Perpdepog's page

Do you lose the disease if you return to life though? Because if not then you'd still have Scarlet Fever at stage 4, meaning you'd still die.

Where is it? There's no Focus Items in Impossible Magic! You have THREE Focus Heavy Casters (Necro, Summoner, Magus!) and no focus items to support them!

My guess is because two of them, the Eidolon cape for the summoner, and the Master Magus Ring for the, well, magus, already exist in Treasure Vault.

I'd love to have a little more context for Numeria's Lashunta.

I'd similarly love a bit more on the Kasatha, Starfinder Player Core, p. 54, who are presumably wandering about.

I know that they're a bit of a stretch because they've got multiple arms, and that there weren't ever many, but I think it'd be really cool to get a little nod about their continued existence in Numeria, even if it comes with a bunch of warnings in the Player's Guide.

I'm not sure if this is necessarily an error, but Impossible Magic, Planar Collision, p. 157 states that pulling in a chunk of the Plane of Air leaves an area that deals acid damage.

Acid damage isn't usually, or I think ever, associated with Air effects, so perhaps it's intended to be electricity damage?

Flightless gargoyles are probably an inevitability of PF2E's restraints, which is a shame. I would def naturally want them to be a Dragonkin-style 20 feet land speed + 20 feet fly speed, but I get why we can't.

You can, it's just likely to show up around level 9-13.

Wait, I do actually love the idea of a Runesmith as an everyman craftsman who got dragged into using their very utilitarian skill for violence. I adore those sorts of accidental hero characters that can be hard to justify in a game where the rules center on being an awesome adventurer -- it's one of the reasons Unexpected Sharpshooter is among my favorite archetypes, which I'm now realizing you could combine with precisely this model of the Runesmith for the ultimate "How does this work? BLAM!" character.

Wait a second… Halfling, Titan Slinger, Marssyl rune of impact, Remote Detonation, and Pattern Flight… Aw yeah. It's all coming together.

I'd finally have a reason to make a character who fights with a polytool.

Everything for Rangers in Howl of the Wild and also expansion of the Beastmaster Archetype.

Also objectively Rival Academies Runelord wizard archetype. I love this archetype.

It's ironic how much cooler Runelord got with the removal of the magic schools given that sin/rune magic was originally made to map onto those schools back in PF1.

I need to go through the list of runes and find the least directly combat-coded ones, or at least the ones described with the most utilitarian effects. I've wanted to make a magical handyman character ever since the School of Civic Wizardry came out, and runesmith feels like it'll easily fulfill that fantasy.

Incidentally has there been any blogs about feedback from the playtests and how the classes may be changing?

Kelseus wrote:

I just noticed that the Ooze Eidolon is Arcane instead of Occult. This is a bit of a surprise since a Summoner with an Ooze eidolon wouldn't know anything about their eidolon or any oozes because they are IDed with occultism.

Yep. Oozes maybe should have gotten moved over to being ID'd by Arcana once it lost dragons, but regardless of that, Arcane Summoner needed something to replace dragon.

It seems like they've always had difficulty coming up with arcane eidolons, so I'm not super surprised that oozes wound up there, though given their linked knowledge skill occult would have worked better.

I remember really, really early on in the summoner's playtest period there was talk of letting you make a hodgepodge eidolon, akin to the eidolons from summoners in PF1, though that never seemed to materialize. I guess construct eidolons fill that role now, given how modifiable they are.

I also would like to see a book of the dead remaster but I would like to see them go in the direction of World of Darkness and Chronicles of Darkness for vampire weaknesses powers and the like since this has almost become the universal standard in RPGs in general for a while now. It would also be cool if they did the same with werewolves and the like. I'm not saying steal White Wolf or Onyx Paths IP or anything just the overall feel. I always thought that vampires having a weakness that made them count things was pretty ridiculous and the whole idea of having to rest in a coffin filled with your native soil is kinda silly too. Garlic I can take or leave it doesn't matter that much. Sunlight should continue to be deadly. For a game I like the idea of steaks through the heart paralyzing instead of destroying vampires especially if those vampires might be player characters give them different powers and gifts like WoD does so vamps don't seem cookie cutter. I must admit that I am not familiar with the non-remastered Book of the Dead, a lot of this might have already been done but I played Pathfinder 1st Edition a lot and I am now just starting to get into 2nd Edition at the remastered point. I'm really liking all the character options even if the multitude of books does hurt the pocket book a little. SO remaster that Book of the Dead and do a good job with it. I would love to see Paizo tackle Urban Fantasy with the same rules system it would be awesome. The have Science fiction with Starfinder 2E, Fantasy with Pathfinder 2E now I would love to see a modern day Urban Fantasy take on the system that if fully compatible with Pathfinder 2E and Starfinder 2E.

If you'd like to see what's in Book of the Dead, all of its options are right here.

I hope so, so badly that we get a devil eidolon option in that book, also possibly a shadow.

Xenocrat wrote:

As a rare thrall targeting spell that doesn’t destroy the thrall it’s good for a necro familiar or one of the super thralls with some durability and mobility.

I didn't give undead familiar too much attention bc of all the stuff that destroys thralls, but you're right: thrall charge, song of the soul, and deathly scream are all pretty awesome on a necro going for some kind of familiar build. I never thought of all the utility. Getting enhanced familiar would probably be important to make it beefier

Would Thrall Charge work? Familiars can't make strikes.

I also took feats to give me extra casting on my summoner. I didn't use it a lot as I recall, but even if I didn't always use my slots it felt like I had too few under the old system.

The old system did have its charms, having all your spells be signature spells and getting to swap out all of them for new ones was pretty neat, but I'm not sure it was worth what you were giving up. Besides, now there's room for more fun archetypes since there's less pressure to always pick more spellcasting.

That is strange. They also don't seem to get any class features at level 17, which is also a bit unusual.

I'm not sure if it is an error though. Runesmiths are filling a sort of caster/martial space, and sometimes their saves can be strange. They could be skewing more to casterly save progression, which tends to only give one save at master.
I do also agree that feels oddly restrictive for runesmiths, who are meant to mix it up n melee, and very possibly could be an error, however.

okay. so theyd get Academia lore trained, plus a random lore of their choice, which would scale.

Correct. Or you could choose academia lore for Additional Lore to apply to, and then select another lore skill to be trained in that wouldn't scale.

Perhaps an animated pen would not be upset about it.

But if you think that you can convince Farien to willingly suffer a violent and explosive death regularly, I would be interested in hearing what logical reasoning you use.

I will give them money. Moreover, because I know the value of a life, I will give them lots of money.

LoreMonger13 wrote:

As a heads up for those who may not have seen the GenCon Keynote yet, the Tome of Dungeons book will include some new ancestries with Awakened Oozes and Gargoyles confirmed!

Timestamp here!

Figured I'd share since I know I've seen both of these on peoples' wishlist (personally very excited for both!)

Super happy for the players getting their wishes. Gotta love how prolific Paizo's options are. So many stories to open up. I hope to hear of the legend of Cubert, the Awakened Gelatinous Cube.

Wouldn't it be Sterling, the Sapient String Slime?

Kevin Mack wrote:

Are the invaders the dominion of the black or something new?

That's technically a spoiler for the campaign, but one that's gonna be kinda out of the bag pretty early and WHAT said invaders are doing is meant to be the real mystery to uncover. Folks who want to know who the Invaders from the Dark are can click below. Folks who want to preserve this relatively minor spoiler might want to avoid most discussions online going forward since it's gonna be pretty obvious the closer we get to release. BUT:

** spoiler omitted **

I apologize for any migraines my high-pitched squeeing might trigger, and no, I will not be stopping!

Oh, I wasn't expecting gargoyles to be commonplace, just to have it as a backstory element in the same way someone might have 'I was living in Starfall when everything went down' as part of their character's background. And don't worry, I brought it up with my game group at our game, and the GM liked the idea too.

I sadly can't recall/find the name just now, but I believe there is even a gargoyle wing mentioned in one of the Iron Gods adventures they could potentially be related to.

Magnus the Armored Swordsman wrote:

Was it deliberate?

Yes, as Minions [and Summoned is a subset of Minion] can be commanded to do 2 actions while Thralls need specific commands to use specific actions. That was a deliberate choice.

It also means that thralls aren't limited to the cap of four--or possibly less if you have a familiar or animal/undead companion--like other minions are. Thralls being their own thing, and not all getting those actions, makes it easier to loosen the restraints on how many can be on the field at once, which in turn makes it easier for the necromancer to fulfill the class fantasy of controlling an undead horde.

The Scorpion Animal instinct for the Remastered Barbarian. Reach Unarmed is back.

I'd lump in the entire glut of new options for Animal Instinct barbarians we got in Howl of the Wild, for that matter. I'm so glad I can now make my dandy animal instinct barb afflicted with the curse of the werecrab without having to reach for rejiggered ape stats.

In terms of other classes I've also got to give it to the Warrior of Legend and Runelord class archetypes. I haven't found a game where they fit yet, but I wanna. I wanna real bad.

Perpdepog wrote:

I'm getting a little grumpy over the new eidolon statistics. I kind of like that they've simplified the attribute spread, but it also looks like eidolon attributes have been lowered overall, which is a bummer. Dragons certainly did.

At first I thought it was a new paradigm that has all of an eidolon's non-Str/Dex attributes add up to a +3, and I was OK with that even if I missed the old spreads, but construct adds up to a +4, so I'm not sure what's going on.

I'm mostly worried over things like reduced saves for the eidolon. Fort and Will saves, especially Fort, are going to matter to a frontline fighter, and eidolons look like they may be an average of one or two points lower than they used to be?

I'm also reading this over AoN, so if it's different in the book please let me know.

It sounds like +3 would be correct to match PC stat lines (which, unless you use optional flaws, always add up to +9 total) since STR and DEX are taking 4/2 between them.

Dragon has the same total stats, but they're spread differently, from what I can tell on AoN. They're one of the few eidolons to not have +3 con now actually.

That was my guess as well until I saw that funky construct statline, though it seems to be fixed now, which makes me think it was a typo after all.

I'm still a bit grumpy about it, even if it does match how statblocks are supposed to go. It makes using your saves feel clunkier, particularly for eidolons like dragons who are rocking lower numbers in that department. It feels like the point is almost to let both yourself and your eidolon be hit by the same effect so that you can more effectively save against it, but that doesn't work because you always take the worse of the two outcomes without a feat. And your eidolon's lowered saves are going to make that outcome more likely now, given they are the ones mixing it up in melee more of the time.

I'll have to play with it to see what the outcome is going to be like, but my gut's telling me that summoners just got more fragile.

Talon Stormwarden wrote:

I was expecting to see some sort of errata that would allow Runesmiths to operate without a free hand, given Birdsong's statements about the intent to be able to trace runes without a free hand. But we got nothing. RAW runesmiths must still have a free hand (unless they take the Smithing Weapons feat).

I'm pretty sure that this round of errata was locked and loaded before the release even happenned with things they have already caught on.

So any new things that they actually didn't catch on early on, like the hand issue, would have to wait for a second round of errata to be addressed.

...or at least that's how it looks to me given how Birdsong was caught unaware by the fact that as written you'd still require a hand to trace/etch.

Agreed. It's probably why the errata doesn't address the oddness surrounding the Learn a Spell language viz the necromancer's dirge, either.

Also, I'm happy with the errata. It explains my confusion over the Hedge Mage archetype if nothing else. I'd always understood a hedge mage to be a magic-user who is self-taught, or performs relatively minor magics, so them being able to effectively double the number of max-level spell slots they had felt weird to me.

I'm a bit sad about Spellshifter, mostly because it did look like a fun archetype for wizards to pick up and leverage their massive Arcana bonuses with. I'll probably still like it, I just need to read through to see how it works, but it's a bit of a bummer.

I'm also a bit bummed that Living Nexus didn't get any errata to let monks take it, particularly how monk-coded a lot of the art was described to me.

I don't see any issue with the thralls either. They can do a lot, particularly for some burst damage and battlefield control, and if an enemy is going to spend their actions removing them as a resource ... well that's actions they're not spending messing up the necromancer's friends or the neecromancer themselves. Seems pretty great to me.

Honestly I view the actions spent creating more thralls in the same light that I view the witch's actions spent sustaining their hexes and other abilities. The juice very much seems worth the squeeze.

Robots! Can't wait to see the beasties. Those Myrmidons in the World Guide have stood out in my mind for years now.

It's the director robots for me; they've been in my head for a long time, not sure why.

All the other Numerian monsters I love are either plays on usual archetypes, like the rust-risen, or are members of the Dominion of the Black, like shipminds or the evolved form of the neh-thalggu--or I guess now the jah-tohl--the yah-thelgaad. I'm hoping we get some Dominion representation in this AP.

Though even if we don't, apparently the AP is supposed to have themes of Invasion of the Body Snatchers, which has me hopeful we'll see another of my fave monsters, the bodythief! (I always appreciated that it's much more plant-coded, bringing it in line with the aliens from the original novel.)

Excited about all of this! Awakened oozes sound like they'll be fun, and I dig a book that sounds like it's all about old-fashioned dungeon exploration.

*insert particularly high-pitched fanboy squealing*

Seconded! Hopefully there's another science-y weirdness AP that goes from 11-20; a lot of critters from Iron Gods that I especially loved were there, and I'd be super hyped to see them get stats.

I'm getting a little grumpy over the new eidolon statistics. I kind of like that they've simplified the attribute spread, but it also looks like eidolon attributes have been lowered overall, which is a bummer. Dragons certainly did.

At first I thought it was a new paradigm that has all of an eidolon's non-Str/Dex attributes add up to a +3, and I was OK with that even if I missed the old spreads, but construct adds up to a +4, so I'm not sure what's going on.

I'm mostly worried over things like reduced saves for the eidolon. Fort and Will saves, especially Fort, are going to matter to a frontline fighter, and eidolons look like they may be an average of one or two points lower than they used to be?

I'm also reading this over AoN, so if it's different in the book please let me know.

Also, part of why I've always pushed for us to keep our adventures fun to just read is because that way folks can enjoy them even if they're not going to play them. Adventure Paths have been and will continue to be one of the main ways we advance the metaplot of the campaign setting, after all.

Just bought Bastion of Blasphemies for exactly this reason! I'm already running a couple games and I'm not sure if/when anyone else in my play group will feel like running a game, let alone this one, but I still really want to read the CastlevaniaSouls-style adventure.

Jokes aside it can be rather hard to find the PDF version of a product sometimes. They don't tend to show up on any of the New Releases or Coming Soon pages; I've generally had to go poking through the specific category of book line I'm looking for and then go to Digital Editions to find them, which feels out of the way.

I'll add my voice to those wanting digital subscriptions. As someone who literally can't read physical print, I would jump on PDF subscriptions right away. It'd be doubly great given that I keep having a hard time figuring out what's on the horizon now that the old "Paizo Releases" page vanished with the old store. (Yes I know there is a "Coming Soon" page on the new store, but I keep having trouble in finding it for reasons unknown, or at least unknown to me.)

I'm glad to hear how things have resolved. I hope things are smoother going forward, and that the next blogs we get from Paizo are good news rather than putting out fires.

That sucks that it's going to be harder for folks to find art of monsters and NPCs, but I hope that the CUP solves at least some of those needs. I'm also glad to hear the PRD is sticking around; yeah it's old and very plain, but folks do still use it, and its functional layout is one of the major contributing factors for me getting into Pathfinder in the first place. Generally the less fancy a webpage is the easier it is to navigate with a screen reader.

*ignores conspiracy thoughts of this always being the original goal and previous statements being a show to make this palatable*

Should be pretty easy to do, given that, had they done this originally--openly talked about coming to a new agreement with AoN, explained that they needed art to be taken down to help save on various legal fees, etc--there likely wouldn't have been a controversy in the first place. This is doubly likely in light of the fact that our previous communications from Jim were about the financial difficulties Paizo is facing with JP Morgan and Diamond still trying to keep a load of their product from them and bleeding them in court with appeals.

In addition to considering the things others have said, I'd also suggest maybe just don't worry about it too much, particularly if your party are ahead of the expected level progression by a hundred or so experience points. Remember that PF2's XP awards are relative to party strength, so a moderate threat encounter (80 XP) becomes a low threat encounter (60 XP) if the party are one level higher. Yeah this makes the encounter easier for the party, but it also means they're awarded less XP for defeating it; it's a self-correcting system that narrows that experience gap as they play.

And, you know, if they're doing side quests and getting invested, why not reward that investment by letting them be a bit stronger than they otherwise would be? If your party is looking for a challenge you can always slap the Elite adjustment on a couple of foes, particularly the boss of an encounter where they also have weaker minions, and call it good while giving them the same XP. I'd recommend talking to your players before using this solution, however, because it may lead to feelsbads at the table if they're savvy enough to calculate the XP awards and know you've short-changed them.

You can also lean more heavily into non-XP rewards, again if you talk it over with the table. Maybe doing side quests doesn't give the party XP, but it does grant access to Uncommon or Rare options the party may not otherwise have, or lets them interact with a subsystem they otherwise weren't going to interact with. The Gardens of Wonder subsystem is especially apposite here. It grants the party a little bump in versatility through ready access to consumables they may not otherwise decide to buy, while not making them too much more powerful because you have control over what kinds of consumables they are able to access.

I think this is something the GM can discourage by making it so you can't always spend 20-30 minutes hanging out between fights.

Like in a sequence where the party is "trying to rescue a captive from a fortified manor house" if you fight the guards in the Hall the ones in the conservatory won't wait patiently for you to catch your breath, and if you take 6 hours to get to the captive, they may have been secreted elsewhere.

I think the thing that I don't like about the old refocus is that the "upgrade to refocus" feats felt really bad to take instead of something more directly useful. A middle path I think I would consider is changing focus to the old way (where you can't do it back to back) but making the amounts of focus points you regain scale with your level (and just remove the feats.) If a class needs a steady supply of focus points to function, you build this into the class (like how the Necromancer has a bunch of options for this).

I'm on the same page as PossibleCabbage. This is definitely informed by my table, where we don't really do a lot of focus spell spamming other than casting one focus spell per fight, but it's not felt like an issue to me.

I wouldn't object to something like the old system returning, particularly if it helps classes like the psychic--though I'd argue that psychic is also a bit overly conservative in its power budget and needs some other fixes--but the old system itself was confusing to many players, and added an extra cognitive load that made everything just that little bit more difficult. Not to mention that the feats that let you regain more focus points just didn't feel--and I use this word specifically--good to take, even if they were a benefit in practice. It felt as though you were paying twice for your focus spells which, in many cases, already cost you a class feat.

I feel that the second problem can be solved by tying the number of points you regain to level, like PossibleCabbage and Unicore suggested, though I'd suggest instead tying it to your proficiency myself. It's functionally the same thing and remembering that your proficiency rank equals the number of points you can refocus is a pretty clean solution.
The first though, that the old refocusing rules create an extra cognitive load on the players, I'm not sure how to square. I honestly suspect it was that issue that caused the change to the focus point system; it just doesn't feel like the juice is worth the squeeze when someone at the table has to ask for the third time if anyone remembers when they all last refocused.

A new Paizo blog post updating the situation is up.

Linked here for convenience.

Awesome, thanks.

And that Raise Dead feat is an interesting one. There aren't many feats that make permanent changes to people's characters like that.

Unicore wrote:

I don’t have the book yet, but I hope the book provides some guidance for how to square having this feat and using grave spells that pull corpses and tombstones out of the ground to make a massive living graveyard thrall. Like, for me, there is something very intentionally disrespectful to the dead about the aesthetic of many necromancer class feats that doesn’t get squared by saying “oh it’s only temporary,” and a player going around and creating gruesome thralls in cities to do relatively meaningless tasks is not going to go over well.

I think the way you thread this needle is by picking one of the grim fascinations (subclasses) that focus on something that isn't going to draw as much attention. Like sure, if you're making bone constructs to open doors, that's going to get weird looks but you can choose to make your thralls spiritual in nature (think Aragorn's Ghost Army in RotK) which probably shouldn't upset people more than if a Summoner has a spooky-looking Eidolon.

This was my thinking as well. Does anyone know if the special thralls you create from feats still possess the qualities bestowed by your Grim Fascination? Thralls like the Living Graveyard do get a fair bit less icky if you're conjuring them up as a mass of helpful ghosts that peal away from the main mass. You could flavor them as a troop of ghostly soldiers or a village's worth of people you are helping put to rest, for example.

You could probably do something similar with blood, too. I haven't got the book yet, but it does sound like there isn't any mechanical requirement that your thralls be made out of literal blood or anything. You could instead flavor them as constructs made of life force or something like that.

You could probably(?) do a similar aesthetic shift for bone. Flesh is the one that's stumping me; not really sure how to de-ickify that one.

Perpdepog wrote:

Unicore wrote:

One of the main reasons I would never want real people to feel like I was conflating them with the undead is because the undead are made by people looking for power and control. That may work to talk about certain aspects of socially constructed identity markers, while talking about those markers, or to highlight problematic portrayals, but it is harmful to overlay over real people who were not created to serve others.

I think that's less a reason to avoid conflating people with the undead in general, and more a reason to be careful when conflating undead created by necromancy with real people specifically. Fiction has loads of examples of self-willed or "naturally occurring" undead, after all, and they're going to represent different themes in fiction.

Yes, I was talking about the portrayal of the undead in Golarion.

As was I. I just want to make sure we're all on the same page here.

Is there any evidence that Pharasma objects to "you were a person, and then you were a skeleton, and then you died and stopped being a skeleton so your soul went to Pharasma to judge?" Like is she going to hold the fact that you were a skeleton for 100 years against you?

My reading is that Pharasma's main objection to the undead themselves is when they want to grow their ranks, and when they plan on existing forever. Like a person who was good in life, and then became a skeleton and decided to continue doing good until they fall apart and cease existing ends up in one of the upper planes right?

As far as I know she doesn't object to the undead on any sort of moral grounds on an individual level. She doesn't like it because, IIRC, animating someone with void energy damages their soul, which leads to less quintessence when their soul eventually breaks down in however many untold centuries, and that leads to less material refreshing planes being eroded away, but someone being made an undead against their will wouldn't factor into her judgments. That calculus shifts if you had someone turn you into an undead, I'm sure, or if you did it to yourself, but I don't think just having undeath thrust upon you is enough to really sway her.

That does raise some questions about how actions while undead affect her eventual judgment, though. I'd guess she'd judge you the same, but presumably your willingness to become an undead would be taken into consideration? I wonder if she'd also consider the kind of undead you are, as some seem to have more control over their actions than others, and also factor the undead outlook where "harm the living" is your default.

One of the main reasons I would never want real people to feel like I was conflating them with the undead is because the undead are made by people looking for power and control. That may work to talk about certain aspects of socially constructed identity markers, while talking about those markers, or to highlight problematic portrayals, but it is harmful to overlay over real people who were not created to serve others.

I think that's less a reason to avoid conflating people with the undead in general, and more a reason to be careful when conflating undead created by necromancy with real people specifically. Fiction has loads of examples of self-willed or "naturally occurring" undead, after all, and they're going to represent different themes in fiction.

Sibelius Eos Owm wrote:

But of course, don't take me arguing my case too strongly--I still fully expect that for the world in general, necromancy is dark and taboo. It wouldn't make sense to me otherwise - again, save for areas like Kaer Maga where it's relatively normal, if not quite accepted esp by the local church of Pharasma.

It would be a boring setting if everyone in the world agreed exactly what good and evil meant in all things, and I am glad overall alignment is mechanically gone so “is this right or wrong?” Is not a question of casting a spell and having the game rule book decide that for you.

That is why I don’t like a mechanical holy necromancer. I am fine with characters trying to use necromancy to do go and believing that it is going to accomplish goodness, but it feels like undeath in PF2 should stay in the realm of social morality. My personal preference is that, within that context, most societies frown heavily upon Necromancy as a source of power that is almost always exploited for personal gain by people very comfortable with disrupting “natural” systems of life and death.

Funnily enough it's the removal of alignment that makes me glad we do have a Holy necromancer. I feel like it's a good way to demonstrate a plurality of different systems of faith in the setting. I'm sure there are more than a few holy-aligned iruxi who commune with the bones of ancestors for aid, or worshipers of the Master of Masters who are both holy and practice necromancy with the eventual goal of becoming one of his mummies so that they may pass on their teachings. Those are points of view that are harder to square with a system as ontologically fixed as the alignment system was, but with Holy and Unholy being--for the most part--voluntary positions it opens the doors for those sorts of practices to exist more comfortably, even with undead having their general spooky baggage.

And even if it didn't, well, PCs are meant to be exceptional people. I like that a PC could, in theory, be the first holy necromancer in the setting. That'd be a fun story to tell, and I like that the game doesn't make you dig into archetypes to do it.

Nice; I'll check those out. Faux-corpo training videos is exactly my kind of humor.

Not sure on ancestry, but I'm thinking of a Gaultan spirit necromancer with the ghost archetype. The thralls would be flavored as fragementary spirits that detach from and then reabsorb into the main character, a sort of diet

PossibleCabbage wrote:

It's also pretty obvious that the end of the Nex/Geb thing is not going to be "and then they kiss" because the feud basically started via "both of them thought they were the best archmages around, and were too proud to admit the other guy had a case."

> Baba Yaga and Jatembe at a Katapeshi coffeeshop

> Sorshen, Hao Jin, and Tar-Baphon Skype-calling in

The fun thing is, with the exception of TB, while they're all definite contenders for the title, I doubt any of them would try to butt into the feud. They all likely don't care about the squabbling, have more important things to do, or both. TB's enough of a tryhard that I could see him inserting himself into the fight, though.

That's right, the Pumpkin Spice Crunchwrap McRib is back, for a limited time only!

No joke, I'd try that.

Ooooh, a wizard school all about snooping? I'll be able to fully recreate my first ever PF2 character, a dromaar wizardly private detective named Gorvick McCue.

Spell shifter seems strong. Sustaining an allies spell or eventually yoinking an enemies sustained spell all using your arcana skill for a higher DC seems potent. Likewise, hedge mage, living nexus, world rouser, and veil dancer archetypes all have classes they would really benefit. Honestly, the archetypes kind of slap in general with this book. I was very surprised that the book ended up having great archetypes for casters AND martials. This wasn't on my bingo card, but as much as I love the magus feat shakeup, I could easily see myself making a magus that leans fully into the living nexus

I'm a little sad that it sounds like you won't be able to play a living nexus as a monk, thanks to them needing martial weapon proficiency. Have I got that right?

It's not a new item: Jar of Shifting Sands.

I don't see it as confusing: immediately upon sand leaving the jar, it starts to conjure more, so it's a "jar of endless sand". This item is a "replacement" for the OGL's Decanter of Endless Water.

More a riff, given they both existed in legacy at the same time.

The rules don't actually prevent doing this as far as I can tell, but as people have pointed out, it's not going to do a lot as you advance in level.

Furthermore, the further away a target is from the Necromancer the lower the height you can achieve.

On the other hand if you can get Reach Spell from another source (Witch or Wizard would be easiest) you could conceivably summon them 60 feet up for a whole bunch more damage. But, the earliest you could do this is 4th level, and by then a DC 15 reflex save is decidedly horrid, considering your spell DC would be 21!

Hm, use them to pelt oozes?

Why did this happen in a rulebook when it could have been a good AP by the sound of it ?

Because it'd be an unsatisfactory way for the story to end for most folks I suspect. A story like that more often ends with the party fighting said big, important thing they just released, or helping them fight some other big, important thing, but since Nex is just getting his bearings, and the dust up between Nex and Geb is all but certain to be the subject of at least one AP, if not multiple, then actually releasing Nex to set that series of events in motion, while impactful, lacks a satisfying conclusion for an Adventure Path.

I do think it would have made a pretty good one-shot adventure though, for sure.

TheFinish wrote:

I think you might mean this for the spell review and this for a list of reprinted/not reprinted content.

Both of them very useful!

Thank you! This is just the kinda info I was looking for. Though now seeing what didn't make it in makes me very disappointed.

I hope we get some of the shadow/umbral options back in the upcoming Cheliax: Infernal Inheritance book. We're getting an overview of Nidal in it, so they'd fit very well.

Yeah that sounds more like an error on Fantasy Grounds' part; I've never heard of a Specific trait.