Would a Warpriest variation be a tad more viable than an Inquisitor? Paladins to me always seemed lawful because they had behavior guidelines. The paly already gets the dieific weapon which to me always stood out as the main Warpriest thing...
I like resonance for the most part. It helps keep the casters a tad more in check & gives Clerics a reason to heal outside of wands.
I am concerned about the Alchemist needing it for class features. It feels like a bit of a struggle like they are always in need of just a few more points to be viable.
Dwarves get a bit kneecapped too in a weird way, you'd think they would be good at manipulating items as a race of legendary smiths but it is still manageable later in the game so not a huge issue there.
A series of questions for people who like the new game and general direction paizo's team is taking it. But, before that I want people to give an honest answer without interference, so no judgement please. Likewise I'm mainly going to be viewing peoples responses, so I'm not going commenting on anything unless people need clarification on a question. Also, the reason I'm asking is because I don't like the direction the new game is going. Despite that I'm just curious as to what people like about and where they might be coming from. I want less drama and more understanding, so here we go.
1. Do you currently like pathfinder 1e? (I know it sounds loaded, but please bare with me.)
2. Did you once like pathfinder 1e but now find it troublesome? (feel free to give details.)
3. Do you like 4th or 5th edition D&D? (Also sounds loaded but again no judgments)
4. Which are you looking for class balance, smoother high level play, more options, or even all of those things? (Small edit: these weren't meant to be mutually excursive, I just want the gist of what you're looking for, feel free to add additional thoughts/desires as well.)
5. How do you feel about making the game more accessible in general?
6. Are you willing to give up on accessibility if you can still gain all of the benefits listed in question 4?
7. Would you be willing to play an alternative rules system then what we have been presented? (A different version of pathfinder 2nd edition if you will).
8. And if you said yes to the above question what would you like to see in that theoretical game? (Most of you will see what I'm doing here, I'm finding common ground)
1) Yes with minor gripes (c/MD)
2) Some of the rules needed to keep older classes on par with those introduced in Advanced Players Guide & beyond are spread out over multiple books (fighter & rogue mostly) & the revamping of Summoner as well as drastic reediting of a couple of the splat book classes (shifter)
3) 4th ed at first yes but as more books came out everything blended together into one big pile of blah, 5th I enjoy but the options still feel kind of limiting.
4) Class & high level game balance are my main concerns with going from 1e to 2e.
5) I'm cool with it.
6) No
7) So long as those options were also play tested yes
8) I think what is presented is done pretty well, aside from minor gripes about certain Marshall feats (especially style fleets) being locked behind a specific class, some spells feeling blah, the alchemist needing more resonance, the ranger feeling lack luster, & ancestry feats seeming weirdly placed during leveling I'm enjoying the system. Unsure what can be productively improved upon beyond minor tweaks.
Not terribly excited at the way the ranger is being handled
It feels incomplete somehow
It seems to force a focus on combat, companion or snares but you pretty much have to neglect the rest outright
They get snares instead of magic but those come online late :( 4 to start & 8 for combat viability I was all for this change, as I tended to play a trapper ranger, it just isn't popping
I have been spoiled by combat options available in pf1 so the few bonuses to crossbows & twf just seem meh compared to a set of feats free for almost any style you could want once you factored in ones for worshipers of specific gods (I know this gripes on me like I said spoiled)
The additional animal companion stuff is neat, stacking with hunted target for bonuses is nice
The situational bonuses are gone but I mostly used them for background story rather than a real combat mechanism
As a ranger player since 3.0 I just feel underwhelmed
The fighter, rogue, & monk all felt like they got a bit buffed but the ranger just feels less... even when compared to the DnD 5.0 ranger
I found 3 Shaman archetypes that trade out familiars for something else.
Name Keeper goes the bonded object route plus some other random goodies that are open to a various builds.
http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/hybrid-classes/shaman/archetypes/paizo-sham an-archetypes/name-keeper-shaman-archetype
Speaker of the Past swaps in some limited Oracle options. This seems to have a very specific idea in mind for it which may be limiting.
http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/hybrid-classes/shaman/archetypes/paizo-sham an-archetypes/speaker-for-the-past
True Silvered Throne goes the Spell book route. This may need some reflavoring but still allows for customization.
http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/hybrid-classes/shaman/archetypes/paizo-sham an-archetypes/true-silvered-throne-shaman-archetype
The Gravewalker witch gets a spell poppet that is similar to a familiar without actually being one. It could work for you. Possessed doll made of dead parts would be great as a vessel for various disembodied outsiders. http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/base-classes/witch/archetypes/paizo-witch-a rchetypes/gravewalker/
Agathiel (Vigilante Archetype) is a sneaky shifting class from level 1 that allows you to keep your form for quite a bit. It does come with some alignment restrictions & is a tad weak for a melee class but still seems neat.
Top 10
1) Cleric: I naturally gravitate toward them, easy to build.
2) Ninja: "Magic" rogue.
3) Oracle: Easier to build less MAD Cleric.
4) Ranger: enough bonus feats to be good in melee, decent spells & a pet :)
5) Slayer: Interesting marshal, gets a good mix of selections.
6) Druid: Easy to build flavorful, wild shape.
7) Arcanist: Like that there are so many options for a caster.
8) Hunter: Pet & tons of potential builds, allow me to use team work feats effectively no matter the group.
9) Unchained Rogue: A step in the right direction.
10) Honestly after unchained rogue everything hits Meh status for me. I don't love 'em but don't hate 'em either.
Bottom 10
1) Summoner: Too much to keep track of with evolutions, I have trouble remembering all the options, spell list kinda broke but that has been fixed with Unchained.
2) Cavalier: Not a fan of mounts.
3) Samurai: See Cavalier.
4) Wizard: Over-powered, lacking in build options that aren't spells
5) Paladin: though fixed with archetypes I don't like mounts or alignment restrictions.
6) Anti-Paladin: See Paladin.
7) Monk: alignment restrictions, MAD
8) Sklad: its weird that it doesn't work well with Barbarians
9) Medium: have yet to play a game in which a haunt exists making them less useful then they could be.
10) Alchemist: I want to like it but you have to really customize or sacrifice to get an interesting build.
I've made some interesting Kobolds & Aasamirs, don't have much experience with any other uncommon races. I've theory crafted with several of the genie-kin but never got to see in action. I do enjoy the crunch of Samsarins, Changelings, Dhamphirs, & Wayangs.
I've played with 4 groups, 2 of which had 1 female player, 1 had 2.
I have noticed that the male players tend to be more leadership ended with the females just following along. Especially in the beginning when everyone is just developing/learning their characters. I try as a GM to get each players input on situations & strategies, especially outside of combat. I find that it provides a much more pleasant experience for everyone.
In one game it really allowed our Ranger (Lisa) to shine after our orc sorcerer (who had a chip on his shoulder & drinking problem) destroyed the artifact needed to weaken the big bad & our fighter (she had amazing stats) managed to critical fumble almost every attack then got decapitated. Prior to this the orc was in charge. Lisa managed to tame a wild dire badger to join the party & convince rescued captives to transport the fighters body so she could be properly laid to rest. Her & the drow druid also came up with inventive uses for his treant companion.
A class all about maintaining the balance between good and evil law and chaos ? could such a class even function or would the paradoxical decision required drive most True Neutral Paladins Insane ?
with "Smite Other" ;) anything outside of a true neutral is fair game for balancing hehehe.
Or is a True Neutral Paladin just another name for an existing class ? if so which class would you consider to be a True Neutral Paladin if such a thing can even exist.
From 3.5 Dragon magazine #110 there is an article "Champions of the Divine Paladins of other alignments" by none other than James Jacobs which has a true neutral pally known as the Incarnate.
Instead of detect magic they can detect creatures with an alignment subtype.
they get some basic elemental attack abilities rather than healing
they get to smite any extreme alignment
they can rebuke outsiders
they get an elemental companion rather than a mount
they get commune with nature as a spell like ability
& they get a more Druid like spell list
Osteokinesis being able to control ones bones
could throw bone shards, make weapons, wrap themselves in the bone etc.
Ex
Marrow from X-men
Kimimaro from Naruto
At higher levels you will need wounding & penetrating trap so you can bypass damage reduction. I had issues with the archetype until after they were released, mostly because of the cost of special arrows.
Cha is only necessary for your wild empathy &/or handle animal checks so it could be dumped if you choose to bond with your party instead.
If you are switch hitting or ranged focused I'd go for vital strike, power attack is more for your 2 handed melee weapon builds.
You can pour certain alchemical items on your weapons, alchemical silver comes to mind.
Personally I enjoy the Trapper archetype, once you can attach the traps to your ranged attacks it becomes really fun.
Granted many of the more interesting traps are from later books (champions of balance, ranged tactics toolbox, magical marketplace) but they are well balanced & there are only 30 or so of them anyway. TrAps are dependent on Wisdom though so you may want to keep at least 12 in it.
Archetypes while not perfect do a gteat job of opening up otherwise unavailable concepts (outside of homebrew). I find them more agreeable than Prestige Classes.
Alternate racial traits & options help open up stuff too. It is easy to come up with a relatively balanced sub-race without starting from scratch.
The sheer number of spells, feats & traits almost guarantees that you always have an option for any setting or concept.
The scope of Galorian is great in it's variety of cultures and topography.
I enjoy the way skills were simplified from 3.0.
I like CMB & CMD a hell of alot better than 3.5 rules.
I like that Drow got poison use.
I have enjoyed most of the new class concepts introduced, those I don't I have chalked up to not understanding how to build (original Summoner & fighter)
I like how Paizo takes just enough risk within reason to keep the game fresh Unchained offered a great boost fo my group.
The Spell Killer Inquisition is thematic.
With team work feats Shake It Off is a great way to improve your chances of surviving a save or suck spell.
Precise Strike can be great with the right team, Rogues, Slayers etc.
Instant Judgement & Extended Bane are always good choices. Judgement Surge can be a good choice also.
Disruptive Spell metamagic feat is another.
From there its a matter of personal strategy & weaponry
Being a tree hugging pagan I'd be a follower of the Green Faith so Gozreh would probably be my (primary) god of choice, with nods to Pharasma, Cernunnos, the elemental lords & the eldest.
There are 2 archetypes that would help out here, the first is goblin only fire bomber from the Advanced Races Guide, this tweeks your bombs, mutagen, poison resistance & discoveries allowing you to focus on fire damage. You can swap some discoveries out for a few feats here so that can be fairly handy.
The second option would be Grenadier. This
trades out Brew Potion & all your poison related abilities for a weapon proficency & huge boosts to your bombs. This one is found in the Pathfinder Society Feild Guide.
Unfortunately you cant use both at once.
With traits Firebug will give you a small boost & is themeatic.
As far as Discoveries Precise Bomb is a must with any bomb based build so you can safely chuck into melee. Explosive Bomb will boost your fire damage. Delayed Bomb allows you to set traps/landmines which can have some fun applications.
With Feats Point Blank Shot is needed for Precise Shot, from here you can go into Rapid Shot or Improved Precise Shot. If you go Rapid you will need Extra Bombs. Splash Weapon Mastery is good, counts as Far Shot feat if you want to build on long range.
If 3rd party rules & psionics are allowed Ultimate Psionics from Dreamscarred Press has the Aegis class which lets you create ectoplasmic custom body armor that has a ton of interesting options.
Occult Adventures has a couple options also. The Battle Host lets you bond with & cast spells through armor.
The Ectoplasmatist Spiritualist archetype allows you to create armor &/or weapons instead of having a spirit. You have to wait til 4th lvl to get armor though.
Yes these would all need some minor reflavoring (nanites instead of ectoplasim) but still...
Drizzt used two weapons and had an intelligent animal as a magic item, not a class ability. The rest of his abilities were mostly racial based (whatever stealth he had, etc).
Honestly, I felt he was better represented as a Fighter, considering how descriptive his training and combat technique was.
Actually, now that I think about it, I seem to recall an rpg-lite-adventure game for xbox or something that had Drizzt as an unlockable playable character. Think it was a Baldur's Gate adventure game (diablo style vs the original RPG-focused versions on PC).
They had him listed as a Fighter, or at least gave him fighter-like advancement.
Baldur s Gate: Dark Alliance I & II
They gave him some spells, Repulsion & Icey Sphere but yeah he seems like a Fighter with a dip of Ranger.
Heroes of Horror from 3.5 had a d6 divine caster named the Archivist. He was a prepared caster who could use both Cleric & Druid spells & kept a prayer book simular to the Wizards spell book. He also got some nice bonuses to knowledge skills. & enough skill points to make a decent monkey. One of my favorite classes.
D6
Skills: 4+Int/lvl
1/2 Bab
Good Will & Fort saves
All simple weapons
Light & Medium armor
No Shields
Scribe Scroll as a bonus feat
Int as the primary casting stat
9 levels of spells
Class Skills: Craft, Diplomacy, Heal, Linguistics, All Knowledge, Perception, Profession, & Spellcraft
If you are willing to sacrifice a feat Amateur Investigator adds to the skill monkey-ness of it all allowing you to add 1d6 to Linguistics, Spellcraft & any Knowledge skills you are trained in.
In what way are you looking to rogue out? Both the Ranger & Slayer have d10 hp, 6+Int skills, but miss out on having Disable Device as a defult class skill.
The Urban Ranger archetype adds Disable Device & Knowledge (local) to your class skills but reflavors most of your abilities
The Trapper Ranger archetype also adds Disable Device & gives some nifty trap related options (you can shoot a trapped arrow) in exchange for spells
The Skirmisher Ranger archetype gives some hunters tricks which are simular to rogue talents, this also swaps out spells though
The Slayer has some great potential, he's more focused on messing up 1 enemy at a time than the Ranger (very assassin). They can choose trap finding, Ranger Combat style feats & favoured terrain with his talents. Later they can access some Ninja Talents.
As both a GM & a player I'm going to go at this one class at a time & try to give an opinion on both sides.
Barbarian: It all comes down to the math here. My players are casual and don't always keep track of things like I feel they should but I let them focus more on the Role they want to play so if I have to keep tabs on what they are doing because they got too into being the badass they wanted to a simple pool of temporary Hp is more manageable than keeping track of multiple seperate stat increases.
As a player, I don't see much difference between them. The math does makes turns go quicker.
Monk: The GM side could not care less about it.
The player in me likes the open options & the fact that the new monk is viable through all 20 levels without an archetype & is slightly less dependant on uber high stats in everything.
Rogue: As a GM it's good to see the rogue having its own place again. Last couple core rogues that were ran with my group ended up dead before they had a chance to shine. Yes you could go a little more specialized with the Ninja, Slayer Investigator or Bard but having a true Rogue to fill out the party again is nice.
As a player its nice to be able to take back some ground as both a skill specialist & a melee assassin.
Summoner: As a GM this class was monstrous, even when not optimized it could hold it's own in an encounter, The spell list was weird, & it forced higher level encounters on the party. Now with some reigning in it seems more balanced all around though I have yet to see it in action.
As a player I hate losing options & the limits on the eilidon don't exactly have me jumping for joy but due to my GM experience I get why it was done.
I can see how the Monk can be interpreted that way. Don't have much experience with the Brawler but a quick comparison does show some overlap.
The new Barbarian was easier for my players to get down. I'm fairly certain the DPS is less but it saves a lot of time, math, questions & accidental death. The rage powers seemed to get a tad better.
Honestly if you are looking for a melee buff I might suggest Inner Sea Combat for some great variety (rangers especially).
If you really want tip the scales though Pathfinder Unchained has upgraded Monks & Rogues & Tweaked the Barbarian.
It introduces a stamina system to give your melee feats more umph.
They simplified/nerfed the Summoner & also included a few tweeked sub-systems for casters to slow their power curve a tad.
One of my players used the Fire Gods Blessing feat (heal hp for fire damage you do to enemy) for his half-orc sorcerer, worked out pretty well at low-mid levels. That's probably sub optimal but it kept him alive & helped out our Druid. (The Druid was the party healer in this case BC new players got overwhelmed by cleric options) Don't seem to have notes on his bloodline... It may have been Orc.
As discussed in other threads the Unchained Monk has some archetype compatibility issues.
In order for my players to keep their current characters rather than rebuild from scratch would letting them use the Qingong Monks trade out to get access to the Unchained Monk Ki Powers be fair?
They don't want to lose that Will save.
Thoughts?
I was wondering if with the counterfeit mage archetype would be good with the new unchained rogue setup? I don't want to by the book yet unless this would work.
It works just fine, the abilities Counterfeit Mage replaces are still included in the Unchained Rouge.
Not sure if its been pounted out already but the Arcanist, Bloodrager, Brawler, Hunter, Investigator, Ranger, Shaman, Sklad, Slayer, Sorcerer, Swashbuckler, Witch & Wizard have messed up Bab on their respective tables. The PDFs have been a great help.
I enjoy a ranged trapper ranger kobold build, go cross bow & you don't have to worry about the penalty to strength you would get with a composite bow. Kobold Sniper feat works pretty awesome with this also. There is an old 3.5 article called Kobolds: Playing To Their Strengths that add some minor buffs to the race that my group use for their players (natural weapons, sleight build, weapon proficiency with picks) & a couple more cross bow choices. Classic Monsters Revisited also has minor buffs based on colour that are paizo official (red scaled fire based sorcerer is pretty awesome).
So along the lines of the spell like abilities can you choose to cast darkness instead of deeper darkness if you take the noble feats or are you stuck with it? The sorcerer is the only person in the party with blindscence, all other party members have dark vision which deeper negates.
Not to be defensive, but I'm not sure what information you'd like to see come out.
With only a few exceptions, all Ultimate Psionics Kickstarter backers at the $50 and $100 tiers have had their books shipped (and those remaining have been contacted because we need their address). Most of the preorders have shipped or will shipped this week.
I was pretty open that they're shipping straight from the printer, as if I got them sent to me and then sent them off myself, it would take even longer. The problem is that with so many posts, threads, and the like, that information seems to get missed by more than actually see it. And by shipping in this fashion, it is costing us money that we did not expect to pay on extra shipping costs, as we had set up our reward levels expecting everything to ship together. Instead, I'm shipping out hardcovers now while the rest of the rewards are still in production, incurring additional shipping charges in the interest of getting people their books as quickly as possible. I had asked our printer about batch order processing to do it all as one big shotgun blast, but they were unwilling to set that up, so I enter each order by hand, a time-consuming and tedious process. (Note, I've been writing this post while waiting for the page to reload while getting more books shipping.)
The situation is that I'm single-handedly handling fulfillment shipping out hundreds of copies of Ultimate Psionics. That's not even factoring in the other portions of the Ultimate Psionics Kickstarter that also have to ship out and that I'll also be handling. And the Miniatures that I'm handling.
This is not to complain - I willingly took on these tasks and have had hundreds of books shipped and have personally packed and shipped dozens of miniatures. But the fact is that for MOST of these orders, our software doesn't have a way to automatically send out updates. Backers of the Miniatures project are the exception, as they're on our new store software that I'm still working to enhance...
I for one appreciate all the hard work Jeremy, the quality of the books you have released has been excellent & judging by the free PDF I got with my pre-order Ultimate seems the cream of the crop! The effort & passion your whole group has put into bringing psonics into Pathfinder in a fair & balanced way is nothing short of amazing especially for a small business! I am sure many others feel the same as I do, Thank you.
You could find "useless" magic items you could drain or items that were good at the beginning of the game that become kinda meh later or situational items for this to work. A wand, scroll, or staff that casts feather fall, water breathing, sleep, owls wisdom etc. they can be awesome in the right situations but most of the time they would be useless. The DM could work with you allowing you to find said items in treasure cashes.
I tried to make a few home brew Changeling traits myself tell me what you think:
*Hidden Self (Blood Hag): +4 racial bonus to disguise checks to look like your fathers race.
*Foggy Vision (Mute Hag): +1 racial bonus vs. gaze attacks, visual effects, illusions, & other attack forms that rely on sight.
*Restless Sleep (Night Hag): The changeling gains a +2 racial bonus on saving throws against sleep spells & effects.
Winter Casting (Winter Hag): The changeling casts all spells with the [cold] descriptor at +1 caster level. (thanks to Berselius)
I was making up a character for Rise of the Runelords and I saw a bit about House Indros being descended from one of the founders of Magnimar and being minor enough it'd even make sense for one of them to go off to become an adventurer for cash and prestige.
Looking at what I could find on the founder of the house, though, it seems he was an Arodenite who converted to the Empyreal Lords, seemingly as a whole, which I was fairly sure you couldn't actually do, and got me onto the subject.
Since having Aroden as a former patron would probably mean that even a Paladin wouldn't have had the temperament that Ragathiel wants, for example, especially if they rejected Iomedae.
It's become argued elsewhere that they are or should count as ammunition, specifically magical ammunition, and I was curious whether there was any basis for making that argument beyond that individual's sense of how the game should be.
So any relevant rules or FAQs or errata I might have missed somewhere or another that might possibly address this sort of thing?
If there is anything, would any of it apply to the spell Silver Darts as well, since it's a cone effect of things that count as silver weapons?
So I've got about 60 days of downtime during a timeskip and about 55K that can be invested into the process.
So far I'm aware of Animated Objects, Soulbound Mannequins, Waxwork Creatures, and Trompe L'oeil as potential options, and I'm sure that there's some form of golem that I've got a high enough level/CL to make.
Not really sure what to go with specifically, though, as even when it comes to Waxwork Creatures, I'm not sure what to use as the base creature.
I think I mostly want something that can act as a bodyguard and still hit often enough and hard enough to be relevant. So definitely no larger than Large size, probably actually showing preference towards Medium-sized options.
Table issues from having too many minions on the field at once have already been addressed, so nothing to worry about there.
If not, is there a reason why this has never occurred to anyone?
Aside from people wanting to kill them on sight, the difficulties of deprogramming goblins of their barbaric and insane culture or raising them by hand depending upon their age, and the logistical difficulties of their metabolisms, what barriers would there be in terms of their nature rather than their categorically evil nurture?
Trample states: Trample (Ex) As a full-round action, a creature with the trample ability can attempt to overrun any creature that is at least one size category smaller than itself. This works just like the overrun combat maneuver, but the trampling creature does not need to make a check, it merely has to move over opponents in its path. Targets of a trample take an amount of damage equal to the trampling creature's slam damage + 1-1/2 times its Str modifier. Targets of a trample can make an attack of opportunity, but at a –4 penalty. If targets forgo an attack of opportunity, they can attempt to avoid the trampling creature and receive a Reflex save to take half damage. The save DC against a creature's trample attack is 10 + 1/2 creature's HD + creature's Str modifier (the exact DC is given in the creature's descriptive text). A trampling creature can only deal trampling damage to each target once per round, no matter how many times its movement takes it over a target creature.
Overrun states: As a standard action, taken during your move or as part of a charge, you can attempt to overrun your target, moving through its square. You can only overrun an opponent who is no more than one size category larger than you. If you do not have the Improved Overrun feat, or a similar ability, initiating an overrun provokes an attack of opportunity from the target of your maneuver. If your overrun attempt fails, you stop in the space directly in front of the opponent, or the nearest open space in front of the creature if there are other creatures occupying that space.
When you attempt to overrun a target, it can choose to avoid you, allowing you to pass through its square without requiring an attack. If your target does not avoid you, make a combat maneuver check as normal. If your maneuver is successful, you move through the target's space. If your attack exceeds your opponent's CMD by 5 or more, you move through the target's space and the target is knocked prone. If the target has more than two legs, add +2 to the DC of the combat maneuver attack roll for each additional leg it has.
Currently what's under contention is whether a creature can simply chose to avoid another creature's Trample or a Stampede of several creatures due to inheriting rules text from Overrun, making the ability to make a reflex save for half damage redundant and pointless.
So I was doing some research for Rise of the Runelords and was reading about the Varisian ethnicity and found that, surprisingly, one of their commonly worshiped deities was Abadar, of all gods.
So I thought to myself that maybe this was a reflection of how they're the ethnic majority in Ustalav after driving out the Orcs and dominating/driving out the Kellids, but when I went to check the religions of Ustalav, there wasn't a peep about Abadar there.
Which leads me here.
What Varisians worship Abadar? Why do these groups worship him?
Where are they located? Are there some groups of settled Varisians around Magnimar and Korvosa that I'm not aware of that aren't Sczarni crime families? Are Varisian wanderers really given to worship the God of Civilization, when they aren't a part of it, merely existing on the fringes of it and trying to exploit it?
How do they worship him? Is there some kind of belief they have where they break or even go on full-on heretical in comparison with mainstream Abadarites?
Everything so far that I've read about Varisian culture and Abadar suggests that they do not mix well. So what, if anything, am I missing here?
"The creature is also treated as one level lower for the purpose of level-dependent variables (such as spellcasting) for each negative level possessed."
What does this mean?
So far I see two interpretations.
1. They count as a creature of X fewer HD/level for ALL effects, regardless of whether they are the source of the effect or the target of it or included in its AoE. Things like being targeted by Sleep or Blasphemy or Lesser Geas as well as their CL and spell durations.
2. They count as a creature of X fewer HD/level for determining the efficacy of effects that they generate, and only the effects that they generate. Things like their Caster Level, the Save DC for effects that scale off of HD like 10 + HD/2 + Ability Modifier.
Let's bring up some specific examples.
Example 1:
Let's say that there is a Level 9 Human Fighter. He dies. He is brought back to life with 2 permanent negative levels. Does Lesser Geas now work on him?
Example 2:
There is a level 6 Dwarf Cleric. She's hit by Enervation and gets 4 temporary negative levels. Would the Sleep Spell now be able to affect her?
Example 3:
There is a Bison. It acquires 2 negative levels. Is the DC of its Trample reduced from 20 to 19?
So I know there are a number of old noble families in West Crown something like 12 main houses with 2 or 3 cadet branches (or is there some other thing at play here with the subservient houses?).
I'm having trouble, however, figuring exactly how the nobility fit with the society and government of Cheliax. I want to play a scion of a noble house, but I feel I need to understand it better to fit the character in, let alone roleplay it.
Spoiler:
I don't really want to give the GM a huge hassle or risking him leaking spoilers, so I want to understand them as much as possible before I run the loose backstory by him, and to feel like I can even make one I have to feel like I somewhat understand what's going on here. I have checked with him and simply being from one of the houses is kosher, though I've yet to fully discuss whether I'll be able to handwave living expenses as part of that privilege or not.
I'm sort of in a toss-up between a Bard, a Magus with investment into social skills and spending arcana on things like charm person, an Inquisitor(can't find a deity that seems like it'd fit), or a Rogue of some stripe.
Imagine Ezio from the very beginning of Assassin's Creed 2, and that's pretty similar to the current picture I have of him. The only Inquisitor angle I can think of would necessitate getting an Inquisitor of Asmodeus that is basically more or less putting up this character as a facade OK'd. And if I'm going that far I might as well shoot for being part of Her Infernal Magestrix's Secret Service. That is to say, I find the character rather unlikely to be greenlit.
My initial understanding was that it was basically a unified, pseudo-Renaissance/Early Modern Period Italy under the control of an absolute monarch in a similar vein to the Sun King, but if that's all that was going on, the existence of nobles lingering in Westcrown doesn't make much sense.
As, if they were landed nobility that had just migrated there to be in attendance to the Dynasty that predated House Thrune's ascendancy, with no impetus to stay in the town and no desire to be fashionably in line with the diabolists in power, leaving aside, for a moment, just what they were doing during the civil war, shouldn't they have retreated in large part to their ancestral lands and legal powerbase?
And if they're not landed, what is the basis of their noble station in the first place? Are they all just descendants of wealthy notables who were awarded hereditary styles by the "ancien regime," and the Thrunes never bothered to update the law to withdraw the titles from the toothless holdouts?
Or are the nobles who are still there of much lesser station than I was thinking and "noble" is here taken to mean the patrician class that forms, and becomes largely hereditary, and rules the city whether it be via nepotistic appointments to the majority of public offices or by having the money and clout to afford enough education to ensure that they stay at the head of the local imperial bureaucracy. So the main difference between the nouveau riche merchant princes and the nobles is that the nobles have been on the scene longer and have been the de facto ruling class of the city through one means or another.
Because if that's the case then isn't 12 major houses a bit much? Or are the families that make up each house a lot smaller than I'm thinking? Even to the point where each individual house is actually more like a single nuclear family with its two generations of descendants.
Another idea I've started playing with to try to grok this was to compare more with the model of the Roman Senators. By my understanding, basically wealthy landowners who stayed close to the center of culture and acted as absentee landlords with a hierarchy of flunkies and children that checked up on and maintained their holdings. Since, after poking around here on the boards, it seems that Cheliax is supposed to have much more Latin/Roman flavor than Italian, though I haven't seen any inkling of that from scouring the non-Paizo boards internet or from what I've read of the description of Westcrown in the first book of the adventure path and in the player's guide.
But it still doesn't quite seem to fit with the rest of it, but that might be more because the reasons for the 12 families to stay in Westcrown, even if they were the landlords of most of the city's property, are left hazy either for DM reasons or because they'd spoil something in the adventure path.
And if they're titled nobility but basically control one aspect of trade or business or landlording or another, is there any sort of rough listing connecting the families to the aspects of Westcrown's economy they exert their influence overand derive their principle notability/wealth from?
TL;DR, can someone explain to me either the canon on chelaxian nobility or their take on extrapolating from canon tidbits?
Even just a different model to draw on for understanding, either from real life or fiction would be helpful. "Standard Fantasy" and "Court of Louis XIV" don't seem to be working for me.
