jscott991's page

And even in that period, you're looking at a shorter period than between the day Abrogail II took the throne in 4709 and the start of Hell's Vengenace (where we first had her show up on-screen). At the current point in the setting, she's been in charge for over a decade.

Yes, it makes sense that she would be very powerful 10+ years into her reign.

It was the Inner Sea Magic book (from 2011/4711, when she had been on the throne just a couple of years I think) that took me aback. She had the same levels there as she did in the much later references to her levels and stats. Also, a lot of the books talk about how inexperienced she is and that struck me as odd combined with her very high number of class levels.

Inner Sea World Guide (also from 2011/4711) doesn't give her levels and it's my main source for Golarion, so I hadn't really looked at Inner Sea Magic closely (or at all) until recently.

And even if she went from 0 level to 18th level in a few years, she's still way slower than a lot of PCs out there.

Ha.

Good point. I prefer campaigns that space things out over time (like PCs might start adventuring at like 18 and end five or more years later), but I know not everyone does that.

The story they want to tell is that she is both very young, and incredibly powerful for her age. What I mentioned above is a good in universe way to understand why, but going too far trying to figure out how NPCs level up, when they don't level up at all, is effectively a waste of time.

She's incredibly powerful for any age. A level 18 spellcaster is one of the most personally powerful people in Golarion. :)

I think I am struggling to explain to myself how someone could be level 18 at 19 years old under the mechanics of the rules as presented, when you're right, those mechanics don't really apply to NPCs. I have trouble acknowledging that NPCs and PCs don't play by the same rules, but that's kind of making a futile attempt to stretch RPG rules to be some kind of simulation of all life, instead of just the mechanics to enjoy being a party of adventurers.

In Abrogail's case, I do think it would make more sense for her to be less powerful in 4711 than she is 4715 and on, so if for some reason a party did encounter when she was 19, I would scale her back and have her hit her peak power later in life.

In Inner Sea Magic, Abrogail Thrune II is listed as 2Ari/16 Sor. This 2011 book is set in, I think, 4711, when Abrogail Thrune is 19 years old. The Cheliax, Infernal Empire book confirms her levels (although it is set in 4715, making her 23 at the time). One of the themes of a lot of the 1E Golarion books is that Abrogail is young and inexperienced.

Does it make sense that she's already a level 16 sorceress (and has 18 class levels over all) at this young of an age?

If I were trying to explain how she accumulated so many levels so quickly in life (without really ever adventuring because she is royalty), what would a good in-universe explanation be?

If I was going to set adventures in 4711 (before a lot of the setting is disrupted by the constantly advancing timeline), would it make more sense to have Abrogail be less personally powerful?

Thank you for any help.

This is an amazing book if you want lore and background.

In my return to Pathfinder, this has been my unexpected favorite book.

Buy it. You won't regret it.

It's Christmas day, dammit. Be joyous and festive. Stop poo-pooing the moment I've been waiting for. Don't obsess over one single little dam detail of the AP.

It's a pretty big detail, as the pervasiveness of all the quotes about it show.

That being said, I loved First Empire. Loved it. It puts Echoes to Glory to shame. It undid some silliness in the older book (the bearded stuff) and gave us a fully fleshed out empire.

And it introduced a ton of amazing female NPCs! General Gwein. Just awesome. Grand Duchess Solari. Scheming and tons of interesting nuggets crammed into a small space. Grand Duchess Tiberan. Political neophyte trying to ignore the growing revolution. Just so cool.

It gave Taldor tons of interesting, sophisticated problems that Eutropia would have to solve if she took power. A bloated bureaucracy. A treasury perpetually in deficit. Tensions with Qadira. Nobles ignoring Taldor's progressive, post-feudalism structure. It hinted that Eutropia seeks to return Taldor to glory (which I admit that I define closer to what Crownfall says Pythareus is about).

That's why I was devastated to read Crownfall (and I probably shouldn't have purchased it, since I don't intend to GM or play it; I just love the older version of Eutropia and was greedy for more details). It twisted Taldor from a complex, decaying empire into a simplistic, black-hatted state. And it transformed Eutropia into a white-hatted paladin of very modernist politics (I'm absolutely shocked she's a monarchist, frankly, given how she's written in the Player's Guide).

War for the Crown has changed Taldor forever. It means that future material on it will use Crownfall as the foundation (and not First Empire), whether there are contradictions or not. It basically turns the Taldor I loved in First Empire and the older Campaign Setting into head canon.

Remember it's a game.

I don't think I'm the one that forgot that in this case.

Nothing about the AP suggests it.

"Taldor’s ancient law that decrees only male heirs may inherit their families’ titles, lands, and the authority that comes with both. Its repeal would be an enormous step forward for all of Taldor’s women and people of other genders." Frasier, War for the Crown: The Player's Guide, p. 4

"Intense traditionalism means Taldan culture is still steeped in sexism and racism that many other nations have spent decades gradually shedding. While any Taldan can own property or hold a title via promotion, marriage, or appointment, the law of primogeniture dictates that only men can inherit, both demonstrating and perpetuating Taldor’s inequalities." Frasier, The Player's Guide, p. 13

"While proud of her nation, Eutropia recognizes the horrible things Taldor has done in the past: the genocide of native Kellids, imposition of strict gender roles, the expulsion of Sarenites." Frasier, The Player's Guide, p. 17

"Your own interpretation of the princess may prioritize additional social reforms beyond the gender equality usually attributed to her." Frasier, The Player's Guide, p. 17

"A ruling class steeped in the racism and sexism . . . ." Frasier, Crownfall, p. 2

"Allowing not only the rabble-rousing Eutropia to inherit family power, but every ill-deserving woman." Hillman, Crownfall, p. 6

"Overturning the backward law will improve not only her own fortunes, but also those of many other Taldan women." Frasier, Crownfall, p. 90

I'm just curious. Nothing in the AP suggests that women are denied power and even full rights?

Nothing in the AP contradicts the existence of powerful women in Taldor: The First Empire serving as senators, grand duchesses, and generals?

Not even a little?

I honestly didn't think my thread would be that controversial. I thought it was a retcon, like "the bearded" or Sarenrae. I thought the discussion would revolve more around why than whether.

I guess I was wrong.

I think Crownfall reduces Taldor to a cartoon. And I think War for the Crown will make General Pythareus into a mustache twirling caricature that he was never presented as before.

There was a lot of subtly and richness in Taldor as presented since the beginning of the line and through First Empire (it's my favorite Golarion nation by far). That complexity is completely stripped out when you transform it into a sexist, misogynist society that is so backward it treats women like chattel. Except of course, all the women who are grand duchesses . . . or generals . . . or senators . . . or prominent adventurers . . . .

Ring of Gyges is on to something. Some wires got crossed somewhere between the writing of First Empire and the writing of Crownfall. I have theories, but I find the entire thing very odd.

The whole campaign and goal of it isn't just to have true gender equality, its to reform Taldor in general <_<

It's the main point in Crownfall and the Player's Guide. As I pointed out earlier, it's such a major part that in the player's guide writeup of Eutropia, they talk about how to change the princess's focus to other issues if that resonates better with your group of players.

I've enjoyed some of this discussion and I appreciate everyone's thoughtful replies.

I think the most reasonable interpretation of all the source material is that War for the Crown and Crownfall contradict the the prior setting material, particularly First Empire. First Empire goes out of its way to introduce significant, politically powerful women. It includes a section on Taldor's government. It mentions the law that bars Eutropia from succeeding. If gender inequality was tearing the nation apart or if gender inequality was the issue that was driving Eutropia's base of support (and disenfranchised women are not mentioned even once as a source of Eutropia's support; in fact, bastard nobles are singled out), it would have been mentioned in First Empire.

Crownfall's presentation of Taldor is a retcon, just like the bearded and Sarenrae banning in First Empire.

I'm sure others will continue to say that you can contort the earlier material to make Crownfall work, but, honestly, the strained explanations and the excuses made for lack of editing in the Player's Guide, seem like they help make my point.

Nor is it unheard of for Taldor (among other things) to get smacked, hard, with the retcon-hammer.

Exactly. I mentioned the bearded and Sarenrae First Empire retcons a while ago. They had no problem tweaking Taldor for the book that supposedly set the stage for War for the Crown. But it doesn't mention anything like what Crownfall is talking about.

I also had someone point out that Taldor's politics come up just a bit in the Half Dead City adventure (Mummy's Mask). A Taldoran woman (NPC) seeks glory in Osiron to return to Taldor to restore the empire. Again, none of the empire's gender inequality is remotely mentioned in her bio.

It's just bizarre.

4. Yeah females is a bit dehumanizing. Though this does raise a super off topic question of mine: is a female Halfling also called a woman? Woman and Man are designations...

This is the issue I've always had with describing characters while DM'ing. It's why in fantasy and sci-fi settings I've always used "female" and "male" as nouns. As I said earlier, it's what is used in NPC stat blocks, whether you are playing D&D, Star Wars, Pathfinder, or whatever.

I've re-read everything on Taldor that I have (Campaign Setting, Echoes of Glory, Inner Sea Setting, Inner Sea Races, and First Empire).

If gender equality were a problem in Taldor the way that Crownfall describes, you'd think it would be mentioned at least somewhere else in a significant way. According to Crownfall and the Player's Guide, it is Eutropia's main platform for reform. Eutropia's succession issue is mentioned in four different books. But all we get is the line in the description of Taldans (both Campaign Setting and Inner Sea Setting, but not, interestingly, Inner Sea Races) about men displaying excessive machismo.

I still maintain the oddest thing about this whole situation is that until First Empire we basically had no women in positions of power in Taldor other than Eutropia. If they wanted to make War For the Crown about gender inequality, why create so many powerful female nobles and generals? It just makes no sense.

That being said, I will make one concession a little clearer. It's possible to get a good deal of very interesting information out of Crownfall even if you find this contradiction extremely off-putting. Just don't read Harris's strange introduction, and ignore a few sentences from Hillman in the initial setup. That means I'm sure it's possible to play the AP (which wasn't really why I bought it) and ignore it too.

Thanks all for the great points.

A couple of questions: Do we have any examples of females inheriting other top-tier titles while they have surviving (non-disgraced) brothers?

A daughter inheriting over younger sons would be a very modern succession system on Earth (Britain just recently adopted this, right before the birth of Prince George). The question is really whether a daughter can inherit at all, in the absence of other male heirs. That's where Crownfall seems confused (see quotes cited above).

On p. 28 of First Empire, the grand duchess described is implied to have male cousins who did not inherit, as they are scheming against her. So women seemed to take some precedence over more distant men before Crownfall jumbled things up.

It changes the central conflict if one insists to oneself it must.

It's hard to read Crownfall's introduction (pp. 2-3) and not think that gender equality isn't the central conflict of the story. They mention it repeatedly there, on p. 5-6, and throughout the Player's Guide.

If someone wants to complain without any responses, there is a place to leave a review.

I certainly hoped for responses and some discussion. :)

I am surprised at some of them, but certainly not disappointed that people replied.

My view is that women inherit everything but the throne. I think that's plain.

I think the authors of the AP exaggerated the sexism of Taldor so they could focus Crownfall on that issue. I'm curious as to why, considering that Taldor has many other problems that previous books spent a lot of time laying the groundwork for.

I agree with you, too, that the flavor of the AP suggests that Taldor should be interpreted in the most sexist way possible. I'm uncomfortable with that because it doesn't match any other source material. Nothing else written about Taldor, save one line about machismo in the setting book and Eutropia's inability to inherit, has ever suggested that this issue was the most important problem facing the empire.

I love Taldor. I love Eutropia. I think the AP went out of its way to bend both the nation and the princess in a way that was never suggested before.

What's most curious is that they had no problem retconning "the bearded" and the banning of Sarenrae into the past in First Empire. If they wanted to make Crownfall about gender inequality, why not change everything there (and not create all the NPCs that they did)? I think that was odd (although I'm glad it worked out that way because First Empire is a pretty decent book).

Sigh.

I don't think I'm the one overreading the significance of the law of primogeniture.

I actually think that's the problem that caused the authors to contradict First Empire (and the other setting material) to begin with.

It sounds clinical and dehumanising to me (in any context). I don’t like the usage either.

It's the term used in NPC blocks. Nothing dehumanizing or clinical was intended.

No, the adventure path is focused on the fact that Princess Eutropia is denied the right to inherit the crown. Other women and their political power, or lack thereof, are not really part of that focus.

I'm sorry. This simply isn't true. The Player's Guide on p. 17 explicitly contradicts this (even saying GMs should refocus Eutropia if necessary). That's not even considering all the other material on this issue.

They made creative choices you don’t like. There is a sensible interpretation of the state of affairs in Taldor that is not contradictory, you just don’t like it.

They made a ton of creative decisions that I love . . . in First Empire.

I don't see the "sensible interpretation".

They created numerous, interesting female NPCs in First Empire that held positions of extreme power in Taldor (grand duchesses and generals in particular), and then focused their Adventure Path on the fact that women in Taldor are denied political power.

I'm sorry. It makes no sense. I'd love to know why they did it (or maybe I don't).

I mean, my heart aches, bleeds almost, at the thought of how many fascinating discussions and exchanges of views did we lose over those 9 years. Regretful. But we'll catch up very quickly.

It warms my heart to be missed. :)

One more thing: can I ask why you keep referring to the authors by their last names? They are frequent posters on the forum and people here, including Paizo staff, are usually on a first name basis. I'm curious because I can't help but it feels like some kind of passive-aggressive put-down to me.

Generally authors are referred to by last name when referencing their work. I would have felt pretty strange saying "Billy, A Guide to Everything, p. 26."

jscott991 wrote:

Crownfall and the Player's Guide present a world in which women are excluded from power. Again, Hillman literally writes that women can't inherit family power.

jscott991 wrote:

Frasier writes that Taldor excludes women from positions of influence, which is out of line for the rest of Golarion (a broad term that I think she misuses -- she seems to have meant Avistan or the Inner Sea at most).

Can you quote or give page references to what exactly you are referring to?

It's in my first post, but here are several.

"A ruling class steeped in the racism and sexism most of Golarion discarded long ago." Frasier, Crownfall p. 2

"Hardliners (especially elder nobles) believe the vote to be yet another wound to be yet another wound in the great history of the empire, allowing not only the rabblerousing Eutropia to inherit family power, but every ill-deserving woman." Hillman, Crownfall p. 6

"Taldor’s ancient law that decrees only male heirs may inherit their families’ titles, lands, and the authority that comes with both." Frasier, Player's Guide, p. 4. (This is just unbelievable, given that Frasier also helped write First Empire, which introduced a half dozen female grand duchesses. And Crownfall has at least three females with titles in the Faces of the Senate section, not to mention all the others mentioned throughout the adventure.)

There are a few other sentences throughout Crownfall and the intro to the Player's Guide (including something about Senate seats going to males "traditionally"), but these are the main ones that stuck out to me.

At some point, Eutropia went from a symbol to restore Taldor to greatness (the two campaign setting guides) to a symbol for reform (First Empire) to a symbol for mainly gender equality (Crownfall, and the player's guide; see p. 17 in particular).

The gender equality part is what bugs me. With so many prominent female leaders ruling provinces, commanding the army, and being in the senate, it just doesn't seem like something that is such a pressing issue that it should be the focus of the entire campaign.

I'm a little confused. Your post is quite well-reasoned, but I'm not sure we're arguing quite the same thing.

Crownfall and the Player's Guide present a world in which women are excluded from power. Again, Hillman literally writes that women can't inherit family power. This is shown, time and again, in First Empire (and even in Crownfall) not to be true. Women inherit titles. They are grand duchesses, countesses, and marchesses.

Frasier writes that Taldor excludes women from positions of influence, which is out of line for the rest of Golarion (a broad term that I think she misuses -- she seems to have meant Avistan or the Inner Sea at most). This also is demonstrably false. Women in Taldor are senators, generals, and high-ranking nobles. The book she oversaw, in fact, introduced all of these important female NPCs and showed how common they were in positions of true power in Taldor.

I don't think I'm guilty of binary thinking. I actually think Crownfall is guilt of that. Taldor is immensely complicated as presented in previous books. It's a nation steeped in traditions that are holding it back. But it's not as black and white as Crownfall states. Women aren't excluded from power. They aren't denied inheritances. Crownfall seems to misunderstand its own use of a primogeniture law. It implies the law bars all women -- in fact, it only bars Eutropia from inheriting the throne.

It's certainly possible to imagine Taldor might be a sexist nation where women aren't given the societal respect they deserve (even though the law allows them considerable power). But Hillman and Frasier aren't consistent in using that interpretation. They reduce and simplify things to "Taldor is misogynistic; women can't inherit power; Eutropia is the symbol for changing the law." That contradicts prior material, even the Setting book (which only states that Taldor men display extreme machismo and never makes reference to how imperial law treats them; and even this characterization isn't mentioned once in First Empire or in the Inner Sea Races book).

I completely disagree.

My whole point is that Crownfall's construction contradicts First Empire. Whoever put together the scenario in Crownfall seems unaware of the NPCs and political background that were presented in First Empire.

The Wikipedia reference was to the other thread quoted above, where Hillman says he reads Wikipedia all the time and understands what the word primogeniture means. Instead of Wikipedia, I would suggest a more careful reading of First Empire.

You might want to tone down the insulting language.

Just saying.

Me?

I'm struggling to find anything in my posts that's been insulting, either toward other posters or even toward Frasier and Hillman.

Their response to valid complaints about a misuse of the word primogeniture is a little snarky for my tastes.

My point, though, isn't whether they are using the right word.

They are ignoring their own material and speaking in absolutes. Crownfall doesn't say it's hard for women to wield power. It says it is impossible (against the law). Then it proceeds to present us with even more females who are in power (senators and nobles holding titles). It contradicts itself, without even considering First Empire's more numerous examples.

If 25 U.S. states had female governors, it would be pretty difficult to argue that women are excluded from power.

If about half of Taldor's provinces are governed by female grand dukes and if there are female nobles holding titles they've inherited, it's hard to argue that women in Taldor can't inherit family power. Thurston and Frasier speak in absolutes in Crownfall. Re-read the quotes above or just re-read the first pages by Frasier.

It's not so much that they didn't read enough Wikipedia. They didn't read their own material, including the main Taldor book that was also overseen by Frasier.

They reset Taldor with First Empire (it makes subtle changes to Echoes of Glory and the first Campaign Setting). If they wanted to set up that Taldor was a "men only" club, they shouldn't have created all of those female grand dukes (and generals). Even in Crownfall, they introduced a lot of titled females (and senators), while at the same time writing sentences implying women were barred from inheriting titles or wielding power.

Again, though, tons of stuff is really interesting in Crownfall. But I think they tried to shoehorn something into the story that was unnecessary and made no sense. Eutropia could be a symbol of reform and modernity without this one issue, which is made prominent for no reason at all.

Of the 12 senators profiled, four are female. Three of them appear to have hereditary titles, unless the "sexist" emperor is appointing tons of female nobles.

There's just a lot of examples, even within Crownfall itself, why the gender stuff seems to not have not been thought out very well. It simply doesn't fit with the characters that are presented to us.

I don't want to start a thread about inserting real world politics into Adventure Paths, but I have to say that Crownfall has as its premise something that contradicts a lot of what has been written about Taldor, including the First Empire book that supposedly sets the stage for it.

I own, I think, basically everything that's been written about Taldor since the first Campaign Setting book 10 years ago. This includes Echoes of Glory, First Empire, the Inner Sea setting book, and, now, Crownfall. It's by far my favorite country in Golarion (despite the weird Grand Prince / Emperor title reversal thing).

This idea that Taldor is sexist and that its gender politics are out of date is completely contradicted by First Empire.

It is true that Eutropia is barred from being empress. But other than that, the Empire is filled with females in positions of power.

Here is just a partial list, using only First Empire:

General Relyson Gwein, commander of Taldor's cavalry
Grand Duchess Mella Denzarni, governor of Kazuhn
Grand Duchess Destalita Solari, governor of Ligos
Grand Duchess Breateeza Fahlspar, Northern Tandak
Grand Duchess Vivexis Darahan, Whitemarch
Grand Duchess Cisera Tiberan, Tandak

The Grand Duchesses are mostly appointed by the Emperor -- an emperor painted in Crownfall as sexist and antiquated.

The existence of all of these powerful females just doesn't make sense with a lot of the text in Crownfall. In fact, it's impossible to square with this by Crystal Frasier on p. 2: "a ruling class steeped with the racism and sexism most of Golarion discarded long ago." Or " while hardliners (especially elder nobles) believe the vote to be another wound in the great history of the empire, allowing not only the rabble-rousing Eutropia to inherit family power, but every ill-deserving woman" by Thurston Hillman (p 6). I hate to break it to Mr. Hillman (and these supposed elder nobles), but women have been inheriting power in Taldor for a long time, just not the throne. The player's guide is also filled with sentences that contradict the state of gender politics shown in First Empire.

I've always loved the character of Eutropia. And I have looked forward to her being Empress of Taldor since the setting was first published. But I don't think painting her as a crusader for gender rights in a misogynist empire that discriminates against women matches much, if any, of the setting information we've been given so far. Taldor has lots of problems in need of reform. But gender inequality isn't really one of them, at least according to everything published before Crownfall.

There's a lot of great stuff in Crownfall. There's even more in First Empire. I just wish they were a little more careful in their language and in keeping things consistent.

Well, that's a very thorough answer.

What a strange business model.

Thanks!

"Too unwieldy"?

I'm surprised at hearing that said about the individual AP instalments.

I'm surprised that it's not a more common sentiment.

Having information spread across six different books, with paperback binding that gradually (if not rapidly) decays with each use, seems unwieldy to me.

I have a lot of Pathfinder paperback books and they annoy me every time I look at them. :)

I was basically run off these forums when Pathfinder first came out for suggesting more flavor text for monsters. :)

I'll just put in my two cents again.

Please go back to having full write ups for every monster (like the later Wizards 3.5 monster manuals or the 2E Monstrous Compendium). A monster's entry should not just be a stat block and a few sentences of text (ala the 4E monster manual). The first Bestiary was very guilty of this and was the last Pathfinder book I bought until this last week.

I would much prefer smaller stat blocks and more flavor text.

Thank you.

If Varisia is too high, it's too high. I explained my reasoning in great detail.

And now I must ask at what point I offended you so drastically that you go out of your way to needle statements out of context?

Yes, I did say that it was my opinion that Taldor was more populous than Qadira.

But I explained where both numbers came from in great detail. And even if you put Taldor lower in the range that I provided and Qadira higher, giving Qadira the greater population, does make the other interpretation "suck'?

You've been doing this the whole thread. I don't get it.

Qadira

Final Population: 2.0 million

Setting Information: 230,000 in 3 cities

Methodology: How large is the Kelishite Empire? It must be enormous. In fact, this empire calls into question all of my population figures, because if Qadira has a population nearly equal to Taldor’s, then Avistan must be incredibly underpopulated compared to the eastern empires. This does not seem reasonable to me, but you can only work with the numbers provided.

Qadira and its parent state present a ton of problems for the setting (the description almost implies that players who use Garund and Avistan are setting their campaigns in a backwater and that Golarion’s real regions are to the east), but I’m going to sidestep all of those issues for now. I assume that Qadira has other settlements than those listed, but that the deserts of the realm keep most of that population either nomadic or clustered near the cities. Also, we are told in the write-up that if Taldor concentrated on Qadira, it was able to beat it (it just couldn’t fight a two-front war) and that Qadira is fearful of Taldor seeking revenge, but eager to try its hand in a war with its neighbor. That suggests a relative balance that might slightly favor Taldor. In the end, I just didn’t want this province-masquerading-as-a-nation to have a population greater than one of Avistan’s most powerful empires.

Kyonin

Final Population: 755,000

Setting Information: 66,000 in 2 cities

Methodology: Kyonin is the only significant elven kingdom in Avistan or Garund. It has one major city, Iadara, and a minor city used to trade with the outside world. Elves are not traditionally presented as major urban dwellers, but they usually are tied very closely to their forest homes. If we focus on Iadara, and assume an urban percentage under 10%, that will probably give the elves a reasonable population. As the only significant elven empire, I also adjusted the population up slightly.

One major assumption I’ve made in producing this number, which might seem low, is that elves in Golarion are much more spread-out in non-elven kingdoms than elves in Faerun, who are mostly concentrated in Evermeet. That is why the population of Kyonin is not as high as Evermeet. Evermeet also has more cities than Kyonin.

The River Kingdoms

Final Population: 1.3 million

Setting Information: 60,000 in 5 cities

Methodology: There can be no methodology for something like the River Kingdoms. There are other sources outside the setting book that reveal more detail than I have access to, so the River Kingdom population is set using its neighbors as a baseline and then adjusted down slightly because of the rough nature of the region. It is likely to be more urbanized than usual, since the countryside is so dangerous. The lack of a central political entity would also depress the population, since markets and food distribution would suffer. The region is very large, though, so the population can’t really be underestimated and there must be enough people or resources here to justify some attempts to pacify the region by older empires. As I said, though, this is mostly based on just touch and feel. The River Kingdoms, in my mind, are probably significantly more populated than Brevoy, Galt, or Razmiran, and probably roughly equal to Numeria and Ustalav.

Brevoy

Final Population: 780,000

Setting Information: 71,000 in 4 cities

Methodology: Brevoy is the decaying union of two smaller nations, one of which suffered heavily when it was conquered. Like many northern states, I am assuming this one has a fairly high urban percentage because of the increasing dangers of living in the countryside. I’m also assuming that there are more cities in the region than we are shown.

Therefore, Brevoy gets a 50% urban adjustment and a 15% urban percentage. I then adjusted the population up slightly. Brevoy is less populous than its River Kingdoms neighbor, but not as small as nations like Nidal and Isger. Brevoy was a key piece in the puzzle of whether Galt was under-populated (and originally, it was).

Razmiran

Final Population: 380,000

Setting Information: 26,000 in 2 cities

Methodology: To me, it seemed that Razmiran was merely a long-lived and somewhat stable River Kingdom led by a unique figure, the false god Razmir. I don’t imagine it being much more populous than a province in a larger nation and its sparse city listing in the setting book seems to confirm this. On the other hand, it does need enough people to credibly support the export of missionaries, so it can’t be as small as Isger.

In the end, granting it a 50% urban adjustment and using the default urban percentage produces a population right around where I wanted to see it.

Numeria

Final Population: 1.3 million

Setting Information: 100,000 in 4 cities

Methodology: Numeria is a tenuously unified nation under the Black Sovereign. There are hints in the book that Numeria has the potential to be a true power in the region, if it were properly unified and led. I could see Numeria being larger than Ustalav, but probably not Varisia or Mendev. Mendev needs sufficient population to credibly support an army to hold back the Worldwound and Varisia is a very large area.

Like other nations in this region, I think Numeria might be more urbanized than a more civilized nation because of the more dangerous countryside. However, I did not overdo this adjustment. Giving Numeria a 33% urban adjustment and then an urban percentage slightly above average produces a population slightly over 1 million. I adjusted that upward to be larger than Ustalav.

Ustalav

Final Population: 1.2 million

Setting Information: 47,000 in 5 cities; 15 shown on detailed map

Methodology: For me, there are three “great” nations in the north, just as there are in the south. The northern Avistan nations, however, are not nearly as populous or unified. Varisia, Mendev, and Ustalav stuck out in the setting book as probably the largest of the remaining nations, unless the River Kingdoms should be more populous (which is possible; in the end Ustalav ended up being behind both the Kingdoms and Numeria). Varisia is located in the ashes of an ancient empire. Mendev is a deliberate creation of crusaders, and has a huge urban population, and Ustalav has an enormous number of cities not listed with their population.

Ustalav has lost a number of provinces over the years and is not entirely stable, but its structure suggests to me that it is relatively populous. Assuming the 10 cities without population figures average 5,000 and the urban percentage is 10%, yields a population of just under a million. I adjusted that up slightly, making Ustalav slightly less populous than the River Kingdoms and Numeria.

Mendev

Final Population: 900,000

Setting Information: 117,000 in 3 cities; 1 city lost to the Worldwound

Methodology: Mendev presents a challenge. It has a huge urban population in its three listed cities and even that population is depressed by the loss of one its major cities to the Worldwound. Mendev seems like it is a major power in this region, but its power is probably largely spent on its crusade against the neighboring fiends. The country is also small.

All of that leads me to conclude that with Mendev, what we see might be what we get. It probably has a high enough population to support a disproportionately large army, but that army’s manpower is drawn from other lands and immigrating crusaders, not the native population. I assumed a 20% urban population, with the idea that even more than that number probably huddle very close to the various fortresses that dot the landscape. In the end, Mendev is probably not as populous as it appears at first blush, but, like Druma, it is not a kingdom whose measure can remotely be taken by simply looking at the number of citizens.

Varisia

Final Population: 2.3 million

Setting Information: 47,000 in 5 cities; 15 shown on detailed map

Methodology: Varisia is given very little detailed population information in the setting book. However, there are several factors that are important to consider when estimating its “citizenry”:

1. It is the site of the old Thassilonian Empire, which was a major power during its heyday.

2. Varisia’s population might have grown much faster if it had remained united, but over time it is not likely that it declined after collapsing from imperial status.

3. It is not unified, which would probably incline it towards a higher urban population percentage since people would remain close to cities and fortresses for protection.

4. It has high elven and orcish populations that are not counted in my figure since I have no numbers to start with. I would assume that something like 200,000 elves live in the forest around Celwynvian, containing the drow and trying to retake the city, but the orcs in the east could be almost any credible number.

Varisia is dominated by Korvosa in the south and Magnimar in the west. Each of these city-states controls a number of smaller settlements. This fact helps offset the complete lack of a central government, but doesn’t dispel it. In the end, I set Varisia’s population to be something close to Andoran and Taldor, mostly to show that if the region was unified as an empire, it would be a force to reckon with.

Lastwall

Final Population: 330,000

Setting Information: 23,000 in 3 cities

Methodology: Lastwall is another crusader nation, this one built to contain Gallowspire. It is built on the remains of former counties of Ustalav, but its population is augmented by an influx of crusaders. However, it is a small nation with the Fangwood forest dominating its land area. My assumption is that it is not that much more densely populated than Isger, but that, like Mendev, it has a military out of proportion with its population because of the small trickle of crusaders that still come to assist holding back the Whispering Tyrant. A 50% urban adjustment, combined with something close to the default urban percentage produces a reasonable population greater than Nirmathas, but much lower than Ustalav.

Lands of the Linnorm Kings

Final Population: 875,000

Setting Information: 127,000 in 5 cities

Methodology: The final three nations bring to mind Scandinavia and bitter cold, though only Irrisen is really described as being particularly frigid. The Linnorm kings, though, are hard to peg. They have a very large urban population listed in the book, and are very Viking-like. Are we to assume that this land is perhaps more civilized and populous than you might think just looking at its location? Perhaps, or perhaps we can assume that most inhabitants of this region simply live close to cities for protection from either the environment or other threats.

Assuming an urban percentage of about 30%, and granting an adjustment of 50%, gives a population of 635,000. That seems too low, so I adjusted it up significantly.

Irrisen

Final Population: 240,000

Setting Information: 41,000 in 3 cities

Methodology: The question I had while reading Irrisen’s entry was who would still live in this region after the Witch Queen conquered it? There is nothing attractive about the kingdom from the description, but it clearly still has people since thousands are listed in the urban populations. So we must set aside skepticism and simply assume that Irrisen has a credible population, none of whom ever really leave the nation, sustaining its aura of complete mystery.

Irrisen probably does not have many other cities than those listed in the book, and the population was largely just the product of my own assumptions. I can’t imagine this area is very heavily populated.

Realm of the Mammoth Lords

Final Population: 520,000

Setting Information: 24,000 in 3 cities

Methodology: The Mammoth Lords’ city information probably tells us next to nothing about the total population of the kingdom. Like Belkzen, which I haven’t done yet, I think you simply must decide how populated this region is using the numbers of its neighbors and common sense. I decided that about 5% of people lived in the settlements listed and that 500,000 was about right, given the Worldwound’s encroachment on one side, and Irrisen’s on the other.

Notes

This concludes everything I've done work on. I have not done anything with Garund, except reading the descriptions. I will do Garund, but finishing Avistan raises a number of issues that should probably be resolved.

1. The Keleshite Empire is a major problem, unless it is assumed that either Qadira is essentially a big city, a desert, and a Keleshite army (making its population low); or the Keleshite Empire, alone, dwarfs the entire population of Avistan. Perhaps the latter is intended. Certainly there are suggestions of this fact. The urban populations in Avistan, the urban population of Qadira, and the notion that Qadira is merely a frontier satrapy for this enormous empire all point toward the fact that Kelesh and the east are the demographic center of Golarion.

2. If you feel the populations are too low, then you can adjust them up by anywhere from 50% to 100% and still be somewhat reasonable. However, doing this will force you to assume that lots of cities that are not shown anywhere dot the countryside of Avistan. Either that or Avistan has a huge rural population. In my mind, the figures I've shown above are about as high as the population figures in the setting book will support, but this is just my opinion and even I like the idea of high, Europe-level populations in a fantasy setting since that gives you bigger armies and a larger economy of scale to play with.

3. It bugs me that the dwarves are missing. There are 5,600 dwarves in Highhelm, but no other dwarven kingdom gets a major mention. So while I think that there are probably about 1 million elves represented in the political entities of Kyonin and Celwynvian, there is nothing comparable for the dwarves at all. We need to come up with some way to measure the dwarven presence in the Five Kings Mountains. There have to be hundreds of thousands dwarves somewhere in this world, and it only makes sense they would have at least one large kingdom. I'm bothered significantly less about the lack of a halfing and gnome homeland.

I welcome all comments and criticisms. I feel I did a much poorer job on northern Avistan than southern, but I hope that everything at least feels close to reasonable.

James Jacobs:

Taldor is desribed as having '...Thousands of noble houses...' (Page 136, Campaign Setting) who are jockeying for positions. Granted some of these houses may be middle class, or even have been reduced to penury with only dreams of some day regaining access to a better life, but is the assessment of 'thousands' essentially correct as regards to total number of different noble houses?

Edit:
Nidal is described as once having had an army of more than 10,000 devoted souls waiting, when Zon-kuthon emerged from his long imprisonment (Page 111, Ridwan (city in Nidal), Campaign Setting). Is that any indication of the current size of the armed forces? (It was, after all, a long time ago that Zon-kuthon emerged from his imprisonment, and Nidal has been conquered by Cheliax in recent history...)

A thousand noble houses is not that many, depending on how you interpret house. I interpret it to be more as noble "families" which would include cadet branches. If you interpret it more as the Dune concept of House, then you will face a problem.

A noble family might consist of as few as 1-2 surviving members struggling to keep the name going, especially in an empire as old as Taldor. (Heck, even the Habsburg Empire, which really only lasted about 400 years, struggled to keep its ruling house intact for much of its middle history.)

So 5,000 noble houses might only mean 50,000 nobles, which is 2.1% of the population number I've given above. That seems about right to me for a nation that seems kind of top-heavy and decadent.

Golarion Population Totals

Global Assumptions

1. Golarion is more advanced than late medieval Europe in many ways. This affects the urban/rural population percentage. Therefore, a 10% urban percentage will often be the low end of the scale.

2. Golarion is not as populous as medieval Europe. Late medieval France, alone, had 10 million people. I’m assuming that no nation in Avistan approaches this number, simply based on urban populations listed in the book. Also, based on discussions on the board, I think people envision populations for individual nations being significantly lower than 10 million people.

3. Each nation that does not receive a “detailed map” requires an urban adjustment; a grossing up of urban population to represent cities that are not listed in the setting book with a population number. For some nations (Irrisen) this number will be small or nonexistent, for others (Taldor) it might be considerable.

The Empire of Cheliax

Final Population: 3.4 million

Setting Information: 237,000 people in 7 cities; 18 cities shown on detailed map

Methodology: Cheliax is referred to several times as the “largest” nation in the Inner Sea. Its size is used to justify its imports and exports. This implies that largest might refer to population. Assuming that the 11 cities not listed in the setting book average 7,500 people (a reasonable number for a nation as old as Cheliax, which was compared to a fading Roman Empire), Cheliax has an urban population of 320,000. Using the default urban/rural settings, you can produce a population of 3.2 million.

Cheliax might be more urbanized than a default setting, but around 3.2 million makes sense as a final population number. If you are uncomfortable with Cheliax being only 10% urbanized, then simply assume that Cheliax’s cities are more populous, and average higher than 10,000; or, more likely, that even the detailed map of Cheliax is leaving out towns and cities that boost the urban population.

For a variety of non-math reasons, I feel that Cheliax’s population needs to be at least 3 million in order to produce workable numbers for the other nations in this region. Much lower will produce too much compression for other states like Andoren and Taldor.

Isger

Final Population: 200,000

Setting Information: 16,000 people in 2 cities

Methodology: Isger is frequently referred to as being economically destitute. It is a vassal state of Cheliax, and is only important because of trade routes that pass through it. Therefore, it is unlikely to have a high population.

Its economic status, though, suggests it is less urbanized than many other Inner Sea areas. Assuming other towns and cities total about 50% of the population of the two listed cities gives an urban population of around 24,000. Using the default 10% urban ratio produces a population of 240,000. That seems slightly high, so I adjusted it down.

Nidal

Final Population: 480,000

Setting Information: 54,000 people in 3 cities

Methodology: Nidal is another vassal state of Cheliax, but one with considerably more power and influence than Isger. Nidal is also one of the oldest nations in Avistan. However, very little is mentioned about either its size or economic power. Nothing suggests that Nidal is particularly urbanized or populous.

The geography of Nidal also suggests there might be fewer cities than Cheliax or Isger. Therefore, I only see an urban adjustment of about 33% necessary. That yields an urban population of 72,000. Because of Nidal’s age, an urban percentage of 15% seems justifiable.

Molthune

Final Population: 400,000

Setting Information: 42,000 people in 3 cities

Methodology: This former province of Cheliax is one of harder nations to peg. Molthune is given a small urban population by the setting and it is not much larger than Isger in geographic size. However, frequent references are made to the fact it is an impressive military power (though this is contradicted by the fact that the setting book explains that it is too weak to target anything other than its former province of Nirmathas). The heavily forested regions and mountains also depress its ability to have a large population. Therefore, I’m assuming that Molthune has a smaller population than Nidal. An important consideration is that Molthune originally possessed Nirmathas, yet no reference is made to the fact that when those two nations were joined they were a large economic or political power. So, Molthune plus Nirmathas should be greater than Nidal, but less than a nation like Andoren (by a considerable margin).

Adding an additional 50% in urban population seems high, therefore Molthune will receive an adjustment of only 33%, yielding an urban population of 56,000. Molthune’s geography suggests an urban percentage of 15% is appropriate. I adjusted the population up slightly to distance it from Isger.

Nirmathas

Final Population: 150,000

Setting Information: 15,000 in 2 cities

Methodology: Nirmathas is formerly part of Molthune, so much of that discussion applies here. The caveat is that this region is almost assuredly much less densely populated than southern Avistan. The entire country is forest, mountain, or river. Another factor is that Nirmathas must contain enough people to produce a military sufficiently credible to have won its independence from Molthune. It isn’t hard to imagine, though, a small, capable guerilla army being able to win a war for independence without equal numbers. In fact, the setting book describes this exact event.

There is no need for urban adjustment for Nirmathas. I determined this population mainly by deciding Isger probably had more people, but Nirmathas needs at least enough of a population to support a temporary army of several thousand fighting men. The urban percentage might seem high, but the reasoning is based on using the default percentage, plus the inhospitable terrain of the rest of the country. Many Nirmathians might be forest-dwellers, but these rangers and hardy folk can’t possibly be that densely packed anywhere.

Druma

Final Population: 280,000

Setting Information: 35,000 in 4 cities, but including 5,600 Dwarves in Highhelm

Methodology: This nation presents almost as much of a problem as Molthune. Molthune is lauded for its military strength, and given a very low urban population. Druma is lauded for its wealth, and given an even smaller urban population, especially when you exclude the Dwarves. This presents a problem, since in the Middle Ages, population usually equaled wealth, especially for landlocked nations like Druma (one seldom hears about the excessive wealth of under-populated medieval Ruthenia). But, that’s where the fantasy element kicks in. The setting information gives numerous reasons why Druma might be wealthy despite having a low population and it is easy to imagine that a wealthy mercantile power might find ways to deter invasion other than having a large military. Plus, Druma might have a disproportionately large military compared to its population if that material wealth was used to hire mercenaries (and they do, note the Mercenary League).

Excluding the dwarves (who properly belong in their own kingdom and are almost certainly disproportionately not living in rural, agrarian areas), yields an urban population of about 30,000. A 50% adjustment increases that to 45,000, and using a high urban percentage of 20% produces a result I adjusted upward slightly. Druma stands out as a classic fantasy kingdom, where wealth is defined more by minerals and trade and not so much by land and population.

Andoren

Final Population: 2.1 million

Setting Information: 170,000 in 6 cities; 11 cities shown on detailed map

Methodology: The three flagpole nations of southern Avistan (the whole continent really, outside of the region of Varisia) are Taldor, Cheliax, and Andoren. Cheliax is the most populous, based on my assumptions and the word “largest” in the text. But which is second: rump-Taldor or Andoren? My answer is Taldor, by a nose. This could easily be wrong and adjusting the numbers wouldn’t be hard. My logic is that it is hard to imagine a former province being more populous than the imperial heartland and Taldor has been “civilized” longer than Andoren. The other side is that Andoren has probably grown in population more rapidly than declining Taldor and that Taldor is much smaller now than it was when Andoren was a province.

Using the 7,500 average for Andoren’s non-listed cities (the number I used for Cheliax) seems a bit high, so I used 6,000. That produces a round urban population of 200,000. The default 10% urban will produce a population of 2 million. Geographically, Andoren looks like it could support a high population, so I think 2 million seems the right number, even if you might think Andoren is more urbanized than a default DnD nation. Once again, though, I don’t want to be bound by math and produce too low of populations. If you think Andoren should be more urbanized, simply use a higher figure for the non-listed cities. I’m also comfortable with Andoren dwarfing Isger, Molthune, and Druma in population, and being about 67% the size of Cheliax.

The Empire of Taldor

Final Population: 2.4 million

Setting Information: 187,000 in 6 cities

Methodology: Taldor is an important nation and much of the discussion about its population is in the Andoren section. Although I don’t have a detailed map for it, its geographic look and its age suggests it has far more than 6 cities of 5,000+ people. A 50% urban adjustment would yield a population of 280,000. An urban percentage assumption of 15% would yield a population of under 2 million. This would give you a nice range to work with for Taldor of between 1.8 million and something above Andoren’s 2.1 million. I settled on the final number because it still leaves Cheliax comfortably in the lead, but makes Taldor the second most populous country in the region. Taldor’s wealth and demographics aren’t given the same level of discussion in the Trade section as Cheliax and Andoren, but I’m comfortable this is a reasonable figure.

Galt

Final Population: 550,000

Setting Information: 76,000 in 4 cities

Methodology: Galt is a former province of both Andoren and Cheliax. (The Cheliax empire at its height was a funny looking thing.) It has 4 reasonably dense cities listed in the setting book. However, using 10% as its base urban percentage and making an urban adjustment would probably give too high of a population. That being said, something has to explain how Galt is able to be so poorly run as a nation and still remain independent. Taldor’s decadence and Andoren’s lack of imperialist ambitions, though, are more likely than Galt being overly-populous and supporting a huge citizen army.

Therefore, I saw Galt as being more in the range of Nidal, but slightly more populous. An urban percentage of 15% yields a population of 507,000, and that was adjusted upward slightly because of Galt’s summary in the setting book, and the fertile appearance of its countryside.

Absalom

Final Population: 410,000

Setting Information: 320,000 in 3 cities

Methodology: Would people get upset if I said Absalom reminds me of Waterdeep? That being said, using Waterdeep’s numbers (100,000 people in the city and 1 million in the country) as a guide doesn’t make much sense here. First off, we have 300,000 people in Absalom the city. Secondly, the country is really just a small island and doesn’t look all that fertile. The text is very clear that Absalom is not self-sufficient in terms of foodstuff and that the government is obsessed with stores to avoid succumbing to long sieges. Therefore, one can almost certainly conclude that the rural population of Absalom is small, or even non-existent.

Non-existent is not that reasonable, because Golarion is not a world over-stuffed with magic (a nice breath of fresh air from a certain other setting) and certain food products simply can’t be imported during this time period because they won’t stay fresh. But I believe I’m not alone if I say I’m assuming that at least 80% of Absalom’s people are represented by the three cities listed in the book.

Controversial Issues

1. Is Cheliax too high?

2. Is Molthune too low?

3. Is Galt too low?

4. Is Andoren more populous than Taldor?

Note: Do not consider anything I've said here a fiat or some attempt to say I'm right and any other interpretation is wrong. I am sure there is other info I don't have that can help this discussion.

Also, if I need to redact any info for copyright reasons, let me know.