graystone's page

Except that the auditory trait has the extra complexity of the caster needing to be able to make the sound, thus it creates extra complications for the spell itself to have it or for the specific part about creatures making noise.

Actually, it's spellcasting that requires the caster to make noise as the spell doesn't have Subtle. "Casting a spell requires the caster to make gestures and utter incantations, so being unable to speak prevents spellcasting for most casters." So I'm not seeing anything lost because you might have to make noise after you just made noise. :P

I think it makes much more sense to remove all of the sensory traits from this spell, and perhaps illusions as a whole because the complexity of multiple senses interacting with each other and how that affects illusions is too complicated. If anything, the illusion tag should clarify all of this without the need for those extra tags.

Maybe? Maybe not. After some thought, I like those traits as I can, at a glance, tell what senses the illusions covers without even diving into the text.

Requiring an at-table edit to the statblock of a creature to use its specific abilities as written seems like an oversight to me? But Paizo can decide.

What edit? the ability works 100% with Strikes and gets a bonus if it happens to have a magic item that matches the ability. I'm not seeing any "at-table edit" needed. Worst case, it's an unused ribbon ability that doesn't take away from its use with Strikes at Sense range. the change to remaster is only the lose of using Touch of Idiocy with the ability.

Deimavigga (Apostate Devil) - Monster Core 2 pg 102-103

Looks like this devil wasn't fully checked through on remastering. Its Boundless Reach ability—allowing it to cast any of its touch-range spells "against any creature they can see directly or via magic"—has very limited use now as the deimavigga no longer has any touch spells!

Boundless Reach works on Strikes and would work on any touch spells they might gain access to from magic items. As such, it doesn't seem like an obvious error or oversight. Even in the pre-remaster, it only had a single default touch spell.

graystone wrote:

Yep, that thread goes over it with pretty much just Themetricsystem disagreeing. I stand that threads posts.

PS: by the way, you really mangled the link. As is, it's non-functional as you left the default link and just slapped on the new oneto the end of the default one.

I keep messing those links up.

I messed it up in other posts too.

It happens, the formating can get me too. I sometime wrongly attribute a quote when i copy/paste from multiple people. ;)

Yep, that thread goes over it with pretty much just Themetricsystem disagreeing. I stand that threads posts.

PS: by the way, you really mangled the link. As is, it's non-functional as you left the default link and just slapped on the new oneto the end of the default one.

Spellstriker staff actually has a shifting rune and so you would look at the shifting rune entry to see what a shifting rune does which tells you what remains when you activate it.

But, once again, it make NO mention of losing anything magical either for the item or the rune. As it's a specific weapon that can change its shape, it'd be logical to make a callout if using it would remove it's abilities, especially as the rune doesn't do so explicitly.

And as I argued before and have not been corrected by any rule the qualities of a staff are also being changed when the weapon changes its shape.

The WEAPON traits change, the Staff trait was not. The onus is on you to show something changes, as the base assumption is things don't change unless an explicit rule does so. So you haven't proved your theory and are using a Burden of Proof Fallacy (argumentum ad ignorantiam), where someone claims something exists and puts the onus on others to disprove it. It's shifting the burden of proving a rule [that the magic of staves mysteriously vanished when its shape changes] to others instead of actually proving that they do. Nothing about altering it's weapon properties infers that it's non-weapon properties changes: nothing says its Staff trait is removed or altered.

They are statistics of the item and now its a different item for a time.

It has different weapon stats: full stop. It in no way mentions anything else changing.

Just like the spystaff has to explicitly tell us it keeps its staff statistics even when it changes using its activation ability.

I don't think that's saying what you think it's saying. Note that it says the "The staff’s statistics don’t change" and not 'The Staff Trait don’t change.' This means you can change it into a Musical Instrument and it still counts as a staff weapon. What it does NOT say is that it keeps the Staff trait or that it retains it's magical abilities. You keep conflating staff and Staff: you can have a staff that isn't a Staff and you can have a Staff that isn't a staff.

Thing is the shifting rune description doesn't say you keep magical features of the items original form and there isn't a rule that tells us it should.

You that that backwards. It would need to tell you something is lost for it to happen: why do you think it vanishes without an explicit call out? it's like saying 'you lose your spell slots because you because someone cast Shrink on you'. There is as much rules to back that up as there is to say 'your staff loses magic because it changes to another weapon'. For there to be an effect in the game, there has to be a rule to back it up.

Shifting is explicitly describing its functions and makes no mention of other abilities: the fact that it doesn't go into things outside it's function doesn't point to anything but a narrow description of its effect: it HAS to mention runes and any precious material because those can change with its shape [a normally metal weapon can change into a normally wood weapon and runes can require a specific type of weapon to work on]. Nothing in shifting effects it's other magic, so its not mentioned.

EDIT: I also noticed that the Spellstriker Staff, the staff with Shifting in it, makes no mention of losing anything when shifted. You'd think that'd be an important call out if losing them was a stealth rule in the game.

Ok what I mean is the staff trait is a statistic of the item.

The shifting rune transforms the item to a different one. I am assuming all the statistics of the new item are adopted and all the statistics of the original are lost until it shifts back. That would include any traits it had, I dont see a reason why the staff trait should remain.
There is no mention about resitricting the statsitics of the item that are changeable to damage dice

Shifting is changing it's physical shape, not it's magic. The Staff Trait is tied to its magical properties, not its shape. Where did you get the idea that shape influences an items magic unless stated otherwise? I sure don't recall seeing that in any of the rule books.

For instance, if your Wand got turned into a dagger, can you point to a book and page where it says that it loses its magical powers and traits because of that? IMO, the effect changing something would have to explicitly state that it loses things or no lose happens.

[Free-Hand] is indeed a specific exception to holding rules here, going by the wording.

Quote:

This weapon doesn’t take up your hand

Yes, but it does NOT say it's not held in the hand, just that it doesn't take it up. Those are 2 different things. You, by definition, can not wield a weapon that isn't held and you also can't change a weapon using the Shifting rune to a weapon with a different Hands, which is defined as the number of hands it's held in. So, yeah, you're holding a gauntlet in your hand.

Remember, holding an item takes up your hand(s), and as you pointed out, wielding an item means holding it. [Free-Hand] specifies that you can use the [Free-Hand] weapon's hand to wield other objects, which implies that free-hand weapons don't actually take up a hand (on the grounds that mechanically, you can only hold one item per hand, so [Free-Hand] weapons must logically be treated as "not held" when worn but not wielded). And most significantly...

I remember holding NORMALLY takes up a hand, but free-hand gives an exception to taking up the hand, but it doesn't give an acception to holding. All being able to wield another weapon proves is that you can hold more than 1 weapon in a hand, which isn't even limited to free-hand weapons. For instance, you can wield a hand crossbow in the same hand as you wield a Bayonet.

(Most relevant parts italicised.)

The trait kinda explicitly states that free-hand weapons are worn and not actually wielded, but are treated as if they were wielded when your hand is otherwise unoccupied.

So, yeah, the trait kiiinda explicitly states that you don't hold [Free-Hand] weapons. It's not even a house rule or anything, it's flat-out stated in the trait description. ;P

All that implies is that it's talking about wielding something other than the free-hand weapon. Taking up the hand isn't the same as held by the hand or preventing the hand from holding something else. For instance read Nimble Shield:

"You are so used to wielding a shield that you can do so even while using the hand that’s holding it for other tasks that require the dexterity of a hand. The hand you use to wield a shield counts as a free hand for the purposes of the Interact action. You can also hold another object in this hand (but you still can’t use it to wield a weapon)."

As you can see, you can hold multiple objects at once in a single hand.

EDIT: actually, you could hold 3 things with nimble shield, your shield, a shield weapon [like a shield spike] and a held item, like a torch.

Right those specifically have the staff trait which makes them staves.

right, and so too would a staff shifted into another form. Nothing removes the staff trait from a staff in another form. The Staff trait has nothing to do with it's weapon stats.

How does a shifting rune handle weapons traits, do they stay the same?

How do you mean? there is no 'weapon' staff trait. The magic item trait is "Staff: This magic item holds spells of a particular theme and allows a spellcaster to cast additional spells by preparing the staff." Why would anything change there?

As to it as a weapon, that changes with the form. If your staff is currently in dagger form, it uses dagger weapon stats. The answer is exactly the same as the answer to any other weapon with a Shifting rune on it.

I am curious though. Why would anyone still allow a staff to operate as a staff if a shifting rune was activated and now its an axe or a spiked gauntlet or any other weapons.

Its no longer a staff at that point right?

Entertainer's Lute is a lute that is a staff. Pipes of Compulsion are pipes that are a staff. Trickster's Mandolin is a mandolin that is a staff. Seer's Flute is a flurt that's a staff. Drums of War are drums that are a staff. Bagpipes of Turmoil are bagpipes that are staves. Musket Staff of the Void and Musket Staff of Force are a musket that's a staff. Spy Staff can change into a handheld accessory but keeps the same stats. Spellstriker Staff has the Shifting rune.

Having a staff shape sure doesn't seem like a requirement to me.

graystone wrote:

Illusory Creature: "The image can't speak, but you can use your actions to speak through the creature, with the spell disguising your voice as appropriate. You might need to attempt a Deception or Performance check to mimic the creature, as determined by the GM. This is especially likely if you're trying to imitate a specific person and engage with someone that person knows." This is why it has Auditory.

Considering the mess of ambiguity and subjective adjudication that Immunity and complex effects causes, it would be really nice if the spell only tagged this particular piece of the spell's effect with the Auditory trait instead of the entire spell.

Otherwise there are going to be plenty of GMs who rule that if a creature is immune to Auditory effects, that none of the spell affects them.

I don't disagree. However, did you notice all of the traits? Auditory, Concentrate, Illusion, Manipulate, Olfactory, Visual. If you have a Dm that doesn't read and understand the spell, a creature that can't smell, hear and/or see is immune to the spell even if they can sense one of the other traits. So something with no sense of smell would be immune even if the spell never created any scents.

So, the spell should really move the sense Traits off the main spell and add them to the spell text for the individual effects.

EDIT: I will also note that the sense traits do say 'This applies only to [sound-based/olfactory/visual] parts of the effect, as determined by the GM.' So the trait already silos effects from the spell as a whole.

But does the caster have to be able to speak for the illusion to speak?

"you can use your actions to speak through the creature, with the spell disguising your voice as appropriate." Looks like Yes, you have to speak, else there would be no reason to disguise your voice. If you're making a voice not your own, there'd be no reason to disguise it.

Now there is the question if the casters voice can be heard while he speaks through the illusion. Unknown and up to the DM. IMO, he can be heard.

Look at Message: "You mouth words quietly, but instead of coming out of your mouth, they're transferred directly to the ears of the target." Note that the spell has Subtle, allowing it to be done stealthily, something Illusory Creature doesn't have. I'd expect something like what's in Message if the caster doesn't have to Speak.

Wouldn’t that be the linguistic trait, not the auditory? It seems like part of the problem here is that the auditory trait includes the need for the caster to be able to make the noise, where as the visual and olfactory traits don’t have that same requirement.

"You might need to attempt a Deception or Performance check to mimic the creature, as determined by the GM."

Lie has Auditory, Concentrate, Linguistic, Mental, and Secret. Performance Act is Auditory, Linguistic, and Visual. If anything, I'd say the spell should add Linguistic, not remove Auditory. The thing to remember is that there is no need to speak in an identifiable language, the requirement for Linguistic. They could grunt, clear their throat, click their tongue, ect that doesn't require a specific language but conveys their meaning and/or fits their character. Linguistic would be a nested optional Trait that is only needed if another nested optional Trait, Auditory, is used So I can't see removing Auditory. The vast majority of things with Linguistic also include Auditory and I'd argue that the few that don't, should.

But as previously noted, it seems like the auditory trait has been used in a confusing fashion with some spells like Illusory creature technically being useless against the deaf.

Illusory Creature has an option to speak through the illusion, hence the Auditory trait. It doesn't seem that confusing unless you just look at the traits and don't read through the whole spell. It could be cleared up a bit by moving the Auditory trait to the explanation of speaking through the illusion so it's clear it's dependent on using that feature.

Illusory Creature: "The image can't speak, but you can use your actions to speak through the creature, with the spell disguising your voice as appropriate. You might need to attempt a Deception or Performance check to mimic the creature, as determined by the GM. This is especially likely if you're trying to imitate a specific person and engage with someone that person knows." This is why it has Auditory.

Can a magus use Runic Impression on a staff to give the staff a property rune?

Staves: "They can be etched with fundamental runes but not property runes."

Runic Impression: "Your unarmed attacks or weapon gain the benefits of a weapon rune you choose when you cast this spell"

The spell only grants "the benefits of a weapon rune" and doesn't etch on a rune, so it looks like it works IMO. It DOES later go on about property runes maximums so maybe they intended it to put a rune on but it never actually does that.

In this case, wouldn't the correct solution be to just rule that using a staff requires you to hold it in one hand? If players want to make it a gauntlet, then all power to them! They just can't actually use it as a staff unless it's actually a staff.

Gauntlet has Hands listed as 1, so technically it uses as many hands as a dagger does. This would NEED to be the case to use Shifting to turn anything into a Gauntlet because the Effect is "The weapon takes the shape of another melee weapon that requires the same number of hands to wield" and "You’re wielding an item any time you’re holding it in the number of hands needed to use it effectively."

You can't rule you aren't holding a freehand weapon because otherwise you could never wield them.

Looking at the new dragonblood stuff in the Codex, and I'm curious if you can use natural weapons from other sources to enable feats? ie; if I'm a werecrocodile and grapple someone with my bite, can I benefit from Energize Bite or does it have to specifically be the dragonblood's heritage jaws? Same question can be applied to claws, tails, wings, etc.

Unless something calls for a specific attack, any of the required type will work. Energize Bite asks for a Jaw attack only so any Jaw attack works.

For an instance with requirements, look at Lizardfolk Envenom Fangs feat. It requires Iruxi Armaments even if they somehow got Fangs from someplace else, they still need the feat that grants unarmed attacks [though technically you could opt to not take Fang from Iruxi Armaments if you had Fang already and pick another unarmed attack].

Probably doesn't help that it looks like Archive of Nethys doesn't mention any of this.

It does include that text. Go to the Psychic class and look at the Key Terms right under Key Attributes and Hit Points. Under Amp, you'll see "you can't apply both an amp and a metamagic ability to a cantrip at the same time" in its text.

Focus spells are good!

Well SOME focus spells are good. Some are really, really bad and a lot more are just mediocre. There are focus spells that are more valuable for the extra focus point they give than the actual spell itself.

Is this correct?

Seems so. Assured Ritualist modifies a secondary check and Flexible Ritualist allows you to make one of those.

My takeaway is that Psychic Dedication needs to give Timber Sentinel.

Only if we can Amp it. ;)

i think cursebound status continues after a combat ends. So you go into the next encounter with whatever cursebound level you left at unless you lower it somehow inbetween.

So with the loop i described you could enter a boss fight at cursebound 4 and then decide how long to keep it up before consuming it all for the strong ability. Like maybe you want it at 4 for the scaling focus spell I suggested then next round consume your cursebound levels to unleash the powerful ability. Also you risk a bit too because your curse at level 4 can be dangerous, but you have a method to lower it too.
This conception of the oracle makes curse and mystery management at the adventuring day level across its multiple encounters.

It can continue but "You remain cursebound until you Refocus, which reduces your cursebound condition by 1 in addition to restoring a Focus Point." This means you aren't likely to walk into a fight with all of your focus points and cursebound 4 unless you aren't using focus spells which seems like a fairly big loss.

I don't want this.

Add me to the list too. They finally made an oracle with a curse that I don't mind interacting with so I'd rather not move it back to one I'd hate.

Again, if you set the DC of Tumble Through to Level Based DC or anything lower, then Tumbling through empty squares becomes one of the best things to do to gain Panache because you're rolling against an incredibly low DC and your penalty for failure is losing 5 feet of movement. Compared to the other ways to get Panache, this would be way too good.

Actually the best thing to roll is a performance check: it requires nothing but taking an action in combat. "When making a brief performance—one song, a quick dance, or a few jokes—you use the Perform action" and "Performing rarely has an impact on its own, but it might influence the DCs of subsequent Diplomacy checks against the observers, or even change their attitudes if the GM sees fit." A Standard DC seems fine for this as it's not specifically being rolled against anyone.

Secondly, Panache states "The GM might determine that a check to perform a particularly daring action, such as swinging on a chandelier or sliding down a drapery, can gain the bravado trait. These checks typically involve at least a single action and a non-trivial DC. So the Dc doesn't have to be as hard or harder that the saves of foes you'll face but non-trivial [several places like Hazard Experience lists trivial as -5 or more levels lower than the party]. So even a -4 Simple DC or better should be fine for gaining Panache.

Why are bucklers just wrist-shields? Bucklers are not wrist-shields. They're small, light, dueling shields. You still hold them in one hand. They should not be "free-hand" shields. If anything, they should just be a +1 AC shield with an agile shield bash (so as to ensure it still has a niche.) If they need more than that, then maybe they can shield bash and raise as a single action, but I think that'd be pushing it.

If you want to preserve the niche of a free-hand shield, fine. Just call it a wrist-shield or wrist-guard, not a buckler.

Traditional bucklers would be more likely weapons with the Parry trait.

IMO:
Buckler
Agile, Finesse, Parry, Shove
Damage 1d4 B; Bulk L
Hands 1
Type Melee; Category Simple; Group Brawling

The current buckler is closest to a lantern shield, a free hand shield. As such, you can always call it that if you want a real life free hand shield.

And you can't compare with attacking an empty space, there're completely different aim, mechanics and results. You can attack an empty space because it's written you can and there's even a rule how. Tumble through requires a creature for a check. If there isn't one I'm not sure even miming would work: miming walls works because they are very easy to imagine and stationary, but invisible creature could be everything. At the very least it's extremely hard difficulty to pull off :)

You totally can compare it. This is a world with invisible creatures, objects that are creatures [like animated objects], creatures that look like items [like mimics] ect. If you can dodge around an incorporeal creature that's in no way stopping you, it seems like an identical situation. And again, saying no means you can't try to move through actual invisible creatures or you telegraph which spaces they are in. You can Tumble Through an invisible enemies space when you know it's there so why would it be anymore difficult to try with an unknown one [the DC doesn't change vs an invisible one]? You still aren't getting precise senses.

You can attack an empty space because it's written you can and there's even a rule how.

It's a direct corollary: you have an ability that only targets a creature but it allowed an attempt vs space that may or may not have a creature in it compared with another ability that targets a creature. Tumble through a space that might have an invisible creatures space seems to be on more solid ground than ruling that you can tumble through an incorporeal creature.

Just do backflips.

It's essentially the same but my disagreement is that I can see actual cases where you will 100% want to tumble through spaces you think has a creature. That combined with your "attempts and checks matter, not effectiveness" makes me draw the conclusion that it should work in a world where it works vs a ghost: you do some fancy dodging and have the potential to lose movement [in a combat] if you fail the roll. If backflips gets the Bravado trait, how is it substantially different from Tumble Through when it's essentially the same mechanically?

No. That's not logical. You terribly over-stretch. There's a difference between a real creature and implied one.

It's a creature with no physical form. It offers NO resistance and requires NO effort to move past. It offer as much resistance as an successfully disbelieved illusion.

Secondly, I don't see why it would work differently than attacking a square as described under Undetected. "If you suspect there's a creature around, you can pick a square and attempt an attack." If you disallow this then you make it so you can never make it past undetected creatures.

So,IMO, it's a quite logical conclusion and well within reason. I don't see a logical reason you can an attack roll to attack an empty space but can't roll to tumble through an empty space.

Third, you yourself said "attempts and checks matter, not effectiveness." How if an attempt to avoid an invisible creature not an attempt even if it proves ineffective by guessing wrong on the space? IMO, it makes more sense than getting to roll vs a creature that doesn't have a physical form: that's sounds more like a "terribly over-stretch" going into 'bag or rats' territory. At least the Undetected rules have you make a roll, unlike moving though the space of an incorporeal creature. :P

graystone wrote:

I then answered his question about tumble through in the second part of my original post: ""A corporeal and an incorporeal creature can pass through one another, but they can’t end their movement in each other’s space." This answers it all: there is no check asked for with this movement."

Although I think they can still make a check if they want and get panache. As is in line with normal gameplay for Swashbuckler: attempts and checks matter, not effectiveness. But there still should be a creature, even if incorporeal. If they want a check and panache 'just because' they need a custom action and a GM's agreement.

Yeah, like the 'swing on chandelier' example. For Tumble through though, if they can roll for an incorporeal creature then rolling for an 'Undetected' foe should also work by picking a square and rolling even if that square ends up not having a creature in it: After all, neither one offers any resistance to movement.

If there's no Tumble check, there's no panache generated, making tumbling but not theough any unwilling creature not useful to the original question.

In his statement of facts in the OP, he said "Tumble Through:

Specifies that the player moves through a square occupied by an enemy who is unwilling. "

I was pointing out that this is in fact not correct: full stop. I didn't want someone reading the thread to assume what he posted was correct as it's been clarified RAI and RAW.

I then answered his question about tumble through in the second part of my original post: ""A corporeal and an incorporeal creature can pass through one another, but they can’t end their movement in each other’s space." This answers it all: there is no check asked for with this movement."

From dev Sayre:

"the 9th-level liturgist ability is intentionally "a move action with style while you Sustain". (And as others have noted, it's not literally all Strides, because it won't work with e.g. quicken effects that let you Stride.)"

That ability is "Dancing Invocation (9th) The movement of your body grants power to your magic. When you Leap, Step, or Tumble Through, you also Sustain an apparition spell or vessel spell." The discussion was about Tumble Through and the ability to get jumps high enough to equal or exceed Strides.

It's 100% intended that Tumble Through can be just a Stride with style. here are some threads about Tumble Through about this very thing.

Reddit Tumble Through thread

Paizo Tumble Through thread

graystone wrote:

Cozened wrote:

Tumble Through:

Specifies that the player moves through a square occupied by an enemy who is unwilling.

It in fact does not say that. "You Stride up to your Speed. During this movement, you can try to move through the space of one enemy." They CAN try to move through an enemy, not that they must. You may use the Tumble Through action to simply Stride and never attempt to move through anyone's space.

pg. 422, PC2:

You can move through the space of a willing creature. If you want to move through an unwilling creature’s space, you can Tumble Through it. You can’t end your turn in a square occupied by another creature, though you can end a move action in its square provided that you immediately use another move action to leave that square. If two creatures end up in the same square by accident, the GM determines which one is forced out of the square (or whether one falls prone).

And? Just because it says "If you want to move through an unwilling creature’s space, you can Tumble Through it" in no way REQUIRES there be an unwilling creature to use it. It's a section named "Moving Through a Creature’s Space" so why would you expect it to mention uses that do not involve "Moving Through a Creature’s Space"? The ACTUAL entry for Tumble Through gives the actual requirements for using it. That says "You Stride up to your Speed. During this movement, you can try to move through the space of one enemy" and not you must try to move through the space of one enemy.

This has been confirmed by Dev posts: they described Tumble Through as a Stride with style and it can 100% be used as just a Stride and qualify for things that require Tumble Through.

You have to get to Step 4: Determine the Degree of Success for both effects to take place, so it's up to the DM on what order to apply them. Myself, I'd apply Incapacitation second so both effects actually take place and cancel each other out.

Tumble Through:

Specifies that the player moves through a square occupied by an enemy who is unwilling.

It in fact does not say that. "You Stride up to your Speed. During this movement, you can try to move through the space of one enemy." They CAN try to move through an enemy, not that they must. You may use the Tumble Through action to simply Stride and never attempt to move through anyone's space.

Question: Is Tumble Through necessary; can it be done simply to gain Panache when the square is not occupied by a creature who can demonstrate willingness or unwillingness for the other to move through it?

"A corporeal and an incorporeal creature can pass through one another, but they can’t end their movement in each other’s space." This answers it all: there is no check asked for with this movement.

I think the answer remains no. In general losing a rune property slot isn't going to be worth it. Poisons aren't generally good, unless you're an alchemist and can modify the DC. Oils are also very circumstantial and also not worth it.

Generally, it's not a tactic I'd consistently employ. There might be some specific niche situation where it makes sense, but not generally.

For a melee Toxicologist, it can be ok if you're running into a lot of baddies that can react to Manipulate triggers [and regularly has combats where they are attacking such creatures 3+ times with poison]. It can give them 12 poison attack without having to pull out more poison [1 from weapon, 1 from injector, 10 from rune]. That seems to be the most likely niche IMO. Plus if you're close to your Bulk limit, it saves you 1 Bulk.

Another use is for Bane Oil, Burial Oil, Ghost Oil, Merciful Balm, Oil of Swiftness, ect. You can essentially have a rune you can switch to whatever situational rune you want every fight for a fairly cheap cost [or free with Cauldron]. So you just have to toss a well-rounded collection of oils into it and when you find yourself fighting a ghost, need to capture someone alive, have a mobile foe and need swiftness, ect and you're ready to go. I can see this rune being much useful than a static Ghost Touch, Bane, Vitalizing, ect rune if you are fighting different types of creatures all the time.

graystone wrote:

JiCi wrote:

May I ask how the Staff Acrobat work with a Halfling Sling Staff when it's not a melee weapon?

Only Levering Strike [8th] and Pivot Strike [14th] require a Strike so you can 100% avoid them. If you did want those feats, you'd treat it as an improvised weapon. I'd suggest taking the Weapon Improviser Dedication or something similar to avoid the natural -2 to hit for improvised weapons.

For Bullying Strike and Staff Sweep, could you still Shove and Trip with the Sling Staff, despite not being a melee weapon?

Yes. The requirement to use Bulling Strike and Staff Sweep is "You are wielding your staff" and wielding a ranged weapon/improvised weapon isn't a problem as it's not asking you for an attack roll.

Quote:

This staff ends in a Y-shaped split that cradles a sling. The length of the staff provides excellent leverage when used two-handed to fling rocks or bullets from the sling.

If you're not okay with just treating it like the staff it is described as, then how about an improvised staff?

Well, a staff doesn't equal a Staff: for instance, a Bo Staff, Gaff or Whipstaff also says they are a staff but it doesn't have Staff stats. It's a clear pattern of using staff as flavor vs it having a mechanical meaning. Not that i don't think the sling staff shouldn't have a melee option, you'll just have to house rule it or improvise weapon it.

May I ask how the Staff Acrobat work with a Halfling Sling Staff when it's not a melee weapon?

Only Levering Strike [8th] and Pivot Strike [14th] require a Strike so you can 100% avoid them. If you did want those feats, you'd treat it as an improvised weapon. I'd suggest taking the Weapon Improviser Dedication or something similar to avoid the natural -2 to hit for improvised weapons.

No archetypes have feats other than their dedication at level 2.

That's not true.

Aldori Duelist has Dueling Acumen, a skill feat, that's 2nd, meaning that they can finish it at 4th level without needing free archetype.

Curse Maelstrom has Familiar Oddities as a 2nd level skill feat.

Herbalist has Fresh Ingredients as a 2nd level skill feat.

Mind Smith has Malleable Movement as a 2nd level skill feat.

Martial Artist has Powder Punch Stance as a 2nd level feat.

Red Mantis Assassin has Twin Feint as a 2nd level feat.

Tattooed Historian has Agent of All Holds as a 2nd level feat.

Trick Driver has Express Driver as a 2nd level skill feat.

The result is that with Free Archetype you can buy your way out of many Archetypes at 4th level by spending your 4th level Class feat on an Archetype feat

Several don't even need free archetype: skill feats 2nd to 4th allow it too. In just the A's:

Alter Ego has a 3rd level skill feat, Archaeologist and Artillerist has a 4th level skill feat.

I know I always force my player monks to only use kick unarmed attacks when using Flying Kick and Fist attacks when using Elemental Fist and One-inch Punch. I wouldn't want to ignore flavor text cuz it would NEVER lead me wrong... What kind of madness would ensue if they could punch with a flying kick! :P

...then surely you wouldn't mind if my ghoul got satiated by using Consume Flesh on an earth elemental, or a fire wisp? /rhetorical

I don't see anything breaking here: you have to have a corpse that you can eat. Elementals tend to not leave corpses or have inedible ones [like it's made out of large rocks]. So, the DM would let you know if a killed creature qualifies. So, no I don't mind if a DM allows elemental creatures work with it. As far as intent, they list a requirement for raw meat in the curse so IMO they would have done the same for Consume Flesh if that was required from a corpse. ;)

I meant that food definitely isn't free in the system, and firewood could be.

And I meant that you're talking about something that's LOWER than the smallest coin in the game. A poor meal is 1 cp so when you're talking about something that's just PART of that meal, it's a negligible price that is the equivalent of free for our discussion. It's like saying an earth kineticist couldn't make a piece of chalk because 10 pieces are a cp and that's a price. Are you really quibbling about fractions of a cp? The requirement is "Elements you create (using Base Kinesis to generate an element, for example) must typically be ordinary materials of negligible value" And I can't think of a better definition of that than LESS than a cp.

That again is only a matter of the general question: could they make exactly what they want and everything they want? If they can, they could as well make strawberries.

I can't see how they can't or else you'd be saying water kineticists wouldn't know if they are making fresh water or having a flame that can't burn normal items [cool flames can be as low as 212 F temp]. I've never seen kineticists have to create random items with the ability. But lets assume it's totally random [lets pull up that random chart]; it's a 2 action ability so even at 1% for what you want, you'll likely get it after 10 min.

graystone wrote:

As far as food, the inner bark of certain trees, such as pine, birch, and willow, is edible and contains carbohydrates, fiber, vitamins (e.g., vitamin C), and minerals (e.g., potassium). At 500-600 calories a pound, you'd only have to make @5 pounds per person. So 2 uses of Base Kinesis covers 1 person.

LOL! Adventurers listening are absolutely sweating bullets right now.

"They're asking us to eat eat 5 pounds of tree bark now? I thought the jerky was bad enough"

You're in luck, you can make bark into something like jerky! I will admit, bark isn't the tastiest food but it's better than starving.

And wood plane is for the overwhelmingly major part is about ... wood. Of different forms and types, animated or not, but mostly it's wood. And leaves. What it's not is a fruit or vegetable garden. So, take this piece of fine oak wood and use it normally :)

I'd also like to point out that there are trees like the crocodile-bark tree and the traveler's palm that release drinkable water when pierced, making even having a strict 'only wood' requirement would allow for water.

As far as food, the inner bark of certain trees, such as pine, birch, and willow, is edible and contains carbohydrates, fiber, vitamins (e.g., vitamin C), and minerals (e.g., potassium). At 500-600 calories a pound, you'd only have to make @5 pounds per person. So 2 uses of Base Kinesis covers 1 person.

Yeah, but we don't have firewood or kindling cost in rulebooks (thankfully) :) We do have rations' or meals' costs.

Without an actual description of what each contains, rations or meals having a cost are pretty meaningless. A cucumber isn't a meal or ration. For instance, a ration by definition is "a food allowance for one day". A singular use doesn't create that so it's not a ration by itself so it has no listed cost. Much the same as a meal unless you're trying to tell me a single cucumber counts as one of those meals. So, IMO, we're looking at the same thing as firewood with no listed cost for individual food items, just the aggregate of several pieces of food.

Yes, food is probably not "precious" (debatable for a starving person), but it's definitely valuable and its cost is not negligible.

If you look at it that way, then simple wood has value, even if it's as firewood or kindling.

Given your fixation on nutritional realism

On the contrary, I replied to YOUR nutritional realism that nutritional food wouldn't also provide water. Once you accept it giving you the food requirement, I can't see an argument that it wouldn't also the water requirement too.

The scenario itself identifies two pools of resources -- food and water -- and makes no attempt to differentiate between types of food, their relative nutritional value, or says that one can be interchanged for the other.

I don't think someone needs a degree in Nutrition Science to know fruits and vegetables have a lot of water in them and knowing that to come to the conclusion that eating such foods would slake one's thirst. My comment was on accepting it as food and not as water: it's pretty much a package deal with either it working as both or neither.

So even if you allow Fresh Produce / Base Kinesis to make edible plant matter with nutritional value capable of sustaining the party, the players still have a finite amount of water.

I'd disagree as vegetables and fruit have high water content: cucumbers, for instance, are 96% water, strawberries have 92% and even at the low end, potatoes have 79% and bananas 74%. Even nuts can have 50% when harvested and even after that, nuts [and seeds] have 5-13%.

If they are eating enough fresh food to feed themselves, they should have no issue with water.

"You can spend 10 minutes emblazoning a symbol of your deity upon a weapon or shield."

Neither option is unarmed attacks, so no.

Rarity traits are not a power creep excuse system. It's thematic related to scenario or adventure (like this ancestry is uncommon or rare in Inner Sea but it's common in Tian Xia or in another plane. Or this teleport spell is uncommon because it can trivialize adventures where the travel is the challenge).

While i agree Rarity shouldn't be a power balancer, isn't teleport in the exact same category as 1st level flight from ancestry, as both "can trivialize adventures where the travel is the challenge"? The only difference i can see is the scale of travel that can be avoided, so if rarity on teleport is fine, then so to should it be fine for starfinder ancestries with 1st level flight.

What are some possible uses for this feat?

It's so you have enough time to use the items you create or to hand them out to those that will. say you're a 9th level alchemist and you Quick Alchemy, making 2 tools or elixirs. Now you're down 1 action and have one in each hand. Unless the alchemist themselves is drinking both that means you're unless you're right next to allies, you can't get rid of both before they go bad unless an ally comes over to you to get it, burning up their actions to get to you and to drink/use it.

Now if you have enduring alchemy, you have 2 rounds to use them: you can make them, move over to an ally and give one a drink and then next round drink it yourself or move and give it to someone else.

Would allowing the enduring alchemy feat to include "bombs" be broken at all?

It's pointless most times as anyone throwing bombs will usually take Quick Bomber, meaning that when they get Double Brew, they make 2 items and if one is a bomb, they then throw a bomb all in a single action. This means they still have 2 actions left to throw the other bomb meaning it's rarely an issue using your bombs in the normal time.

“I am the only one like me you will ever encounter can get very “protagonist energy” very quickly.

I mean, the game kind of does this already with Rare classes and ancestries. You can make a Kashrishi Reflection Exemplar with the Chosen One background gives off more “protagonist energy” than a Kasatha Mystic for example. Not everyone wants to start off with local connections or to be a cookie cutter fit in a campaign and they don't need Starfinder to get there. Heck, you could have a [human, android, ysoki, ect] Knight of Golarion or a Golarion Survivor Human anything might fit in better than some PF2 characters.

Hi there! I've noticed a small but confusing problem; I've been trying to DM someone, but it repeatedly gives me an error page and doesn't show it's sent anything.

Weirdly, I tested by DMing someone else, and it's worked. It's just this one person.

I'm wondering if the issue is that I'm trying to message a Paizo employee? You know, to complain that kobolds don't get a boost to all stats at first level.

I'd totally understand if there are protections in place for that, obviously. Just wanna know for sure so I can stop retrying!

EDIT: It could also be because I've never messaged this person before. I could try messaging someone I've never DMed, but I don't want to be rude. XD

My favorite part about the Sihedron Spires is that we all know what the most popular technique of rune magic is going to be in New Thassilon. :)

hmm cool merfolk feat

So, we all know how queer Golarion is. But have we ever gotten any indications of what terms Golarion people use for the actual queer groups? Like, say, in Varisia, we know conservative Chelish nobles and members of the Magnimar establishment don't much care for The Gays, while small-town folk don't see it as any big deal, but has language formed around it?

Do they just use the exact same terms, or have they come up with their own?

I'd love to spitball! But first, I want to be sure nobody's got an obscure source that reveals Varisian locals call trans people "the Called" and lesbians "birdwatchers", or what-have-you.

One person I know likes the idea of lesbians and sapphics having terms linked to the Prismatic Ray, like "radiants".

Hi there! So, I've recently decided to run a pickup game of Rise of the Runelords in PF2e, and I'm very excited about it!

That being said, I'm the kind of GM that loves to take a perfectly good AP, tear it apart, and reconstitute it as her own thing. I'm allergic to someone else doing my work for me. Rise of the Runelords is a complicated adventure path very rooted in its era, and there are a few elements in particular I want to tweak. I do really love this AP, and this thread is not meant to condemn, only to play around a little with six great books.

1. Its focus on pure-evil ancestries and a lot of sapient living beings becoming cannon fodder.
2. A tendency towards grossout horror at the expense of dysmorphism and obesity.
3. What feels to me like a slight vagueness of theme and storyline, i.e., "wait, we're fighting who now?"

I know a couple of these "problems" might be polarizing, so to be clear, I'm not here to judge! Lots of people aren't bothered by this stuff, for a whole host of perfectly good reasons. I just know it won't mesh with my group's playstyle.

Besides, I like messing around with stuff! I'll be tampering with other plot beats, too. For instance, I'm thinking a lot about Nualia. Nualia is a complicated character, a victim of abuse and manipulation from all corners of her life. She's also a terrible person, of course, who's made terrible choices. Still, I like injecting nuance into characters like this, so I may give her a path to redemption or a path to escaping and becoming a recurring villain depending on the choices the PCs make.

I figure sharing this might be helpful to some people, and y'all might have ideas I haven't thought of. I haven't been able to find many other threads talking about some of these problems, so I decided to start my own.

But anyways, let's start off with the big one.

The Goblin Thing
So, we have a few aspects to take care of--how to integrate goblin PCs, how to move on from the idea that goblins are pure evil, and how to avoid it being a bummer when you're punting enemies off of bridges.

Part One: Your Friendly Neighborhood Goblins
Here's the thing: Every goblin tribe is different. Most reasonable people in Sandpoint know this. The Licktoads might be a little annoying, but they don't usually pick serious fights, aside from the odd band of bored youths hassling travelers. The Mosswoods are mostly too busy with their little feuding families to focus on anything else--a problem the Sandpoint locals can relate to. The Birdcrunchers sometimes even trade with Sandpoint, though they mostly seem to just want to be left alone.

The Varisians have a complicated history with the goblin tribes. The Varisians were here first, but the goblins were here second, and things haven't always been cozy between the two. There's a big reason the Varisians didn't totally hate the idea of a town being built here: Sandpoint forms a handy buffer against goblin mischief.

There are two tribes of special importance. The first is the Seven Tooth tribe. The Seven Tooths? They get along with Sandpdoint just fine. They're not quite locals, but they're regulars, and it's not uncommon for Seven Tooth goblins to spend time in the town itself. Prejudices are mostly playful, with plenty of rueful jokes about the goblins exposing the town's waste--"The worst thing about the Seven Teeth is you'll throw something away one week, and the next week one of those damn goblins will be trying to sell it right back to you, only now it works better and costs double."

But for the most part, the Seven Tooths are as much a part of the town as the traveling Varisians. They especially enjoy a friendly rapport with many local Gozrehns, since they're keeping the beaches clean. This is the tribe most goblin PCs are likely to hail from.

And then there are the Thistletops.

Part Two: Everybody Hates the Thistletops.

The Thistletops have always been the heels of the Lost Coast goblinkin, but especially in the last five years (which is a long time, to a goblin!). The Thistletops are mean. The Thistletops are militant. Any goblin can join the Thistletops, provided they're willing to go through cruel hazings, but the only goblins who want to are the goblins who want to push other people around. Some say the Thistletops are more a cult than a tribe, that whoever sits in the chieftain's throne can hear the whispers of an ancient goblin patron speaking to them from below the island. Few goblins can agree on whether this patron is foul or fair.

Most of the time, the Thistletops are too busy pushing other goblin tribes around to bother with Sandpoint. The fact that they've managed to organize a raid--and that goblins from other tribes seem to be leaving their tribes to sign up en masse--should be extremely alarming to any goblin PCs, as well as any goblin experts like Shalelu.

In reality, the Thistletops have recently acquired something of a divine mandate with Nualia's arrival. This has caused a religious schism and a massive uptick in recruitment, with moderates like Gogmurt the Druid being purged from the ranks and new arrivals from other tribes being put through heavy indoctrination. The priestess of the Mother of Monsters, blessed by demons and bearing the approval of The Voice Below, has managed to redirect all of the Thistletops' hunger for domination onto a single target: Sandpoint.

So, sure, they're a bunch of jerks and bullies. But why are they so stupid?

Part Three: They're Nihilists, Donny
It's tough being a goblin. You get drafted into bloody war after bloody to lose again and again, your life expectancy in a best-case scenario is 50 years, you're small enough to be picked up by large birds, and you probably lack the strength to actually open that pickle jar.

On the other hand, you're pretty close to unkillable, almost never alone, and you can always just smash the jar and pluck the pickles out with a knife.

Goblin culture is bent towards hedonistic nihilism, a "life-is-short-so-let's-have-some-fun" mentality. Worrying too much about the future is seen as fussy and embarrassing, even rude. Expressing a desire to die of old age is almost taboo. What's the difference between dying in an explosion at 30 and dying of old age at 38? Many goblin philosophers don't see one--or at least, not one of consequence. If there is a difference, it's that one makes a much better story than the other.

And stories? Stories don't live fifty years. Stories live forever.

Part Four: It's Complicated
Throughout Burnt Offerings, the PCs will have the chance to meet goblins who aren't violent and deranged. A Seven Tooth representative will likely be present when they meet with Hemlock, Shalelu and Deverin. Gogmurt will be a morally gray figure, a druid who counseled Ripnugget against his reckless course but is definitely a bit of a jerk. The ten new recruits the PCs encounter camping outside the Thistletop base form a social encounter, a chance to learn a little about what's going on between the tribes and convince the arrivals to ditch Ripnugget while they still can.

Notably, there will be a few goblin babies in the cages, and this can be an example of the cruel survival-of-the-fittest "parenting" practiced by the Thistletops, a chance to take these children to another goblin tribe when it's all over. Goblins aren't always the most attentive parents--it's why most goblins get raised by the whole tribe--but cages are not normal. Not anymore.

For the most part, the Thistletop goblins are pretty awful, maybe irredeemable. The gleeful bouts of animal cruelty, the abuse of children, the cult-like devotion to Nualia and Malfeshnekor... figuring out what to do with the Thistletop survivors will be a challenge for the PCs.

One helpful element, though, will be removing Malfeshnekor from the equation. The barghest's voice has guided chieftains of the Thistletops towards wickedness for years, to the extent that Ripnugget, who never heard the creature's silken voice in his ear, was nonetheless sculpted by its values. With Malfeshnekor gone and the tribe disbanded, the legacy of Thistletop can hopefully become nothing but an unpleasant memory to the goblins of the Lost Coast.

Other tribes will now act to absorb the less awful Thistletop survivors into their ranks, de-indoctrinating them through simple exposure to a less brutal ideology. The worst of the worst will face exile or imprisonment, although they might just destroy each other first.

Part Five: So, What Does This Mean For Goblin PCs?
So, how is a goblin likely to interact with Burnt Offerings?

First, they have to decide their tribe of origin. It's probably best to avoid having any PCs hail from Thistletop, unless the PC is joining later in the adventure or wants to have left a few years ago. Otherwise, they might know too much about what's to come. The Seven Tooths are a perfect pick, assuming they don't want to just be a goblin who grew up in town.

Of course, if the Seven Teeth are going to be emphasized, we may need to flesh out a couple goblin background characters.

And that's all for now! I went on a bit longer than I intended. I'll try to do more later. I'm admittedly a little daunted by Book Four, which makes some choices with coding that are going to be hard to dial back without a complete rewrite. As for focusing the themes more, I have plenty of ideas, but I need time to sort through them in my brain.

Hello, everyone!

So, some recent conversations elsewhere about the challenges in playing Kuthite cleric PCs got me thinking about what a fun prompt it can be. Putting aside whether Zon-Kuthon is an easy god for a PC to worship, you can definitely create a cleric who follows him who can still function in a typical party!

I think that's a neat idea to explore for all the evil or "iffy" gods! I thought we could take a stab at it.

For everyone's reference, here are the edicts/anathemas for some of the sketchier gods of Golarion. Remember: The goal is a PC who can play nice with others.

Just for fun, you can roll 1d100 by the following list:

Hi there! Before I get started, I want to be clear: I love Pathfinder's art, including a lot of really creepy stuff. I also definitely don't think it shouldn't exist--artists who like drawing spiders, deep sea monsters, gore and body horror obviously deserve work, and GMs deserve visualizations. At the same time, something that has been bothering me a lot lately is how ubiquitous it is, how hard it is to avoid, and how difficult it can be to see it coming.

I'm very afraid of spiders. From an early age, I learned to page carefully through new Monster Manuals, paranoid and skittish. I still feel nervous on the Bestiary's silver dragon page specifically because, as a kid, I always had to remember to flip two pages ahead. Pathfinder's spider art is inescapable, and it is realistic. The ogre spider is petrifying to me. The problem is, this art isn't just scary to me. It's art I mostly just don't get to enjoy at all, which sucks for both me and the artist whose work goes unappreciated. I can't look at the ogre spider. I can't look at the drider. I just hurriedly flip to the next page, put a piece of paper over the image, or, on AON, use an adblocker to hide the image for me so I can read in peace.

It's not just me, too. My girlfriend is much, much more afraid of spiders than me, and she as a GM straight-up can't access parts of the first Kingmaker book without exposing herself to art that makes her panic. The art isn't placed where she can simply zoom in and avoid it. It's right in the middle of the text.

My focus is on spider art here, but other common phobias, like trypophobia and thalassophobia, are relevant, too. Honestly, though, sometimes it feels like spider images in particular are leaned on for cheap PG scare value--"we can't do skin couches anymore, but nobody's going to give us an R rating if we put a giant realistic-looking spider on every other page."

Possible solutions:
1. Just commission art for different game elements when possible. There's no reason we needed art of the spiderlegs meal when many other meals were available to draw. It's okay to reduce the artists' focus on spider content for a lot of stuff. I'm not saying "no more spiders", but maybe keep in mind that the more common phobia art you put in, the more people are going to have trouble enjoying your books!

2. Include warnings. Page numbers at the start of the book would be nice, though I think you could go a tidge further and put some sort of marker on the edge of a page that precedes potentially upsetting art. This might be hard to get used to, but would make a serious difference.

3. Stop making the art so hard to avoid. Put it on splash pages, or block it off more carefully. Offer imageless PDFs, or even PDFs that remove specific triggers, like a "spiderless" PDF, a "kid-friendly" PDF that removes gore, etc.

4. I have no idea what the limits of the PDF file type are, aside from "significant and cumbersome". If there's any way to spoiler images, gosh, that'd sure be nice, but I never bet on .pdf having the bare minimum of utility. ;)

5. Embrace cartoony styles more, especially for scary art. This is half-serious, but I do think that varying your art style can be a great way to make the world feel more wild and collaborative, show other ways to play your game (some people play gritty, some people play Nodwick-style "bloodless battles"), and expand your options.

I understand a lot of these changes would be a lot of trouble to initially implement. The fact that I'm still asking will hopefully impress upon people that this is important to me and those I know. This is an entirely fixable problem, but first we need to admit it's an accessibility issue. A picture of spider art that scares readers off the page isn't a feature. It's a bug.

Hi, all! So we've all been in a pretty creative headspace lately thanks to the Remaster, and I thought it would be fun to brainstorm the kinds of variant rules we've had on our minds these last few years.

So, for me:

Variant spell components
I got really excited when I heard they were "getting rid" of these, even though it turned out to be a misunderstanding. I've long felt frustrated that every single spell, no matter who's casting, has to involve incantations and gestures. It's very flavorfully limited, even if it's obviously important from a balance perspective. It also makes certain spells like message somewhat confusing.

I'd love a system where maybe you could get more control over how your spells manifest, or where different spells would each have their own unique components. Maybe witches would all rely on raw materials, while wizards would be more dependent on the verbal and manipulate traits, and druids could cast a lot of their spells, like Wild Shape, "stilled".

Would that be hard to balance? Definitely. Extremely. Probably untenably. But the heart wants what it wants.

Bringing back the old consumables system from the playtest
From what I've heard, this original system was really cool, and I think we missed out on it. Like, I love the idea of consumables that are actually powerful in their own right, balanced around not being able to benefit from them an infinite number of times per day. it sounds like a man that got scrapped for realism reasons, but it sounds like a good system in a mechanical sense. This would take up a high page count, of course.

Variant proficiencies
I would love to see a system in which simple weapons could be wielded as martial or maybe even advanced weapons, gaining more traits or more damage as a result. The idea of it going the other way, of weaker versions of martial/advanced weapons being wieldable as simple weapons, could also be cool, though that would obviously cheapen access a little bit in a flavor sense.

So, what would you like to see? There aren't really any wrong answers--we're not talking about how the game itself should be changed, we're talking about variant rules that could be fun to explore

Hi, everyone! This is just a lighthearted creative thread focused on brainstorming new class names. I noticed we kept doing this on all the "please rename x" threads, and it was always the least exhausting section those threads had. It's kind of an interesting challenge.

Ideally, let's not argue about whether the classes need renaming here. This is more a brainstorming space. I'm actually kind of interested in seeing if we can come up with anything good here.

Monk renames are worth 5 points, oracle renames are worth 4 points, magus and druid renames are worth 3 points, barbarian and fighter renames are worth 2 points, and all other classes are worth 1 point. I'm on the phones with Paizo right now, and they say that whoever has the most points at the end gets to make their least favorite ancestry Rare in the Remaster.

So, I was looking at the steam trolley today, thinking about playing a getaway driver-type character for an upcoming oneshot. I'm really enjoying reading about the vehicle subsystem.

That said, I noticed that the steam cart has a very flavorful ability called "Steam Cloud". The Steam Trolley, which is supposed to be a larger version of the steam cart, lacks this ability.

This could be a balance decision, but it seems to come at the expense of the steam trolley having much unique about it (beyond being the only affordable land vehicle that can house a 5-person adventuring party, which would be a problem if we weren't playing in a mid-tech setting). It also feels a little weird, since it gives it much less in common with the steam cart.

Is this really necessary for balance? Could it have been a mistake?

I'll admit to a bias here--the steam trolley is my only option if I want to be able to drive the whole group, but with its low speed compared to a typical carriage, every extra utility counts.

Hey, all! This should be a simple one. So, the yellow musk creeper has a spray pollen ability which inflicts fascination and also, notably, forces the creature to spend all its actions hanging out with its new plant buddy. Barring a Critical Failure, any hostile behavior ends both the fascination and the "stay close" compulsion. The "stay close" compulsion is not something normally inflicted by fascination.

The creeper also has Bore into Brain, which explicitly doesn't end the fascination--but doesn't say anything about whether it ends the "stay close" compulsion.

Bore into Brain (manipulate, mental) The creeper bores dozens of tendrils into the brain of a Small, Medium, or Large humanoid creature that's unconscious, willing, or fascinated by Spray Pollen, and within reach of the creeper's tendrils. The creature must succeed at a DC 18 Fortitude save or become stupefied 1 (stupefied 2 on a critical failure). Subsequent failed saves against Bore into Brain increase the stupefied value. If the creature reaches stupefied 5, it is turned into a yellow musk thrall. Boring into a creature's brain doesn't end fascination caused by Spray Pollen.

Spray Pollen (mental, poison, incapacitation) The yellow musk creeper blasts yellow pollen in either a 30-foot line or a 15-foot cone. Each creature in the emanation must attempt a DC 20 Will save. Once a creature succeeds at any save against Spray Pollen, it becomes temporarily immune for 24 hours.

...

Failure The creature is fascinated. For as long as it is fascinated, it must spend each of its actions to move closer to the yellow musk creeper as expediently as possible, while avoiding obvious dangers. If the creature is adjacent to the yellow musk creeper, it stays still and doesn't act. If anyone takes a hostile action against the creature or its allies, the effect ends. Otherwise, the creature can attempt a new save at the end of each of its turns. On a success, the effects end.

So, do I have this right? When the yellow musk creeper starts boring into someone's brain, they can run away without a problem, they're just still under the Fascinated condition:

Fascinated

You take a –2 status penalty to Perception and skill checks, and you can't use actions with the concentrate trait unless they or their intended consequences are related to the subject of your fascination.

So, Bore Into Brain allows you to start running, but you can't cast a spell unless you're fireballing the big scary flower.

Do I have this right?

mods busy post alignment takes

Nah, I'm just kidding. This isn't that kind of alignment thread. Alignment takes are like sandwich definitions: everyone has their own, and arguing about them is the pedagogical equivalent of pressing the crosswalk button several times to make it turn green faster. It accomplishes nothing, but if you find it cathartic, good on you.

No, this is actually about alignment etiquette. Specifically, it's about people policing each other's characters' alignments. I've really soured on it. Especially when it's other players or onlookers.

Alignment is unbelievably subjective. I think it's inarguable that modifying the alignment system is the most common house rule in the entire game, and in D&D besides. A lot of people prefer a more complex Evil, or a higher-standards Good, or to not use alignment at all. Others do like the stock mechanic, of course.

All of these interpretations are fine. They work.

But what happens when they clash? Well, we know the answer to that: We start arguing. That's fine, too. As long as both parties want to argue, they can go to town. It's a lot more problematic, though, when you start an argument with someone who didn't come looking for one.

So here's a scenario.

Let's say I'm joining a new game, and I come in with an elf wizard. This wizard is sweet and friendly to everyone, he likes to help others, but he's also got a quiet mean streak. He likes to be good, but if someone's in his way, he's willing to burn down the guy's home and kill his family in front of him.

What's this character's alignment? Neutral Evil? True Neutral? Chaotic Good? Whatever I pick, there's a risk another player will notice and have an objection. I know because it's happened to me, and lately I've seen it happening to others. It seems to happen a lot on these forums in particular. We love to argue here, don't we?

In this case, though, I'm just trying to play my character true to the way I see alignment. I didn't want to have to defend my character's alignment to someone else.

A lot of GMs will take a laissez-faire approach when it comes to this infamous mechanic--"As long as you aren't being egregious, I'll let you define your own alignment. I care more about how you play your character, anyways."

And in that situation, the best thing as a fellow player to do is mind your own business. You shouldn't need the GM to weigh in and tell you to back off. Someone choosing an unusual alignment for their PC is not an invitation to start a Paladin Falls debate with them.

Hi, all! In the spirit of the old PF1 thread of a similar name, this is just meant to be a fun casual place to talk about the projects you're working on right now that you're really excited about!

Feel free to exchange thoughts and feedback, but I think it's best to only offer serious criticism of a project if someone says they're looking for it, and try to avoid derailing the thread with any big discussions.

I'll start! I'm currently working hard with my girlfriend on a collection of slightly risque ancestries we're hoping to publish under Pathfinder Infinite. The main ones right now are mothfolk with a big "drawn to danger" motif, beefolk with a bit of an "ex-Thriae who overthrew their queens after prophecy failed" implication, slimefolk (more in the "slime girl" genre than the "sapient ooze" direction Battlezoo's taking), a sort of "what if some wicked little tricksters got kicked out of Hell, gnome-style" devil ancestry, an ancestry of people who've been turned into lifesize doll-like living prisons for troublesome spirits, and an alraune heritage of people who sought out a mystical coral reef that completely remade their bodies into their "true selves". It's an absolute ball so far, and I'm so excited by it I keep starting to derail other threads, so I figured I'd get some of that energy out here.

Hi! Just a quick suggestion I have, after noticing I and a dozen other people didn't understand what Community Use was for: I think it'd be great to add a short one-sentence summary of each subforum's purpose to the main subforum page. Like, just so people know the basic role of the subforum and can put it to use properly. This would at least be nice for the major subforums that are more ambiguous, like Community Use.

So, every now and then, a new Discourse pops up over Pathfinder becoming "kid-friendly". Some people like it, and some people don't. When these arguments start up, there's a very common defense used to counter those who don't like the change: "Calm down. There's always third-party content."

This, to me, always made sense. Sure, maybe there will be fewer "canon" adventurers featuring shopkeeper's daughters and the sort, but people who like their fantasy a little on the grittier or raunchier side can just buy from third-party publishers and still have a ton of fun.

However, I've recently noticed a clause that may be intended to tell us that this isn't something third parties are intended to provide.

You must use your best efforts to preserve the high standard of our trademarks. You may not use this License for material that the general public would classify as 'adult content,' offensive, or inappropriate for minors.

So, with the disclaimer that I am running with my personal interpretation of this paragraph, which could be wrong, here are five points I want to express while I look for a clarification.

1. Family-Friendly Paizo is Not a Bad Thing
I think it's ultimately a good thing that a family can grab some dice, roll up some characters and have fun with a wonderful game like Pathfinder without having to worry. I think moving away from the more NSFW content was a good move for Paizo. Paizo content is too center-stage, and moreover, if Paizo writers don't want to write NSFW content, that's totally fair!

At the same time...

2. Risque TTRPG Content is Not Bad, Either
So, full disclosure--I've been writing erotica for a living for nearly a decade at this point. I have a lot of sex worker colleagues and friends. Risque content, whether it's openly XXX-rated or just a little inappropriate for kids to see, is a valid art form that requires skill and artistic integrity just like any other. It should not be looked down upon or degraded simply for focusing on expressions of passion and intimacy. Those things are part of the human experience just as much as grief and violence.

Some people enjoy featuring varying levels of NSFW content in their games. That's valid, and there's nothing wrong with it. If it's not for you, that's totally cool and also super valid! Nobody should ever feel pressured into engaging with adult-only content. But we that doesn't mean it's bad.

I have a lot of colleagues who've been driven off of platforms and into the shadows of obscure less safe websites, had their incomes sliced open and sometimes outright stolen, because--say it with me--Our Society Treats Sex Workers Badly. I'm a little anxious about working hard to design something, publishing it, and finding it taken down within a week because it reminded someone too much of rope play.

3. Of Course Safeguards Are Important
I want to get ahead of this one. Yes, obviously, anyone publishing NSFW gaming content should be mindful of who is going to see it. Warnings should be included, at bare minimum, and it should be made very clear that it's not for children. Content that outright endorses abuse should also obviously not be included, but that's already more-or-less covered by other facets of Pathfinder's license.

Also, while I did mention XXX ratings, that's not really what I'm talking about here. Consider this conversation to mainly be about R-rated and "heavily suggestive" content for now. Basically, anything you wouldn't want a kid to see.

4. Not All Media Has to be Kid-Friendly
NSFW content at all levels has the potential to spark important conversations, to get people thinking about important concepts, to help people discover things about themselves or express facets of their identity that society does not treat well (hi, ace bisexual trans girl here), or just to, you know, have fun. The idea that adult-only content should be suppressed nearly out of existence because a minor might hypothetically ignore multiple warnings and lie about their age to access it is... not healthy, but unfortunately not that uncommon.

As an asexual person, I often feel really weird discussing my sexuality. It's actually very difficult to explain the complex nuances of the ace spectrum without getting a little bit NSFW. That's part of why this issue is important to me.

5. This Isn't a Demand, and I Don't Know How Strictly the Rule is Enforced, Anyways
At this time, I don't know the legal situation Paizo would be in with allowing NSFW content. I also don't know how strict the policy is--does it only apply to outright pornography, or does it also extend to content that alludes to sex acts or kinks?

Obviously, succubi exist in PF2. Is that level of implication (offering rules for gaming groups to include "acts of passion" that may be nonconsensual) the hard limit? Or are succubi just grandfathered in, and third-party products would be held to a higher standard?

At this time, I just want to express my opinion about the issue, and provide a safe and healthy environment for people to air their thoughts about it as well. I'd like it to be known that I would consider a strict application of the rule to be an unnecessary restriction--one that's not healthy for artistic and personal expression. Again, if that's not how the rule is enforced, cool! I'm just looking for clarification.

If it is the case, and it can change, I personally believe it should. With as violent a game as Pathfinder is, it seems a little silly for some level of sexuality to not have an outlet. Third-party publishing is perfect for that--it's safely distanced from Paizo and requires more active effort to track down.

To anyone who wants to engage, please be civil and try to assume good faith of others. This is obviously a hot topic that could get dicey if we don't treat each other with respect and curiosity.

Hello, friends! I've been working on launching another Age of Worms game lately, and I'm working on a content warning sheet using this excellent resource from the Consent in Gaming supplement written by Sean K. Reynolds and Shanna Germain. Anyways, it got me thinking the work I was doing might be helpful to others!

So, here's my (fairly informal) list of major potential triggers for each chapter. This list may not be totally complete, especially since I haven't finished the AP yet (my longest-running game is currently on Chapter Nine). I'm also not going to include standard Pathfinder CWs like "gore" and "violence". An asterisk is next to triggers that can be quite easily cut out, or that are entirely optional bonus flavor, such as the character of Constance Grace.

Broad or Constant Triggers
Parasites
Bugs
Nihilism/the end of the world
Undeath and a general feeling of rot
Religious extremism and cults

Chapter One: The Whispering Cairn
- Harm to children (implied)
- Self-harm (religious)*
- Animal abuse*
- Poverty and worker abuse
- Freak shows*
- Violence against sex workers (implied)*
- Implied zombie necrophilia*
- Drowning
- Paralysis
- Elemental slavery (implied)*
- Drug addiction*
- Fatness framed as villainous

Chapter Two: The Three Faces of Evil
- Self-mutilation (religious)
- Animal abuse
- Magical insanity
- Suicide (implied)*
- Eye trauma
- Villains with deformities

Chapter Three: Encounter at Blackwall Keep
- Colonialism
- Fantastical racism
- Child endangerment
- Mass PC killing of nonevil humanoids

Chapter Four: The Hall of Harsh Reflections
- Giant spiders*
- Villainous madness*
- Player vs. Player deception/betrayal
- PC being kidnapped/rendered helpless
- Mind control/mental enslavement
- Paralysis
- Negative encounters with law enforcement
- Drowning
- Giant squids
- Mental illness
- Suicide/self-harm*
- Torture (implied)

Chapter Five: The Champion's Belt
- Mass death of noncombatants
- A man murdering his girlfriend
- Mental illness
- Prisoner abuse
- Violence against disabled person
- Villains with deformities
- Offscreen deaths of friendly NPCs

Chapter Six: A Gathering of Wounds
- Mass death of noncombatants
- Giant spider
- Mental illness framed as villainous or dangerous*
- Kidnapping

Chapter Seven: The Spire of Long Shadows
- Mass death in cult
- Magical insanity
- Paralysis
- Hallucinations

Chapter Eight: The Prince of Redhand
- Police state
- Eating of sapient beings/cannibalism
- Public executions
- Torture
- Villainous madness
- Nooses/hanging
- Villainous deformity
- Sexual harrassment*
- Animal cruelty
- Fatness framed as villainous*
- Slavery*

Chapter Nine: The Library of Last Resort
- Villainous madness
- Animal cruelty (minor)
- Magical depression
- Betrayal

Chapter Ten: Kings of the Rift
I have not yet run this adventure, nor have I read it many times, so I don't have a ton for you here.
- Slavery
- Paralysis
- Villainous madness
- Betrayal
- Mind control

Chapter Eleven: Into the Wormcrawl Fissure
I have not yet run this adventure.
- Insanity
- Body horror/fleshwarping
- Sexual assault (implied)
- Torture
- Villainous insanity

Chapter Twelve: Dawn of a New Age
I have not yet run this adventure, nor have I read it many times, so I don't have a ton for you here.
- Chance of an extremely dark ending
- Villainous trauma victim*
- Mass death of noncombatants
- Eye trauma

This is a minor glitch, but I thought I'd let y'all know--the "Time Posted" number keeps switching back and forth for posts, going up and down and up again within the same minute.

Refresh #1
Refresh #2
Refresh #3
Refresh #4

(This is the thread I've noticed it happening.)

So, I kind of wanted to say something about those threads that keep popping up, those "inexplicable" subject derails into complaining about site moderation, about SJWs taking over, about the "chilling effect on free speech" we've seen in recent months now that Paizo has adopted a policy of banning open bigots using the website.

This conversation is probably going to keep sprouting up for a while in various tangentially-connected threads. A lot of us would love to stop seeing it, but there are a number of regular posters here who feel frustrated at not being able to have conversations without fear of tripping up and getting called out and banned, and those frustrations probably aren't going to go away until either those users experience dramatic changes in perspective or push boundaries just enough to squeak into states of "Permanent Sus".

I don't really give their anxieties a lot of credibility, mind you. While callouts might sometimes be a little harsh or rude, and sometimes post deletions might feel unnecessary to some, those aren't really punishments to fear. Being criticized or having a post deleted is extremely light as far as consequences go. The only people who have been banned have been extremely hostile, repeatedly insulting minority groups or insulting those who advocate for them. I don't miss them.

Let's talk about that second target, the insulting of those who advocate for minority groups. That's a very familiar tactic to me. There's a funny habit the more subtle TERFs have formed of avoiding going after trans people directly. Instead, they criticize "trans activists". It's a very nice vague way of attacking the group while assuring any moderates watching that they have no problem with "the good ones". It's a tactic used by other reactionary ideologies, too--"I don't have any problem with [group], it's the activists who say that [group] deserves rights that go too far!"

This liberal language--celebrating the minority but punishing all activism on the minority's behalf--has the same "chilling effect on discourse" that a lot of people on this thread are afraid of. It makes allies hesitate to advocate for [group], and members of [group] afraid to advocate for themselves. [group] is expected to stay nice and polite and in their lane.

For another example... are we allowed to acknowledge yet how Gamergate was just an insane hate campaign fueled by rage that minorities in gaming communities were daring to speak up for themselves? You know, launched by an abusive ex who made up a bunch of lies to hurt a game developer who dumped him? Back in the day, Paizo moderation simply banned all talk of the harassment effort. Paizo didn't want to take a side, because taking a side would have meant banning a lot of blatant bigots and abuse apologists. I remember quoting a Zoe Quinn tweet about Thanksgiving, getting called out for it by another user, and knowing I couldn't really respond without all our posts getting deleted, because Paizo preferred comfortable silence over messy honesty.*

Paizo's taking a side now. I don't know the deeper motivations of those who don't like the side Paizo has chosen, or who object to the way Paizo has chosen to take its side, or whatever. But they're probably going to keep bringing it up for a while. They feel attacked. They protest that they aren't allowed to voice their opinions anymore, but... they never really say what those opinions are. And they wonder why some of us are suspicious or don't give them the benefit of the doubt.

"Paizo is silencing my beliefs!" What beliefs? That trans people deserve dignity? "You can't say anything without getting in trouble with the mods!" You mean like repeatedly misgendering people, or defending vehement bigots? What are you talking about, if not that?

I dunno. It's a tangle by design. With all these strings in a knot, it's hard to know which ones to cut, and which ones are just caught up in the mess.

It might help if those who really are just caught up in the mess actually seemed to care about making their positions clearer, though.

*I do think moderation was overworked and doing their best, but I always felt very disturbed knowing that we couldn't even criticize Gamergate, and that so many pro-Gamergate posters were being left alone, as if those views wouldn't filter into their behavior elsewhere. I also do believe that moderation was pretty openly anti-Gamergate, though I don't remember details on that. A lot of the pro-Gamergate users later got banned for other offenses, which kind of suggests maybe banning them sooner would have saved everyone a lot of trouble.

Honestly, I find this to be a really interesting choice, and I'm curious what people think of it. The discussions it's starting elsewhere are riveting.

What do you think of 5e as a system for a Dark Souls RPG?

What do you think a Dark Souls RPG should feel like?

What TTRPGs do you think would make better models for a Dark Souls RPG?

So, alignment threads seem to be chock-full of "example characters" of every alignment to try to demonstrate points. I don't want to do any more alignment debates for a good long while, but I do think that it's interesting to see other people's takes.

First, roll 1d9 ⇒ 6 to generate your alignment.
1 is LG, 2 is NG, 3 is CG, 4 is CN, 5 is TN, 6 is LN, 7 is LE, 8 is NE, and 9 is CE.

Once you have the alignment, provide a character concept--some basic backstory/personality--and try to subvert expectations. Remember: The goal is to create a character who subverts alignment expectations. Not every Chaotic Evil character is a murderous serial killer and not every Lawful Good character is an uncompromising squeaky-clean paladin who thinks sex is an enthusiastic form of wrestling. Play with what we'd think that alignment should be.

Also, please refrain from arguing alignments here. Everyone's interpretation of alignments is valid, and more importantly, not your problem.

I'll go first. I rolled LN above.

1. Kella, Rebel Monk (LN)
The ex-rumrunner Kella (half-orc rogue) was once happy to spend her days in the monastery, working on her illuminated manuscripts and ignoring the world outside. This changed when a local warlord demanded to use the monastery as the setting for her latest decadent banquet. When the abbot refused, all monks were slaughtered--save for Kella, who managed to slip out through hidden tunnels she'd discovered years ago.

Enraged at the desecration of her home, Kella now puts her smuggling skills to good use, assisting just about anyone who wants to violate the warlord's local laws. She doesn't care much who she helps--refugees, drug kingpins, freedom fighters, arms dealers--as long as they're a thorn in the warlord's side, she'll help them get their supplies into the warlord's territory. She does draw the line at helping necromancers or traffickers, but otherwise, Kella is totally focused on revenge. It has been a long time since she's been able to return to her manuscripts, and sometimes she wonders if she'll be caught and executed before she can finish it. She's too stubborn to let go of her grudge.

Okay, this is the pettiest thing ever, but... am I the only one having this problem? Whenever I refresh, or click a [# new] link, on a blog post, it sends me to the wrong part of the thread. Clicking enter on the link itself works.

This isn't remotely important, I just wanted to mention it in case there's an easy fix. :P

Hi, all!

So, a lot of people would rather avoid roleplaying in settings featuring heavy bigotry, and I think that's totally fair--a lot of people play D&D/Pathfinder/Crab Truckers to relax and have fun, and reliving real, lived bad experiences can be stressful. Or, if they're not queer, it can still be stressful to try to recreate stories they haven't actually experienced, knowing they're going to mess up.

I very rarely play in games with, say, transphobia, because most people I game with don't find that very fun. Personally, though, I think it can be really interesting to try to explore that with a fantastical lens. No shade to those who don't like it; I personally do, as long as it's on my own terms. I find it personally empowering to play a trans woman berserker who ran away from transphobic parents and became an adventurer, or an ace lesbian who fled an arranged marriage to a man. I find those sorts of stories more relatable than what feels for me personally like (and this will sound sassier than I mean it) fantastical wish fulfillment.

I'd like to hear other people's experiences--both negative (times you attempted it poorly, or got trapped in a bad gaming group where they insisted on roleplaying it out) and positive!

I'm sure the answer is 'no', but I have no idea.

So, I'm pretty laissez-faire about the whole swearing thing, and I've always thought the "newspaper comics" thing we had going on with symbol replacements was fine.

That being said, if it's not fine? I think having the swear get auto-replaced with "smurf" would be a lot more effective. It has the bonus impact of making whoever's swearing look a bit silly, so if they're being abusive, it takes the punch of of things.

Alternatively, just replace the whole word, so kids can't easily tell what the swear was anymore. "What the $%@#?" is literally something you could find in Zits or Dilbert--explicitly child-friendly comics. "That's #$%@*&!% crazy" is, again, something you could find in a newspaper comic. This would allow swears to retain a little of the tone while removing any of the actual bite.

I also want to say, for the record, that I think this is incredibly silly and way more conservative than basically anywhere else in society right now. Half-censored swears do not make the Paizo forums non-kid-friendly. If anything makes Paizo non-kid-friendly, it's the massive amount of violence in the game Paizo publishes, but that's never been a problem before.

In the depths of the forums, beneath the most knotted and twisted of Boards - in turn hammered into place with the blackest, crookedest iron nails - there lurk beings so foul, so alien, so wretched that not even the Postmonster could bear to gaze upon them, not even the Trickster of Curtains or the Captain of Yesterday or even the heinous T of Z would keep them in their courts of monsters and atrocities. These beings were banished, cast down to the lowest points and sealed away, with the hopes that none would ever be forced to remember their embarrassing, outdated, irrelevant existences.

Only Candle Lighter, the lone kobold tasked with keeping the prison's warding lights aglow at all times, must gaze upon these creatures. She herself is both warden and prisoner, and were she not kept constantly busy with the lights, perhaps she might attempt to escape herself.

This place is prison to the worst, most unnecessary aliases ever known to the Boards. Aliases referencing inside jokes that no longer make sense, aliases attached to cults and organizations long since dead and dust, aliases with misspelled names or that still have the original Erik Mona avatar from that time everyone tried to make Erik Mona's avatar the most common one on the forums. D&D characters from Play-by-Posts that never got off the ground. Aliases with the poodle avatar.

This is the Bad Alias Jail, and no good aliases may enter these cursed halls.

Hi, there!

So, I'm trying to place an order for the Mwangi Expanse, but I need to change the address. Unfortunately, it won't let me add a new address. It just keeps giving me this message.

Clicking "Select this address" makes the little spinny wheel appear, then nothing happens.

EDIT: I fixed it! Turns out, if you get the address exactly right the first try, it doesn't trap you in the loop. I had to exit out, then re-type it with the full postal code/abbreviated state name/etc, and then it worked.

I'm leaving this thread up just in case this comes up again this Holly Days season.

This is a discussion on this blog post. Erik Mona responds in the comments below the article.

We are forking this discussion from this thread, which, as keftiu, noted, kind of drifted off-topic.

Also of note:

Gonna leave this here for absolutely no reason at all.

Sara Marie from nearly three years ago wrote:

Paizo.com is not going to be hosting discussions with people trying to justify or be an advocate (devil's or otherwise) for slavery. Unfortunately this has been how many discussion threads about slavery, including this one, have ended up going.

Slavery is something that has caused multigenerational damage to real, human, people. It has inflicted trauma on countless lives, directly and indirectly, and the repercussions and the racism it has fueled still reverberate across our society and people’s lives today. Human trafficking continues to perpetuate the injustices and cruelty of slavery to this day.

It’s part of our mission to encourage and support gaming environments where people feel welcome, included and safe. When a topic like slavery comes up and people try to justify it, it reads as trying to justify hundreds of years of pain, suffering, countless indignities, rape, and murder inflicted upon the lives of other humans. While one person might feel that they are discussing theory or abstract subjects, for too many people the subject of slavery is not some abstract concept, it is an active painful reminder that there are other humans who would try to excuse or justify this awful practice. Coming across this type of thread on our forums when simply trying to read about a roleplaying game causes harm to people in our gaming community and it is unacceptable.

The mistake I made with the Absalom book is in dwelling too much on a very sensitive topic. Yes, the PFS plotline helped by removing legal slavery from the city, but I should have just let well enough alone, mentioning that it had happened in the timeline and then moving on to any of a countless number of other evils.

Instead I wanted to flesh out the context more, and make the change a more holistic part of the setting while still giving a few illegal baddies for people to kill.

The thing is, with this topic, that's too much. People just hate it in the setting period. We really should not have put it in there in the first place. Trying to deal with "phasing it out" within the context of the story adds fuel to the fire and makes people even more uncomfortable.

It's not worth it.

So while I suspect the word may come up a time or two in the future, we're just not going to be covering it going forward. A few in-production items might reference it still, but it's no longer going to be a notable part of the Golarion campaign setting.

If you want to write a big adventure where people burn Okeno to the ground to have it all make sense within the fiction of the campaign world, you are free to do so.

But we are not going to.

I didn't feel great about the tone of the previous thread's OP, so I've decided to start a new thread to make things a bit clearer. I'm sorry to anyone whom the original post discomforted; the phrasing was my attempt to be tongue-in-cheek and "clear through brevity", but it didn't work for a lot of people and that's entirely on me. I communicated poorly and may have hurt some people. I'll try to do better this time around.

Hi, all! So, I actually really, really like PF2. It's a gorgeous edition that brings so, so much I love to the hobby, and I've been having a blast with it. I am also very much not on-board with adding to forum negativity. That said, I feel like some of us just need a safe, argument-free space to air our grievances and talk them out.

Please refrain from starting arguments on this thread. Start a new thread, if you have to, but I've noticed that the second an argument starts, everyone tends to go on the defensive. Sometimes complaints are just matters of taste or blatant misunderstandings, and in either case, it's okay to share your thoughts if you disagree, but please refrain from trying to "rebut" anyone's issues. Agree to disagree.

On the flip side, when trying to criticize, remember that a human being wrote whatever you're about to say you don't like--a human being who could very well see your post, since they're all on these forums to some extent. This is a thing they worked hard on, through a lot of adversity, and you're here to criticize things about it. That is going to hurt no matter how nice you intend to be. They get a lot of negativity in general on these forums, and by contrast, compliments are tragically uncommon. Consider sandwiching your criticisms in with praise, if you can. In general, be nice.

Everything I say, I say with the utmost affection and respect for the creators. They did a wonderful job for the most part, and a lot of the things I don't like are just matters of taste. The goal of this thread is to reduce the amount of "threads complaining about PF2" floating around, to help people process their issues with the game without needing to start fights about it. The game's not perfect, but no art is.

Worthwhile reading:
This thread's more benevolent counterpart.
A post by James Jacobs on the effects of unchecked negativity on the creators.
And another.

Hey, all! I want to practice my character drawing a little bit. Post some interesting PCs (or NPCs) for me to take a stab at!

No guarantees of quality, mind you. Hey, you get what you pay for. :P

Okay, I actually really, really like PF 2.0, but I got tired of getting into arguments with people every time I wanted to gripe about the things about it I don't love. I say everything here with the utmost respect and affection, promise. :P

The only rule here is that nobody's allowed to defend PF 2.0 except in the blandest possible "I don't agree, but you're entitled to your opinion I guess" terms.

Oh, and be nice. Pretend your favorite dev is reading your complaints, and think about how you'd come across to them.

Oh, and I suppose all the mods' rules apply, too. Technically.

Hi! This is sort of a tangent off of the "bring back the Recent Posts sidebar" thread--I think there are some subforums that are often pretty hard to run conversations in because they're, well, dead, and that's a shame, because some of those subforums (like the TV Shows subforum, the Arts & Crafts subforum) actually contain really high-quality content that would fit perfectly fine in other subforums (like Off-Topic, or Gamer Life General Discussion).

It would be really cool, as a long-term modification, if we could work out a way so that those browsing certain subforums could see recent posts in the "subforum family". Like, if I'm browsing one of Off-Topic/Arts & Crafts/Television, I see new posts in the other two.

Maybe we could even be given a way to make a "playlist" of our favorite subforums. Like, being able to Focus only specific subforums, while leaving others Defocused, would be amazing. I don't want to look at all the endless Paizo product subforums, but I would love to be able to idly browse and see what's going on in, like, some of the Homebrew subforums, the old Age of Worms subforum, etc.

In general, using Arts & Crafts as an example, just merging it with Off-Topic could be messy--but nowadays, it's a very quiet subforum, and getting both OTD and A&C threads in my sidebar wouldn't bother me one bit.

So, a summary:

It'd be cool if certain especially quiet subforums were lumped together, so we'd get to see Recent Posts made in one while we were reading a thread in another.

Alternatively, it'd be cool if we could someday get the ability to Focus or Defocus certain subforums.

Happy Saturday! Today's prompt: "flower garden"

Asva the Snapdragon, LE
Asva always makes sure she's dressed according to the latest in human fashion, in high slit satin gowns that glimmer jet black against her curry-yellow scales. Standing at 3'1", she decorates her two pairs of curving, twisting horns with thistle flowers and mint leaves. Her voice is a slow, winding high-pitched purr, like a thin spiraling trail of smoke from a smoldering cinder. Asva darts across the charred rubble she calls home like a water strider, her motions graceful as a dancer's and yet sharp, guarded, unpredictable. When she casts a spell, her magic lifts her whole tiny body up into the air as if it's too big for her, suffusing her whole head in magical flames as she struggles to keep the almost-painful magic contained long enough to channel it outward at an enemy.

Exiled from the depths for sending her clan into a disastrous war with the duergar, the former court magician Asva has come to despise the rule of kings almost as much as she despises herself. Asva and her band of kobold bandits--assembled from the tattered remnants of a stripmining crew that collapsed due to druidic intervention--now claim the surface land surrounding an active volcano as their territory, extracting harsh tributes from the small human and halfling tribes and villages that lie "beneath our mountain's shadow".

Asva paints herself as a "champion" for her bandits, a "liberator" to the villagers. Indeed, she did manage to drive out a hobgoblin warband recently, at great personal cost--her mate was slain in the chaos. But now her mental state is more fragile than ever, and everyone knows it. In truth, Asva is plagued by a terror of her own faults and mistakes. She refuses to learn. If everything she held now was lost in a day, she might just flee a hundred miles west and start again, or sign on with the first adventuring crew she finds and aim to forget it all.

The only thing that Asva has left that's truly harmless is her flower garden, a little space she maintains next to her lair full of interesting plants her "subjects" bring her. Unfortunately, a recent acquisition of a shambling mound seedling threatens to turn even the garden into yet another tool for her self-destructive schemes.

Interests: Fashion, food, collecting things made of glass to decorate the garden
Likes: Vampires
Dislikes: Bad table manners, people's knees

For reasons I cannot fully explain, every single ounce of my hypomania today has suddenly and without warning coalesced into a single, incoherent thought, two words solitary, blazing in my mind like an archangel's burning sword, a singularity of pure, unyielding, unbending, completely useless certainty.

*deep breath*

Okay, here we go. Let's try to be concise for once, KC. Even if I have extremely complicated feelings here and am still working out how I'm gonna express them.

EDIT: It's just one of those days--

Before we begin, I just want to say that this thread is intended to serve as a place to talk constructively about the problems Rysky and others have been bringing up elsewhere, as well as to talk about what I've perceived as some problems in how people have been bringing them up. As such, I am going to politely ask that the following arguments not be made on this thread, either because they are off-topic, never lead anywhere good, or have been done to death elsewhere:

1. Pleas for this thread to not exist. It exists. Hide it and move on with your day rather than trying to shut down the conversation, please.

2. Complaints that the moderation team is "biased" or has "double standards", such as acting on behalf of management or being intolerant of conservative views.

3. Arguments that this is "pointless" because Paizo doesn't have to care what we think, or because the forums are a "privilege, not a right". See #1.

4. Nitpicking at broad generalizations with irrelevant niche exceptions. Read people in good faith, and if they seem to be saying something really dumb or excessive or extreme, consider that you may be assuming less nuance than they actually intended. Yes, we know that not literally every single mammal gives live birth. We're discussing what animal might be making those scratching noises in Cosmo's attic. Let it go.

Okay, So. So. Here's The Thing. Here's Why Everything Is Terrible Lately.

I don't need to tell you that these last two months have not been fun for anyone. Through it all, there have been two groups that have been effectively obligated to engage to some extent with every single discussion, no matter how toxic or cruel, even if their own integrity and good faith were being attacked the entire time:

Trans people and forum moderators. the two genders

The "moderation team" we have been engaging with--Raychael, Tonya, Heather, the whole crew--is, as far as I can tell, a small cluster of Paizo employees who are expected to keep these forums as safe and supportive and friendly as possible while also doing other jobs that they're actually employed for. The team has recently lost two members, including the person who used to run the team. Sara Marie was a widely beloved figure who ran the team extremely effectively and did everything she could for the forums before being unexpectedly fired without clear cause.

As far as we know, Sara Marie was fired because someone in leadership had it in for her, or didn't like her vocal support for labor rights, or who knows what. We don't know and neither does she. It is honestly one of the grossest things Paizo has done, and one regret of mine is that in all the excitement about transphobia and doxxing, we have spent a lot less time talking about how her firing was gross and inexcusable and incredibly self-destructive on management's part. This isn't the thread to discuss it in detail, but I have yet to see anybody who disagrees with that basic synopsis.

Adjusting to new leadership is hard even under the best of circumstances--a graceful transition, an amiable departure, an initial quiet period for getting a feel for things. Paizo management's abusive actions cost them that transition.

That much is not the moderation team's fault. The responsibility lies squarely on the shoulders of Paizo management, who have, incidentally, gotten to largely avoid having to interact with us at all while the moderators take all the heat for them from an increasingly anxious and frustrated community.

Over the last two months, nobody has handled things perfectly. Tonya herself recently issued an in-depth apology acknowledging that she and the team were much too slow to deal with abusive actors early on, and that their blind spots on transphobic dogwhistles exacerbated the problem.

Trans people are used to being tone policed, to seeing dogwhistles allowed to fly under the radar without issue. Seeing abusive actors get "moderated", then pop up a week later to resume their abusive behavior, hurt. It felt like Paizo was turning into yet another toxic community for us, and moderation wasn't going to do anything about it because they valued the aesthetics of forgiveness and redemption above the feelings of safety of trans people.

Many cis people are, putting it kindly, a little clueless about these issues. They've never been an egg, so they don't understand why they're expected to tread so delicately on eggshells now. Some of them feel like they're under attack, like they're being told they "aren't allowed" to have an opinion, like they're the only person noticing, "hey, this person is being kind of rude", like they're the only person who's ever heard "hey, you catch more flies with sugar" but everyone yells when they try to educate us. They feel like the moderators are shutting down every discussion they try to start while letting "worse offenders" off the look.

That's how it has felt for these groups, I think. And those feelings of hurt and fear and frustration and embattlement are valid for both groups. To some extent, they are based on truths: I believe that the moderation we've seen has been, at times, inadequate. I believe that the moderation team needs to reconsider many of their policies, particularly their policy of silence on bans and tempbans.

And yes, being told that you have made a mistake, or realizing that someone doesn't trust you, can be very painful. Not being trusted hurts. Being told you're privileged or spoiled hurts. Sometimes these criticisms are true, and that hurts, too, and that, too, is valid pain. When my now-ex once told me I was being codependent and manipulative towards her, she was completely right, and I still felt devastated and attacked at the time.

You're always valid in feeling hurt. It doesn't make you petty or bad or wrong or selfish or fragile.

But there's a difference between acknowledging valid hurt feelings and translating that into actions and inferences on others.

The Moderators Are Not Our Emotional Support Punching Bags
Look, I'm not here to appeal to some idea of "balance" or "center position" that is somehow superior to taking a strong stand for what you believe in. I am not a centrist. Actually, I'm a pretty enthusiastic extremist. But "moderation in all things" is not the same thing as the Golden Mean Fallacy. It's about acknowledging nuance. It's about acknowledging what we don't know. It's about acknowledging that ultimately, when you bash the moderators, you are bashing people who do not have a lot of power right now, and there is still so much we don't know going on behind the scenes with them.

The moderators are likely victims of all this, too. They don't own the website. They're employees. Employees getting paid less than living wage, most likely. The moderation team is understaffed and underbudgeted. They have likely been just as burned out as everyone else has been during the COVID Years, and their workload just keeps increasing. Their current leadership is inexperienced, and the person who probably knew where everything got fired for no reason. Some of them have been involved directly in union matters, and activism is work, too. Oh, and then there's their actual jobs in Customer Service/PR, right? And these are difficult questions of moderation sometimes. Not all concern trolls realize they're concern trolls, and the whole problem with dogwhistles is that they are designed to blend in, to prey on how online discussion only works if everyone takes good faith for granted.

I have been getting incredibly uncomfortable with criticism of moderation, because I agree with a lot of it in principle, but not in tone.

And no, that's not tone policing. It's about not personally attacking people you don't know. It's about not assuming the worst of complete strangers based on second-party accounts--even from parties you generally trust--and taking that out on them.

Tone policing is telling someone not to be angry. I'm saying that directing your anger at people who may well be fellow victims of management is not the way to go.

So, it's often gone unstated that Tonya herself was criticized heavily by Jessica Price on several points. I think people are uncomfortable bringing this up because we'd all like to stay on good terms with the moderation, because we don't know the full context, and/or because some people don't trust Jessica Price's framing of events. That said, others do trust Jessica enough to feel uncomfortable with Tonya, and I respect that. It's helpful to remember, though, that two good people can severely dislike each other without it reflecting on either one's moral character.

The thing is, I agree with a lot of the criticisms! I think moderation techniques are drastically inadequate! But human beings came up with those techniques, and human beings are trying to tinker with them on the fly, and some of those human beings may well be complete jerks--or they may be trying their best to help and making extremely understandable mistakes.

I have Favorited a lot of posts critical of the forum moderation, because I think those criticisms are accurate, but the moderation team? I have nothing against any of them. I don't know most of them. We have not met.

And because there is a significant possibility that everyone on the team is trying to help, and is in a horrible situation where they are forced to be the face of leaders whom they themselves may be incredibly unhappy with, and because I have no way of knowing that this is not the case, and because I have no way of knowing who cosigned what post or what kinds of conversations went on behind the scenes, and because they are likely going to have to read any post about them I make, I do not think I am going to make anything better by taking out my pain and frustration on them.

This isn't a big company. They aren't distant public figures. Assume that every single member of the team is actually reading any given post you write about them. Yes, including the really snarky or bitter ones. Assume when you criticize an action "one" of them undertook that in reality multiple teammates were involved in that action, not just Tonya or Heather or whoever made the post about the action. And they'll see your criticism. The same thing goes for criticism of the team as a whole.

Have you ever had that moment where you write a really sour post about some "bigwig", and then they reply, and you suddenly feel awkward because they're being nice but they seem sad and you realize you didn't fully expect them to see your post at all, and suddenly you're apologizing and adding nuance you neglected to include in the first post? We're all meaner and harsher when we feel unheard.

But as valid as our pain and fear and anger may be, we do not have the right to take it out on people who we don't know to be responsible. It may be cathartic, but a lot of abusive behavior is.

It's also still abuse.

I don't know anyone who's crossed that line yet, but I do know people who've tapdanced on it repeatedly. That nuance you might be guilted into adding in retroactively? Let's try to add it in the first time instead.

My Problems With Paizo Moderation Practices
Okay. So.

Seeing Rysky's thread get deleted really upset me. I'm still pretty unhappy about it. I have real concerns about how the team is being run, but a lot of them are based on things I don't actually have any way of knowing. And on the off-chance that I'm wrong, I think I'd feel pretty rotten having those assumptions read by those they concern.

But it was not handled well.

I've really appreciated Paizo moderation over the years, including these last few months. You all have a nightmarishly difficult job, and you do an amazing job of it. Paizo moderation practices have been pretty good at tackling problems like "ah geez, the Full Caster people people are calling the Martial people cucks again", where it's more a case of good people losing their tempers due to poor communication on contentious issues. In that case, often the best thing to do is just delete a bunch of toxic posts and tell everyone to cut it out, calm down, and try again.

I also want to thank you for what you have done--the banning of certain abusers, the understanding and forbearance shown when we've gone too far or broken rules, and especially recently, the efforts I think I've seen you all making to be a little more transparent. We see that! It's appreciated! Thank you! This sounds sarcastic but it really, really isn't, I've just been struggling with this post for three hours straight and my breakfast was an apple!

Some of the following criticisms may seem dated to you, old news. But that's kinda the problem: none of us on this side of the screen really know for sure.

My concerns with moderation basically amount to this: As Rysky put succinctly yesterday, deleting posts is not, on its own, meaningful moderation. It's cleanup. It takes care of the bad posts but largely neglects bad posters and bad forum norms.

And yes, to be clear, I can tell that some people are being tempbanned or even permabanned now. Unfortunately, it's always been Paizo policy to not tell anybody what happened except the disciplined party. I don't think this is the right way to handle bullying and abuse. The targets of the abuse need to know something was done.

When I was in college, I reported a professor who was behaving very badly. For legal reasons, they couldn't tell me exactly how he was disciplined, but even then, they took care to message me and tell me that actions had been taken. That sort of vagueness was a necessary evil, but, like, at least they told me something. At least I knew they took me seriously.

A lot of the strongest solutions to these problems would involve extra labor to maintain, not to mention the time and effort to implement in the first place. We understand that. I know that's a big part of why you keep asking us to help as much as we can, to act as "unofficial volunteer mods", and I agree that we need to. And maybe the mods are already making some of these changes without us knowing, which would be great! But, again, not knowing is part of the problem.

And communicating... also takes time and labor, I know. Hell, reading through a post this long, on such a draining and personal subject matter, is the kind of job I would procrastinate to the end of the workweek. I know that almost every improvement we ask for is going to be in some way costly, but I believe that improving practices now will help avoid more labor-intensive breakdowns later. Still, I hate the position you all are in right now.

In Conclusion

Yes, I think people have been too harsh on the moderation team. But at the same time, some of that comes from real pain and real mistakes the moderation team has made, not all of which were even fully under your control but all of which still happened. That hurts to say, because I know it's a very harsh way to approach it. It certainly doesn't excuse the occasional abusive comments I've seen, not one bit.

Trans people are kind of at moderation's mercy. That's a very scary position to be in, and when we don't know what's going on behind the scenes--why someone hasn't been banned yet, whether someone is facing suspension--trust starts to erode.

We know you have the power to ban people. Because of that, when we see Abusive Bill post here again and again, we know that on some level, that's moderation's responsibility. He is here because moderation decided this was "okay". Is that an oversimplification? Yes! Of course it is! Jesus, I am positive the moderation team as a whole is disgusted that people who are extended benefits of the doubt keep taking advantage of that trust, sad and repulsed at how trolls keep sneaking under the radar.

But Bill is still here.

And so moderation becomes the face of the abuse itself, as every time Bill posts some flamebait, we mutter amongst each other, "Funny how he's still around." We don't know what's going on, what the process was to keep Bill around. We just see the results. I only work out Bill was banned if I stick around to notice, "Oh, hey, Bill hasn't implied I'm overemotional or violent in a while." And sticking around waiting for that gutpunch is sort of like waiting to see if a hiccup cure worked. It sucks.

It's not fair. We are on different trains heading the same direction, and we have pretty minimal way of communicating, "Hey, are you about to turn right and smash into us?". You likely often feel you have no way of shouting back, "No, sorry, we were just cleaning the turn signal."

The Trains Expert has logged on.

It's not a good situation. I think all of us are trying our best. But above all, I think more transparency is absolutely critical.

And for our part, yes, I really want us all to take a step back and remember that as frustrating as the situation is, sniping at the moderation doesn't actually make anything better. It probably just makes them sadder.

I wrote and rewrote so many parts of this post so many times. I'm about to post it, and I hope it comes off exactly as I intended. I hope nobody thinks I'm only lecturing trans and trans ally posters here, either--some of the meanest potshots I've seen aimed at mods have been from the same cis people I keep getting in arguments with. I'm not trying to dismiss people's pain or anxiety, or act like it entitles us to behave badly, or imply that everybody who's been critical of moderation or clashed with it has been abusive, or act like moderation has no idea what needs to change, or indicate "the real crisis here is that ear-splitting goddamn smoke alarm". But I was also trying to keep this short. I genuinely thought I'd be able to. Hubris.

Anyways.

If you read this far, you're an angel. If you didn't and you skipped to this paragraph and plan to lie to me about it, [comedically disproportionate condemnation implying illicit affairs between you and the Christian Devil] that's totally understandable. Hope your Friday's going well. <3

I've been thinking lately about homebrew and independent game design, and in particular, how I seem utterly incapable of compressing a magic item description to a single simple paragraph. That got me curious - what kinds of game design challenges do other people struggle with?

I don't know if an open-ended prompt like this will get any bites, but it's really interesting to me as both a point of curiosity and a discussion point. How do you learn to be less voluminously verbose, for example? Does it come easily to anyone here?

Hey! So, me and a few other Paizonians were talking in another thread, and we each spontaneously realized we all really missed the old sidebar that used to show the latest posts. It was a nice way to browse parts of the forums we normally didn't think to check, and helped the messageboards feel like a coherent entity. Especially in the days of Focus (a feature I use a lot, to be clear, out of necessity), that's something I really miss. I don't think we'd have gotten iconic threads like "Succubus in a Grapple" without people glancing at the sidebar and muttering, "Okay, I GOTTA know..."

Anyways, the last time I brought the sidebar up, a long time ago, I remember Gary Teter joking that he was pretty sure I was the only person who ever used it. But that's not true! There are pairs of us! Quartets, even! ;)

Aside from creating clutter for those who disliked it, the biggest problem I can see with the sidebar is that it might encourage endless dogpiling onto toxic threads. I do think it might be interesting if threads that get moderated heavily just automatically get removed from the sidebar, or maybe the moderator can remove them from consideration from the sidebar by checking a little box. I think making the sidebar an optional feature you could Enable/Disable would also solve most of the major problems it introduces, though that might be tricky to program.

So this is just a thread to say, for the record, that you would use such a feature if it ever got re-added.

Fun fact: I first found out about NaNoWriMo from these forums, and that led me to write my very first book, way back in my middle school days. So as long as I'm bouncing down Nostalgia Road, as I've been lately, I figured I might as well make a quick stop here.

So, yeah, for those who don't know, National Novel Writing Month is a nonprofit event organized to promote literacy and the creative arts across the world, although I honestly mainly know it as "the event that puts my Thanksgiving plans in jeopardy every year".

The goal of NaNoWriMo is to write up to 50,000 words, or a full novel, within the month of November. Sometimes people set higher or lower goals, as they so please. I like to keep it traditional. It's a really helpful exercise for those who work better under deadlines, and those tight deadlines can really help inspire you. Plus, being forced to write 1,667 words a day for a month can be a real confidence booster.

Disclaimer: Obviously, we're having a 600-day year right now. I blew off last year's event, the first time I've done so since I started over a decade ago. I think I've reevaluated a lot of my feelings about NaNoWriMo as the problems with my own workaholism have become increasingly apparent, especially over the last few years, and I do think there are very good reasons not to like NaNoWriMo at all. I think NaNoWriMo's culture sort of encouraged a damaging norm of not taking care of yourself, of obsessing over productivity at all costs, and worst of all, of liking Harry Potter. But they've taken great strides in recent years, and I'm down for a nice, wholesome, good-faith stab at getting back into the rhythm. NaNoWriMo can be a lot of fun, and it would be nice to write for myself instead of for commissioners for a change.

So, yeah! I'm doing NaNoWriMo this year. I may use this thread to talk about my ideas for what I want to write this time around--I've already got a couple. Is anyone else in?

Hi, all.

I hope this is the right subforum from this; it seemed appropriate. We've been arguing a lot lately about the issues Paizo's facing, but everyone seems to be in consensus about one thing: We care about the people who make Paizo great and want them to be okay through all this.

A lot of people have said that a good thing to do is contact your favorite staffer, or ex-staffer, with some kind words. I kind of want to encourage that kind of constructive positivity amid all of this. Truly, I want it to be a part of the process here: It's easy to do battle with the bad things, but it's just as important to bring kindness to the good things, isn't it?

So here's the place to talk about the nice things you've been sending their way. Or just say the nice things here, if you don't know how best to send them or feel shy about doing so! That's, um, what I'm doing for the time being. :P

Please don't use this thread to snipe. It's just not the place for it. Also, if a thread like this already exists, I will not apologize, I demand control over all the threads, I will be the center of attention, I can no longer be contained and I will assimilate all who dare sorry, yeah, my bad, I didn't see it on my cursory scan. <3

Anyways, I'll start. I'm honestly not the best person to start, because I actually haven't interacted a ton with Paizo staff in a long time, but I do have some names off the top of my head to at least kick things off with.

Okay, I'm sure there's more, but that's all I got for now. This started as me just wanting to improve the overall energy of the discourse right now and point things in a better direction, but honestly became really cathartic for me.

I know not everyone I posted about will likely see this thread, so I'll try to actually send emails or something out when I have the time and the energy and the non-crippling-shyness. I'm also sorry that I don't know enough to praise everyone working at Paizo, haha! I'm out of touch these days, and I'm also a terrible ditz.

Also, while I'm being all nostalgic and positive, big shoutouts to Ashiel, Mikaze, Freehold DM, Celestial Healer, Tacticslion, Radavel, emperor7, Heathansson, Courtfool, Ambrosia Slaad, TOZ, CrystalSeas, DMCal, Doodlebug Anklebiter, Dogbladewarrior, Fake Healer, Dragonborn3, Kelsey MacAilbert, James Sutter, Amber Stewart, Cosmo, Hugo Solis, Adam Daigle, Steve Geddes, Umbral Reaver, thejeff, Mark Hoover, that guy with the gorgon avatar, Dungeon Grrrl, Limeylongears, lynora, Aubrey the Malformed, Patrick Curtain, Crimson Jester, big time Kalindlara, Rysky, Sharoth, Captain Yesterday's Avatar, and Sebastian, among countless others. This weird list is not comprehensive or curated or anything. It's just people I have on my mind right now for random arbitrary reasons who are or have been, like, important to how I view the community. Thanks for making these messageboards what they are today.

Since the beginning of history, the mortal world has measured time in ages. Ages of Legend, of Enthronement, and even of Anguish mark the human tally of years, giving a sense of order to the events of past centuries. Over one hundred years ago, another Age was meant to begin—an Age of Glory for humankind, for Avistan, an Age marked by Aroden's return.

But it never came. The anointed date arrived, and Aroden did not. His clerics were called upon to explain it, but you might as well call upon a telescope to explain why a star has gone out. Prayers were answered with silence. The empires Aroden had molded into being crumbled. Many of the old gods were cast aside, for not one could explain what had happened. Prophecy was slain, and the Age of Lost Omens had begun.

A century passed. Mortals found new gods, or new names for old gods, or some combination of the two. Empires crumble or fall into hollow ruin, but Varisia has never had any use for empires, and so the Chelaxians and Taldans are not missed.

No town has exemplified the shift more than Diamond Lake. The pristine, near-crystalline body of water came under focus nearly one hundred and fifty years ago for the many ancient tombs dotting the Cairn Hills around it. An outpost sprouted up of adventurers, tomb robbers, treasure hunters. As the years went by, cairn after cairn was picked clean of relics. By the time of Aroden's death, the town was dying, too. The town would have collapsed had coal and silver deposits not been discovered in some of the old tombs, and so Diamond Lake became a mining town.

Over the last century, the lake has become more and more polluted, the fish within mutated and borderline inedible. The town has followed suit. Corruption has seeped into every crack in Diamond Lake's crumbling pavement. It is oft-said that there are two kinds of people found in the mining town of Diamond Lake: Those who have arrived disgraced, broken, seeking a fresh start in a town that will accept them as they are...and those who've come to take what little the former have left.

It is also said that one Age has yet to occur—the last prophecy still intact, the final fate for a world left sick and infected without its Living God. Golarion draws near an age of rot, of decay, and of writhing doom. Madmen and seers rave about it drawing nearer by the day. The Harrow has become obsessed with it, scarce able to perform even simple readings without whispers of writhing doom emerging from the cards. Monsters rasp its name in the fell tongue of Aklo with fear and excitement dripping from their jaws. Astrologers, diviners, and the servants of Fate believe that the Age of Worms may begin at any time.

The wisest among them fear that it has already begun.

Chapter One: The Whispering Cairn
CurrentDate: 13th of Arodus (August), 4706
8 am
1d100 ⇒ 25

The entire town stinks of sweat, beer, and despair on this warm summer day. But it's just another day in Diamond Lake.

In the perfumed arcade known as the Emporium, a drunken Governor-Mayor Lanod Neff rubs shoulders with petty heirs and heiresses awaiting appointments in the Veiled Corridor. Several of the less pleasant among them peek out the windows and holler catcalls at a passing elven woman down below. She ignores them, pulling her hood down slightly. She has no time for such nonsense at the moment. A floor below, a gaggle of grasping miners presses against the windowed door of a darkened cell, impatient for a glimpse of a two-headed calf. Many of the poorer patrons are using hard-won days off from their abusive employers to come here and have some fun. This is their idea of it.

Out in the street, a gang of rowdies screams obscenities at a crumpled halfling, kicking it as if scrambling for a ball. Their drunken laughter echoes off shuttered windows and booted doors, but peters out when they notice a heavily-armored dwarf coming their way. The gang scatters. His symbol of a sword embedded in a mountaintop might be wooden, but his greatsword and axes are not. The halfling crawls into an alleyway, leans against a wall, and pulls out a wad of something medicinal.

Across the polluted lake, an ancient tomb stands decorated with vivid green tapestries, colorful mint gardens growing atop it. Symbols of Wee Jas and Pharasma are carved above the entrance, though the latter has recently been vandalized to make the swirling spiral look like a very oddly-shaped item of human anatomy. From the Cult of the Lady of Mint emerges an out-of-breath woman in black, her purple cloak billowing behind her in the mind breeze as she races to catch the Jasidians' morning ferry into town. She's running very late.

Off the northeastern corner of town, a woman dressed quite like a ranger or druid rides a sleek warhorse. The horse pauses as it passes the Moonmeadow Mine, sniffing the air. After a moment, it lets out an uneasy whinny and hurries along, cringing under the baleful glare of a pale yellow-haired elf sitting by the mine entrance.

Up about fifty yards ahead of her, just out of sight thanks to the shape of the hills, a tall woman in a red riding habit and matching sun hat makes her way northeast. The Company Road here is littered with smashed wine and whiskey bottles, along with the occasional broken vial that likely once contained less wholesome substances, and her riding boots make unpleasant crunching noises every time she picks a less-than-cautious step.

At a crumbling old homestead further along the same road—the rendezvous point for the motley crew that is assembling, just an hour or two away from the Whispering Cairn—patiently waits a lean, muscular man with an oft-broken nose and the garb of a soldier. He sits on an old stool and... waits. He didn't expect to be the first one here.

Don't feel beholden to the implied timeline above—you all can arrive and encounter Broccan in whatever order suits you.

A rather nice map of Diamond lake. A less-nice map with a key. In both maps, the Moonmeadow and Dourstone locations are swapped.

Welcome, my friends, to the story of Golarion's next and perhaps final age, and the fools who'll try to stop it.

As difficult as the choice was this time around, I am incredibly happy with the PCs I've chosen.

Kata Coszma, N human bard of Pharasma
Rosella Breban, NG human fighter of the Bronzewood Lodge
Briar Vervain, CG human oracle of Calistria
Alaïs Thalanassa, CG elf skald noblewoman
Broccan Dunchad, NG human brawler of no account
Edrukk Thorvirgunson, CG dwarf warpriest of Gorum

Welcome to the campaign, and congratulations!! I'll be looking to start the Gameplay thread tomorrow morning. Thank you so much for putting up with the wait!

As a reminder, all House Rules are included on my profile. Also, particularly in the first week or so of play, I am probably going to be checking in here now and again looking for feedback. I like feedback. PbPs don't give me a lot of it. So I beg your patience if I come across as overly insecure—I'm just trying to get to know people and get a feel for how the campaign's gonna be.

Some Basic Housekeeping:
• Can I ask what people prefer to be called? I go by she/her.
• What's everyone's comfort levels? We touched on it briefly in the Recruitment thread. Any notable topics to avoid? Of particular note, Briar's backstory has some pretty heavy stuff in it, including transphobia and homophobia. Rosella's backstory deals with some real emotional abuse and neglect. Kata's backstory contains some real trauma. Edrukk worships a god who is, in the campaign, primarily associated with violence and, in his darker embodiments, slaughter (not that Edrukk worships those darker elements!). How do we feel about some aspects of these things coming up in the campaign?

Alignments
My personal alignment rules go something like this: If you'll consistently do evil things when there are other viable options, you're Evil. If you prefer to constrain your own and others' behavior around a code that is not necessarily subservient to your own convenience or morals, you're Lawful. If you consider your own personal "takes" to supersede any external framework (such as laws, codes, masters, etc), you're Chaotic. Killing or hurting a captive when there are viable alternatives, for instance, is always an evil act. You can commit evil acts and still be Good, but, well, has anyone seen Bojack Horseman? It's not enough to feel bad about it. You have to make genuine efforts to be better.

Final Backstory Tinkerings:

Does anyone want their PCs to already know each other?

So, the start of the campaign goes something like this: One or two of you (including at least one native of Diamond Lake, quite possibly Kata) have put together a plan to loot the Whispering Cairn. It's a well-kept secret among kids who grew up in the area that the Whispering Cairn has never been fully looted by the adventurers that come on by now and again. Some strangers have come to Diamond Lake of late, so the clock is clearly ticking to make it big and get out of this crummy little town!

Just as a suggestion, my favorite framing device goes something like this: Two people came up with the idea, someone invited a friend, that friend invited someone else they knew, and so on. When the party meets up, the original couple of planners can be increasingly nonplussed at just how many people have been pulled into this "secret" endeavor. It's a fun way to gradually introduce the crew.

Aside from already knowing other PCs, this is a good time to make those last-minute modifications. Briar, we talked about "localizing" Briar a little bit more, for instance. Edrukk, Gorum's worship will be a major element in the second book, as you encounter a heretical cult dedicated to his Erythnul incarnation. That might be of interest to you.

Everyone can feel free to make any tweaks they like in this time.

It’s said that the town of Diamond Lake started off rotten. Like an apple already browning when it fell from the tree. Maybe it’s all the ancient ruins and cairns dotting the hills. Maybe it’s the coal dust clinging to everyone’s clothes, the constant cough old-timers of the town have developed. Maybe it’s the remnants of the original inhabitants of the area, the goblinkin, who can still be spotted spitefully roaming the cursed hills or milling through the town looking for work. Maybe it’s the dead things that keep getting up and moving around.

Or maybe it’s something deeper. Maybe Varisia itself is plagued by a deeper sickness—a rot that festers, a death that writhes and squirms and multiplies by the second. Regardless, you want to raise the cash to get out of this awful town sooner, not later, and tomb robbing may be just the way to do it.

Druids and wizards speak of the mythical “Age of Worms” as if it is imminent, as if the next great era is just around the corner. Some suggest that it has already arrived.

Hello, everyone! I’ve been running an Age of Worms PbP for some time on these forums, and you might think I’ve gotten tired of it—but actually, I’m just getting nostalgic for the start of the AP. So I’m starting a second Age of Worms game! With this one, I can correct for problems I identified the first go-around and focus on PC growth a little more.

I should note that some aspects of the AP will see major changes—either as I modify elements to fit the PCs, or to fit my own ideas. For instance, the 8th installment will see massive elements overhauled, since parts of them really bugged me.

Setting: Varisia. A well-tinkered-with Varisia, with a lot of tie-in with Greyhawk. Pathfinder gods are allowed, but might just be reimaginings—for instance, Cayden Cailean might just be a more idealistic form of Olidammara, for all anyone knows. You are free to embellish as you see fit and I’ll tell you if there’s an issue.
Concept: This is a PF1e conversion of the Age of Worms AP, a campaign about the end of days and the prophesied heroes meant to try and fail to stop it.
Aim: This AP runs from 1st level to 20th level. I’m hoping we can complete it within 2-4 years, with a fast, steady pace.
Tone: Age of Worms is a fairly classic D&D campaign, with a lot of darkness and despair contrasted by brave, noble heroes doing their best to save the day. Will they succeed? Up to you! And the dice! And also me!
Playstyle: Combats will be harsh and vicious, but with mostly story consequences—I want to try to avoid unwanted PC deaths this time around. Outside combat, I focus on character arcs, relationships, and growth. Backstories will come up from time to time. If your backstory tells me you’re an exile from your homeland, you’ll probably either have to go home or meet someone from there at some point.
Major House Rules: Action Points, Background Skills, some custom traits, see profile and character creation info below.

Application Guidelines:
It’s okay to submit a completed PC. However, what I need from you is a post with your alias that contains:
Your character’s alignment, class, race, and party role.
Your backstory.
A good example post would be, Hi, here’s Jonathon Ageworm, a Chaotic Good human rogue. He’ll be sort of a trapsmith and backup melee combatant, with the backstory spoilered below, along with any other information I’d need to know.

I will be recruiting 3-4 players. In addition, we already have a dwarf warpriest and a human brawler, and I've invited one other person who's guaranteed a spot if she's interested. So, a total of 6 players. Recruitment will close on 8am PDT of the 14th.

People are free to use this thread to talk about their characters, though actual roleplay shouldn’t go beyond one or two posts. Basically, don’t spam the thread, but you are absolutely welcome to use it to expand on how you think your PC would fit in the game or interact with other PCs.

Honestly, I get why this isn't already a thing—it might clutter up the boards, especially if people decide to fill their profile bars with nonsense—but I think this would be a very positive change from an inclusivity point of view. Most boards I know, like GitP, already show a "Venus/Mars"-type symbol below the avatar. It helps cut back on confusion.

It would also be handy for the Recruitment subforum, since the GM is spared from having to open the profiles of PC applicants to see their basic information.

Just a thread for me to talk about whatever. I've been trying to get into the habit of some sort of journaling, and a part of me would sort of like to start reconnecting with this community and see how things have been going. Two birds, one stone.

I realize people don't really know what I'm up to nowadays. It's been years since I was active around here. If anyone's wondering, I went into the teacher education program for a bit, realized it wasn't for me, burned out just before Covid hit. I started transitioning openly around the same time. Changed my legal name just the other month; still need to sort out the paperwork for it.

I've only recently started getting back into D&D. The edTPA—the test teachers have to take to get certified—is a nightmare train that you can only get off by jumping out of, and I lost touch with a lot of my hobbies in the fallout from it all. If people have noticed me being basically absent around here, that's a big part of why.

I've been writing for a living since then, which suits me just fine. I currently have two roommates to support, both of whom I'm dating. It's a "U-haul lesbians" situation. So it's a good thing writing's worked out. Neither of them have jobs yet. Of the three of us, I'm the most "neurotypical-passing", so I can be pretty productive when I need to be. When I'm not obsessing over my D&D characters, anyways.

Hyperfocus is kind of like a roc. It'll pick you up and take you soaring, and you'll forget why you ever bothered walking on the ground. And then it's just dead weight and you're remembering, "Oh, right, I was supposed to write actual prose today. Oops. Well, at least the GM now has 4,000 words to read if she wants to accept my PbP application."

Get it? It's like a roc. Turns into dead weight. Wordplay. It's midnight, I'm going to bed. I hope everyone's having a lovely night.

<3

Hi, all! I was wondering - would anyone be game for an all-goblinoid playthrough of the horror adventure Escape from Meenlock Prison? My thinking is a one-shot with a major focus on roleplaying and character arcs. It would obviously be an evil-leaning party, but one that can struggle with actual moral dilemmas, so the horror still holds meaningful stakes. Hobgoblins with honor, goblins who just wanna have fun, characters along those lines.

I know that "interest checks" usually just morph into recruitment threads if people are interested, but for now I really do just want to know if this would be something people would be into. I know "RP-focused evil goblinoid party one-shot" is a bit of a weird one. I do have a concept in mind. I might look into launching an actual recruitment thread in a week or so if it's something that generates interest!

Hi, all! This is a thread I thought might come in handy. We've all seen the dozens of Rise of the Runelords games that end at Thistletop, the countless Second Darkness PbPs that never make it past the first book.

Obviously, spoilers may abound for basically all the APs here.

I thought it might be useful and enlightening to have a thread to talk about where campaigns tend to stall. Sometimes an AP offers five doors in a row, or a lot of open-ended questions, or haunts, or all the various forms of "the players aren't sure what to do so they go quiet" and "the GM isn't sure how to run this so they disappear".

I can start. I've been running Age of Worms for some time now, and the biggest stalling points I've run into are (in order):

We don't have to spoiler talk about APs, but I'm spoilering the above simply because it's very long. :P

This is a thread for keeping track of the various items of note in an Eberron campaign I will soon be running. I like to tinker with the setting a lot to make it feel more dynamic, and I don't like forgetting what I've tinkered with.

Sending Books and Reading Stones
Sending books are distributed monthly to households in large cities such as Sharn—provided they pay their fees on time to House Sivis, of course. A sending book generally contains 10-50 scrolls, each of which holding a carefully modified form of the sending spell.

On their own, sending books are almost useless. However, when torn out and used in conjunction with a reading stone—a simpler and cheaper cousin of the speaking stones used at message stations—a page from the book creates a direct line to a specific speaking stone in the area. Upon contacting the station operator, the caller's reading stone is commandeered and directed to connect with another reading stone in the area. This allows someone to call another home from the convenience of their own home. The conversation can be maintained for up to 5 minutes.

Reading stones are increasingly popular, though their inability to make contact with anyone outside city limits does present certain drawbacks—not to mention their total reliance on House Sivis's message stations to function. They also cannot be moved at all without expert handling, usually by a well-paid House Sivis employee. Cheap ones can break just by being jostled out of their constant crackling levitation.

A cheap reading stone costs 10 galifars, while a typical 25-page monthly subscription to House Sivis's sending books costs 2 gp per month, or 20 galifars as a flat annual fee. For this reason, reading stones are largely a luxury of the middle-class.

Sending books lose their power after a month if not used up. It has been suggested that this is not by accident.

The rules of this "game" are simple: I like hearing how people reflavor their fantasy species, so share what you've done with the previously prompted race in one of your games, then prompt the next one!

For example, let's say the previous poster prompted with, "Next Prompt: Kobolds". I would then provide the way I like to run kobolds in one of my games:

Kobolds
In one setting I was working on with my sister, kobolds are basically dragon fairy tales. This is to say, most dragons do not believe they exist. Kobolds are generally unaware of this small wrinkle in their efforts to earn the dragon's favor.

But it tends to get very, very confusing for the host dragon when they do take place.

Next Prompt: Orcs!

(Your concept doesn't have to be nearly this detailed. I'm just procrastinating work right now. Also, try not to go too obscure with your race or monster prompt, at least not for now!)