Dexinis

Timothy Ferdinand's page

Goblinworks Executive Founder. 143 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists.


RSS

1 to 50 of 143 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>

Owen K. C. Stephens wrote:

[unofficial]He's part of a fiendpunk movement among younger drow to mark themselves with the symbols of demon lords they don't worship, as a way to thumb their eyes at their opponents and prove they fear nothing."[/unofficial]

[unofficial]He is part of a minor house with a different demonic patron cult that was acquired by Zeizerer as part of a.... hostile takeover.[/unofficial]

[unofficial]He made a high-stakes power play to become a major manager within Zeizerer... and lost. He was marked with that demonic sigil to ensure he'd never rise any higher. Which is why he's a contact between the House and the Starfinder Society.[/unofficial]

Many thanks Mr Stephens, any one of those would work, and that's why we'll miss you so much!! Good luck for the future by the way.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pantshandshake wrote:
None of my tattoos have anything to do with my job, either.

but do you work for a drow noble house overseen by a demon lord......or perhaps its best not to ask!! :)


Ceobarn Zeizerer is the interface between the Starfinder Society in Starfinder Society adventure 01-06 "A Night in Nightarch". The portrait of this character on page 6 shows him with a face tattoo which is the symbol of the demon lord Socothbenoth. But the adventure makes clear that the demon lord which acts as patron of House Zeizerer is Abraxas. It seems odd that a senior representative of the House would openly sport a tattoo on his cheek of another demon lord. Does anyone have a sensible explanation which I could use if the issue comes up at the table?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I think this is a brilliant approach, we already have settings guides for many of the individual countries, so by moving to 10 regions, they can write updating guides which cover far more countries, allowing us to get updates much more quickly. It also means that smaller countries will get covered. It’s a sensible evolution given where the Pathfinder world sits at this stage at the end of version 1.0 of the game.

Can’t wait to read about these new regions because every one contains at least on country I love!


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Might also be worth remembering that a copper coin is rarely (even in ancient times) made of copper - they were usually alloys.

Silver coins were also generally alloyed - certainly one of the "hidden" reasons for the decline of the Roman empire after about 150AD was that the imperial mint systematically reduced the silver content in coins.

In fairness, gold was generally gold, but not always.

So direct comparisons of the value of copper to silver to gold are probably not necessary.

I too like the idea of 100 cp to 1 sp

Generally, I'm happy with 10 sp to 1 gp, but 100 sp to 1 gp might be more explainable if you assume the coins are alloys.

I never bother with platinum coins - I don't feel the medieval fantasy World would have the technology to extract platinum.

Like most everyone on this thread, I am delighted that the basis for the PF 2e system is silver - way more believable when you consider that the total amount of gold (above ground) in the modern World is estimated to be able to fit in a cube just 20 metres by 20 metres by 20 metres!!


So it seems (from various comments at Gencon and the entry on deities in the Players guide for this AP) that Nocticula is on the verge of ascending to Godhood (or should that be Goddesshood?) as a Chaotic Neutral - redeemed at last, but by whom......I'm assuming that this is a tale that draws from the book God's Demon and that someone has helped Nocticula on her path to redemption......maybe Shamira was sent by Sarenrae......??


super excited about this scenario - more information on Apostae and its arms dealing rulers!! Just how much mayhem can a group of adventurers cause in 24 hours with diplomatic immunity.......I'm drooling at the prospect :o)


Luke Spencer wrote:
All NPCs in Starfinder are built with a completely separate set of rules to PCs. The rules themselves aren't currently available and won't become so until Alien Archive launches in October, but it's said to be similar to Pathfinder's unchained monster creation rules.

Thanks so much for that explanation - it now makes sense (sort of) and I guess everything will be crystal clear when the Alien Archive arrives

Cheers (at least I wasn't just being dumb!!)


Maybe I am being really dumb, but pg 240 of the Core Rule Book states that EAC and KAC are calculated as 10 + relevant armor bonus + Dex modifier.

The Space Pirate Crew Member on pg 15 of First Contact is listed with second skin armor and a Dex modifier of +4 - so by my calculation its EAC should be 15 (10 plus 1 for second skin and 4 for Dex) and KAC should be 16 (10 plus 2 for second skin and 4 for Dex).

However, the stat block lists the EAC as 11 and KAC as 13 - why?

The same question arises with many of the NPCs in Incident at Absalom Station. Just trying to work out how these NPC armor classes are being calculated.

Anyone out there able to help me - I'm sure I'm just being really obtuse.


or it could be a hala demon?


Is there an evil equivalent of the Angelic Aspect spells? If so, what is it called and where can the rules be found?


Flynn Walker wrote:
Sleeves of Many Garments wrote:

These translucent cloth tubes easily fit over their wearer’s arms.

The wearer of these sleeves can, when she slips them on, choose to transform her current garments into any other non-magical set of clothing. These new clothes fit her perfectly and are always clean and mended unless she specifically designates otherwise. When she removes the sleeves, her clothes revert to their original form.

Two questions about this useful little item, somewhat related. I've been using them in PFS and had mixed reactions from GMs, so I'd like some clarity if possible.

Firstly, do the clothes actually change or only appear to change? It seems to me that the word "transform," and the lack of any will save to disbelieve, means that there is an actual physical transformation of the clothes.

Secondly, what are the limits of what the sleeves can do? I've tried to use them to avoid having to buy cold weather gear, for example, and had a GM shoot it down as not working. Taking a more extreme example, could it change clothes into a Swarm Suit? Arguably yes RAW, given that it's a non-magical set of clothing, though some might quibble about the lack of a hat in that particular example.

The description of this magic item is quite clear, they "transform THE APPEARANCE of her current garments" - so its the appearance of the wearers garments (note plural) that changes. That is why the aura is faint illusion and the spell to create them is an illusion spell (disguise self). So the wearers garments do not change or transform, just the appearance of those garments - and you can change the appearance of all your "garments" - ie your whole outfit to the extent its clothing.


deuxhero wrote:

http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic-items/wondrous-items/wondrous-items/r-z/sleev es-of-many-garments

The aura is of illusion and it requires an illusion spell, but the verbage seems to have more in common with a transmutation effect: It uses "transform" while all illusion effects I can find say something about appearance or looking like/as though while all uses of "transform" are physical changes. The requirement the new clothing be "mundane" is also weird for an illusion but standard for transmutation.

This is important because a lot of clothing has mundane bonuses (such as weather appropriate clothing).

If you read the description of sleeves of many garments it is quite clear the effect is an illusion - the text reads "transforms THE APPEARANCE of her current garments" so its THE APPEARANCE that transforms, not the actual garments. As pointed out, that's why the aura is faint illusion and the creation requires an illusion spell (disguise self). You clothing doesn't change whilst wearing the sleeves, just the appearance of your clothing. Hope that helps.


blackbloodtroll wrote:

So, we are trying to saying it produces real sets of clothing, but gain no benefit from them, like normal clothing?

We are also saying, that a set of clothing, is only considered a set of clothing, if it is listed in a very specific location in the book?

I am following so far?

Sleeves of many garments "transform THE APPEARANCE of her current garments", they do not actually change one set of clothing into a different set of clothing, they only change THE APPEARANCE of your clothing - its an illusion - which is why they have a faint illusion aura and the spell to create them is "disguise self" (an illusion spell). If they actually changed one set of clothing into another the text would read "transform her current garments". Hope that helps.


Hi Chris
Can you update the artwork for this flipmat yet?
Thanks
Tim


James Jacobs wrote:
Rysky wrote:
It is mentioned that Nocticula and Socothbenoth are siblings, were they siblings when they were mortals or did it occur after they became demons? And now would the second happen? Larvae Litters?
They were not siblings before they became demons. As to how this happened... they were both born from the same mother. We have not revealed who that mother was yet... but chances are VERY GOOD that it was Lamashtu.

Hi James

Given that Nurgal is also alleged to be a half brother of Socothbenoth, would i be correct to assume his mother is Lamashtu, in which case he is presumably also a half brother of Nocticula?


6 people marked this as a favorite.

This sounds like a really useful system and one which could well be transferable to other hierarchical societies - I am thinking drow cities for example. A really useful addition to the rule set for those who enjoy roleplaying and sociela intrigue. Thanks so much.


Hi James, so sad to hear that Joe Dever (author of the Lone Wolf books) has died - were you a fan?


James Jacobs wrote:
Timothy Ferdinand wrote:

Hi James,

On pg 395 of the new release "curse of the crimson throne" updated version, I noticed some new wording not in the original part 6 "crown of fangs"! It states in the section on continuing the campaign that "Runelord Sorshen is an incredibly dangerous foes, one of the most powerful wizards to have ever ruled on Golarion, and facing her might require heroes of mythic power. In fact, she may feature in a prominent role in an upcoming Pathfinder product, so if you'd rather hold off on the return of the Runelord of Lust in your game until then, using her vampiric minions......"

So does this mean that Paizo are preparing some new module or adventure path involving the mythic rules and Sorshen and if so will you give any further details - like when we might look forward to seeing this?

Very excited by the prospect

Tim

Interesting tidbit, eh? All I have to say about that at this point is what I put in print there on page 395. Make of it as you will.

you tease, you!


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Purple Dragon Knight wrote:
Timothy Ferdinand wrote:
On pg 395 of the new release "curse of the crimson throne" updated version,
How the heck did he get that book so soon? :P O_O O_x

He paid for it and the nice folks at Paizo delivered it with their usual efficiency - its not far from Seattle to the UK!! That's how :o)


LOVE THE FACT THEY HAVE INCLUDED RULES FOR UNCHAINED SUMMONER KYTON EIDOLONS!

ALSO INTRIGUED BY THE REFERENCE ON PG395 TO SORSHEN APPEARING IN A MAJOR ROLE IN AN UPCOMING PAIZO PRODUCT AND THE HINT IT MAY INVOLVE THE MYTHIC RULES


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Hi James,

On pg 395 of the new release "curse of the crimson throne" updated version, I noticed some new wording not in the original part 6 "crown of fangs"! It states in the section on continuing the campaign that "Runelord Sorshen is an incredibly dangerous foes, one of the most powerful wizards to have ever ruled on Golarion, and facing her might require heroes of mythic power. In fact, she may feature in a prominent role in an upcoming Pathfinder product, so if you'd rather hold off on the return of the Runelord of Lust in your game until then, using her vampiric minions......"

So does this mean that Paizo are preparing some new module or adventure path involving the mythic rules and Sorshen and if so will you give any further details - like when we might look forward to seeing this?

Very excited by the prospect

Tim


3 people marked this as a favorite.

I like this a lot because it hasn't been "spoiled" with a lot of dungeon decor that requires you to work it into the story. A relatively blank dungeon map allows the GM to go to work with no limitations imposed by strange coloured pools, or markings which imply a particular deity. More like this please. I'll definitely buy this one.


that's very helpful, thank you


1. Do NPC classes grant the character a favoured class bonus - for example would a ratfolk expert be able to take expert as his/her favoured class and either add one skill rank or one hit point?
2. Do NPC classes give the right to take full hit points for the first hit dice or is that just player classes?


Hey Chris, when do we get to see the final product image, description, and sample images! :o)


Hi James, I know this is more of a question for Wes, but he doesn't answer questions posted on his equivalent of this messageboard, so I thought you might have a view.

Devils are all about temptation and using temptation to corrupt souls. But of all the devils listed in the various Pathfinder products, there is no devil focused on the greatest temptation of them all.....no devil focused on sexual temptation......I know hell is misogynistic in the extreme, but I would have thought that Ardad Lili would have created some devils to seduce and make fools of men at the very least. Or have I misunderstood hell or missed the relevant devil type?

I'm up to my neck in Cheliax right now running the latest adventure path, but needed a "temptation devil" for a side adventure to bring the party up to the next level and couldn;t find one.

Apologies if this has been asked before

Tim


If, for example, a drow in Sekamina casts "Mount" what animal would appear? The spell specifies a horse or pony, but as neither has darkvision that seems wrong underground, however, it seems equally wrong that the spell is useless underground. Any thoughts? Is there an "undeground" version of the spell?


I am sure I recall seeing rules in a Paizo product for a magic item which is a covered wagon or cart or varisian caravan that is Larger on the inside, etc ( as in tiny hut or secure shelter) but after a fairly extensive search trhough my pdf library i cannot seem to locate it, can someone point me to the relevant publication?


Hi there, i have received email notification of shipment of my three subscription products this month : hells bright shadow, occult bestiary and dirty tactics tool box. The last two have appeared in pdf form in my downloads, but mysteriously, hells bright shadow has NOT appeared........could you check this out please? Thanks. Tim


Hi Wes, the infernal duke Lorcan has as his unholy symbol a "bloody bassinet". This may be a very stupid question, but does that mean a bassinet in the sense of a helmet or in the sense of a baby's cot.....given his link to vampires, i suppose it could be either. Thanks for your thoughts. Tim


2 people marked this as a favorite.

None of the above, its a conflagration!


Sara Marie wrote:
Timothy Ferdinand wrote:
Hi Sara-Marie, i received the shipping notice and pdf of my Occult Adventures on Tuesday, but have still not received the same for my other Paizo products (Hell Unleashed, etc) which are due this month. This has not happened with any of my previous orders even when shipped in more than one package. Should i be worried? Thanks and sorry to bother you.
Everything looks good with the other portion of the order, just hasn't reached the shipping desk yet.

Thanks, i'll just wait patiently then :0)


Hi Sara-Marie, i received the shipping notice and pdf of my Occult Adventures on Tuesday, but have still not received the same for my other Paizo products (Hell Unleashed, etc) which are due this month. This has not happened with any of my previous orders even when shipped in more than one package. Should i be worried? Thanks and sorry to bother you.


really pleased there is a cavern campsite, but why, oh why, did they design it with a 5 square wide opening which means it doesn;t link to any of the existing map pack caverns or map pack cave tunnels? surely it would make sense to have these map packs interconnect?


all good points, but as most eidolons get two attacks for free and usually add a third, you get three DR overcoming attacks, whilst the potion/oil only gives you one and then only once. The cold iron is a good one for use against demons, but alchemical silver is a lot more expensive and reduces the damage for slashing and piecing weapons. Silversheen is 250gp for a single use, so too expensive for 1st levellers. Overall, it does seem that a DR overcoming eidolon is quite useful (to say the least) espcially with an enlarge person spell. Compared to a druid's companion which is much more difficult to buff against DR - for example. A cold iron wielding summoner with a good aligned eidolon is going to get three/four attacks a round at first level against a demon with no DR enough to scare any low CR demon I suspect - no other class gets close......is all I'm saying :o)


James Jacobs wrote:


That is an excellent question for the Rules Forum and an FAQ.

Thanks James - I have posted it in rules Questions and tagged it as FAQ as you suggest, although it wasn't really intended as a rules question (I know we aren't supposed to use this forum for such things). My real question was to you as creative director, asking whether the change was intentional or just a by-product of the decision to make all eidolons specific outsider sub-types - ie did the team set out to give eidolons this extra power as part of the rebalancing or did they simply want eidolons to be specific sub-types to try to narrow the room for crazy builds and going down that route had the unintended consequence of giving eidolons the power to overcome opposing alignment DR? If that also falls under the heading if "inappropriate questions" for this forum, then apologies and please ignore me :o)


FLite wrote:

Correction:

It gains Outsider, Extraplanar, and alignment. It does not gain archon.

Not sure you are correct - page 29 of Unchained under the heading "Eidolon Subtypes" states: "the first time a summoner calls his eidolon he must decide on its subtype. The eidolons subtype determines...." The list of subtypes from which the summoner has to choose are Angel, Azata, etc. So I don't see how you can be choosing a sub-type if that is not in fact one of the eidolon's sub-types! It also gains the relevant alignment sub-types IN ADDITION as stated lower down the page. At least that is RAW as far as I read it. But lets not argue as its not really relevant to the issue of overcoming DR.


Well I can think of at least 6 devils which might be confronting 1st and 2nd level adventurers in Hell's Rebels all of which have DR/good:
lemure (CR1)
Nupperibo (CR1)
Imp (CR2)
Lesser Host Devil (Gaav) CR3
Accuser Devil (Zebub) (CR3)
Accomplice Devil (Hesperian) (CR4)
And from the Worldwound there are seven demons with DR/evil (dretch, quasit, cambion, abrikandilu, vermlek, hala and schir) all of which range in CR from 2-4. Also, bear in mind that the ability to overcome DR applies not just to the natural weapons, but to all weapons wielded by a good-subtype creature - so give the eidolon weapon proficiency with a big damage weapon and it overcomes DR/evil.
To me that is a big plus in any campaign involving outsiders.


1 person marked this as FAQ candidate.

The new "unchained" summoner (which is the only vfersion permitted in PFS) now has an eidolon which has a specific creature sub-type and specific alignment sub-types. For example the summoner might have an eidolon with the following type and subtype - "outsider (archon, good, lawful, extraplanar)". Now I may have misunderstood the pathfinder rules in a serious way, but as I understand it, any creature with the "good" sub-type deals damage which overcomes DR/good (and likewise for chaotic, evil and lawful subtypes). So my question is: was it the intention of the authors that under the new "unchained" rules, for example, an archon eidolon would be able to overcome DR/good and DR/lawful at 1st level? That seems to be a very big change in the context of a summoner's ability to take on outsiders of the opposing alignment - and here I'm thinking of the upcoming Hell's Rebels adventure path (or for that matter the Worldwound adventure path). As far as I can recall, at 1st level, only a Paladin would have the ability to overcome DR/good - and then only once per day with his smite evil ability. Most spells which allow weapons to overcome DR are 2nd level or higher (ie only available to characters of 3rd/4th level or higher).


Hi James
A few questions about the drow:
1. Why are they not more active in the Worldwound? The drow city of Far Parathra is beneath the Worldwound, but they don’t seem to play any role in what’s going on there – as demon worshippers, that seems odd to me.
2. Given the location of Zirnakaynin beneath Fangwood, do the drow (particularly House Udrinor – followers of Cyth-V’sug) have any involvement with the twisted dryad Arlantia and the blight she is spreading in the heart of that forest?
3. Do the drow have any involvement with Treerazer in the Tanglebriar – he would seem a natural ally in the drow’s war with the surface elves?
4. Apart from drow activity in Celwynvian in the Mierani Forest in northern Varisia, are there any other locations in Avistan, or (less likely I guess) Garund, where the drow are active on the surface? If not, why?


Hi James! A quick question concerning "unchained" (which is a great book by the way). The new "unchained" summoner now has an eidolon which has a specific creature sub-type and specific alignment sub-types. For example the summoner might have an eidolon with the following type and subtyoe - "outsider (archon, good, lawful, extraplanar)". Now I may have misunderstood the pathfinder rules in a serious way, but as I understand it, any creature with the "good" sub-type deals damage which overcomes DR/good (and likewise for chaotic, evil and lawful subtypes). So my question is: was it the intention of the authors that under the new "unchained" rules, for example, an archon eidolon would be able to overcome DR/good and DR/lawful at 1st level? That seems to be a very big change in the context of a summoner's ability to take on outsiders of the opposing alignment - and here I'm thinking of the upcoming Hell's Rebels adventure path (or for that matter the Worldwound adventure path). As far as I can recall, at 1st level, only a Paladin would have the ability to overcome DR/good - and then only once per day with his smite evil ability. Most spells which allow weapons to overcome DR are 2nd level or higher (ie only available to characters of 3rd/4th level or higher.


Hope they include an underground cavern campsite for my Darlands campaign


Hi Sara Marie
I don't seem to have had my authorisation email yesterday, is that because order spawning is still ongoing, or did mine get missed - perhaps because i added a new subscription this month?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Great blog article Mark, really helpful - I'll have a print out at the table for future "debates" on those issues!! Thanks


1 person marked this as a favorite.

If the cities detailed are all ports, i see real use in this book for anyone running a ship based campaign.....the chance to set up new trade routes would make for many options as a GM and lots of fun for players - must remember to ban my players from buying or reading this one! Really looking forward to this


James Jacobs wrote:
Thraug wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
Branding Opportunity wrote:
P. 43 notes that
Quote:
Blackstrand (pop. 4,790): The closest major city to Zirnakaynin ...
However, looking at map of Sekamina on p. 38 shows that the drow city of Giratayn is a lot closer and a lot bigger. Is this a text vs. map communications issue or am I not seeing something?
This is, I suspect, a map error where the tags for Giratayn and Blackstrand were exchanged.
Was this verified? i plan on using Blackstrand as a site. :)
Yup. Verified that they're switched. But whatever you go with in your game is the actual right answer, of course!

Hi James, in Dungeons of Golarion, it states that the drow outpost in Black Siren Citadel is loyal to Blackstrand, which would put Blackstrand under the Asphodell mountains in north west Andoran. That is where it is shown in the map on page 38 of Into the Darkness, so does that mean its the text on page 43 of Into the Darklands (in the sidebar) which we need to switch - I presume it does, so the map is correct and the sidebar is where the mix up happened? Thanks


Kvantum wrote:
Timothy Ferdinand wrote:

Hey, thanks for that "inside info" :o). If you happen to be able to speak to the people in charge of such things at Paizo, do you think you could suggest to them that they (1) produce a free download with a list of the existing archetypes that work for the unchained summoner (and the other new unchained classes) and (2) perhaps also produce a free download with updates/reworkings for those archetypes that don't?

Its pretty obvious to me that the senior staff at Paizo really want to abandon the old APG summoner in gffavour of the new unchained summoner - and to some extent I can sympathise with this as the old version is very unweildy for GMs and also overpowered (IMHO) compared to some other classes. But if that is the plan, then they need to give us the archetypes for the new unchained summoner to help that process.

Just saying..........

I don't think it's all that hard to figure out. "Does Archetype X alter the mechanics underlying the Eidolon?" If yes, then X is not a good fit as written for the Unchained Summoner. If no, then talk to your GM.

My best guess would really only rule out Broodmaster, First Worlder, and Synthesist, along with the Heroes of the Wild's Wild Caller. I would think the other existing archetypes would be fairly usable. First Worlder and Wild Caller would work if Fey and Plant were each defined along the lines of all of the Unchained Summoner's eidolon subtypes.

Not sure you are right about the broodmaster, as i think you'd just split the base evolutions between the two small eidolons and then apply the rules as you would for the APG summoner, but i could be wrong. I definitely agree that the First Worlder won't work with unchained. Not sure abiut the shadow caller.


Hey, thanks for that "inside info" :o). If you happen to be able to speak to the people in charge of such things at Paizo, do you think you could suggest to them that they (1) produce a free download with a list of the existing archetypes that work for the unchained summoner (and the other new unchained classes) and (2) perhaps also produce a free download with updates/reworkings for those archetypes that don't?

Its pretty obvious to me that the senior staff at Paizo really want to abandon the old APG summoner in gffavour of the new unchained summoner - and to some extent I can sympathise with this as the old version is very unweildy for GMs and also overpowered (IMHO) compared to some other classes. But if that is the plan, then they need to give us the archetypes for the new unchained summoner to help that process.

Just saying..........


If you check out the new Heroes of the Wild player companion, you'll see that it includes a new summoner archtype - the wild caller - this allows the summoner to call a plant eidolon with one of four base forms, BUT It also allows the summoner to vary the form which appears in different terrains, so you can have a tree version with one set of base evolutions in the forest and a fungus form with another set of base evolutions underground. Sadly, as this changes the base form of the eidolon, it will (I assume) not be eligible for PFS but it does get close to your idea of having multiple eidolons only one of which can be summoned at a time. I actually really like this new archtype, but i'm not sure yet if it works with the unchained summoner........in that sense, i really think paizo needs to specify which archtypes already published work with the new unchained summoner, as i for one am a bit confused......and i'm a fan of the limits imposed by the unchqined summoner (being both a GM and a player)

1 to 50 of 143 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>