james014Aura's page

Looking at Archives of Nethys here:

Eldritch Trickster: "Choose a multiclass archetype that has a basic, expert, and master spellcasting feat."

Spellcasting Archetypes: Basic/Expert/Master Spellcasting Feats exist

BOUNDED Spellcasting Archetypes: Basic/Expert/Master BOUNDED Spellcasting Feats exist.

By the letter, "Basic Bounded Spellcasting" is not "Basic Spellcasting". Indeed, per Nethys, Basic Bounded Spellcasting is usually level 6, while Basic Spellcasting is usually level 4.

Prior to seeing that level 6 detail, I was about to cite how the Arcanist-style archetype for prepared casters, Flexible Spellcaster, and how it says things can be adapted at need, if it makes sense. But now, I'm in the "No, can't eldritch trickster into Bounded Casters" camp.

It's poor form to interrupt a battle to lecture the BBEG on why their spell selection is highly inefficient.

james014Aura wrote:

James Jacobs wrote:

Not sure where you're getting a "nasty no going back" bit from that post, unless it's just my conversational internet posting tone not carrying over in the way I intended.

1) Calistria
2) Gorum
3) Sarenrae

The no going back bit was part of the premise of my original question, 2 questions ago. Because the nature of the deal would in and of itself make those changes.

As for that list, I was thinking more of "All of the Above, In Order" not "each option individually." Reposting the question for clarity:
Let us say some party has (correctly) determined that a particular small settlement/city block had a WHOLE LOT of active and festering evils in it. Which (demi)god would be most amenable to the plan of,
1) quietly evacuate the few remaining innocent
2) burn the rest to the ground, butcher what remains
3) make sure to relocate the innocent from step 1, so they don't suffer.
Is there a minor or major faith that would do all three of those, and not only one or two?

I have no idea then. In part because this feels a little bit like I'm being baited into saying a good-aligned deity would be into butchering things.

I should probably mention that I was expressly saying "active" and "festering" evils, and meant to imply fiend/undead-level threats. And was wondering if there existed any who'd be for that, regardless of alignment. (Only GOOD ones I could think of, from just vague memories of reading divine rules, would have been Torag/Ragathiel from PF 1e, and even they felt a little off for that - hence my asking). And was overstating step 2 a little.

I recognize there's a thin line between what I meant and what you saw, but I was trying to distinctly be on the other side of it with steps 1 and 3, not the side you feared. Sorry for the wrong impression there.

____________

Question: Which region of Golarion would you say has the most insidious evils in it, that has been revealed?

Not sure where you're getting a "nasty no going back" bit from that post, unless it's just my conversational internet posting tone not carrying over in the way I intended.

1) Calistria
2) Gorum
3) Sarenrae

The no going back bit was part of the premise of my original question, 2 questions ago. Because the nature of the deal would in and of itself make those changes.

As for that list, I was thinking more of "All of the Above, In Order" not "each option individually." Reposting the question for clarity:
Let us say some party has (correctly) determined that a particular small settlement/city block had a WHOLE LOT of active and festering evils in it. Which (demi)god would be most amenable to the plan of,
1) quietly evacuate the few remaining innocent
2) burn the rest to the ground, butcher what remains
3) make sure to relocate the innocent from step 1, so they don't suffer.
Is there a minor or major faith that would do all three of those, and not only one or two?

Getting consent from a soul or spirit to be used in a golem is not the same as enslaving a spirit or soul, so that's an entirely different topic that isn't covered under my description of awful above. ;-)

I was mostly asking because of that nasty, "no going back" bit.

Let us say some party has (correctly) determined that a particular small settlement/city block had a WHOLE LOT of active and festering evils in it. Which (demi)god would be most amenable to the plan of,
1) quietly evacuate the few remaining innocent
2) burn the rest to the ground, butcher what remains
3) make sure to relocate the innocent from step 1, so they don't suffer.

From above post, "where if you're an awful person you take the shortcut and enslave a spirit/soul in there and are just as bad."

What if the magic user contracts freely and openly with the animating spirit? Does that count, or would it be fine since it's contracting honestly?

Example:
"Hello, open call for a spirit of earth to inhabit this vessel under these listed conditions, service to end upon destruction of the vessel. By my standards, this is intended as a very long-term contract, but if your standards of time differ, I may be in error. The major catch is, once you inhabit the vessel, short of someone destroying it, there's no going back."

james014Aura wrote:

Do the gods have a memetic component? That is to say, if perception of art were to refocus towards portraits [say, over landscapes] and literature [say, over music], would Shelyn then have a greater focus on those two things? Or would Shelyn refocusing on those things over other arts cause (through her followers following suit) perception of art in turn to refocus on portraits? Both/neither?

Rephrasing a little for clarity, because my thought tracks tend to diverge from others' thought tracks: if perception of a god or their domain by said god's followers were to shift slightly, would the god themself shift a little to accommodate that, provided they didn't outright reject the shift (or lack thereof, like Nocticula rejecting Chaotic Evil followers post-ascension)?

EDIT: I'm only asking about if there is a component at all, not how intense it is beyond 0 or not-0.

Both.

So, if a god wants to rebrand so to speak, how much pushback from their followers/priests would they need to worry about? Just as examples, if Iomedae were for some reason to choose to refocus on the interpretation that one book on the Ascended called her, the Prime Commander vs Shelyn rebranding as a variant lust goddess (since she has the Passion domain, I'm guessing "you weren't already?") vs what Nocticula went through ascending and abandoning the CE alignment. I'm assuming that it scales (not necessarily in a linear fashion) with all of how much/far, how many followers, and how traditional they are?

Do the gods have a memetic component? That is to say, if perception of art were to refocus towards portraits [say, over landscapes] and literature [say, over music], would Shelyn then have a greater focus on those two things? Or would Shelyn refocusing on those things over other arts cause (through her followers following suit) perception of art in turn to refocus on portraits? Both/neither?

Rephrasing a little for clarity, because my thought tracks tend to diverge from others' thought tracks: if perception of a god or their domain by said god's followers were to shift slightly, would the god themself shift a little to accommodate that, provided they didn't outright reject the shift (or lack thereof, like Nocticula rejecting Chaotic Evil followers post-ascension)?

EDIT: I'm only asking about if there is a component at all, not how intense it is beyond 0 or not-0.

Just wondering: for APs and Modules, have you or others at Paizo ever tried minimum-kill runs? That is, as few sentient deaths by PC hands as possible?

and books that focus on deities and their lives tend to trigger "We can't just do a book just for clerics" sort of knee-jerk reaction.

I'm suddenly curious about the LAY followers. The religious non-divine characters, and how people interact with the divine casters. Like in Shelyn's temples, if Bards treated the same as full Clerics, how to address a priest of the faith, how the farmers and craftsmen and merchants interact with their flocks, how player characters who are AMONG said flocks should regard priests of their faith, etc... But I can't think of a good way to ask about that so:

Question is: Is there a favorite church hierarchy that you have that's has a canon format? (As in, I recall reading somewhere that Sarenrae's churches are organized like families, while Iomedae's temples are organized more rigidly as by a commanding sword-knight and up to a dozen subordinates)

The resulting pantheon was something of a hodge-podge, and then as we went in to detail them more, we focused on articles about the deity and their faith, with a strong focus on the worshipers and faith and not so much the deity or their domain. As a result, we got well into the edition before we even started giving names to the places our deities lived (in several cases, this would take us nearly to the end of the edition in Planar Adventures to address), and information about their friends and family was even lower on the to-do list. It's happened here and there, but not yet in any sort of way that brought those characters into "high profile."

What general sort of questions into their families and friends would be unlikely to get refused ("unrevealed", "undecided", or variants thereof where you're not allowed to go into further detail?) Or is that category too broad for any answer to this question to be useful?

So, I was on the wikis, etc lately and saw the rumor that Shamira's actually the child of a high-profile deity. Got me thinking, so here's the related question:
Not counting stories in which a player character is related to a deity, do any of the major deities (core 20 / Gods of the Inner Sea) have a high-profile child that is not themself regarded as a (nascent) divinity? At this time, I'm specifically asking the existence of ones we've seen, but who haven't been confirmed as significant in that way, but not what their identities are.

Welcome back!

Here's my question: What's your favorite villainous faction, and why?

So let's say a character spent their entire 1-20 career being as greedy and mercenary as possible, betraying anybody and everybody when it suits them, and having no lines they will not cross if the pay is good enough, so as to acquire maximal wealth and thereby maximal power.

But at that point they realize "I can't really get more powerful, and money isn't really useful to me anymore since I already bought everything" and they spend the remainder of their lives doing philanthropy, because people at least like you when you do that.

Is this person good or evil?

I think that's literally

That has the problem of, well - firstly the worldbuilding question of "does this ~medieval/Renaissance-esque society even have institutions devoted to this?", but assuming that's the case, will they listen to random adventurers who march in and say "hi, this guy is an evil cultist, please lock him up for a while and maybe teach him to stop being evil, thanks!"?

Especially for adventures that happen outside of the obvious reach of the law of whatever place they're being brought.

I was thinking more along the lines of, "Hey, we captured these two cultists outside town. We'll stay long enough to provide four sworn testimonies about the circumstances. And here's the group's journals for evidence. "

I mean, Rise of the Runelords established Magnimar's justice system has some intricacies to it, already.

Outside that reach, though... well, that is an issue, but I was concerned more about close to the cities.

james014Aura wrote:

What do the gods in the Godclaw pantheon think of their portrayals in said pantheon? (EDIT: choosing this one specifically to ask about because of all the pantheons I've looked at, it feels like the one that skews most from the ideals of the individual gods.)

They don't really. Pantheons are inventions of the faithful, not of the deities.

Then how do the faithful get spells from pantheons? They have Edicts, Anathema, Domains, and Cleric Spells, after all.

What do the gods in the Godclaw pantheon think of their portrayals in said pantheon? (EDIT: choosing this one specifically to ask about because of all the pantheons I've looked at, it feels like the one that skews most from the ideals of the individual gods.)

Can gods of Fire eat cold food, or does their fiery nature sear the meal as they try to eat it? That is, could Asmodeus or Sarenrae have Ice Cream? Ditto for hot meals and gods with the Cold domain, like Gozreh.

224) Slept in, forgot to attend the ceremony. Breaking the prophecy killed him.

225) Murdered to create the Worldwound.

So, who leads the other Outsider races then? I'm assuming the Whisperers/Oinodaemon WOULD lead the Daemons if he could (and the Horsemen collectively do), but what of Agathions, Archons, Azatas, Aeons, ... would Proteans even have a leader? I'm also assuming Pharasma for Psychopomps.

Since Outsiders can Fall/Ascend on their moral axis (Celestial to Evil, and a couple Fiends to non-evil), can this happen much on the ethical axis? I'm especially interested in the Angels here, given the non-Neutral Good Angelic Empyreal Lords (according to the Wiki) like Pulura and Tolc (CG), or Ragathiel and a couple others (LG).

Or, interpreting how Archives of Nethys's cites the Bestiary, is it just that Angels are *slightly* less bound to the Neutral part of the NG alignment than Agathions are?

Entrapping someone in a no-good-choice situation is kinda lame, honestly. It's when you choose to ignore an edict or perform an anathema of your own free will that it really matters. Being tricked or forced to do one, be it by deception or magical control or by being forced to choose the proverbial lesser of two evils isn't the same.

Would it be less lame if it's delightfully ironic, that is: the players doing it to a villain who worships a god with the "Trickery" domain who revels in forcing people to do things (an Asmodean)? NINJA EDIT: That is, a god who I'm fairly sure would say his followers should know better than to get entrapped in the first place?

(And for the other answer, I specified that I'd level with them even in character generation about that being a thing. I meant to imply that I'd be clear with them that they'd want to be wise about avoiding traps of that nature. And the entire point of my other question was to advise them WELL, so that I could, for instance, tell a wise Sarenite: a lie is temporary, but the aid it will enable you to provide to those wounded refugees permanent. Or rather, to verify that I'd be correct in-lore to give that advice to the player. But since your answer to my first question included "It's much easier to fall from grace by ignoring or disobeying anathemas, in other words, than ignoring edicts," I'm not so sure about that advice any more.)

Building off the previous question, if a villain themed on undermining faith or his minions learn of a player character's faiths and tries to create situations against them, how should I guide them? (It's thematic to the villain, and in character generation, I'll level with the players that moral dilemmas including of that nature are a part of the campaign. They can handle it.) That is, if the player character rolls well on their lore (religion) check, then should I guide the player towards INACTION (fail to obey the edict, but do not violate the anathema), towards ACTION (sacrifice an anathema to fulfil an edict).

AKA, like that Church of Sarenrae tolerating the government allowing slavery in one area answer from back in 1E at least because they're between a rock and a hard place - they needed a war to solve it, but war would be worse. I can't find the post, though.

Reposting the question for clarity: If a religious-themed villain tries to trap a PC between anathema, or between an anathema and an Edict, and the PC is wise enough to know what to do in such a situation, how should I guide the player?
(And yes, I feel my group can handle this type of situation in the general case. Actual RP into the hacking and slashing at evil, not just the hack and slash.)

So, I'm turning ideas over in my head for a homebrew campaign, and while this question is gonna be very long-term, on the off chance my players get creative about this, what happens if Edicts and Anathema are pitted against each other?

Relevant example I may see coming: attempting to entrap the (currently planned to be) Asmodean Champion with a contract... to force him to grant a wish to them, and they wish to free a slave. Either obey, freeing a slave (breaking an anathema), or violate it (and thus break an anathema). (This is ALSO assuming they manage to leverage circumstances, the villain's pride, and Edict: Negotiate Contracts to your advantage against said villain to get him to negotiate with them in the first place).

Reposting the question for clarity: if my players manage to trap a religious-themed villain between two Anathema, what happens?

james014Aura wrote:

So, given Ragathiel's heritage... a hypothetical descendant of his, if they were to have sorcery (assuming 1e's Crossblooded Sorc, or 2e's crossblooded evolution):

Aasimar (Assuming 1e's subraces: Peri, Angelblooded, or default/mixed), Tiefling (also assuming 1e's subraces: Devilblooded or default/mixed), or Ifrit (would any 1e subrace apply there?), and what sorcerous bloodline(s) would said descendant have?

Whatever the player wants. Sorcerer bloodlines can come from your ancestry, or from being afflicted by a magical source, or from being attacked by a supernatural creature, etc. All the things that generate comic book superheroes can be used to justify a sorcerer's bloodline.

If you want to lean in to "my ancestor was Ragathiel" though, I'd suggest to you if you were my player to go with the celestial bloodline.

And given the unique heritage, which ancestry/race would be most thematic? Asking because it feels like his Empyreal status is acquired rather than a normal inherited trait. (And because if my group gets the time for more campaigns, I'm looking into leaning into exploring Ragathiel.)

So, given Ragathiel's heritage... a hypothetical descendant of his, if they were to have sorcery (assuming 1e's Crossblooded Sorc, or 2e's crossblooded evolution):
Aasimar (Assuming 1e's subraces: Peri, Angelblooded, or default/mixed), Tiefling (also assuming 1e's subraces: Devilblooded or default/mixed), or Ifrit (would any 1e subrace apply there?), and what sorcerous bloodline(s) would said descendant have?

james014Aura wrote:

What's the Angel I'll list in the spoiler been up to since their resignation, and would they be an Angel or an Archon in 2e?

** spoiler omitted **
edited for format.

The way you wrote this question confuses me. Please restate it in full; if you're referencing questions you asked upthread, keep in mind that I've got a LOT of questions bumping around in my head from this thread, on top of being pretty stressed and distracted by other current events at Paizo.

I am not referencing them.

CorvusMask got half of my question rephrased. The other half is, what's the Hand been up to after his resignation and replacement in a certain AP? Has he returned to service in another capacity, looked for another job, or is he still meditating?

PCs can't dedicate the time, but what about the magistrates of, say, Magnimar or other cities? (And re: eye for eye, "provided they've only done things that could be undone or repaired"). EDIT: For clarity, I'm talking about, just turning the villains over to the magistrates.

Is this thread because of my questions in the ask James Jacobs anything thread? Because those are because I was considering playing a Ragathielan and was trying to understand him a bit better, starting from a view similar to the first post.

Do you guys think harsh sentences spent mostly undoing stuff the sentenced villain has done (provided they've only done things that could be undone or repaired) would be in line with his 2e softer self?

What's the Angel I'll list in the spoiler been up to since their resignation, and would they be an Angel or an Archon in 2e?

james014Aura wrote:

What would Ragathiel think of:

** spoiler omitted **

I suspect he'd be a mix of wary and jealous and temperamental and judgmental and demanding. Of all the empyreal lords, he's the one I see being the least friendly and least understanding of them all.

That said, I played through that game as an azata and don't know much at all about the angel path.

... Having a little trouble there. He'd be the least understanding,

What would Ragathiel think of:

Archpaladin Zousha wrote:

Is there any way a Lawful character might believe in or develop some sort of connection to concepts like change and entropy, or would those things be solely accessible to nonlawful characters, given almost any deity or extraplanar creature associated with them is some form of Chaotic?

Not if you want to retain the value of the alignment system. To me, that's like saying, "Is there any way a good character might stay good even though they do evil acts?" It's nonsense, to me, for a lawful character to be deeply invested in entropy.

What if they regard said entropy as a universal law (it is in IRL thermodynamics), and focus on regulating where it strikes?

No, thank you for proving my point about showing how little it takes to set some people off. You and the "elf" guy are prime examples of how to read-into a statement meaning that is manifestly not there.

You have no moral or logical right to complain about that, given that you did EXACTLY that in my early posts, and then twisted things I said again in a post complaining about you twisting my previous post. From what others said, you did exactly that to them, too. Or: Those who live in glass houses should NOT throw stones at a mere window.

There has been faked data. And hype, lots of hype.

Thanks for finally admitting your role in this. Prior to my quietly washing my hands of this in hopes the thread would die - a washing I see was premature - I looked at a sample of the links posted by persons other than you, and they're not the ones with fake data.

When given three wishes, they can't be:
1) give the tarrasque ghost touch and immunity to evil,
2) teleport the tarrasque to Geb,
3) Wake up the tarrasque.

Does the phrase "the naked truth" exist on Golarion (and the origin story where Truth and Falsehood go swimming)? If so, what do the deities of truth and lies think of it?

From the Inner Sea Gods category on Archives of Nethys

Truth: Sarenrae, Iomedae, Irori
Trickery: Asmodeus, Calistria, Lamashtu, Norgorber

Mage the Ascension / pf1 spheres of power 3pp / GURPS / Mutants and masterminds: Just because the rules allow it, that doesn't mean my character can be apocalyptic right out of chargen.

There are 10 kinds of people in the world: Those that know binary, and those that don't.

There are two types of people in the world:

james014Aura wrote:

Irontruth wrote:

If you die in the same hospital you were born in, your average lifetime velocity will be zero.

Relative to what? Earth, certainly, but the planets and stars will be in different positions. Galaxies, too.

Also disageeing because the maternity wards are in a different position than your deathbed.

Have you ever measured the speed of something on Earth (and not the Earth itself) relative to anything other than the Earth? I know it's possible, but rather I'm asking whether this would be something you'd find useful in describing the behavior of this object while on Earth. The closest example I can think of would be the tides, but even that is usually still measured relative to the Earth.

Also, you can't think of a single possible way that someone might die in the place where people give birth?

Lastly, if you don't like a joke... you can just move on and leave it alone. No reason to pick it apart in a thread about jokes. Kinda ruins the vibe.

I was making a meta-joke by demonstration about people who do that. It seems I went a little too deep, though.

If you die in the same hospital you were born in, your average lifetime velocity will be zero.

Relative to what? Earth, certainly, but the planets and stars will be in different positions. Galaxies, too.

Also disageeing because the maternity wards are in a different position than your deathbed.

To the non-QBs here: I recall someone said we'd lose ~90-95% of species. Is that mostly going to be a chain reaction from losing a few keystone species, like wasps and bees, and the like?

QB, how bluntly do they need to say that they know that you, QB, are not arguing in good faith and that you've been proven in error so often that the only reason they bother with the falsehoods you keep posting is to minimize the damage you're causing?

Please, QB: start being honest (both intellectually and otherwise).

So, when someone shows that YOUR OWN NUMBERS, QB, show that it's a whole lot easier for us to fix than you claim, ... you move the goalposts, by a trivial amount?

200 m3 was above average, but let's go along with QB's x2, and then 100 more for the roads (you make numbers up QB, so I can, too.) That makes CB's 1 year 2.5. Still very reasonable.

(summarizing: an answer to my questions)

Thanks! So, assuming a semi-concentrated effort, how long would it take for the world to implement the pure solar/hydro/wind power?

So, last time I was here, I got a bit of info re: what the big problem is (animals can only survive a certain increase over a short time, and we're going to push that even in good scenarios), but something else has come up to pique my interest.

Carbon capture, and transitioning to renewable only.

To the many who are actually here in good faith, could you educate me again?

For CC, what's the general thing of that? Is it lots of machines or chemicals that bond with CO2 and release O2 or just take it out entirely? Or something else?

For renewable only, what's a bit deeper than the general picture? I know wind and solar are part of it, and we need better storage systems, but I'm not enough up on this to know deeper than what the general direction of the issue is.

On mobile, so it's too difficult to quote, but: first sentences of QB's post.

You are not a victim. Everyone has been inhumanly patient with you while you've done the exact thing you 1, falsely see in their posts, and 2, are complaining about in an extremely hypocritical way.

Stop it, Quark Blast. Turning around and claiming to be a victim after over a year of your intellectual dishonesty is 1, an admission that it's not worth their time to respond to you, and 2, a troll's tactic.

I was aware it had already started; weather in my hometown so to speak was already becoming more chaotic, and I heard about some mussels that just died off from warming seas. The can't-stop-X-therefore-waste-of-time thing ... much more about the situation makes sense, now.

Could you elaborate on the big milestones? Based on news and the weather, I'm pretty sure drastically increased storm strength is on the list? As are completely flooded islands.

Thanks,
james014Aura

Thanks Boomer!

...

lots of rambling

Thanks Boomer!

______________________

In all seriousness, now that I can mentally write off the rambling: The rest of you might have noticed that I only joined the thread to point out certain fallacies. I don't have the right knowledge to talk much about this and sorting through QB's posts beyond looking for blatant fallacies to call out to bring logic back sorta turned me off from the main content. So, now that I can mentally pay attention to the actual information, could one of you educate me a bit?

For reference, my understanding is only broad strokes: Climate Change = Rising seas and chaotic weather = real bad, rapid action needed because time is running out, carbon-neutral fuel sources needed. Not much about how long we have or how bad things would be other than in broad strokes.

Thanks.

And with that, avr's shown why the cherry-picked Burundi example is not a refutation of the NZ discussion.