Perpdepog's page

Oh, and while it's not out yet I'd highly recommend Tech Core when it comes out. It's also going to have some ancestries in it, the Mechanic and Technomancer classes, and lots and lots of technological goodies.

New idea, a holy spirit necromancer, likely a reaper, who worships Ragathiel and whose thralls are the spiritual remains of the victims of whatever baddies they're fighting that day.

Teeth are basically bones right? Sprite with the Bone fascination. The tooth fairy ain't giving out coins no more

Ooooooh, that's a fun one! I'm imagining them being a reaper; hopefully there are plenty of feats to let you debuff enemies by "pulling their teeth out" and ways to consume thralls to empower yourself; Golarion's tooth fairies eat teeth to become more powerful.

I haven't got a name yet, but I've been thinking of an Ustalavic necromancer from the University of Lepidstadt or the Sincomakti School of Sciences interested in studying vitae. They've got absolutely no facility with nature spirits or druidry, or indeed primal magic, of any kind, so they instead study "the seat of life": the blood. They have yet to achieve life ex nihilo, or really any life at all, but with their various elixirs and command over blood they are planning on changing that.

I'm imagining some combination of necromancer and alchemist, likely one who hands out mutagens to the rest of the party and then supports them with blood thralls, or maybe who collects samples with a massive syringe on the frontlines to study later.

I think it's pretty safe to rule out the Rare tag for Necromancer, seeing how there's an entire school dedicated to training them. That would make them at most the sort of regional Uncommon that Gunslinger and Inventor are, although I suspect that necromancy is more widespread than that.

TheTownsend wrote:

Much as Necro is my favorite of the two, I'm curious how the Runecarver shook out. I don't remember the playtest for that one as well but it seemed a little strained on hands and action economy. I suspect a pretty big overhaul is coming and I'm fascinated to see what shape it takes.

I'm glad we'll be getting some information on it soon. It's a lot harder for me to speculate on character ideas, since at least some of the runes are changing. I feel like having a "signature" rune or two is pretty key to settling on a Runesmith character concept for me.

I don't know why but I didn't click with the runesmith during the playtest. I think it's because necromancers have become one of my favorite 'mancers out there and that excitement overshadowed me looking into runesmith much. Really looking forward to the revised version getting me hyped for the class.

I also hope that they keep the ability to chain runes together to form larger effects. I think they were called diacritics in the playtest? I'd love to make a character all about that kind of combining and augmenting of runes who sneers at all the lazybones wizards in the Ars Grammatica school because they don't even bother breaking their spell components down into semantic thaumophemes to learn how they work.

I've been wanting an intelligent armor ancestry of some sort ever since Battlezoo created the Intelligent Weapon ancestry for Classic Creatures.

Honestly the books you're scoping are pretty much it, yeah. You could also pick up Alien Archive if you want a bunch of pre-made critters to use, but pretty much everything you need to make a campaign is contained in those first two books you mentioned.

Wait…which ancestries are…nuts? Like sapient, sentient nuts? All you’d need is some seeds, raisins, a bit of honey and you could walk into a Muesli…Bar.

I’ma make a Cashew Luminary. Now that is nuts!

A leguminary, if you will.

Sure! Most of the information can be found in Guns and Gears from pages 213-215. Though curiously, I don't quite remember where the tidbit about celestials being experimented on was mentioned, as that aspect alone does not seem to be in Guns and Gears. So I'll need some time to track that down, or see if that was a simple misremembering.

I don't recall any talk of celestials being bowned into constructs, though I do remember the fiendish ones. The Fiend-Infused Golem template comes from PF1's Cheliax, the Infernal Empire, and talks about the difficulties in binding fiends into golems.

As a reminder, there is a thread for folks to discuss ethical forms of undeath already.

Pallemi seems an interesting character, a person displaced in time and unusual in species. However, I am perplexed that iconic runesmith's backstory mentions runes only secondarily.

It's less perplexing if you also incorporate Pallemi's dabbling in the different traditions of magic and the focus on the essential underpinnings rather than specific spells. That's also pretty core to the runesmith; crossing the boundaries of a singular tradition of magic through the use of multiple runes is how they stand out as a class when spellcasters can already make runes of their own.

LoreMonger13 wrote:

BotBrain wrote:

Also - if I'm not mistaken this is our first rare iconic! Truly exciting possibilities moving forwards if this keeps going.

By Ancestry, yes! Though technically Nahoa was the first Rare Iconic because of Exemplars being a Rare class ;P

Actually, Jotunborn are also rare, so alas that distinction goes to Grimmyr.

Just to clarify, you mean Grimmyr was the first rare iconic by virtue of ancestry, yeah? Just double-checking because War of Immortals came out before Battlecry!.

Love Pallemi! Robots so often get used for allegory for neurodivergence, it's fun to see a character who's clearly implied to actually as much going back to when he was still human!

Yeah that was a concern of mine when I heard we were getting a mechanical iconic, and so learning that's just how Pallemi gonna Pallemi was a nice touch.

However, you will absolutely want to replace any Golem enemies with their equivalent Remaster counterpart. Golem Antimagic is not all that much fun to play with, and the Clay Golem's curse is pretty unmanageable (the Clay Effigy curse is much more reasonable).

This especially. AoA's got a couple encounters, and they can be brutal if you haven't lucked into prepping the right damage type.

Seconded. Though I'm also hoping for more cantrips in general. I love cantrips; there is something about all-day spells that really helps define a particular caster's flavor or style in my mind.

Sounds interesting; I may need to wait until I've got more funds I can throw around, but it's on my radar now for sure. Have they got any smaller/cheaper offerings? I like checking those out before making larger purchases to see how a 3P dev's ideas about balance mesh with my own.

I could also see impossible spells letting you do something much more quickly than usual. A spell that mirrors the effect of a ritual, for example, save it happens over rounds rather than hours or days, if not sooner, and that doesn't require you to make a check to have it happen.

I've said before I'd love a dedicated rule book called something like "Last Omens" giving those rules for porting the PF2e classes in, and maybe future specific subclasses.

That's a real good name.

Just as a reminder, particularly if anyone is planning on using geniekin as foes any time soon, ifrit were renamed to naari in the Remaster; ifrit are now what the genies who give rise to naari are called rather than their prior name of efreeti.

Aristophanes wrote:

AHHHHH!!! I CAN"T TAKE IT ANY MORE!!

"PIE AND PUDDING" ARE DESSERTS!!!!
"THE SAHARA and THE GOBI" are DESERTS!!!

Sorry...I feel better now.

I likely wouldn’t eat a chicken pot pie or a Yorkshire pudding for dessert, but I certainly wouldn’t say no in a desert!

Tough call.

On the one hand I live in a desert, and eating something really bready and thick can be absolute Hell if it's hot out.

On the other hand... I'm having genuine difficulty thinking of circumstances when I would say no to a chicken pot pie or a Yorkshire pudding, or maybe a Yorkshire pudding filled with pot pie filling.

This sucks, and I'm sorry for all the folks at Paizo. I'm glad to hear there's stuff you guys can do to push forward, and hopefully these layoffs will all be more like a high-stress vacation and everyone can come back throughout those eighteen months.

So what is the best way to support Paizo right now? Where do I have to spend my money?

My first guess is getting anything over the Paizo store; I believe they make the largest cut of profit from direct sales.

My second guess would be to buy PDFs of lines like the Lost Omens books or Adventure Paths. Purchasing RPG PDFs also likely helps some, but IIRC those are loss-leaders to help onboard people to the game.

And you can of course always buy Paizo books in print that you're looking for from your local game stores. That supports your store, which is good, and also signals to them that there is enough demand to keep ordering shipments from Paizo, which helps them as well.

Blave wrote:

kaid wrote:

Zoken44 wrote:

I wonder if they added support for undead familiars or companions.

I have zero doubt the former will be an option and the latter seems like a no brainer too.

The Impossible Playtest Debrief Blog says they "do plan on including some undead familiar options in the final release of the necromancer".

We've already got the Crawling Hand, Old Friend, Polong, and Talking Head so it will be interesting to see what new concepts they've come up with.

Assuming they do make anything new and the familiar section isn't just a remastering of the older familiars.

I'm hoping that in addition to specific familiars we get a couple more familiar abilities that let us customize our familiars more. Things akin to the new Construct ability, but for different forms of undead, like skeletal familiars or mummified familiars.

3) You could rule that it just doesn't work that way. It's not real armor and doesn't get damage that way. Sometimes, a PC just happens to have the perfect ability to deal with that kind of enemy. You don't have to block that.

Especially for an ability that is so uncommon. I'd say just let them have their cool moment in the spotlight tanking for their friends with more breakable armors, like you'd let someone spam a cantrip with the right descriptors to take down an otherwise terrifying golem.

Not to mention that, while it does really, really suck to lose your gold investment if your equipment is destroyed, the player with natural armor spent a much more precious resource, a feat pick, on that armor. GMs can fix issues of equipment destruction with convenient gold piles, chests stuffed with goodies, or dead adventurers to loot, while making someone bummed over their feat pick granting them an extra-special weakness they weren't aware of beforehand isn't as easy to fix once it's out there.

I'm eating up these breath-holding facts; keep 'em coming!

The only reason I can think to add armor specialization to the guardian is if someone is playing Starfinder and wants to wear ceramic or maybe polymer armor, which don't grant physical resistance.

Naval combat is what I'm looking forward to most now I think, though I'm always down for more familiars and animal companions.

I don't know. The story felt like a rehash of Aang the Last Necromancer/Airbender. Aang/Usharak ran away from his unwanted chosen one job and his tribe was completely wiped out.

There are major differences but I felt like I've seen this before.

The irony of someone whose username is "The Dragon Reborn" saying this is not lost on me.

Edit: Just wanted to clarify that this isn't a criticism, just an observation.

It was a legitimate question. If they had spelled it Cat Sidhe I would have actually probably connected it to Celtic mythology instead of 'star wars' mythology. I just wasn't aware of the connection and it made me laugh, as I bumped into the statblock on, I believe it was the demiplane site for Starfinder so it made me wonder.

Thanks for the information, although I still wonder if it might be a useful springboard for a fey ancestry whom might be able to be stretched to encompass a species similar to the Cat from Outer Space in a Starfinder setting. I don't think I'd have though to go Fey, but it makes a lot of sense. I also imagine one would be able to pull in Egyptian mythology into them as well perhaps as there seem decent parallels.

Thanks for pointing me in the right direction.

In future a handy question to ask is, "Can/Would Paizo pay the licensing fees to be able to integrate Star Wars/[insert intellectual property here] into their own setting?" Since using the word sith as part of a creature wouldn't just be touching on Disney's trademark but also borrowing their canon.

ChakraMaster wrote:

somebody did that...

inspired so much since the pf2e "grand bazar", "Secrets of magic", the first "dark archive";
* Closes book, "This is good."
* LB, "it's the story".
* JB, "why don't you give him a million dollars"

no. that wasn't ever asked for. that is not what the author asked for.
money is not what PFI is about.
somethings are freely shared without conditions,
truth can be stranger than fiction,
did the author hear them?
what book was that?

Can they talk to the author? yes.
but please, use e-mail this time.

...

Considering that the word salad nature of your posts has gotten worse since this morning, it would probably be a good idea to take a few days off from the Internet until you feel more settled. But right now we have absolutely no idea what you're trying to say.

I can't speak to the earlier posts, but I believe this one is arguing that Pathfinder Infinite isn't what they want to post their ideas on because Pathfinder Infinite is primarily a site where people sell their ideas, and they are writing these posts because they want to share those ideas freely. There also appears to be a bit in there about the disconnect between Paizo as a company and the independent author, too.

At least that's what I'm assuming from the hypothetical discussion between Logan Bonner and Jason Bulmhan in the beginning, and the bit in the end about authors being left out of the loop and a request to speak through email. Not sure about that couplet there in the middle.

I really dig the direction for this iconic. I especially dig their reluctance and distaste with the thing they're apparently really good at; that's a cool angle to take the character in. I was expecting they'd be someone who fully understood the dead and that communing with them would be an unqualified good, so the fact the blog makes a point of highlighting how messy, stinky, and unpleasant the work is makes him feel more like a person to me.
I also liked that Usharak is apparently not unusual in his aversion to necromancy, as evidenced by his teacher understanding needing to give him time to get over his revulsion and sorrow at being stuck in the village. Painting fantasy necromancy as a reverential spiritual practice that we know from previous lore does genuinely benefit iruxi life while also making it messy and embodied makes it feel more like a spiritual practice that I could see existing.

Ze'Rehan wrote:

Thanks! I wish that all items published post Remaster would be labeled for people like me who are coming into it afterwards and get confused.

I greatly appreciate this!

They should be. The paizo store labels them as such and if you have the book you can check the last page(s) of the book. If the licence is listed as ORC it's remaster.

I believe the color of the books is also different from Legacy to Remaster, but I'm not sure there since I can't see them.

BotBrain's summary was excellent, but I did want to add that Revenge of the Runelords also uses the mythic subsystem.

Also, you should have even fewer issues with legacy adventures if you look up monsters or the like on AoN. Searching the legacy name will often link you to the remastered option, should one exist.

Theaitetos wrote:

I'm hoping for new implements, a way to apply weapon potency runes to implements to give spellcasters the appropriate scaling for spell attacks, and a way to apply special materials & effects to spells (not just metal for Needle Darts).

As much as I would like that, I don't think they're going to add Potency Runes to casters this edition. Consider that, by default, all mainline spellcasters (with some "subclass" exceptions like Warpriest Clerics) go up to Legendary Proficiency. And while it comes online VERY late, it still would be the equivalent of (eventually) giving all of those primary casters Fighter accuracy.

I really think the Shadow Signet is the best and likely only item-based spell attack "boost" option that we're getting and that's why it was lifted from Secrets of Magic and put into GM Core during the Remaster. The Kineticist feels like the exception simply because it's meant to be the "blaster caster" class so it being uniquely more accurate than other casters fits. (NOTE: I don't agree with this design choice, but it really does appear to be an impasse that won't be addressed this edition)

That said, it WOULD be very cool if we could get implements that allow certain Property Runes and shouldn't cause the devs to worry as much as changing the game's math so much. Would be nice to have a Non-Lethal Wand, for example, that doesn't require you to get higher level versions for higher-level spell ranks and can be used more than once a day (twice if you want to risk it), ala the Merciful Rune. Could also open up some neat design space, such as making a caster-specific Rune similar to Quickstrike albeit the allocated Quickened action would be to Sustain or Dismiss a spell (and it being a level 16 Rune would be in line with the level 16 Effortless Concentration feat).

Sounds like a more generalized and permanent form of spell catalysts to me, and now I'm surprised that there isn't a way to get a non-consumable spell catalyst and hope they're in the book.

If they're not it seems like an easy item to implement, though I'm not super sure on cost.

Xenocrat wrote:

Until level 8 and doing ersatz get em the luminary doesn’t overlap at all with the envoy when comparing their every round resourceless combat loops.

I guess some of the stagecraft spells can give status bonuses to hit, but they also do more or do it better than get em. If nothing else they’re more action efficient once they’re up.

It’s surprising no one has said much about the comparison of the luminary to the much lamented envoy playtest penalty to reflex saves from get em. It’s back (albeit status and not circ), now with Will and Fort options!

That actually is where my mind went too- I liked the debuffs of the playtest Envoy, so seeing them again was nice.

Same. It's also why the luminary feels a lot like the 2e engine's take on the mesmerist from 1e, swapping out the stare options for the luminary's spotlights.

I agree, not every condition is created equal, though I don't think anyone is actually suggesting to make a role apply the frightened condition here.

Actually, now that you mention it, a feat that leans real hard into "stage fright" puns, which I know some feats already reference, that gives enemies the Frightened condition would be pretty peak.

I am very excited to learn more about these, Impossible Spells.

Spells that are comparable to artifacts for spells that push the boundaries of magic and can only be cast once.

That sounds freaking epic.

I hope that the spells are either more narratively-themed than mechanically powerful, or come with some method of recharging/regaining the spell, even if the thing is difficult or "impossible" to do. Otherwise the spell will essentially be a consumable, i.e., prone to never being used because the party worry they'll need it more later.

I mean, the issue should be less of a concern because, if an impossible spell is like an artifact, then the spell needs to be placed in relationship to the story the party are running through, but it's still a concern I'll have if the spells are both something that can totally turn the tide of a combat and have no way of regaining its effect at all.

I really hope there's some kinetecist stuff in this book. Armor, shields, utility items, suchlike. Maybe some toys for the necromancer and runesmith, if Impossible Magic doesn't come with gear especially for them.

Same. Some elemental-themed armors would be cool, or rods or something that give you a spellshape-type effect on your impulses, or maybe even the ability to get an extra low-level impulse from a diadem-like item or something.

I'm expecting that DC scaling is going to involve some form of gold expenditure, implementing one of the community fixes that allows you to upgrade items as if they all had twenty versions. I also hope it's something along those lines, because that's the system I've seen that gives players the most flexibility without breaking the item system too badly.

And I'm really, really looking forward to this book. The discussions around artifacts has me hoping we might see more PF1 artifacts show up in this book, maybe even as an archetype. Imagine getting an artifact archetype tied to one of the Alara'hai, for example; that'd be awesome!

I'm also hoping that familiars-as-objects lets us have intelligent weapons as familiars or something, akin to how Team+ implemented the Bladebound Magus.

kaid wrote:

Overall I don't think the summoner needs a massive rework so tightening stuff up and then adding more eidolon options should be pretty solid.

And finally defining what they can do and use. Nothing big. Just to remove the need to basically homerule all the time.

And also redo their level 10-12 feats that give you monster abilities, either altering them to the old versions, or making the level lower.

I'm really looking forward to impossible spells. Those sound awesome! I like artifacts that aren't physical things, and those tend to be pretty hard to make in games.

I've been thinking about the spotlight needing to do more, but also how there is a massive difference between a 1 or 2 when it comes to modifiers, and wonder if that can be solved with an investment somewhere? Not actions, luminary's already dealing with a bunch of actions, but maybe time?

The spotlight can linger on a single creature for two turns, for example, perhaps having it on a creature for consecutive turns increases the bonus/malus? Giving them their full fifteen minutes (really fifteen seconds but who's counting) of fame before you swap it, and their role settling on them more strongly as a result.

Adamantine is one where I see PF1 players often surprised by just how much worse it is in PF2 in terms of function, and it got significantly more expensive on top of that.

I'm still sad about what happened to adamantine armor. I'm not sure what it should have, I know things like resistances aren't handed out as lightly in PF2, but being built Tonka tough and not being easy to destroy, a rule which almost never comes into play in this edition, doesn't feel like enough.

I like the concept, but this almost feels like something you can already do through flavoring, or possibly an archetype.

Granted, I'd have said the exact same thing about the luminary before the playtest came out, so I'm super open to seeing what a paintmage class might look like. I think it depends on how robust the central gimmick is, how the ability to create art that comes to life is captured in mechanics.

I'm also a fan of there only being one class here. Hopefully it'll lead to less fatigue and more focused survey information for the devs, and there being only one class does mean the earlier SF2 classes can hopefully get more love.

There's also the fact that Starfinder's got to, at least nominally, try to avoid stepping on Pathfinder's toes viz classes, and Pathfinder's already made a load of them. Outside of Starfinder Society I just don't see the same need for loads of classes to come out for SF2. Heck, if the Hell's Destiny Player's Guide is anything to go by, suggesting uses for the soldier, Starfinder Society may soon do the same and incorporate some of Pathfinder's classes.

This should probably be in Homebrew rather than Rules.

It actually seems really interesting to me, it's a non-spellslot focus-caster martial, kinda like a Champion/optional Ranger/Monk, but with a centrally magical action economy centered on illusorally buffing and debuffing. So you don't technically get any Spells, but you have an almost Kineticist-like passive command of holograms and hardlight to effectively… narratively position your allies toward success?

It might feel a bit mechanically restrictive in its current form, but the conceit of a storytelling illusionist class is very compelling to me.

Just downloaded the playtest and looking forward to digging in. From that description it sounds like the luminary is going to be filling a pretty similar mechanical niche to what folks wanted the mesmerist to fill.

Master Han Del of the Web wrote:

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.

Where is all the lore about Joros written up?

I believe it's in Galaxy Guide.

Underwater enemies can be more devious than overt artillery. They can get up close to drill or dig through thick hulls, maybe apply Withering Grasp (from the Decay Domain) every 10 minutes or so. It's easy to imagine they could magically develop molds or barnacles that ruin ships. Or simply tame/Charm a whale (or pod of whales) to capsize enemy ships. Saboteurs could attack oars, rudders, and anchors. Ships would have to keep moving, and could easily be tracked back to their ports which would have to be built with underwater defenses which would be susceptible to siege warfare, except far more difficult to man or repair.

Recently played a scenario with an underwater sniper. Comes up, shoots, leaves to reload, repeats as desired. That'd be continuous along one's docks. Luckily we had a water-themed PC who simply dove in and chased them down, but it wasn't easy.

Thing is, there'll also be PCs using these tactics. Skull & Shackles had to address this pretty much by ignoring it, handwaving that ships were too voluminous (and IMO goes against the pirate genre anyway). But the war genre...Paizo's gonna have to address this again, even if as a discussion rather than ruleset.

Gotta play nice with the aquatics.

Not to mention that ships may be more fragile than they would at first appear. Vehicles, like everything else, have levels, and their AC, HP, and hardness are tied to those levels, even if it's more loosely tied than other items are. After a certain point vehicles just won't be able to stand up to the average damage of spells and strikes enemies can dish out.

Seconding what Finoan said. This sounds more related to setting and narrative than the rules, as such. I mean, even your suggestion that not all priests of a deity serve as clerics is already true in the universe; some NPC priests are other classes, and many have no real class at all. Clerics just get put front-and-center for a deity in the minds of players because of gaming tradition.

IIRC the RPG rulebooks are loss leaders as far as Paizo is concerned. I heard the print ones were at least. I'm not so sure about the PDFs given the smaller amount of overhead with a digital product.

Monks and I think rangers would love this, fill up on loads of focus spells they'd otherwise need to pick between. I think commanders would also be big fans, though it's been a minute since I saw their feats.

Out of curiosity, what would making Fleshwarp into a versatile heritage accomplish that giving them a heritage, call it Ancestral Echo Fleshwarp, wouldn't? As in, a heritage whose primary benefit is that it gives you ancestry feats from another ancestry. I suppose it might cause you to miss out on special senses or other ribbons that ancestries get at level 1, but I'm not sure what past that.

I'm asking because, while I do think there needs to be an option for lesser and greater degrees of fleshwarpery on a character, that was an issue I had with the Premaster fFleshwarp ancestry, I think it could also be confusing to make an ancestry both a full ancestry and a versatile heritage. Including the versatile heritage's benefits into a heritage in the ancestry feels a bit neater, and I suspect would also take up less page space.

Swarm Lore sounds like a reasonable category of lore to me. Lores are meant to be shorthand for grabbags of knowledge anyway, like all the ancillary skills and facts required to practice a trade, so focusing on stuff like the behaviors of creatures when they swarm, how swarms move, and specific creatures known for swarming either through a hivemind or other means all sound reasonable to me.

I do think it's a little funny that this character could be stumped on what to do with a single rat, but give them a bunch of rats in a sack and they're suddenly brilliant, but that's also a degree of silly I'm comfortable with in my games and fiction in general.

I'm hoping so, so desperatly that we get power armor rules in Tech Core.