James Jacobs wrote:
Cool. It makes me think of how nihilistic evil is mostly a CE (demon) in D&D, and it is more a NE (daemon) thing in PF. I appreciate the variety.
I suspect that the material plane is unpleasant to the elememntals. It may even be painful. Think of the poor fire elemental--it is bitterly cold and there humidity in the air--it may not do damage in the game sense (no hit points lost), but it can still be unpleasant.
They may regard organic life as an unnatural aberration, maybe akin to how the average humanoid would view something from the Far Realm. No one badmouths John Q. Dirtfarmer if he uses his shovel to smack some tentacle horror that pops out of a dimensional portal without waiting to see if it will suck out someone's brain.
In my games, I have the Elemental Liberation Front (ELF), a group of elementals trying to end the slave taking practices of the material plane's magic users. No reason to assume that elementals don't talk to each other, and stories of mistreatment by humanoids may be widespread.
If a PC found him/herself in an unpleasant environment and met some hideous monsters that were widely regarded as hostile in the PC's culture, what do you think he/she would do?
The 4e warlock is clearly the inspiration for the witch. It doesn't matter what the 3.5 or the 5e version does. It is just as relevant to talk about what the 2e ranger or 1e paladin did as it is to bring up either of those warlocks.
The 4e warlock could be either an int caster or a cha caster and spent all day making sure that warlock's curse was on somebody (and a lot of somebodies at higher levels) and could hang around a summoned minion. By 3rd level, the 'lock only used eldritch blast if he/she ran out of creepy encounter or daily spells. I don't know about you, but that seems just a cackle short of being a lot like the PF1 witch to me.
I admit that a wide variety of patrons is an assumption (one I feel good about but still an assumption). It all depends on what is the most important part of being a witch. If it creepiness, then no need to go farther than the occult.
If it is getting magic by being the student of some otherworldly being, then different types of patrons seem worthwhile. That being said, there are some missing outsiders from PF1 that if they became occult would go along way to filling the fiend/celestial/fey patron roles. Kytons in particular practically scream occult as does their home, the Plane of Shadows. Oni, Rakesha, or Qlippoth are also possibilities. For the Qlippoth, maybe the demons have finally driven them totally out of the Abyss or they left to strike a major blow (I mostly included them for the creepy factor). Agathions are a little tougher sell as the good occult guys, but I could be persuaded by a good story (they collectively decided to sacrifice their place in Nirvana to more actively battle evil). Not sure who could be the occult stand in for the fey off the top of my head, but that doesn't mean there couldn't be some.
Tender Tendrils wrote:
I get magic because my daddy is a devil is okay for that magic to be divine, but I get my magic because I learned it from a devil means the magic is somehow occult? On the surface, that doesn't feel right to me.
Now if they say something like "devils and fey lords teach witches occult magic in order to disguise their influence", I could buy that (assuming they explained how a nonoccult patron can teach occult magic [for devils I assume it would involve mining knowledge from occult casters souls in Hell]), but I haven't seen anything like that either (especially on this thread)
Inquiring minds want to know: how is prepared occult any less "checking off boxes" than prepared any? You might be able to argue that it is a more important box, but ultimately it is just a box.
If clerics were really the source of their power, then it would make sense for gods to grab any of them they could into their service. But that isn't how it works in Golorian, not to mention that "being the source of your divine power" is the divine sorcerer's gimmick.
I could even see if it clerics were charisma casters, since maybe they could draw large groups to worship the god, but even though PF 2 clerics can benefit from charisma, they are still primarily wisdom casters.
Which brings us to wisdom. You are really great at noticing things, except the nature of the god you are worshipping?
I am assuming the witch will be the prepared version of the sorcerer: your patron might be, for example, a dragon (arcane), a devil (divine), an archfey (primal), or a GOO (occult). The hexes will be the focus spells. Int caster, which will also solve "it isn't right that my wizard can't summon a demon", since a witch/wizard multiclass should be a good combo.
Archpaladin Zousha wrote:
Maybe Norgorber got him in the same way as "Darth Vader killed your father, Luke" actually played out. It would explain the whole "kill anyone who knows my secret identity" bit.
I figure lay followers can be any alignment, since all they know is what they have been told. It wouldn't be hard to make Asmodeus look "good" (if not Good) or at least a necessary evil (and Hell as Meritocracy isn't necessarily a punishment (although it is)]. No Internet on Golorian to tell people Asmodeus is evil (or that he is secretly Desna). It seems like you could play someone like that as LE with a big chip on their shoulder and contempt for those not trying to move up in the world (at least as you see it), since PC's are generally trying to level up, and thus are "worthy of respect."
Someone drawing divine power from the Big A is opening themselves up to him. If you have high wisdom, there is no excuse for not knowing Asmodeus's nature (no one expects that much mentally from high charisma classes, so if you want to play a divine caster who doesn't know what is going on, divine sorcerer or paladin should be fine).
That is just spending money that could be better spent on booze. I kid, I kid. The good part about CC is that if you think you are doing good, even if you didn't think it through enough, He won't hold it against you. A talking beer mug might tell you to do differently next time, though....
Now some deities might want to know why you didn't read through 300 volumes of dwarfish religious texts to see what the accumulated wisdom before you did this, but CC isn't one of them.
Doesn't the bulette do most of its traveling by burrowing? Since that is digging through the ground instead of some kind of magic phasing, it seems like that would be hard on the rider.
If the bulette's preferred form of travel is burrowing, making it stay above ground seems egregious like riding a seal on dry land.
Thank you. Reacting when someone attacks you seems more LN-N-CN than evil to me, but I am sure you are right, unless they decided to make the evil champions super cliché evil (which would actually be my preference--what's the point of being a champion of evil when you are barely evil?)
I figure Disney might have issues with anyone trying to copy write "Avenger" for anything. Even WotC with Hasbro $ backing them chose to go "oath of vengeance" instead of "avenger" this time around....
Other than that, avenger would be a good name.
Maybe this leaves design room for the Inquisitor (or some new class) to be the offense oriented holy warrior? Not at convenient as having it from the get go but could be something.
I would go with crusader myself. Both names have cultural baggage, but crusader has less "I have to tie them up before I hit them", and more "militant invasion" which seems like what is missing from the champion.
Unless the evil champion's reactions are going to be "if I am going to get hit, I push my buddy in front of me", I am not sure how evil champions are actually going to work. (or maybe "if someone else is getting healed around me, and I am less than 100% on hit points, I use my reaction to steal the healing").
You could have damage-dealing spells treat the target as neutral the first time it hits, but mark the target as having an alignment that takes extra damage by the spell (the mark fades in a minute). You might power up the alignment damage a little bit, since you won't get it the first time you use it.
Modern bureaucracy has totally solved any issues involving clerics worshipping pantheons. Simply put, when the cleric prays in the morning, his/her magic Outlook calendar tells him/her which god is powering spells for the pantheon that day. Some days that might suck (Xeroxus, the TN God of Stationary won't help your divine lance any...), but if you wanted dependability, you should have picked a single god (as anyone who has ever worked for a council, commission, or other group where you have a lot of bosses will tell you).
I think it is supposed to be simplified in some manner. The last time they did something like that was in PF Unchained, which involved monster roles. If roles are a thing in PF 2, that will negate any value of "typical monster stats by level", since you would have to know the level and the role. It might mean that monsters with the brute role will get a "brute bonus" to an attack that is unrelated to their stats (but related to their CR or XP) in lieu of juggling feats.
An alternative approach would be to make some area effect spells with undead themes (yeah, I saw a commercial for Zombie Tidal Wave). It seems to me the benefits would be that:
1) you are getting "a lot" of undead but aren't adding to GM headaches by having to keep track of where each of those undead are.
2) since the necromancer isn't micromanaging 30 skeletons, the necromancer's player's turn shouldn't take 45 minutes.
3) an interesting heightening effect could be that the spell leaves behind a zombie/skeleton/whatever appropriate undead when the spell ends.
4) when the party goes to sleep at the end of the day, the necromancer doesn't have to worry about a random group of gnolls or ghouls eating half of his/her zombies (for some reason the "I've got an army of undead" necromancer has never been popular at my table--it is a real mystery).
5) This becomes good precedent for other themed area effect spells (I'm looking at you Impnado or Lantern Archon Thunderstorm).
Watching the medusa fights in both Clash of the Titans movies (the main reason to watch the remake) and the Percy Jackson movie, it doesn't seem like she just sits there hoping someone just happens to catch her gaze. She is doing stuff to draw attention. Admittedly that should take one of her actions, but it does make me think most gaze attack types aren't passive about it (except in the white room, where they are standing still with their eyes closed).
Vali Nepjarson wrote:
I was wondering that about the agathions as well. I suspect that they were trying to keep 1 outsider type per alignment, and angels took over the "main NG" spot from the agathions, but that doesn't mean they can't show up later. I think if they were going to have angels absorb agathions (like aeons did to inevitables), there would have been an example in the Bestiary.
How much of a swarm has to be together to remain a swarm? It would be pretty easy to narrate a scenario where Ang-gar the Barbarian tries to grapple a swarm of rats and half (or more) of the rats wiggle free. What percentage counts for actually grappling the swarm? If he holds 40% of the mass of the swarm is he grappling the swarm? 50%?
And since this is the rules forum, I expect a rules-based answer.
If all the rats in one hand don't fit, then you must acquit.
Sorry, I don't have the book in front of me, but what do the grappling rules say about grappling more than one creature at a time? If the rules set any sort of limitation on how many creatures you can grapple, then the definition of swarm (specifically "a mass or cloud of creatures") means you can't grapple the swarm, and you wouldn't need to say that in the swarm definition because it is in the grappling rules.
Sorry, don't have the book in front of me, but are there limits on how many creature you can grapple at a time? "Functions as one monster" is not exactly the same as being one monster (and might have been better to have been stated as "acts as one monster"), so if there is a limit on how many creatures you can grapple in the grappling rules, then by that rule it would be impossible to grapple a swarm, which is "a mass or cloud of creatures."
Even if the rest of the designers decided that "I'm feeling evil" is how they meant for this to play out, I think they should clarify it, since RAW + unconventional often equals problems at tables.
That being said, I would be fine if Mark changes it. If that is the case, I hope they find something more imaginative than "eventually you will turn evil/good/lawful/chaotic"--maybe every time a nonevil type casts the spell an imp teleports into the vicinity (you don't have to be evil to use this spell, but you are helping evil get a stronger foothold in the world every time you do). Last I heard, imps are still worth xp and have loot, so it is a win-win for the murder hoboes.
As for alignment traits, having the player declare "Bob the sorcerer is feeling evil" (and thus for the time being Bob's alignment is one of the evil ones) solves that. Now, undoubtedly, Bob's player will claim he is over it after the spell is cast (and Bob is back in his previous alignment), but part of being the GM is to notice that Bob has been doing a lot of evil but not a lot of nonevil lately...
I think "My PC is suddenly feeling evil" solves this (followed by "he/she is over the evil feelings"). Not only do you get to use the spells, but temptation is preserved (and documented for when the GM wants to know if the sorcerer's alignment has changed due to all the evil spells he/she has been casting...).
In terms of "cosmic goodness, I think the best solution would have been to make the champions more like the Hellknights, focused on a particular kind of celestial/fiend/monitor. There are nine kinds of outsider in the Bestiary with enough info to flesh out the outsider-based champions, and I am sure the other 6 big fiends types and 3 big(ish) celestial types will show up eventually. But that would have started with outsiders, not gods, but wouldn't have worked with the "Power of Love" or whatnot unless the player decided that "angels are Love."
I think if you are getting power from something other than gods, it should look different/get different abilities. It isn't like there is an excess of "magical, but largely non-spell casting" melee classes, so it is an opportunity for a new and interesting class. Ideals or ancestor spirits seem occult to me, so that is what I think they should make the "non-god paladin" (assuming they make one).
Ed Reppert wrote:
Those are great spell components. That does make me think of those old Weird Tales (and Dune) where psychic powers often involved sniffing something or drinking something (hmmmm, maybe the alchemist is already psychic). Maybe black lotus, hallucinatory mushrooms, Spice, and Granny's Moonshine as archetypes.....
I agree. It would be nice to account for occult being available on Day 1. On the other hand, in the "why is bard occult" thread, Mark Seifter said: Fey are tricky! It's slightly different metaphysically, but Mechagamera was right on the money that fey were "cheating" and doing weird things with their magic, hacking the essences they have rather than using mental/vital combo, but very similar.
Maybe Hags are good at hacking too....
You go see the oracle to find out what quest the gods want to go on. You go see the medium to find out what quest your dead aunt wants you to go on. That seems very thematically similar to me. It is basically mad libs.
Stone Dog wrote:
I'll buy that with the First World and all, but I wonder if the fey will be focused on just one power source. Maybe mortals can't access vital/mental, but that would help make the fey a little more alien if that was their default. It makes sense for fiends/celestials/monitors to be Spiritual, since getting souls is a big part of their gigs, but it seems like fey have wider interests.
No one played a barbarian in my playtest group. I will have to take a look at them. Thank you.
I would like a more transfigural class, like the 4e warden (but not limited to "nature"). I think of it as the martial sorcerer, but instead of a weird connection to magic giving you spell casting, it temporarily turns you into a being of stone, a half-dragon, a half-angel, a humanoid bear, etc. Transformations + being inherently good at hitting things with weapons (like fighters, paladins, barbarians, etc.) is what I am going for.