Old Ones Cultist

Tender Tendrils's page

658 posts. No reviews. No lists. 2 wishlists.


1 to 50 of 658 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

4 people marked this as a favorite.

It is an item, not a creature - it mentions that it doesn't have strength, dex or con due to being an inanimate object, so it definitely isn't a creature.

Petrified Wood of a magical tree that grew when the world was warmer
Some kind of magical ice that doesn't melt
Ironfur (fur from a beast that has a thick hide of supernaturally strong fur)
Shark teeth

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Honestly I like the asymmetry that comes from not all kinds/colours of dragons mapping to kobolds.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Why would a manticore or a griffon or owlbear even want to use tools? Humans used hunting and gathering tools because we didn't have claws or fangs or great strength and speed, and we used shelter-building tools because we didn't have blubber or fur or a thick hide or the ability to hibernate to protect us from the elements.

When you have foot-long, razor sharp claws, you don't really get much benefit from a knife or spear.

laraqua wrote:
Speaking of Adventure Paths: Anyone know of any modules or even non-Pathfinder Fiction set in underworld temples or locales that could be good inspiration?

For rpg books:

D&Ds Ghosts of Salt marsh
PF1 Skull & Shackles
PF1 Ruins of Azlant

For fiction works;
Zelda's Water Temple
Lovecraft's Call of Cthulhu & Dagon
Aquaman (the movie)
Clash of the Titans & Revenge of the Titans

Temperans wrote:

I am guessing its more a result of A person level X would get manipulated and out politiqued by B person level X+Y.

So a level 1 leader who is trained in deception and things would not be able to control people as well as someone who is level 5 and experts. Those would lose to people who are level 10 and masters. While all of those would lose to people who are level 15 and legendary. Of course its also possible for there to be a level 1 NPC with really high level in those skills, but a high level NPC will have both the power to not get assassinated and a similar amount of skills (thanks to level to proficiency).

If not using level to proficiency it becomes a lot easier for a low level but highly skilled to be able to keep power. But still runs the risk of just being killed off.

Power is often hereditary - the level 5 noble knew and had relationships with all of the people who make up the apparatus of power from early childhood, on top of having the legal right to their position, they know all of the right people. Political power is all about having all of the people who hold the keys to power be familiar with you and on your side - you can be the most charismatic person on the planet, but the police chief and the general and the billionaire financier might still prefer to back the guy they went to boarding school with.

Give the players a way to drain a flooded section of the temple into another dry section, and add in parts of both sections that can only be easily accessed by swimming or when it is dry.

Have doors that are holding back water, so gaining access to an area floods previously visited areas.

Have some enemies that are at a bigger advantage in water in the drainable section - when the clever players figure out to sneak past and drain that section before fighting those enemies, they will feel really accomplished.

Conversely, you can drained water reveal hazards (hibernating foes disturbed by the draining of the water, pockets of gas, collapsing ceilings that where being held up by the buoyancy of the water, etc).

A sunken temple is a fantastic opportunity for a dungeon that players move through and interact with in interesting ways.

If you want to be particularly evil (this isn't for parties who are the faint of heart) have enemies who are clever enough to dispel the PCs water breathing at an opportune moment (have this happen just once or twice, having to repeatedly recast water breathing mid combat gets old after a while)

Ubertron_X wrote:

I don't think anybody has an issue with making potentially adventure or campaign breaking spells, feats, equipment or abilities as well as locally rare items uncommon or rare. I even embrace the concept that many of the "know it all too easy" divinations or "remove the need for overland travel" spells are now locked behind GM approval.

However and as the OP I am still a little baffled when locking what I supposedly thought of as "class iconic features" behind rarity (the definition of "class iconic" may of cause greatly differ for each individual GM and player), which e.g. in case of my cleric would be the Protection spell. I don't know why it was limited in the first place (I suspect either due to its indirect alignment check or because of the flat out AC bonus; monsters are to hurt you in this edition) but I always considered it a cleric bread and butter spell, second only to Cure Light Wounds respectively PF2 Heal. Granted, those occurances are rather rare, nonetheless I was quite irritated when I first memorized spells after character creation, so I can understand OP's confusion.

Given that a focus spell that was common and does aligned damage triggered a massive debate on these forums about the morality of zapping everyone you see with it to root out evil characters, protection being an indirect alignment check is absolutely worth making uncommon so that GMs can feel empowered to restrict it if they need to.

For spells, it is largely because certain kinds of spells can disrupt adventures - it harder to write a mystery or investigation adventure if the players can just ask the murder victim who killed them, and the ability to teleport vast distances or summon food and water takes a lot of the challenge out of a survival advenutre.

It is also useful to have some spells/items/feats be uncommon so as to give GMs a way to use them as treasure/rewards.

If one of your players who is a fighter treks into the mountains to seek out the ancient blademaster to learn from him, the player will be pretty disappointed if the "secret technique" is a combat feat they could have learned anyway.

Having uncommon/rare feats and spells gives you the option of them being secret things that can act as an additional form of treasure.

Last night in a 5e game I play in, we could all hear each others thoughts because we had been mind linked by an elder brain. That kind of unfiltered honesty created a lot of interesting drama, and it was pretty easy for the brain to cause us to almost come to blows.

To adapt that to a system neutral or pathfinder thing - some kind of magical statue that broadcasts a thought link throughout a section of the dungeon that causes everyone to be able to hear each others thoughts.

(The mechanical effect is that you tell the players they have to speak of whatever would come to mind, as it is practically impossible to not think about a thing that is related to something someone says).

A few other ideas (most of these probably belong in a tomb of horrors style dungeon wherein the players expect and accept that they will be messed with pretty brutally, I wouldn't spring most of these on a party that isn't prepared to be screwed around with)

A room with 5 pedestals - each pedestal manifests a magic item that would be ideal for one of the members of the party (one themed to each party member)- an inscription states that only one treasure may be taken - when an item is moved away from its pedestal, the others start to become insubstantial and fade away - the first item to leave the room causes the others to disappear completely.

A room that contains a puzzle, but a puzzle designed by a creature from outside of our reality, and hence follows a logic completely alien to our own, making it impossible to solve.

A library full of ancient knowledge, but with failing structural integrity so that opening the door causes it to start to slowly collapse - the heroes have 15 minutes before the ceiling will give way completely and all of the knowledge will be lost forever.

2e is so much more intuitive. I ran and played in 1e for years and I still don't know how grappling works.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

The Cavalier in 1st ed was actually a warlord/leader character masquerading as a mounted combatant - they had abilities about;

Issuing challenges
Waving a banner around to inspire their allies
Granting allies teamwork feats

(This is why I would love to see the cavalier come back as a class instead of just an archtype)

I think the reasons the executioner has a special ability for executing things (instead of just narrating the execution) are;

1# it's an executioner statblock, people would complain if it didn't have an ability for what it does

And more importantly

2# when it is a PC on the chopping block, or a very important NPC the PCs are trying to rescue, it is useful to have mechanics that aren't just "instant death with no dice rolls" - the fort save at least gives the player or NPC a chance to survive the first swing, in which case the rest of the PCs have a round in which to save them before the executioner tries again.

If it isn't a situation where the PCs are trying to mount a dramatic rescue, then you absolutely should just skip the abilities and dice rolls and just narrate that their head gets chopped off.

That is just insane.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I think that it is unlikely that spellcasters who can cast 4th level or higher spells are that common - your average war mage is probably equivalent to the mage for hire in the GMG, who is a level 3 creature who can cast 2nd level spells.

I think from memory that level 12 has been mentioned as roughly the level from which npcs of that level are very rare and always are significant characters that are comparable to PCs, so I doubt that most armies will have even a single 12th level spellcaster (so even a single 7th level spell is unlikely to happen in most battles)

In most cases, fireball is probably the big gun of spells being deployed on the battlefield, with stronger spells only turning during particularly epic battles.

An extraordinarily high level wizard (12+) probably can't make a huge enough difference on the battlefield to justify the risk of losing what might be the only wizard of that level in your kingdom - all of the spells that exist are impressive when deployed in an encounter with a dozen enemies, but aren't really designed RAW to actually do a lot to an army - the 10th level spell Cataclysm for example, only affects a 60 foot radius - anything in that area is almost guaranteed to die, but that is probably only somewhere between 20-60 soldiers (depending on how tight their formation is).

I think a if an army has access to a high level wizard, they are probably using them to scry and gather strategic information, and holding them in reserve to deal with really serious problems that crop up (for example, if the enemy bring a dragon to the battlefield, that wizard might be deployed because she is the only one who can deal with it). They are simply too valuable to risk just to throw big area of effect spells at rank and file soldiers - basically, the 14th level wizard is only called in if the enemy seriously escalates things to the point where she is needed.

There is also the issue of how people perceive and react to the use of excessive force. If you ride into battle on the back of a bound dragon and start throwing meteor swarms around, you are inviting a pretty severe escalation of hostilities, and many will probably consider you to be a war criminal - most of your warrior types will probably at least feel that this vaporising 30 people with a spell thing is a pretty dishonorable.

Aratorin wrote:

That just makes it really obvious though.
"Guys, he rolled a secret check. There's something here. Keep looking."

Well, non-secret checks have that problem on top of also giving away the information of whether you failed at the check (if you roll low, you are less likely to trust the information that there isn't anything there).

I guess the ultimate way to make it least obvious is to roll 10d20 for each player before the game, and write down the results beforehand so you can just look at your list of results and check them off instead of rolling in front of the players.

5 people marked this as a favorite.
Deadmanwalking wrote:

Also, even if she was androgyonus looking, her preferred pronouns clearly remain female so those are what people should use and reference her with. That's just common courtesy (albeit, in this case, to a fictional character)

Exactly - a person's presentation does not determine their gender. I could get a crew cut and wear a suit and tie and still be a woman.

I think the newer art is more just reflecting that just because a character is a woman, it doesn't mean they have to wear makeup and be super curvy. Iomedae is a goddess of valour and righteousness, not a goddess of styling her hair and wearing makeup.

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Ravingdork wrote:
Draco18s wrote:

Also also:

If this would bring another creature with you—even if you're carrying it in an extradimensional container—the spell is lost.
You can't leave your but biome, diseases, or other pests behind by Dim-Dooring. The spell fails.
So unless you're a sanitized robot, the spell simply doesn't work.

The rules do not by any stretch of the imagination classify microorganisms as creatures.

Dire Elf wrote:

Lately I’ve seen a lot of custom character sheets for DnD5 on Pinterest and I’m jealous. For years I’ve been using some sheets a friend made in Word and I modified for my personal use, but they are not very attractive. They’re made entirely of tables, which makes some editing easy but other edits are hard. It ends up looking like it was made in Excel even though it wasn’t.

I do not want to use an app. I find that too annoying during a tabletop game. I do not want a printed sheet I have to hand-write all the details in. I want a sheet I can type information into on my computer and then print. I’ve seen the suggestion to use Excel, but I despise Excel. I want the sheet to have space where I can insert things like graphics and decorative borders. I want to be able to select from a variety of fonts for the fillable fields. I do not want it to do formulas for me.

I want a sheet that I can edit to suit changing needs or customize for specific characters, and I want it to be attractive but functional. Does such a thing exist? Is it possible to create one without having to purchase new software or develop artistic skills that I lack? Why is all the cool art going into DnD sheets and not Pathfinder?

5e is a bit more widespread, and is much older than PF2. I hope to see people working on PF2 variant character sheets soon, especially now that the optional rules for stamina in the GMG make it so that we need variant character sheets that have a place to track that.

Cyder wrote:
Glad to hear you are all ok. The real question is do you have enough toilet paper? (For reference for some reason many of my fellow Australians has decided the thing to do during an outbreak is bilk buy toilet paper so all the stores have run out).

Yeah, I don't know why but that has been going on here in Western Australia too. We have a shortage of toilet paper because of people panic buying toilet paper.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Dimension door doesn't force you to do anything.

Without dimension door, your options are
1# Stay with your familiar
2# Move away and hope your familiar can catch up in time

With it, your options are
1# Stay with your familiar
2# Move away and hope your familiar can catch up in time
3# Move away and hope your family can catch up in time, but with magic

You still have options 1# and 2#, so you are not being forced to leave your familiar to die.

(Additionally, unless your familiar has the spell delivery ability, there is little reason for it to be in the combat area in the first place, unless you got ambushed or forgot to tell them to hang back)

But, in response to the more constructive version of the question "Should dimension door be changed to allow a familiar to be brought with you" I would say yes, as it seems pretty harmless to allow a familiar you travel with the character.

Additionally, I would propose an action that repositions your familiar to your side as a free addition to the familiar rules (with the proviso that anything the familiar is carrying is left behind). I think that spending an action to avoid a week of downtime is a pretty fair trade.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Darksol the Painbringer wrote:
consuming potions and bombs in-combat.

I would strongly advise against consuming bombs in-combat or otherwise.

It does have a hidden action economy benefit, in that things stored in a bandolier are not stored in your backpack

"3 Retrieving an item stowed in your own backpack requires first taking off the backpack with a separate Interact action."

The 8 items of light bulk you can store in a bandolier can be retrieved with a single interact action, while items stored in your backpack require two interact actions to retrieve (one to remove your backpack, the other to rifle through it).

I would see it more as "even when you aren't casting false life, you are casting false life".

5 people marked this as a favorite.

There needs to be a demon formed from the souls of those sinners who stop in doorways or walk slowly in the middle of the path.

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Megistone wrote:
I'm wondering what happens if my characters eats a whole Mattock of the Titans. For 36000gp, its effect should be massive!

Urgathoa is impressed (and somewhat confused) by your incredible display of gluttony, and blesses you with a moderate boon.

I got the impression from the starfinder pact worlds book that most of Eox's sentient population are ghouls, supplemented by vampires and wights and other intelligent undead, and served by a huge numbers of nonsentient undead, and of course all ruled by the bone sages.

I suspect that this is probably the case before the Gap as well.

3 people marked this as a favorite.

The only currently published rules for 2e concerning eating dragon eggs are the alignment and anathema complications of eating the babies of a sentient species, the rules for divine intercessions if a draconic deity decides to curse you for your crimes, and the statblock of the dragon that will hunt you to the ends of the earth for eating its young.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

There are many examples in real life where a position that is technically open to everyone has only been filled by people of one kind due to privilege - maybe humans just have the right combination of;

1# Numerous enough in the vicinity of Abasalom that many have tried to take the test
2# Short lived enough to want to seek immortality
3# Ambitious enough to want that kind of power
4# Well regarded/well-treated enough by society to be commonly doing well enough to be able to harbour such an ambition (if you are struggling to survive, you may well try to ascend out of desperation to better your situation, but you won't have the education and fitness and support that make it likely for you to succeed)
5# Not likely to be in a situation of great power and wealth by default (dragons for example, usually are able to hold sway over a bunch of people and amass a lot of treasure and power just by being dragons, so it is less tempting to risk losing it all on an attempt at ascension)

For example, there would be less elves attempting the test due to 1# and 2#, and less goblins attempting due to 3# and 4#

That's not to say that a person from a population who doesn't meet those criteria can't or won't succeed at the starstone test, just that less people from those populations will make attempts, and less will have the resources to make good attempts, and that it takes many thousands of attempts for a population to get one person through who succeeds, so humans have a pretty good leg-up on everyone else due to the setting having them as the "default" ancestry.

Deadmanwalking wrote:
ChibiNyan wrote:

This does matter! An monster's level is used to calculate their challenge. Imagine a scenario where it comes down to a 1 v 1 battle with some enemy. If the enemy is the same level as you, it should in theory be a deadly 50/50 encounter. In practice, this is probably a losing fight since the monsters are stronger than you in every way until you have many class feats and supplemental items, which isn't gonna happen at low levels.

I suppose it's balanced around a party of 4, then..

Uh...this is false. Let's examine a PC Barbarian (Dragon Totem) vs. a level 1 creature.

The Barbarian will have +6 Perception, +7 to hit for 1d12+8 damage, AC 17 (all while Raging), +7/+5/+6 Saves, and 24 HP (+3 Temp) assuming relatively optimal stats.

A Goblin Commando has +5 Perception, +8 to hit for 1d8+3 damage, AC 17, +7/+8/+5 Saves, and 18 HP. And those stats are around average for level 1 creatures (they're all between Moderate and High by the GMG guidelines, except Will Save and Perception, which are Low).

Those stats heavily favor the Barbarian in a straight fight. Like, a lot.

Fighters, Monks, and Rangers do equally well IMO, and Rogues only do less well because they lack an easy source of Sneak Attack (and even then, they wind up pretty on par doing 1d6+4).

Casters have more problems unsupported (at least at very low levels) vs. martially inclined enemies, admittedly, but that's a martial/caster disparity, not a PC/NPC one.
In terms of the actual thread topic, I think this disparity in monster spell attacks specifically is odd, and perhaps an indication that an item to add to Spell Attack Rolls (but not Save DCs) is warranted, but monster design in general does not make them superior to PCs.

It was probably one of those things that doesn't make sense of paper, but then in playtesting monster spellcasters just weren't getting enough hits in with their spells.

Most spells are 2 action activities, while melee strikes are single actions, so a spell attack roll is higher stakes, but on the player side that is mitigated somewhat by the monsters usually being weaker than the players, and by players having creative ways to make it easier to hit things (I feel like one of the base assumptions of this edition is that players will often (when they don't need to move) use their 1st action on using a skill debuff or similar effect on the enemy before casting a spell or striking twice, such as demoralize or feint or grapple or trip)

3 people marked this as a favorite.

Keep in mind that the WHO has instructed that unless you are a health care worker, in the Wuhan province, or have flu symptoms, you shouldn't be wearing a mask - they recommend rational use of medical supplies so as not to cause shortages that will be counter productive.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Cyrad wrote:

2nd Edition is an opportunity to expand on what the magus can be.

Much like how the alchemist and maritals were expanded. Merely turning the magus into an archetype or an arcane thesis is a missed opportunity.

We don't have the ceremony spell in 2e yet, so I don't think maritals have been expanded much yet.

I mean, it's better than what we called our planet. We basically live on a planet called "dirt".

I honestly would really like the goblin hero gods to be explored more (and given stats! They would make fantastic boss monsters for extraplanar adventures that can be of a lower tier than demon lords)

I think the Magus is best represented with its own class. It is too broad for an arcane thesis, and I have no idea how an archtype would work.

Honestly, it would actually make the game more realistic if ghosts fell through the planet.

I waaannnt it already

Vidmaster7 wrote:
But what happen to the crouching tiger?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
DomHeroEllis wrote:
Zapp wrote:
DomHeroEllis wrote:
Side note: Are Leshy even fertile at all?

If you're asking if flowers and trees can be fertile just like animals and humans, the answer is very simple:


You just might call it by a different name, such as fecundity.

But can they breed and the child will have a Leshy spirit inside of it, or is the only way for Leshy to increase their numbers to forge a plant golem and then do the ritual.

...which would make a really cool short story with a twist.

I would say that Leshies can only reproduce by using the normal means of creating more Leshies - they are nature spirits that have been summoned into bodies of vegetable matter - an animate pile of sticks with an orange for a head and hair made out of flowers isn't a complete unified plant, its several plants and bits of plant put together.

Additionally, I think reproduction via druidic ritual is a lot more interesting from a narrative standpoint than doing it the same way as everyone else.

Heck, if I could light a bunch of candles around a ritual circle and create life by chanting it into existence, that would be way cooler than the normal process.

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Martialmasters wrote:
Ruzza wrote:

What sort of games are you playing in? That sounds awful and I would leave them?

Edit: There are GMs out there that see class abilities and features and try and stop them. We call that out as bad GMing when it happens. Why not here, too?

"Oooh, I wrote this dilemma that's gonna make the champion fall for sure!"

"The whole dungeon is covered in an anti-magic field!"

"I kill the PCs' familiars."

We play RAW games and the DM role play each group of enemies appropriately. I'm not saying every time it scouted it was shot. But it was always a risk and did happen more than once.

If there is a small weak creature being any sort of involvement in combat like giving out potions and such and the enemy doesn't attack it I'd say your DM is being soft handed.

I honestly prefer combats where the GM plays the monsters as ruthless, cunning and tactically devious enemies (when appropriate for the creatures in question). I enjoy being intellectually challenged by the game, so I regularly ask my GM not to pull his punches (because I certainly won't).

If I where to start using a familiar to gain a tactical advantage in combat, I wouldn't hold it against my GM if a hobgoblin archer decided to take a few potshots at the familiar.

There is a difference between being a dick "the dungeon is covered in an anti-magic field because I didn't talk to my players about expectations surrounding spells that bypass challenges" (the anti-magic field thing is almost always a result of GM frustration with players turning into ethereal ghosts or flying to bypass the entire dungeon by just flying into the treasure room.) and playing the creatures in a challenging manner "Hobgoblins are cunning, devious and underhanded, they will eliminate the weak first".

4 people marked this as a favorite.

A good way to go about it is to have characters with those identities, but have the stories you tell about them be about something other than their identity.

As an Asexual Autistic Trans person, I would much rather people focus on my accomplishments as an artist and a gm and a writer and a student than "oh look how brave I am for being trans" or "you are so smart and functional for an autistic person!". There is more to me than my identity.

What I would most like to see in fiction is characters that are trans or autistic or asexual in stories that aren't primarily about their identity. We have a lot of movies now about trans people finding acceptance and going through struggles and all of the things about being trans, but we don't really have any movies where the main character is a jedi or pirate or superhero who just happens to be trans.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I wish I had learned these three things before I first started GMing;

The rules are a tool that exist to help you resolve interactions. They are not something that you as the GM are bound by.

If there is no meaningful consequence for failure, dice roll is meaningless.

Time pressures are essential to maintaining dramatic tension - if the party has all of the time in the world, then there is often no consequence for failure.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

In 1e and SF creatures introduced in society and APs often found their way into future bestiaries - the list is very helpful in the meantime however.

Malk_Content wrote:
The other option is to (after a while of using Earn Income) to present them with commissions to use with their craft skill. Their patron explicitly wants x art piece at y value. You can then use the crafting rules to do this, where the more time your player takes the better return they get.

That tracks well with how art was created historically - generally a wealthy person hired an artist to paint a fresco or portrait, and the artist was often seen more like a contractor and was often not credited.

Lost In Limbo wrote:

Whether you are using lore, crafting, perform, or some other skill, they would all use the same DC for earn income. I would advise you do have the player roll the normal earn income checks and either flavor it as them spending time trying to find buyers or otherwise working on or finishing the sketches they made while on the road.

I don't advise you treat each sketch as in individually priced art object. Art objects, gems, jewelry, precious metals and the like aren't really meant to be things that PCs produce and sell. They mostly exist to make treasure more interesting than "you find a pile of 40 gold coins".

Any balanced attempt to house rule a system for PCs to work on items to sell is just going to be a more complicated version of the existing downtime rules.

Exactly this. The game isn't designed with the intent that you take a simulationist approach towards making money from any kind of crafting activity - the design intent is that you use the earn an income activity for anything of that kind.

Additionally.... and I say this as a visual artist - pricing and valuing art is very difficult. Generally, if you aren't well known, selling art is difficult (except to friends and family and people you know).

A common method that I have seen a lot of people use or suggest when trying to sell their art is time (I would go with slightly above minimum wage here if you aren't well known) + materials + 15%.

To get the prices you see sometimes where people are getting thousands (or tens of thousands) for an artwork, part of what is being paid there is for owning a unique work created by a specific (famous) artist. For those pieces, I don't think a calculation can really be made (which is why those works are often auctioned, as they are worth whatever people decide to pay for them). Some people spend their entire career being paid to essentially make educated guesses as to what those pieces are worth.

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Darrell Impey UK wrote:

Page 59, Ghlaunder: "Cleric Spells 1st: goblin pox, 2nd: vomit swarm (Pathfinder Advanced Player’s Guide), 3rd: insect form"

Oh yes? Is this preperation for the forthcoming APG in August, or a mistake referring to the 1E version?

I am happy to see that vomit swarm is making it into 2nd edition!

Now we just need Beguiling Gift, Compelling Rant, Deathclutch, Lipstitch & Skinsend and I will have all of my favourite spells with which to torment my players.

graystone wrote:

The Prerequisites entry for Living Monolith Dedication (page 59) is “Osiriani language, trained in Crafting” rather than “Ancient Osiriani and Sphinx languages, trained in Crafting.”

The Prerequisites entry for Ka Stone Ritual (page 59) is “Living Monolith Dedication” rather than “Living Monolith Dedication, a sphinx or living monolith with this feat performs a ritual with you”.

They added these to the PFS page but haven't added them to an errata/faq yet. [Pathfinder Society (second edition) Character Options]

Those are probably exceptions for PFS rather than something they will errata into the LOWG (as those are changes needed for PFS, but not for home games as the GM will probably give you access when you meet a sphinx and learn their language, or if your backstory contains that).

Perpdepog wrote:

3. There may be worshipers of Rovagug with that ethos, but since their ethical outlook would be so different they wouldn't receive any of his "blessings," and they would more likely worship another existence-ending force, like the Four Horsemen, or the Asura Ranas, or possibly something like the nightshades.

That was my thought too - you have to be a real believer in a deities philosophy to gain champion or cleric class features from them, and they likely won't give you blessings or intercessions or anything like that either.

You could appear to be a worshipper and be manipulating/furthering the goals of a deities church for your own reasons, but you won't have any of those blessings or class features (though you could probably fake it through other sources of power).

Squiggit wrote:
Tender Tendrils wrote:

Honestly, I think the best definition (rather frustratingly) is a combination of "mouth-feel"
Do not put the violet fungus in your mouth.

But they look so delicious

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Deadmanwalking wrote:
PossibleCabbage wrote:
I wonder who was the successful attempt that just jumped off a tall building with a hang glider and floated across the gap, probably Cayden.
I can see that being either Cayden or Norgorber, actually. It's possible as both a simple, clever, plan that Norgorber might've dreamed up, and simultaneously the sort of thing that sounds like a great idea when you're drunk...

I like to think that Cayden just got so blackout drunk that he woke up on the other side.

1 to 50 of 658 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>