Souls At War's page

The Raven Black wrote:

I have sometimes read that 3-parters felt a bit rushed and could have been developed more.

Some of them do. That said, some of the 6-parters feel padded.

Partly why I think they could consider mixing 4 and 5 parters in once in a while, especially if/when hitting "too much for 3, but not enough for 6".

Edit: as a side note, I wonder how people feel about slow burn types like Council Of Thieves.

nephandys wrote:

Is anyone else getting a bad feeling about the upcoming changes to the loyalty program? The way it’s been described so far - lots of vague “coming soon” language and talk of a “better experience” - just screams corpo-speak for we’re cutting benefits, but trying to make it sound like a good thing.

Let’s be honest: when companies say they’re “enhancing” or “evolving” a program to “better serve us,” it usually translates to more restrictions, fewer rewards, or a new tier system that’s harder to climb. They frame it as a win for the customer, but it almost always serves their bottom line, not ours.

Until they drop actual details, there’s no way to know for sure, but the language so far feels like a red flag. If the changes were genuinely beneficial, they probably wouldn’t be so cagey or need to spin it this hard. They'd be shouting them from the rooftops instead of deferring them for a future blog.

Would love to be wrong on this, but right now it feels like we’re being softened up for a downgrade.

I know that feeling, but usually Paizo is a good company, somehow an exception among the big names in the hobby industry.

They might also be cagey due to things out of their control.

Since the primary point of switching to 4 Adventure Paths a year was to give folks additional chances to like one enough to want to buy it, swtiching back to 3 would erode that goal while not appealing to folks who want full 1–20 level six-part Adventure Paths. Seems like a solution that would disappoint everyone but also give us on the Narrative team another dose of disruptions to the workflow, so I don't see this happening.

Still something that can be talked about, especially when wanting to try experimental ideas/APs.

On 12 volumes a year:
* 1 x 12 (would be slow, and the thing about variety)
* 2 x 6, what was used before.
* 3 x 4
* 4 x 3, currently used.
* 6 x 2, kinda short
* 12 x 1, OK, that's pretty much standalone modules.
some combo like 2 + 3 + 3 + 4 or 3 + 4 + 5.

And with a dose of "themes in APs", branching/splitting AP, granted those would probably be an headache to make.

Useful to remember that there are people in Isger who want to throw Cheliax out, so a lot of opportunities for many factions and sides.

It IS unusual for volume 1 of an Adventure Path to be available before a Player's Guide is. That's not the norm, and we try not to do that, but... sometimes reality has other complications in mind, I guess.

Was it Hell's Vengeance? One of them was cursed; big site update 2 days before street/release date, which wasn't a good idea, especially since pretty much all product lines had a release, and an Humble Bundle sale that caused a catastrophic increase in trafic to the site, which did result in quite the crash... and a player's guide that was released closer to book 2 as a result.

Edit: might have been "War for the Crown"

Would you mind linking the Player's Guide or whatever it is we'd need?

@I'm Hiding in Your Closet: On your Paizo page, if you place your cursor over "My Account" a list pops up and you'll click on "Digital Content".

You'll see a full list of Player's Guides. Just scroll down until you find CC. Once you do, click on it and download and you'll have it. :) *thumbs up*

Carrion Crown Player's Guide since I'm not sure those are automatically added to download.

Few questions:
- How will you handle age categories?
- Young Characters?
- Templates?

My headcanon is ~snip~

I think you posted that in the wrong thread.

Claxon wrote:

The "take what you want" but "be loyal to your crew" part I think is what keeps Besmaran adherents from going full murder hobo.

Also, if you look at history, pirates usually didn't want to kill their targets. Because if you became notorious for killing your prey, they would fight harder and to the death (if they thought their only way out alive was to kill you). Ideally pirates just want their prey to surrender and give over their stuff.

And stealing is bad, but like, not as bad as murder.

You hit the nail on the head

I completly aggree with you

My question is not, can there be non-evil pirates, that I aggree with
I am talking specifically Holy (good aligned) Clerics of a Goddess of PIracy. Someone who has good intentions but will only raid and plunder as their lifes work. How would THAT work

Jack is a fun guy, but I wouldn't call him a really morally upstanding person.

While Good vs Evil is one thing, it can be useful to remember the whole Law vs Chaos part, and maybe avoid conflating Good with Law and Evil with Chaos.

Also, Robin Hood as a "good thief"

id prefer age of ashes or agents of edgewatch, SoG is really good as is

AoE is an interesting case, it wasn't well received, which would normally DQ it from a compilation/remaster, yet it is one AP that could gain a lot from a remaster.

For some things, the degree of success of failure is known, but perhaps not what the effect is. Is Unrest or Ruin going to increase by some amount? Is a hostile army going to get a bonus? etc.

This is pretty much what JJ, Tridus and I are talking about, it would be after the "you succeed/fail", but before describing what it means/does and any extra roll(s).

Thank you, so basically it's an optional reroll with a +2 circumstance bonus, but the GM is not allowed to tell you the outcome (most likely only applies to events then)

the GM is allowed to tell the outcome of the second roll.

Admittedly, the roll to result thing might not work well with things like play by post.

Souls At War wrote:

Kavlor wrote:

I think we will have this sides:

Cheliax, Ravounel, Nidal, Isger, Katapesh goverment, Mzali, Shackles, Korvosa, Molthune, Oprak

vs

Andoran, Nimrathas, Katapesh Firebrands, Senghor, Vidrian, Nimrathans, Kraggodan, Five King Mountains

I don't see the Shackles teaming up with Cheliax.

Also, many nations and groups would probably stay neutral until their opposite take sides, with some "play/trade with all sides" types in between.

This is also asuming A vs B, not some A vs B vs C thing.

For the Shackles, maybe Cheliax doesn't do a full alliance but instead offers the pirate lords letters of marque that lets their ships through the Arch of Aroden so they can prey on Andoran shipping? Privateering like that was pretty common back in the 1700s, so it would make sense that nations might do it in Golarion as well. Would make for some fun mini adventures as well, where the PCs can engage in ship combat!

Would still be weird for the Shackles to side with Cheliax... and Cheliax probably wouldn't be the only one using privateers and mercenaries.

I reminded myself today that the Tower of Slant Shadows had a strange syncretic religion pop up around it a few Golarion-decades ago - cultists of Desna and of Rovagug who originally named together simply to protect the Star Tower from a group of demodands (shaggy and tarry, iirc). One interesting dimension which probably has a slight (but prolly no more than) influence on their religious understanding is that both are opposed to Zonny K but are now defending his works or one of them, at least... So there is a TINY chance that he might end up being worshiped by the cult as well? Mostly, I imagine it would just be Desna and Rovagug.

Complicating the question is that James Jacobs has said that they wouldn't be doing anything with demodands in 2e XD

Wondering if anyone has any ideas about what that syncretism might look like and how it has evolved in the time gap between 1e and 2e (both from a world building POV and mechanically as a 2e pantheon)?

I don't see Rovagug being interested in protecting the Star Towers, especially since he gain from them being destroyed.

Thread kind of reminds me of the issues people had with Bastards of Golarion, and to a lesser extent, Blood of the Beast.

Thanks and goodwill only go so far, especially when being a one way thing, gratitude won't put food on the table most of the time.

There is also the risk vs reward part, if doing something cost more resources for the PCs than they get in return, they might be bothered by this. Part of this might be bad luck with dice rolls.

It can also be useful to tell the players ahead of time that they are expected to spend a lot of resources, and as a GM to remember they will need said resources.

There is also a possibility that this AP simply isn't for them.

For Andoran I would love to see more of the political factions and organizaitons. Major guilds have a seat in the People's Council. Also how council districts are drawn and chosen. The Lumber consortium is a big one but there should be others.

Kinda reminds me, I would like a good explanation on how the Lumber Consortium has that much power.

The point is that Paizo does not know where the boundaries and/or comfort level for specific types of actions lie with your (and every other) group.

Even Hell's Vengeance is fairly well "sanitized" from what it could be.

Aside from the Chelish curse, HV suffered from inverting the roles of heroes and villains, one of the reasons it didn't feel like an Evil AP.

Shay: If I get trampled in the crowds I just want everyone to know: Josh isn’t allowed to have my legos

Josh: Not even the cool spaceship ones?!

Why do I imagine the following would be: "Shay: Especially the cool spaceship ones." ?

Yes. The one thing I DON'T want is for the war to kick off and end in the same adventure. Things must change, but a war should take 3+ years to resolve. And Paizo can get feedback from the community before deciding where to go to resolve the war. I feel strongly that Geb is the more interesting faction to ally with, because I want to fight the horrors and mages of Nex more than more undead again.

Let the good vs. evil fight against undead campaign be against Tar-Baphon. And in Geb we can be the group of adventurers that joins undead.

Useful to remember that some undeads are against Tar-Baphon's plans, especially those who feed on the living, and this is quite divisive in Geb, just not brutally... yet.

One thing to keep in mind with Civil War AP/Adventure is the question: "which side?", something that might not be easy to answer.

Personally, I actually knew very little about Golarion lore before the event. Like, I knew some about very specific areas and topics, and about a couple major events (like a certain two powerful beings escaping their respective prisons and changing the literal map), but I learned a lot assembling my conspiracy boards. So much effort to be completely wrong. XD

At least you can admit it and not go: "I'm not wrong, it's the Paizo writers who are wrong".

Is it just me or is this module too top heavy with magic loot?

Last session the party beat up three sealbreaker knights, all of whom had +1 full plate, a +1 heavy steel shield and a +1 longsword. That's over 6,000gp of loot per knight. Then the otyughs gave them glove of storing, which contained a scabbard of keen edges, a further 16,000gp worth.

Earlier they were gifted a +2 halberd by Ranton Gandry, Brunna gave them a +2 shield. They beat Kilibrandt and got her +1 shadow studded leather, +1 composite bow, belt of dex +4, and cloak of resistance +2, along with the gear from her hirelings.

And that's not even mentioning the multitude of potions, wands, talismans, etc they keep picking up.

I would suggest reading the whole module, and the beginning of the next one, there is usually a reason for increased loot.

Charles Evans 25 wrote:

I gather from your post that Rovagug's immunity has been discussed in a thread before though. Do you have a link, please, to the thread in question?

Still have to find the blog post commenting on this series being the “safe from death” notices, but the entries can be found here.

and the Which Core Deity will we lose? thread.

and Achaekek isn't the only deity with contradicting lore, hell, PF1 never really made its mind about Ydersius being quasi-deity, demigod or full deity.

those images, especially the spoilered one...

Does it mean Deities can

The issue is that Mesoamerican have long been smeared as Devil worshipers who did blood orgy rituals which was far from the truth.

The idea of a pure evil demon lord people worship to cause eternal darkness is also fake bullshit. Mesoamericans didn’t even have concepts of platonic good or evil.

Even the early frays had a hard time trying to teach the concept of "evil" in mesoamerican society because in nahuatl there isn't a word for "bad", there is only good "cualli" and not-good "ahmo cualli". Someone explained to me this with fruits: the fruit that is still immature is not good "ahmo cualli"; the ripe fruit is good "cualli", while the rotten fruit is not good "ahmo cualli" but neither of those states or phases are inherently "bad", the same applies to anything else, everything has its own time.

After stating this... the divinity that would carry the "evil" concept can be traslated to Tezcatlipoca and even so this god is also a protector of the poor and slaves. Although in modern times the word "chamuco" referring to the devil may have its roots in the god Oxomoco from the primal couple, the ancestors of the humankind.

Word of advise, might be very useful to know when people are talking in-game/in-verse vs real life things, and when things get mixed...

I'm someone who likes a lot of different styles of adventures in my campaigns rather than sticking to a single theme the entire time. Stringing together a few shorter APs sounds like a good way to get that variety.

However, I've also grown to like a good thru line. What are people's thoughts on an AP that skips levels. Like, Vol. 1 is levels 1-3, then you do some other adventures before Vol. 2 kicks off at level 8 or something. The whole thing goes to 20, but sporadically.

Something like Eden Odyssey's Wonders Out of Time (for 3.5) if anybody remembers that. It's a favorite of mine.

Kinda highlight one of the issues with 6 parts APs, filling 6 volumes with contents can be difficult.

I enjoy Saranrae as a goddess more than basically any other fictional god I've read about in any fantasy setting, since I find her focus on redemption (with swift retribution against the unredeemable) to be fascinating. I associate the Pathfinder setting very strongly with her. Hence, her loss would make me very unhappy. Also since I personally find Arazni to be a pretty naff replacement (it should have been Nocticula!), if it turns out to be Saranrae who has to go.

Saying "well, isn't her legacy enough for you?" sounds a bit clinically detached and uninvolved, no offense intended.

It has been mentioned a few times that Arazni won't take the mantle of whoever bites it.

I think this AP was quite high on the list of things that had people put their fist on the table and point out internal consistency wasn't a want but a need.

I'm curious about the Hell's Vengeance edits, the Slavery ones would require quite a few rewrites, especially book 4, and trying to figure out what you mean by "brutality"?

If I'm running an evil AP, I want to give the PCs an opportunity to summon demons, use evil class features, and wear a lot of red and black,

Would be Devils in this case. +1 to the "use evil class features" part

Evan Tarlton wrote:

Asmodeus' death opens room for Diabolism in general to take his place. Pantheons have been one of the most interesting 2e creations, and it would be nice for one to make it to Core.

Pantheons are a bit complicated to grasp. I do not expect at all one to take the place of a Core 20 deity.

and Asmodeus is Public Domain if I recall correctly.

Jim Butler wrote:

We’ll be replacing the current Paizo Store with a shiny new one.

I hear that people who try to buy physical products from paizo.com run into some bug such that the purchase doesn't get approved. That physical item gets a hold charged and the financial institution never approves it. Has anyone looked - or will anyone look - into that before "replacing the current Paizo Store with a shiny new one"?

Might already be on the long list of reasons for needing a new one.

Hope we can get new Easter Eggs.

And a Dark/Night mode.

Oh, Jonathan, I didn't mean to suggest you wouldn't still be moderating! Just that getting one or two extra people whose main or sole job is moderation could be nice. All these forums are a lot for one Morgantini to handle! Even a Morgangargantuan would probably have a tough time handling it alone.

I definitely don't want to relitigate the Moderation Discourse or anything. I just think it'd be swell to see the forums with another couple hands on deck. The impression I always got was that the old forum team benefited a lot from having multiple moderators to lean on and compare notes with.

Kinda have to agree with this.

Yeah its really not that difficult:

Good wants to help everyone and is self-less.
Neutral will not go out of their way to help or hurt someone.
Evil wants to hurt everyone else and is selfish.

Lawful wants things to be orderly and organized.
Neutral won't blindly follow laws but will not go out of their way to break them.
Chaotic wants things to be chaotic and free.

Someone having an anathema/edict of "always carries their clan dagger" tells me nothing about how the character behaves. It does tell me that they won't just give away their dagger. Someone "hunting the enemy of their people" does not tell me how they will act outside of being very patriotic or vengeful.

Alignment isn't just about the "why" but also the "how".

can help to remember the saying: "the roads to Hell are paved with good intentions"

Just using Squares can get wonky if you're on maps where a Square doesn't equal 5 feet, though.

Shh, you are not supposed to say things that make sense on the Internet.

Rysky wrote:

I’m interested in why you’re framing that as a bad thing.

A) I've already made the point as to why, multiple times.

B) Why are you responding to me? Am I asking YOU anything? Do I need to get the mod back again? I asked the BRAND MANAGER a question, not you. Do you work for Paizo, or BKOM or even in the industry, do you know anything of any relevance to what I am asking THEM? nope.

My question was for them, the people IN THE KNOW, the people in a position to provide an actual answer with basis in fact, not assumption, opinion or personal bias.

Then you should have pointed this out more clearly earlier.

"what are the brand managers thinking" isn't the same as "to the brand managers..."

DaverdGM wrote:

I'm referring to the use of Metric system along the Imperial one, something like every time a distance or a weight is called in the rules it could be displayed in both units like 22f(10m). If it's not to much to ask.

There generally aren't weights in the game and adding meters would add a LOT of ink to the game and most likely some reformatting [every range, every range increment, maps {squares and other distances} and miscellaneous rules]. I'm a BIG NO for this, if for no other reason, I have to go back and edit them out when I copy/past things into a list or character sheet.

Spanish edition of Pathfider has measurements both in Metric and Imperial because that edition serves Spanish-speaking players both in the United States and normal countries. So, it's perfectly doable.

can also be useful when different players use different measuring systems.

Ezekieru wrote:

Yeah, I wish people would realize this is a project BKOM conceived and pitched to Paizo, rather than an order from Paizo to BKOM. BKOM wanted to make an ARPG, and so that's why they made it that way.

Nothing is preventing Owlcat, or any other potential Paizo partners from making whatever genre of game they want to make. You're not getting an ARPG instead of a CRPG. You're getting an ARPG instead of literally nothing.

Your missing the point, Whether or not BKOM conceived and pitched this project, Paizo still had to give it the green light and they wouldn't have done that unless they thought an ARPG was beneficial to the brand in some way and that is something a brand manager would 100% know.

Also when it comes to "pitching" ideas, keep in mind that is not a one-way process, anyone can pitch an idea, even Paizo. It isn't just Paizo sat in the corner waiting for Computer game developers to come along and throw them a bone, which they have to accept because it's the only bone on the table.

So I am genuinely interested in their reasoning behind that and that isn't something you can answer, only them as they are the only ones who know.

You are only thinking of the mechanical aspects there, Paizo might be considering the setting aspects as well in those decisions.

Guys (and girls), remember that this isn't a thread about Dungeons & Dragons various editions, so take this off-topic bickering elsewhere.

I'm a little antsy about changes to kobolds. What's the word on that? I have a personal aversion to any change that leans them further into the "miniature dragonborn" angle.

Isn't reptilian/draconic Kobolds kind of a DnD thing?

So, Gorgon should be gone or renamed?

No more Rust Monster?

What about the Tarrasque?

Lucas Yew wrote:

Most changes are good, but I truly mourn the death of Ability Scores.

It seems like the whole universe is trying to convince me that Simulationism is not cool, not that I'll ever bend though...

----

On monsters, I wish an Asian-esque body-form Dragon to join Monster Core from the very start.

I don't know why an 18 is more simulationist than +4.

I like using systems to provide some simulationist stuff for my groups, but the numerical expression isn't necessarily what makes for simulationism.

18 is just as abstract as +4.

Carrying capacity, it changes for each +1 Strength.

Spellcasting: Ability score needed being 10 + Spell level, so, 15 would allow level 5 spells without changing the modifier.

etc...

Souls At War wrote:

Carrius is pretty much the trigger for Pythareus' actions/reactions.

I didn't read it quite that way. Appreciate the good word and the help.

Carrius being around kinda make attempts at reversing the decision about Primogeniture pointless, and later makes spilling a certain dirty secret of the Stavian more useful... granted, that not the trigger for all of Pythareus' actions and reactions.

Souls At War wrote:

Did the death of Kentaro Miura impact anyone at Paizo?

Didn't impact me, although after googling him, I'm sorry to see him go. Hasn't come up in any meetings (video or text) that I've been in either.

and his work influenced many video games, novels, shows, etc in some way or another.

Did the death of Kentaro Miura impact anyone at Paizo?

Hmm, aren't there a few "smaller" giants in the Castle? the place would probably be difficult for large creatures as well.

Changing Volstus's class (magus seems the current plan, though sorcerer is also under consideration).

you would also have to consider changing some of his gears.

I really think the challenge in this adventure as well as the previous book needs to be turned up. Way to many low CR encounters, I can’t believe there is only one storm giant for the entire adventure path. I’m thinking about adding Storm Giant captains to all the cloud giant squads. As well as many other things to this campaign.

the Cloud Giants can already be tough customers, but I agree that the lack of Storm Giants is a bit weird

Wondering how easy/hard it will be to backport some of the new rules.

I blame Cosmo for these being way more awesome than they should.