypocrites' and never have to hear their complaints again!

*yawn* You're already half a year behind the curve. That has already been happening, and the only reason it's not widespread is because AI companies are actively restricting their models from doing that.

https://www.tomshardware.com/tech-industry/artificial-intelligence/anthropi cs-ai-model-is-now-blocking-attempts-at-video-game-recreation-and-cloning-u sers-also-claim-non-malicious-generic-reverse-engineering-tasks-are-blocked
https://www.404media.co/reverse-engineer-anything-ai-companies-crack-down-o n-the-coolest-thing-people-were-doing-with-ai/...

I was saying that you, personally, were being unpleasant. I'm resisting the urge to respond in a way that would make Maya's morning worse.

The AI industry is vastly unprofitable and is essentially only propped up by burning piles of VC money and the handful that have IPO'd have been pretty pathetic, but sure, it's the future. So was leaded gasoline and CFCs at one point.

I was talking about a TTRPG. I'm aware that you can use AI to rip off entire games and it's a reason indie devs don't feel like they can release demos anymore. Coding is maybe one of the few things AIs are good at. Writing a compelling setting with internally consistent game mechanics is what I am skeptical of.

J-Bone wrote:

If the use of AI can bring the price of these products down, I'm good with it.

It would certainly do well in bringing down revenue as well.

I would cease to purchase Paizo products if they changed their stance on AI

I've been working on another run of Hardspace: Shipbreaker and it's been reminding me of one of my favorite bits from SF1e, the sheer range of professional weapons. We're getting there in 2e but there's been a notable absence of stuff more suitable for heavy industry. I want to see mining lasers and welding torches make a return alongside gravity guns and riveters. Maybe even a fun archetype that plays into being a 'professional' that uses the tools of their trade in entirely non-OSHA compliant ways.

LET ME PLAY ISAAC CLARKE.

Easl wrote:

graystone wrote:

There are several Ancestries that don't age in the conventional sense like Automaton, Poppet and Skeleton or have VERY long lives, like Sprites having 1000+ lifespans or Yaoguai at several thousand. Elves at a 600 year life spans are on the low end of long lived ancestries.

Sure, but just living a long time doesn't mean you know everything. The 1,000+ year old sprite doesn't know how to build a space-based accelerator if they've spent their entire life learning how to stab with a spear and cast spells. And if there was no story justifiable reason for the sprite to level up and gain the skill "Lore: engineering" or whatever, then they just don't have it.

Oh, I wasn't implying anything about the OPs post or the viability of his idea. Just pointing out if lifespan is used as a factor for it, there are Ancesties with far more of it than Elf.

My point was less about whether there are ancestries that could meet that need and more that achieving what OP was setting out to do would require centuries and several complete revolutions in science, technology, and society to produce one on demand.

Does the knowledge exist elsewhere in setting? Sure but that means OP would have to both know where the knowledge could be found and then have the relevant context to employ said knowledge.

Then on top of all of that OP's GM would be perfectly within their rights to say 'this is just a more fiddly version of a ship mounted weapon from Starfinder 2e, we're using those rules instead and not the stupidly huge dice pool you are arguing for.'

Cool, you better be playing an elf, because it would take a few centuries from understanding that magnets are a thing to working out literally any of that technology and a few more centuries to build the industry necessary to provide the materials to even start building the manufacturing necessary to build it.

Master Han Del of the Web wrote:

Deriven Firelion wrote:

I'm reading checks automatically work against thralls. So attacks against thralls automatically destroy them. So if you used an ability like Impossible Volley, you wipe out a bunch of thralls with no roll.

I don't know if I want to play a class whose main power mechanism is easy to destroy and make useless. That's a serious, serious weakness on top of the usual saves and attack rolls and such.

You can summon thralls and expend them in the same turn. Create Thrall is a one action cantrip that can produce 1-3 thralls depending on what you're trying to do and your choice of puppeteer or reaper.

I'm playing a puppeteer at the moment and I usually scatter a few thralls the first turn, setting up flanking for my allies and getting a decent coverage of the battlefield. Then the following turns I usually cast Create Thrall as my first action and follow it up with a grave spell from one of the thralls I just created.

Do enemies waste actions dropping thralls? Yes and every thrall they kill is an action they don't get to use hurting me or my allies.

I was thinking about this. Even a third action -10 MAP attack is good to kill a thrall. If you were fighting a group, they could use their third action to kill a thrall with no attack roll or check required.

Even a caster using a dagger with a third action could wipe out a thrall with the action guaranteed to work.

A Whirlwind Attack wipes out every thrall in their reach with no roll needed.

If the group is hasted, every hasted creature could spend an action and their haste strike to wipe out two thralls a round with no roll required even if -10 MAP.

A fire kineticist with Thermal Nimbus wipes them out as soon as they enter their aura which can be anywhere from 10 to 30 feet.

Kineticist is like a bane to a necromancer since they can AOE every round wiping out tons of thralls every round while still doing damage to the main target.

I'm pretty sure in the lower...

Again, you can create a thrall in the same turn you expend it. My favorite combo is currently Create Thrall behind an enemy to hopefully get flanking, have it attack as part of the Create Thrall cantrip for some chip damage and then either use Necrotic Bomb or Thrall Charge if I'm saving a focus point for something else.

Additionally, you are assuming that enemies will immediately know what thralls are and their weaknesses on sight and seem to be judging PC class abilities with how well they might be defeated by PC class abilities, which is against the design intent of the game.

Regardless, figuring out how to place your thralls to maximize being a pain in the butt for enemies is kind of the point of the class. I can clog a hallway with them, scatter them around the room so they can't easily be cleared out in a single action or put alarming pressure on the enemy's back rank. I'm not a fan of white-room theorizing and Necromancer is definitely not a class that lends itself to being understood in that context.

I'm reading checks automatically work against thralls. So attacks against thralls automatically destroy them. So if you used an ability like Impossible Volley, you wipe out a bunch of thralls with no roll.

I don't know if I want to play a class whose main power mechanism is easy to destroy and make useless. That's a serious, serious weakness on top of the usual saves and attack rolls and such.

You can summon thralls and expend them in the same turn. Create Thrall is a one action cantrip that can produce 1-3 thralls depending on what you're trying to do and your choice of puppeteer or reaper.

I'm playing a puppeteer at the moment and I usually scatter a few thralls the first turn, setting up flanking for my allies and getting a decent coverage of the battlefield. Then the following turns I usually cast Create Thrall as my first action and follow it up with a grave spell from one of the thralls I just created.

Do enemies waste actions dropping thralls? Yes and every thrall they kill is an action they don't get to use hurting me or my allies.

Weapon Specialization? I think them having a proficiency attached means they get the extra damage from weapon specialization.

Yeah, it's feeling pretty anemic right now. I was really hoping for an option to maybe add traits to the equipment in your gear array or something that let you treat all your registered gear as being of a higher grade to bring back the swiss army knife feel of the 1e class.

Bishopp5 wrote:

What kind of stats would the sword Stormbringer have if it were set loose in the world of Pathfinder/.

It's a relic that scales its level and power with the wielder, or the plot.

It could also be a PC.

As much as I kind of poo on the old Spheres of Might and Spheres of Power 3pp rulesets for 1e, they had some conceptually wild character options. My favorite was the hive mind that split over several lower level bodies but there was an option to be a living weapon. If I remember correctly, it sort of turned the wielder PC into a pseudo-gestalt character and let the weapon PC take some actions through their wielder.

Thralls cannot make skill checks. Locked doors, even trivially locked ones cannot be opened by them. Same with heavy or stuck doors that might require athletics checks. Set up traps on the doors to trigger after unlocking unless the PCs manage a high thievery check.

Thralls are not alive and are mindless. They probably would not trigger most haunts and traps that sense or target living creatures/thinking minds would ignore them.

Thralls are slow. Without feat investment using them as minesweepers would be time consuming. A nercomancer would be moving at below half speed because they need to spend time to command the thrall forward periodically and standard movement for thralls is 15ft. Put a time pressure on your players.

Thralls are not ever-lasting. You'd be well within your rights to say a thrall coming into an encounter has a reduced lifespan since it was summoned before the fight.

Thralls have 1 HP. Are of effect traps, nested effects, multi-pronged ambushes... all of these could take out the thralls and threaten the PCs or lure them into a false sense of security.

Necromancers aren't uncommon. You are justified in having suitably intelligent enemies identify thralls and react much more tactically.

Let your players have their victories here by being able to bypass or work around problems with their thrall supply but nothing about the advantages they give is insurmountable or 'irreparably broken'.

If I had a nickel for every character concept I've seen that involved streaming, I wouldn't be rich, but I could hop on down to the corner store and get myself a little treat.

Throw another nickel onto that pile. I've got a tiktok dance and streamer at my table. She's probably gonna take Chat, Help! and the streaming feats once this book comes out.

I just really, really want to see the new nanocyte archetype. Nanocyte was one of my favorite classes in 1e and I'd really like to see what they've done with it in 2e. Making it an archetype makes so much sense. In 1e it was trying to do a little bit of everything (and notably succeeding really well at a few of them) so letting the class it's attached to take some of the game design load hopefully opens up space for the concept to really breathe.

Man, I've really gotta wonder if we're looking at the same book.

I've got a copy and I've been planning to run it for a group at my FLGS and I've only been delighted by what I've seen inside.

As much as this might sound like a dismissive 'touch grass' statement, I really cannot stress the importance of stepping away, taking a breather, and putting this contentious issue aside for the better part of a day before returning to it with a clearer head. That is certainly what I tried to do and it helped temper things.

I am still angry, but at this point I'm a little more focused and feel I have a better grasp of the situation. I'm not going to chide anyone here because, at the end of the day, Paizo is not entitled to our loyalty or our dollars and if you feel this is a bridge too far I trust you to act in your best judgement.

Demiplane sucks and I'll never willingly use it.

Master Han Del of the Web wrote:

Greg K. wrote:

The more I have discussed this situation on multiple platforms, and read and viewed all responses by both parties, I will not lie, I've been increasingly disappointed with how AoN handled this.

Definitely not happy with that either but it is important to remember it is an entirely volunteer organization whose members have whole jobs outside of it. The impact could have been mitigated if Jim had just followed up or empowered someone to check and respond to his e-mails while out of the office and the two groups could have released statements that were better coordinated and collaborative as opposed to... this.

Hell, they should have done a freaking Zoom call or something and gotten down to it in an evening or two.

I am not pleased with how Jim handled it either, don't get me wrong.

However volunteer work should still receive some criticism, because it can still be mismanaged. Example: A reminder email is not so much of a courtesy as a basic thing to do in situations like these. I think what personally bothers me on AoN's front is how they have not disclosed some of the info that led to Paizo being viewed worse, even by myself at first.

I would have preferred to know that there was at least a possibility of a deal, even if they said that Paizo had not replied to them, in the initial statement.

I would have also preferred if they had specified that they're getting a six month period to remove the art and that it is their own choice to remove said art on day 1 to get done with the matter quick.

Right there with you, I'm just always more inclined to lay the lion's share of the blame at the feet of the part with the most power in the situation. In this case Paizo or, more specifically, Jim Butler.

I really feel like this is getting out of hand with the potential to do real damage and it's mostly because of a handful of boneheaded and irresponsible decisions.

The more I have discussed this situation on multiple platforms, and read and viewed all responses by both parties, I will not lie, I've been increasingly disappointed with how AoN handled this.

Definitely not happy with that either but it is important to remember it is an entirely volunteer organization whose members have whole jobs outside of it. The impact could have been mitigated if Jim had just followed up or empowered someone to check and respond to his e-mails while out of the office and the two groups could have released statements that were better coordinated and collaborative as opposed to... this.

Hell, they should have done a freaking Zoom call or something and gotten down to it in an evening or two.

I'm still not happy with this. It does sound like AoN pulled the trigger a bit early on their announcement but, at the same time, Jim mismanaged the situation and now we're here.

I cannot stress enough that AoN are a group of volunteers. That is not to impune their character or professionalism but rather to state that while resources might be thin at Paizo, they will always be thinner for AoN. What's more, the fact that Paizo was not on the ball with this is an incredibly bad look. Paizo has years of experience working with and managing community volunteers. There should have been exactly zero room for miscommunication with one of the pillars of their gaming community and yet there clearly was some.

I am making an effort to not catastrophize this situation. This does not strike me as fully boycott-worthy. I've been around long enough to remember AoN before the partnership and it sounds like they will be largely going back to that model unless Paizo actually makes good on some new deal. Mostly, it sounds like Jim fumbled this situation badly and the one thing I will say to his credit is that he is, intentionally or not, putting himself in a position to absorb some animosity.

Jim, be glad my antipathy to what seems like a wholly bone-headed decision that has clearly and utterly predictably earned the ire of a decent chunk of your customers is outweighed by my desire to support the creatives and workers under you. You're the one with power here. Sort this out properly and tell us when you do.

Removing a lot of stuff they no longer have the licensing to use is going to take time and manpower.

They could have at least said something. This sort of thing always goes a little easier with actual honest communication. Handling it this way feels immature and untrustworthy.

For those of you who have not seen yet, HERE is the announcement I just saw from Archives of Nethys.

I have yet to fully digest how I feel about this news and I am trying to remain restrained about the matter and examine it from multiple angles. However, please do not be mistaken, I am quite angry.

The very least that should have been done would have been a blog post, preferably one that honestly explains the reasoning behind this decision. The reason the AoN crew said Paizo gave patently makes no sense and I have no reason to believe they are lying. They were never going to make Paizo royalties. They were a bunch of volunteers doing this for free. They barely monetized the website with ads and that was mostly to keep the site running. Paizo knew this going in to their partnership with the Archives. The fact that these 'royalties' were the end of that partnership is categorically nonsensical and if Paizo was expecting them to produce a steady stream of royalties then that should have been communicated on day one or any of the following days when Paizo realized they were not getting paid what they expected.

Now, I can imagine the reasoning behind this decision. The Diamond fiasco hit Paizo hard and maybe someone wanted to motivate a few more sales by removing AoN's early release period. However, the best way to handle that would have been transparency and open communication. I should not have had to find out about it via a confused and hurt message from a pillar of Paizo's community.

I have long been broken of the notion that a company can be the 'good one' largely by Paizo itself. The events and horror stories leading up to the formation of United Paizo Workers are what fully soured me on the organized play programs and prompted me to reexamine my relationship with the brand. I won't say this is as bad as that time but it could have been handled worlds better. The Archives of Nethys crew deserved way, way better. You could have negotiated a better model with them, maybe a grace period before new material hit their site. Something. Paizo's positive relationship with fans putting together services like theirs for free has been one of the strongest selling points for the company.

I have been trying to purchase more physical copies of books ever since the economic downturn and Diamond. I have collector's editions of all of the released Starfinder 2e core and setting books bought through my FLGS. I was considering buying the PDF of Impossible Magic on the day of release because of how excited I am for the necromancer.

I'll probably be back to buying books shortly but unless there is a better statement on what just happened, I think I'll wait for Impossible Magic to hit Archives of Nethys.

Everyone, thanks all for the interest.

1. Thaumascourge: I am not familiar with the official versions of Necromancer or Runesmith, so will have to say no.
2. Ilmakis: Posting daily M-F is fine - weekends get hectic for me as well.
3. Master Han Del of the Web: See answer #1.

All good, I'm toying around with concepts based around Spellshot or Werewolf

Any chance you'd be willing to accept a Necromancer?

Master Han Del of the Web wrote:

If I had my druthers, I would love to see a customized version of Wrath of the Righteous with a party entirely from Numeria using Starfinder classes and gear. The fact that Numeria only really gets a passing mention despite being RIGHT THERE was a major frustration for me.

Huh. Even on Pathfinder, you can run DOOM.

Just a whole campaign of reenacting that one scene from Buffy on increasingly powerful demons.

I have been planning to or actively doing so at every opportunity that makes sense. Including but not limited to:
-A planned retraining of my sad boy fire kineticist into solarian as part of a character aptheosis for a sadly short lived Strength of Thousands campaign.
-Running a game that involved a soldier getting transported into the middle of a medieval fantasy siege. Turns out area weapons work real well on massed infantry.
-Currently running a necromancer in the middle of a full Starfinder party. They all scoffed when I said I was playing a human and now he is quietly the most weird out of all of them.

If I had my druthers, I would love to see a customized version of Wrath of the Righteous with a party entirely from Numeria using Starfinder classes and gear. The fact that Numeria only really gets a passing mention despite being RIGHT THERE was a major frustration for me.

I like that one Han, and yep, it *could* be reskinned a bunch of ways where dishonourable warriors die. But the Viking-coded one fits beautifully.

Reflavoring the spirit thralls as aspirant Einherjar just works so well and I'm a sucker for characters that seek to redeem others.

The knightly flavoring puts me in mind of a Godbound character I made a while back. A friend wanted all of us to theme characters around myths and legends from Earth, and mine was called "The Once and Future King."

They were a take on King Arthur who came back in England's time of greatest need, though he was, unfortunately, not very alive when he did it, nor was he in England. I had to bow out of the game but it was my eventual goal to create legions of chivalrous undead knights who fought evil for the glory of the crown and the good of the commons.

Why stop there? The 'King Under the Mountain' is a fairly common motif in mythology... Having all the 'sleeping' cultural heroes (and a few villains) return to fight, like, an alien invasion or Cthulhu or something is a hell of a visual.

A viking-themed hallowed spirit necromancer, traveling from town to town in order to collect the dishonorable dead for one last chance to sacrifice themselves in glorious battle and earn their redemption. I'm thinking a reaper merely for the image of a painted brute of a priest with rune carved knucklebones tied into his hair and advancing with a sword and shield while flanked by a wall of furious viking ghosts.

It would be very easy to do something similar with knights and need only a slight tweak to their moral code to make it work.

Might not really count since this is a character I was already running with the playtest rules but...

Street urchin turned minor gang member turned frighteningly good lawyer. He works for one of the more mercenary and amoral law firms on Absalom Station who were sitting on his necromantic talents and legal mind mostly to keep him out of the hands of their competitors without actually investing in him. He's also a father of three and more-or-less amicably divorced from someone distinctly eldritch.

A lawyer/necromancer with a gun and a worryingly broad set of skills. It's a SF/PF hybrid game so he gets access to the much more fun and interesting SF2e simple weapons so his weapon of choice is a reaction breacher. Having Osteo Armaments at a lower level and Necrotic Bomb being rolled into the base class means that in a couple of levels, he'll suddenly get a lot more flexible. Sure the Seeker Rifle doesn't have a lot of kick but it would still be hilarious to turn a thrall into one and start laying down overwatch.

Thanks for your insights!

Regarding armor specialization: I was surprised that "resilience value" appears literally nowhere else in Player Core or GM Core, and had to assume that refers to the Resilience stat that (apparently) comes only from Improvement tier Advanced and above, or from Pathfinder resilience runes. Is that correct?

Correct

As Squark noted, the overall total of AC will be higher. Both light and medium armors cap out at a total of +5 from dexterity and item bonus while heavy armors cap out at +6.

Additionally, heavy armor has an increase to armor specialization effects. For example, the armor specialization for composite armor is "You gain resistance to bludgeoning damage equal to 1 + the armor's resilience value for medium armor, or 2 + the armor's resilience value for heavy armor."

So it's mostly something for soldiers since I believe they're the only class that gets armor specialization innately.

1e witchwarper might have some mechanical overlap. Their Infinite Worlds class feature has some nifty debuffs that could be reflavored appropriately.

Is... something holding you or, more importantly, your friend back from 2e? 'Never be able to play one' is awfully strong language when there is a very clear fix for this particular problem.

Edit: Scratch that, just read through some of your post history. Clearly you have a bone to pick with 2e. Its sad that you're not willing to give 2e a try so your friend can play a class they're excited for. Hope he can find a table willing to accomodate.

I want a megadungeon. Specifically, I want a megadungeon that's an entire, colossal, derelict spaceship. An AP about a team of salvagers who found a lifeless hulk floating out in the black, and are both trying to extract value, and figure out what in the Vast happened to the place. Heck, set the whole thing on a lost dwarven Star Citadel, they're already an incredibly cool setting detail!

That would be a great opportunity to bring in some Dead Space flavor and maybe an excuse to build out more gear with the professional trait related to mining and construction. I never got a chance to use the mining laser in the last edition.

If it hasn't been mentioned yet, I really, really want to see rules for improving and customizing vehicles make a return. Wicked custom rides are a staple of sci-fi for a very good reason.

The Joros are from a vault on Salvation's End. The Simar Communion is located in the various semi-permanent ships and stations located around Absalom Station. If memory serves, they are known for their expertise in genetics and psychic magic and it's generally considered a very bad sign if one of their number is seen outside of the Communion.

I like how the a lot of the 'yes' arguments really seem to boil down to 'because, hypothetically, someone else can do this thing better, you should not bother with it at all'. It neatly ignores experience in gameplay, party composition, a few game mechanics... and a bunch of stuff our optimizationally-minded friends in this thread would immediately dismiss.

But hey! Maybe they're right! After all, I stopped bothering with attack rolls since fighter and gunslinger both had the absolute best accuracy, I stopped trying to do damage since rogues, barbarians, and thaumaturges get such big bonuses, I stopped bothering to heal since...

No.

Going to add my voice to the overwhelming tide of 'No, Remaster is fine actually'. The labels, as they are, do exactly the same job as numbers and do it as functionally. I still see people regularly get confused by Starfinder 1e and Starfinder 2e despite them using the purportedly better edition naming convention. Changing now would require re-releasing all of the books and generate even more confusion of exactly the type that switching to 'Pathfinder 2.5e' would ostensibly be intended to reduce.

Might want to give the Degradation Grenade entry another pass, spotted a few spelling errors.

Also the Quantum Reaver looks sick as hell.

Oh, certainly, a sufficiently intelligent enemy can absolutely avoid a telegraphed attack without it being necessarily adversarial GMing (though I'd caution a GM from assuming every sapient combatant is automatically aware enough to recognize the false opening for what it is in the heat of combat). No, I was responding to JiCi's report that bracing reveals your plans to the GM--a take rather distinct from whether some enemies might be able to recognise a ready action.

Fools! You are all fools!

Having a properly formatted character sheet with your spells, feats, skills, class features, and ability modifiers listed out merely reveals your plans to the GM! They will know everything you plan to do with your character! You might as well surrender to them now!

Zo!'s Player Panoply!
A book of mostly player-facing options that seek to spin out existing options in new ways with class archetypes. Current thoughts include a Soldier that specializes in dual-wielding pistols to make close-range area fire attacks in unique patterns, a return of Broken Cycle Solarians and Vanguards as Solarian class archetypes, a 'Anachronistic Gladiator' archetype for Fighter.

Also, probably going to include a note somewhere saying 'Help, I'm trapped in the Paizo building and hiding in a janitor's closet'

Gotta love how often weapon complaints just boil down to 'my pet favorite weapon should do more damage'

Again, anything to steal WotC's lunch is good in my opinion. The people going for Daggerheart over Pathfinder are not going to be types to enjoy the crunch of Pathfinder but they are the sorts of people that might otherwise be drawn into the 5e event horizon and trapped there.

Okay! I've got to work a secret mocking dragon into my next campaign.

Oh no! Where are all the crypto spammers going to hang out while the site is down? Did anyone think of the crypto spammers?!

Captain Jack of the good ship Crypto Recovery will have to find a new port of call for the time being.

Yes. While perhaps somewhat harmful to the fabric of reality in some esoteric way and irritating the followers of Pharasma, undead PCs are not inherently evil. Furthermore, the old systems of alignment are not in play anymore. Ghost in particular have shown up with a wide range of motivations and ethical characters.

So long as they manage their hungers as ethically as possible, there should not be an issue with playing a ghost paladin. In fact, I'd say a paladin actively resisting their final reward to continue to right the wrongs of the world is a pretty dang compelling concept.

It comes out of their mouths, so teaching them not to bark is very important

4d6 ⇒ (3, 1, 2, 6) = 12 11
4d6 ⇒ (5, 1, 1, 5) = 12 11
4d6 ⇒ (3, 6, 6, 4) = 19 16
4d6 ⇒ (4, 5, 2, 1) = 12 11
4d6 ⇒ (1, 3, 5, 1) = 10 9
4d6 ⇒ (3, 1, 6, 2) = 12 11

Wow, okay... rerolling the 9

4d6 ⇒ (1, 3, 4, 2) = 10 9

9 again. Got it, cool... juuust gonna see myself out
Don't worry gang! I've eaten all the bad rolls!

Speaking of, I really hope we get to see tashtari return as companions. I love my silly laser wolves.