Ravingdork's page

Deriven Firelion wrote:

If you want more of an old wizard feel, try the imperial sorcerer.

You're mostly right, of course.

But one thing that I used to enjoy pre PF2 was the wizards niche as the Know it All character. The Hemione Granger of spell casters.

Of course, Int no longer fully scratches that itch anyway with Religion and Nature being based off of Wisdom (which is a SUPERB change in general but does hurt this particular fantasy). And Legendary Arcana (depending on how the GM runs things) is a thing much more likely to be taken by the wizard than the sorcerer.

It would be cool if the new wizard class had a class ability that allowed them to substitute Intelligence for those skills.

I would apply it to any spell that creates something with permanence, such as everlight or protector tree.

Probably do in some form or another, but it's not something that really pertains to adventuring and so doesn't need game mechanics.

Seems like something to talk to your GM about. Might make for an interesting character background or adventure hook.

Maybe just ask your GM to play the system as intended and to stop screwing over the casters.

Pathfinder 2e's math is well documented and understood; your GM's encounter setup is clearly the problem. If it doesn't change then at best all we're going to be able to do is give advice on mitigating the circumstances rather than a true solution to the actual problem.

I would Write the Codex of Horror, about the worst threat lurjing in the material plane.

Allghollthu, the Dominion of the Black and so many more.

Ooh, I would absolutely love some body horror options, much like the 1e alchemist or the content from 1e's Horror Adventures.

I'd recommend sorcerer over bard. It's the simplest caster in the game, and is a cut above the rest when it comes to damage and healing.

A bard's spell list is rife with mind influencing spells, which are of limited use against undead. Your buffs are unlikely to amount to much either, what with a primarily defensive guardian, a rogue who can't deal precision damage against many undead, and an investigator who is unlikely to be all that affective in melee to begin with.

So be a sorcerer and blow everything up. Just watch out for your allies.

I’d probably remaster Gnomes of Golarion. That book was absolutely unhinged in the best possible way--equal parts whimsical, unsettling, and deeply Pathfinder. It leaned hard into the idea that gnomes are colorful little chaos engines barely held together by curiosity and existential dread, and I’d love to see that concept revisited through a modern Remaster lens, with updated lore, art, and cultural depth.

But if I were really going full gremlin and sneaking something new onto the production schedule, I’d write a Lost Omens–style guide focused on “little people”: gnomes, goblins, halflings, and other Small humanoids.

Not just a stat or ancestry book, but a cultural deep dive.

It would explore what daily life actually looks like when the world is built for Medium and Large folk. How do these cultures design cities, tools, vehicles, and defenses? What does hospitality mean when your guest might be three times your height? How do Small ancestries navigate intimidation, patronization, or being underestimated, both socially and politically?

I’d want chapters on:

Domestic life (architecture, food, festivals, and family structures scaled for the Small)

Adventuring realities (gear modifications, tactics, and why Small heroes often survive on cleverness rather than brute force)

Power dynamics (how these peoples are treated by larger societies and how they exploit or subvert those expectations)

Inter-Small relations (gnomes vs. goblins vs. halflings; where they clash, where they cooperate, and where they absolutely refuse to understand each other)

Basically: a book that treats Small ancestries not as “cute options” or comic relief, but as fully realized cultures that have had to adapt to a world that literally looms over them.

Also: the art would be incredible. Give me cross-sections of halfling homes built into human cities, goblin marketplaces carved into absurdly unsafe places, and gnome workshops that look like they were designed by someone who has never once considered OSHA compliance.

If I’m breaking into Paizo HQ, I’m not leaving without making Small folk feel big.

I think this is being overthought. Darkvision is a simplified, catch-all game mechanic meant to represent a variety of ways creatures might perceive in low-light or darkness; things like infravision, heat vision, ultraviolet vision, and similar senses. Older editions of D&D actually used those more specific terms, but they were later streamlined to make the game easier to run.

Conceptually, those creatures still “have” whatever sensory abilities they would have had before; they’re just abstracted. This is no different from how turn-based combat abstracts an otherwise chaotic fight, or how hit points abstract serious bodily injury. Combat doesn’t literally pause every six seconds, and a grievous stab is still grievous (at least from the character’s perspective).

So if a GM wants to describe a creature tracking someone by the residual heat of their footprints, and then resolves that with a perfectly ordinary Survival check, that’s entirely reasonable. The narrative description is just window dressing layered on top of a standard mechanic, in service of the story and the table’s enjoyment.

Outside of this abstraction, darkvision doesn’t really exist in the campaign world as some distinct, named, or inherently magical ability. In most cases, it isn’t magical at all! Plenty of entirely mundane animals possess darkvision.

I'm pretty sure you can only gain one effect per distinct trigger. I wonder if that would impede this strategy any.

Hey everyone,

I’ve been digging into Razmiran lore lately and ran into a question I can’t quite pin down with certainty: Do Razmiran priests genuinely believe in their own divinity and in the supposed godhood of Razmir himself?

On paper, Razmir’s entire nation is built on a lie and plenty of sources make it clear that high-ranking clergy know this. But what I’m curious about is the internal culture of belief among Razmiran’s priesthood:

Do most priests know it’s a hoax, or is that knowledge limited to the top tiers?

Are low-ranking acolytes indoctrinated from the start to truly believe they serve a living god?

How much self-deception exists within the hierarchy? Are there priests who choose to believe because the alternative undermines their identity or power?

And lastly, do some priests genuinely believe they themselves possess divine authority derived from Razmir, even if they don’t consciously buy into his supposed godhood?

There’s a lot of room for interpretation here, especially given how propaganda-heavy and cult-like Razmiran society is, but I’d love to hear how others have handled this in their games or how you read the canon lore.

Looking forward to your thoughts!

Ravingdork wrote:

Zoken44 wrote:

I would want an Archmage to be able to do things outside of their tradition's normal wheel house.

Well why don't we pull on that thread, shall we?

How might your wizard break with tradition or otherwise expand their abilities beyond those normally expected of wizards in order to claim the title of archmage?

Easy. My Imperial Sorcerer had Heal as his 1st-rank arcane signature spell and the daily ability to prepare one 1st-/2nd-rank spell regardless of tradition as another signature spell, e.g. Cleanse Affliction, Harm, or Silence.

Fey Influence (Unicorn), Elf + Otherworldly Acumen (+ Share Thoughts, Wildborn Magic, Brightness Seeker), Arcane Evolution + Ancestral Mage, wand of Recall Legacy.

:O

Does the Bloodmagic- Stolen Life affect only apply when the spell is cast at the level granted by Sourcerous Gift? For example, if I make Harm a signature spell and cast it at a rank higher than 1, does Stolen Life apply?

It applies regardless of spell rank.

Ravingdork wrote:

Perpdepog wrote:

An archmage is an archmage because they keep out-maging other mages and somehow acquire consensus from their peers and inferiors that they are the most mage there is.

Had I asked for a squire instead of a knight, I doubt anyone would confuse the two or have any issues making different builds for each character concept.

Is the squire vs knight not also a matter of degree of skill?

Why then is archmage and wizard so difficult for us to work out? (Rhetorical, some explanations have already been given upthread.)

My 2cp on this comparison is that there are real-world examples to draw on. We know the relationship between Knights, Soldiers, and Squires because of history.

There is no such Apprentice, Wizard, Archmage history to draw on.

That's a good point.

An archmage is an archmage because they keep out-maging other mages and somehow acquire consensus from their peers and inferiors that they are the most mage there is.

Had I asked for a squire instead of a knight, I doubt anyone would confuse the two or have any issues making different builds for each character concept.

Is the squire vs knight not also a matter of degree of skill?

Why then is archmage and wizard so difficult for us to work out? (Rhetorical, some explanations have already been given upthread.)

I would want an Archmage to be able to do things outside of their tradition's normal wheel house.

Well why don't we pull on that thread, shall we?

How might your wizard break with tradition or otherwise expand their abilities beyond those normally expected of wizards in order to claim the title of archmage?

I also quite like the idea of narrowing the focus based on campaign themes, such as the Magaambya and the Runelords mentioned by Captain Morgan. How might archmages from different cultures or organizations differ from one another?

Ravingdork wrote:

a uniquely powerful and talented master of the arcane arts, a cut well above your typical NPC wizard or sorcerer.

Uh... Isn't that what any Arcane tradition PC spellcaster is supposed to be?

As this is essentially a brainstorm thread, I intentionally left it as a VERY broad open concept.

What is an "archmage" to you? How might you represent it in-game and with what mechanics?

Sure you could simply say "be a high level wizard" but that's not really conducive to the discussion's goal of generating ideas.

There is no archmage archetype, prestige class, subclass, or feats insofar as I'm aware. Just a couple themed items, such as the archmage's regalia and robe of the archmagi.

So, if you want to play as an archmage*, then how might you go about doing it?

No homebrew rules or third party content suggestions please.

If you were in a position in which you needed to jump a distance, but did not have the use of your feet (such as when dangling by your hands), how do the rules expect us to run that or, in the absence of such rules, how might you expect to run this corner case?

I'm imagining something like a rock climber hanging from the underside of a rock overhang by their hands and needing to jump to a nearby cliff face. Like in those Tom Cruise movies (Or maybe it was Sylvester Stallone? Whatever.) or any number of video games with widely spread "jungle gym" elements.

What does a Sudden Leap used in conjunction with Cloud Jump look like?

And what happens to creatures inside the bag when it ruptures?

This is how vengeful Vecnas are made.

If you scroll down to the bottom of the product page in the store (past the bit where the social media icons are) there is a section titled "Customer Reviews" and a big button which you can click to add a review.

Where exactly is that "big button"? I don't see it anywhere on any of the product pages. I've checked in a number of different browsers and all I see are the little "Write a review" links for OTHER products at the bottom of the page; and clicking on them doesn't seem to do anything.

Could my ad block be censoring it maybe?

Are people putting AI generated art of conrasu into their guides? The ones I remember don't include a picture for every ancestry, and doing so with be more of a detraction from the guide then it would be a benefit even if each picture was custom commissioned.

I was speaking more generally about character portraits, since they constitute the vast majority of art people search for, for their roleplaying games.

When I tried to leave a product review, I couldn't find any links or options to do so.

There doesn't seem to be anything on the product pages or on my account pages that would allow for me to leave a review.

I want to be heard. Where is this capability? I see mention of other reviews (though clicking on them doesn't reveal any of their contents) so I know it's possible to do.

What am I missing?

Sure, but Paizo already have an alternative brought up in this thread for if they care about that. And if they don't care about it, why not use actually good art instead of AI slop? It's not like generating an AI image is easier than grabbing something off of google or pintrest.

For incredibly specific or contrived characters, Google or Pinterest aren't going to be much help. At best you might find something kinda' close, then have someone Photoshop it the rest if the way. But at that point you might as well just get someone to make a unique image for you in the first place.

But with "AI slop" nothing is out of reach. Take the conrasu, for example. You couldn't find good art of them anywhere. Best you had were Photoshopped treants.

Now conrasu art is much more common, and will show up in searches (and many look pretty good), but 75% of them are AI generated. They simply wouldn't exist if not fir these amazing new tools.

Probably time to create new threads for these subjects. The ruling is clear we can discuss it elsewhere.

I considered asking for this whole topic to get moved to it's own thread, but thought better of it since I seriously doubt anti-AI Paizo wants a thread on their forums in which people talk about whether or not Paizo should adopt AI.

TBH I am pretty comfortable with writing, so I would not use an AI for this.

I'm been writing for over 30 years, and am quite comfortable with it myself.

I still frequently use AI tools to check my spelling and grammar, or to soften the tone of what might otherwise be a volatile knee-jerk reaction post. (Did anyone notice that I haven't caused any big blow ups in the last few years?)

Are thousands of my posts now suddenly at risk of deletion just because I used AI tools to make them better?

I've heard of psychic magi plenty of times...in these forums.

I've yet to see one at an actual table.

Also, how can you make sure an image has been created with AI?

They can't. It will be educated guesses at best.

That's one of the many reasons it's not practical, or really at all enforceable.

It also opens up the potential for abuse, with people falsely reporting alleged AI content of posters they just so happen to be feuding with.

Lots of pitfalls for little to no real benefit for Paizo or their consumers.

Ravingdork wrote:

So, to clarify: direct links to generative-AI content will no longer be allowed on Paizo’s digital platforms. Under this policy, it seems the acceptable alternative is to link to a neutral, third-party site, which can then host or link to any relevant assets on its own. Since Paizo’s moderation only extends to content within its own domain, this would appear to comply with the new guidelines.

I feel the easiest way is just to contact Broken Zenith to give them the link to the guide and then post here as usual but with a link to the 2e Guide to the guides instead of to the guide itself.

That's exactly what I was thinking.

For your second question, can you provide an example of this? I'm struggling to relate it to the conversation at hand with generative AI on our forums specifically, but that could just be my autism being rigid about conversational buckets, and I want to make sure I get on the same page as you to give you an accurate answer!

Allow me to rephrase:

If another company creates a product using AI tools or generated AI assets intended for use with the Pathfinder roleplaying game, is Paizo going to send them a cease and desist letter?

I'm thinking of apps like Pathbuilder 2e, a campaign setting book for a non-Golarion setting, or Tableplay Gamers' various online Pathfinder character galleries, all of which might contain AI generated content or had been obliquely created with AI tools.

So, to clarify: direct links to generative-AI content will no longer be allowed on Paizo’s digital platforms. Under this policy, it seems the acceptable alternative is to link to a neutral, third-party site, which can then host or link to any relevant assets on its own. Since Paizo’s moderation only extends to content within its own domain, this would appear to comply with the new guidelines.

Does Paizo intend to similarly police 3rd-party products that may be relying upon the ORC license?

Everyone focuses on the AI generation of "creative" content. Many of those concerns stem from the idea that it is theft at worst, and potentially harmful to the livelihoods of content creators at best. Such concerns are 100% completely valid.

However, what people often fail to realize is that (and I'm speaking as a professional content creator and graphic designer of over 20 years) that amateurs and professionals alike have been using algorithmic technology ("AI") for well over a decade.

The removal tools in Photoshop? Algorithmic AI. Sound files calibrated in Audition? AI. Use an online tool to convert the image you got permission from the artist to use from a JPG to a PNG? AI! Checked the grammar of your character's backstory with Grammarly? AI!!!

A broad AI forum ban needs to be VERY SPECIFIC in what it is actually banning. Algorithmic AI tools are already so prevalent in nearly every electronic tool that a blanket ban basically means we can't share anything at all.

And banning sharing is not a good look for Paizo.

If the offending art is not removed, will this thread also be removed?

Since it links to a collection of links, one or more of which contain ai generated images?

Hahaha. I cannot think of a better way for Paizo to turn the community against them than to start removing useful resources such as this.

Telling people what to put or not put in their own resources HOSTED ON OTHER SERVERS is overstepping, Maya.

Whether Paizo likes it or not, AI is going to be a big part of the future. All this policy is going to do is upset half of the community (specifically the half that isn't anti-AI). Ultimately, Paizo will have to adapt to the new paradigms right along with the rest of the world. You guys may not want it in your own works, which is all well and good, but when 90% of fan created content ends up using AI, or AI tools, in some form or another, you're eventually going to have to change the policy about the links, or face dwindling community participation.

They got rid of Kostchtchie? Why? What lore changes were there, if any?

Hey all! Guides are great, but please don't include generative AI images in them! It puts them in a kind of weird grey area where it's not us using the AI, which is something we don't do, but having AI associated with our content and on our forums puts us in a tricky position. The things on our forums are things we promote and support, and we do not promote or support the use of generative AI in our products or products associated with them. Please continue to make the guides, but just make sure the art you're using is from an artist!

We'll just go back to stealing original artwork directly from the artists then. *shrugs in jest*

I think your errata proposal makes sense.

Claxon has the right of it insofar as I'm aware.

Wands, scrolls, Trick Magic Item, and similar silver bullet options are all simply more nails in the wizard's coffin.

I mean, wood harder than steel will definitely require some very special tools that party will almost certainly not have, and to maximize the value it will also most likely require some very specialized skills the party will also probably not have.

Not really. All you need is a shovel, time, and shrink item.

Wow. The new troop rules are WAY more complicated than I thought.

Aren't they supposed to be easier to manage than multiple individual creatures? The more I read about them, the less that seems to be the case.

I deal with the issue by never using precious materials in Pathfinder 2nd Edition.

This is us too.

I like to think of them as non-mutually-exclusive traits.

Attack, interacts with MAP
Roll, requires a d20 roll
Melee, reach range, probably uses strength
Ranged, longer range, probably uses dexterity
Spell, uses casting modifier

Mix and match.

Why aren't you EAing the target(s) for 40 while the eidolon Strikes for 23.5?

Last I checked 63.5 is better than either 23.5 or 40.

The Raven Black wrote:

And it does not protect the Kineticist.

This is debatable, to put it kindly.

*Reads two posts above this one*

LOL. I guess you were right.

Depends on the fight. Against mindless enemies that don't have any real way to understand what is going on, it absolutely trivializes them.

I mean, so does figment or most any other spell whose trickery they are unable to comprehend. So what?

It's the same way a dire bear is trivialized by anyone with flight and ranged attacks. It doesn't take much sometimes.

And that's fine. Heroes should feel heroic from time to time.

Would Gaze Sharpe as Steel stack with Rogues precision damage with a dual class rogue/Exemplar.

If all the appropriate conditions were met, then yes. To my knowledge there is no rule stating that like damages do not stack.

I have a Large awakened giant spider rogue that wields Medium bolas, nets, and slings to great effect with the setae on her legs.

It hasn't caused any issues whatsoever.

There's no reason she should need a Large weapon, basic crafting book, or potion to get use out of them.

I agree that armor and many other worn items should be Large though.

Just use your best judgement and don't worry about the rest.

Immanence is a +1 status AC in 15ft, yes

To everyone, not just the exemplar?

Does the mirrored aegis immanence grant allies in the aura the +1 status bonus to AC?

Or is the reference to protecting your allies just referring to the transcendence effect from Raise the Walls?

People are comparing with inventor, thaumaturge, swashbuckler or the like, but not barbarian here? It seems like an obvious thing to do with strength exemplar.

If you're wanting to compare martial prowess and combat damage, the barbarian does make a bit more sense.

However, if you're comparing all the red tape, hoops, and actions classes have to do before being allowed to perform their primary shtick appropriately and effectively, then the other classes make more sense.

It's all in the context.

I don't know of many other things with similar wording, because PF2 has few things that are actually this strong at what it does: no possibility of failure regardless of DC, and x4/8/16/32 multiplier to the result based on your proficiency.

I was focusing on the "If you get result A, it increases to result B. When you get result B, benefit C happens."

Interpretation 1: I fail to get result B. I get result B anyways. I do not get benefit C as I did not roll result B.

Interpretation 2: I fail to get result B. I get result B anyways. I get benefit C since I got upgraded to result B.

I've seen similar worded abilities (though I don't recall where) that wouldn't make much sense, or even be totally bonkers, if you got benefit C even if you didn't naturally roll B.

I hope that made sense. :P

Ofcourse, one thing that needs to be mentioned is that you still need to meet the minimum threshold for the area they want to subsist in, So you arent going to pick this at level 2 and then instantly be able to sustain yourself in the most inhospitable of deserts, glaciers, oceans or planar environments. Not that most players would run into that issue, and there are spells that litterary conjures food, or something like cornucopia where you can create the equivalence of one square meal every 30 minutes starting at level 3.

But yeah, the feat makes survival real easy provided you have a minimum of 8 hours a day where you can just forage, which again.. real easy in kingmaker provided you arent doing group activities like travel.

Are you referring to proficiency gating like "must be Master to succeed" in a place like the Mana Wastes or the Plane of Fire?

I'd sure like to see a rules citation for that. If true, it would be impossible for anything weak or low level to survive no matter how well adapted to the environment it is described as being.