steelhead's page

The perfectly-timed thread as I was just getting ready to ask about how 2E mythic rules have played at tables - although that’s not what I was expecting from the title of this thread. There’s some really good ideas here, and despite me enjoying the occasional challenge (e.g. my animist is a lot of fun but there’s many moving parts), I’ve also had players drop out of games due to the ‘complexity’ of their characters. I didn’t think a ranged ranger was that hard to play, but there’s that difference between people, as someone mentioned above.

I waited until my son was in his teens before introducing him to the game as a barbarian. I saw lots of people bringing their younger kids and burning them out. Now he’s just made a sorcerer and is having a blast with his goblin pyromaniac. By the way, ‘No Than You Evil’ is a fantastic rules-light RPG introduction for younger kids.

So mileage may vary by table and among players, but the game providing options of complexity regardless of the class is an interesting one. To a degree, that is already dialed into some of the classes. Perhaps it will be explored further in an Unchained book once we get closer to the next edition?

I think this would be best if it addressed the differences between the settings. I don’t really see a ‘best practices’ book, but more an exploration of how it’s been done in the past, the limits of that, and how things might be taken. For example, the Numerian advanced technology is a far cry from Starfinder tech, with a much grittier feel. I would like to see that updated for Pathfinder but am not really interested in bringing any Starfinder technology into my game.

I can tell you the origins of Teki Stronggut, if you would like, as I was the person who wrote her first incarnation as a mortal.

Hah! Thank you for that as I enjoy giving my non-divine characters a deity to worship. Now I know who my PFS goblin braggart swashbuckler reveres! He has a cook background and is not very good at it (average intelligence), which means that he combines the metropolitan ingredients of Absalom with those found from his goblin upbringing in the Puddles district. Perfect for Teki’s humble background. Maybe he one day hopes to meet his goddess in the Great Beyond if he is brave enough in defending the weak so he can cook her his reefclaw grub gumbo.

steelhead wrote:

So we come full circle…

My OP was regarding PFS, but now after a lot more debate related to home games, it appears there’s no standardization. Does that mean we’re back to the request for Paizo to let us know how we should be doing this with an outline of what to do at official tables and guidelines (or at least notice of what might become problematic in encounter design) for home games?

I am still pretty confused why you would be expecting there to be standardization of handling cross-over content in people's home games

And I am very confused as to how you read ‘guidelines [which is italicized for emphasis](or at least notice of what might become problematic in encounter design’ as standardization. I have never said that things should be standardized and would hate for someone to tell me how to run my home games.

This looks very cool, especially all the mix and match options! I’ll definitely check this out when I get home and can see all the glory on my large home screen.

steelhead wrote:

and the power landslide it entails

You keep talking about power landslide.. but your OP essentially just boils down to one specific feature, not some fundamental systemic shift.

Like, I do think level 1 flight is probably something most GMs should stay away from in PF2 and it's a lot stronger than most level 1 ancestry features, but I also think it's somewhat telling that the 'landslide power creep' here is one character being able to overcome a specific skill challenge... but only personally so the actual challenge still remains an obstacle for the party as a whole unless they all take this specific quirk.

‘Power creep landslide’ is somewhat overstated, but I also don’t think it’s the minimal impact you are mentioning. There are two players with that boon in our local PFS group. It is not just a matter of trivializing a specific skill challenge. That skill challenge was in the context of a combat where enemies used terrain to their advantage. As I and others have stated, at lower levels encounter design is not predicated on the assumption that two flyers are able to grab two other party members and fly them over complicating terrain.

If others also see it as a problem, then it was worth the conversation. How it plays out might be insignificant, but if the discussion got people to think through implications and possibilities… well, that’s why I keep returning to these forums.

I have really enjoyed how Pathfinder 2nd edition has limited power creep, which I think can be demonstrated in how, despite all the new classes over the years, the initial ones remain relevant. However, I’ve noticed some warning signs in Pathfinder Society (PFS) and believe this warrants a broader discussion as even those who only play in home games should be aware and join in the conversation.

First the context: in a recent PFS game, a player brought a 1st level dragonkin character to the table. It was described as coming from a boon that allowed him to use that 2E Starfinder ancestry in PFS because of his participation in the Starfinder play test. As we played through the scenario, his dragonkin character was able to easily fly himself and others over a chasm with a slippery bridge because dragonkin get unlimited flight right out of the gate. With low level assumptions between adventure design in PF and SF being so different, if more of these unintentional slippages occur, I’m worried that we’re headed for a landslide of power creep in Pathfinder. The only way I see around this is by making these types of assumptions explicit and possibly allowing for some control (at least in home games).

I understand that people have more control in their home games by limiting to only common options or just allowing things out of certain books, etc. However, for PFS the GMs do not have that kind of control. So for other PFS GMs, have you seen this type of power creep and how has it affected your games? For home GMs, does this lowering the barriers by having a shared ruleset between PF and SF affect you? If so, in what ways?

I also really don't like non-scaling items. I think a good thing to introduce to your games are relics. These are special items that grow stronger with your character, and they unlock new abilities as you level up. For example, you could have an axe that is an earth/plant relic that starts with the ability to spray pollen at level 1, and then at level 5 gains the shattered earth ability, letting you create difficult terrain.

I am also a big fan of relic items. They give more variety as the item doesn’t have to be a weapon or armor, and can start as almost any type of permanent magic item. The problem I’ve found is there hasn’t been any continued support for them such as expanded gifts or even relic categories. I’m currently trying to home brew something that does not overlap with the shadow gift and some others, but it’s not easy.

That being said, epic items still don’t fix the problem of the huge amount of non-scaling items. If DCs for at least some of the cooler items scaled, then there wouldn’t be as much brow-beating about PCs being unable to find markets at their level. Particularly, the middle to upper level characters in certain APs can have difficulty selling items they will never use because of either a lack of interest or very short shelf life of how useful the items can be without a scaling DC.

KaedenR wrote:

My biggest concern with the narrower level bands: you level out of it so quickly, it can be difficult to figure out which scenarios to schedule for in-person venues.

That's my fear, as well. Scheduling. No question it's easier to prep. But what good is prepping a game that doesn't have enough players?

Also, are in-person non-convention games on the decline? I hadn't thought about that, and I only have my area to go off of, but is that other folks' experience?

Our local games are seeing a surge in popularity! Fortunately, our local store expanded to a larger location and the in-person non-convention games have gone from every other week to nearly every week there is not a convention nearby. Additionally, for PF2e games we’re starting to fill two tables pretty consistently.

Will adventure path subscriptions still include a free pdf? I have never subscribed to a hard cover book line at Paizo so am hoping someone who is more knowledgeable can inform me know. The quarterly subscription model might also give folks more time to subscribe or unsubscribe. However, that will only be the case if adventure release dates are relatively consistent.

The Duskwalker's Due is also an interesting looking PF2e solo adventure. It can be found on DriveThruRPG. I've been meaning to try it for years, but I'd rather play with other people or spend my time preparing to game with others. It is pretty highly rated, so is probably worth the time - especially if you don't have access to other gamers who play the game.

I would love something like a pyromancer archetype per example that give a few fire focus spells and maybe even add a few fire spells to your spell list, but no, have to be the archetype where you sneeze on crystals so your strikes gain the cold trait during the new moon.

I agree, the snootokryomancer is a little too specific. However, you have to admit the boost to damage is great if you have darkvision to see during that darkest of nights. Smurfalicious!

People cannot tell you WHAT information to tell the players if they don’t know WHAT your campaign is about. Therefore, most of the replies to the OP resorted to HOW you might provide the information to your players. If you give the details of WHAT the campaign is about, people might be able to provide the specifics of WHAT information you should provide. Does that make sense?

I'm really hoping we see a Numerian [something] that gives a good excuse to rope in some SF2 stuff.

Likewise! I’m trying to figure out how to bring some high level tech into my home game, but the Isle of Kortos doesn’t have any good options that fit within Golarion lore for that kind of crossover.

So where and when can we watch?

I think all the necessary links are above. Videos will probably be posted on their YouTube channel once a new episode is announced on their blog (The Sky Scions thread above). However, I’m just guessing, so someone please correct me if I’m wrong.

I’m also cautiously optimistic about the mass combat rules in Battlecry! It sounds like they really tried to strike a balance between PCs impacting battles on the troop level and maintaining details regarding types of units and morale.

Unfortunately I wasn’t able to attend as much as I would have liked. For those who saw more of PaizoCon, what did you find interesting? What are you most excited about regarding announcements and why?

What I did enjoy were some well-balanced PFS scenarios with great GMs. I’m excited about the new season and the next year’s focus on war between Cheliax and Andoran. I’m hoping there were some good details given about how that might play out.

There are definitely rules that should be followed by the Razmiran priesthood. That’s what makes Razmir’s fanatics so frightening: they wholeheartedly believe his big lie, consciously or not. That is what the game rules reflect: the fanaticism of belief and the rules of one man/god. People who don’t believe, or fall away from that path will likely turn away from those beliefs and not want to associate with them any longer - thereby ‘losing access’ to that type of power. Them’s the rules, now you come up with the roleplaying to make that character believable and fun for everyone at the table!

Even at first level it can effectively slow an enemy. If you make sure your turn is after a melee ally, but before the opponent he's fighting, you can shift your ally 10 feet away from their opponent, who then has to spend an action closing with them to continue the fight.

That also significantly helps teammates who have reach weapons and reactive strike. This makes the iconic fantasy duo, often found in literature - the martial traveling with an esteemed caster - much more synergistic. Yay, action economy!

My favorite character who was killed by the Remaster was a polite and quietly-seething halfling battle oracle. He was raised by a distinguished servant family in what is now Ravounel. As a Bellflower agent he learned to both politely serve the political elite of Cheliax while scheming for freedom in the shadows. The pre-Remaster oracle gave him a range of skills and allowed him to attack from a distance with his sling staff (admittedly action intensive but good damage) and left options open for buffing the group.

With the Remaster he lost the battle oracle’s sweet bonus for attacking every round to hold off his curse. Try as I might, I couldn’t figure out how to rebuild him in the Remaster with a free PFS rebuild, so had given up on ever playing him again. The animist changed everything by providing some tools to try and return to the original concept. I decided to rebuild him with ACP as we were beyond the free rebuild time frame.

Unfortunately with the rebuild he doesn’t have as many skills (to both deceive and charm his way through social encounters), plus not having access to martial weapons all the time or heavy armor stinks. However, I’m willing to give the rebuild a try, hoping the Remaster did not completely destroy the character concept - even if it did remove some of the benefits. We’ll see how he plays out.

Yes, I’m getting the same message. I am also exhausted from returning multiple times to see if the downloads on that tier would work a number times over the weekend.

This seems very abstract. How does Charlie control all of Bob’s actions without using any of his? Is that a dominate spell, a charm spell, or something else? Details matter! The same goes for how Alice is being controlled by Bob.

To answer this officially, no, we do not yet have a set of custom class character sheets like the ones in the Pathfinder Character Sheet Pack or the ones in the Pathfinder Advanced Player's Guide Character Sheet Pack that have been Remastered. Suffice it to say, in my research on this, I've put it on the team's radar.

Thank you! And please remind the team that larger open white spaces for writing in chosen feats/abilities is what made the 2E character sheets SOOOO much better than the overly-designed first edition sheets that had small open spaces framed by dark backdrop elements. Remastered sheets starting from the the 2E change will help those of us who like to write in ALL the important details.

Starocotes wrote:

There is a reference to Monster Core 2 on Page 71?

Both there in the Instant Spy item description, as well as on Page 98 in the Ambling Surveyor item description. They refer to a Clockwork Spy, who was originally in Bestiary 3!

The Remaster does not invalidate every 2E book that has come before. That is a benefit, not a bug. All the monsters previously published can be used with no to little modification. In fact, recent Adventure Paths have referenced creature stat blocks from the pre-remaster Bestiaries. Embrace the ORC and its slightly older cousin, the OGL by using it all as much as possible!

There are many great ideas here, but an alternative way to take advantage of doubling rings, two weapons, and defensive options is to add either a shield boss or shield spikes so that your shield becomes a second striking option. Unfortunately, neither of those additions have finesse or agile traits, but they do provide the benefit of alternate materials and different types of damage for those classes who can also maximize shields/ weapons in their second hand (e.g., fighters, champions, clerics).

An interesting question- would Moradin be the same as Torag in this campaign?

Obviously, converting every single deity that might be worshiped in this campaign is daunting. I'm not even sure where to begin.

The beauty of Planescape is you don’t need to convert all the gods, or even bring them all into the campaign, as the deities are drawn from many different universes. Therefore, you could just have Golarion be one of those universes with some of their gods scattered among your Planescape locations.

This discussion is making me want to revisit a campaign across the planes of existence! Between Planescape and Eberron, I have some fond game memories that were driven by those settings.

Book 3 provides access to the ring of stone shifting which allows one person to travel through stone for 100 miles up to three times per day. If the PCs travel to the south east portion of the Swardlands right below the mountain range, that puts them within 100 miles of Absalom so one person can go there for a shopping trip and be back before the end of the day. I love the ingenuity of my players! That was probably the best used option in that book.

In book 4 they also traveled back to Escadar by boat to buy slightly lower level items, check in with their old friend Chief Constable Paldreen, and gather the resonant reflection for new PCs. Yes, finding places to buy appropriate gear for this AP has not been easy, but also not impossible.

Bariaur = centaur
Rogue modron = automaton or android

The other two I’m not sure about as it’s been a couple of editions since I have been familiar with them. Perhaps there’s some third party products you could use? Does anyone else have ideas?

Instead of getting started at ground zero with attribute boosts and then building each ancestry from the nothing, why don’t you use already existing ancestries that are relatively close and then reskin them as needed? If you do the same with classes and everything else, you’re leveraging the already existing material and can then focus on other things that cannot be as easily adapted. That would make it easier to get started more quickly, especially since there are others who have already started doing some of this conversion.

Some of the posters in this very thread have been involved in those debates, and in fact have pointed to the way casters mature as they level up in previous discussions.

I think the OP has a reasonable point: Level 1 Pathfinder players wildly differently than the game does at pretty much any other breakpoint. Even level 2 changes a lot of assumptions about the game and by level 5 and up you're in an entirely different world.

Yet lots of new players have washed out because of those very specific low level experiences, or had their entire view of the game defined by them.

We've had each of those discussions so many times it's kind of wild to me to see people arguing that it's not true. Is it just that it's framed as a criticism of the system and people are having a kneejerk reaction to it?

Has the OP been involved in those conversations? Sorry, I didn’t check and was just trying to summarize for them. You might be correct that many people have washed out at first level, which is why it’s important for other players and GMs to teach them about the vast differences between first and other levels.

I’m not sure who you say is arguing that 1st level play is not difficult and bland. As you point out, by 2nd level (or 5th or 7th) the game has changed significantly. That holds true once you get to 10th or 15th. Each tier of play brings its own challenges and rewards. That’s a boon not a bug. Once again, I’m not sure who is arguing that the OP’s experience is untrue. It seems that people are just offering other experiences that don’t match with that OP. Isn’t that how you teach the game, by talking about it?

I think that the game does NOT do a good job of teaching new players how to play it. Only other players and GMs can do the job of teaching how to play it. Yes, low levels are deadly and all you are trying to do is survive and get a little more power. Maybe that’s why there aren’t heroes overwhelming Golarion - it’s a deadly occupation!

Seriously, let’s take a look at each of your concerns in turn. Correct, low level combat is brutal and short (18-30 seconds, kinda like real life). You have to maximize your strengths and also help your comrades to hit, damage, and stay alive. Following that, your next three points aren’t really the outcomes that I have witnessed.

Rogues are pretty awesome martials and make a nice alternative to those characters who just stand in one place and hit things.

Casters are more difficult to play because their spells and abilities provide subtle but critical factors to party success, whether that’s buffs, debuffs, area damage (very strong and underestimated in multiple enemy encounters-which are nearly all of them), or battlefield control (which maximizes your martials’ damage and minimizes that of the enemy).

I’ve seen some very interesting games in Pathfinder Society at a table of 3 or more casters and one non-optimal martial like a monk or rogue. Even these ‘bad’ tables do well and often make for a very fun / exciting game. I don’t know what kind of games you are playing, but it doesn’t match up with my experience at all, which means ‘the game’ is doing a fine job of teaching people how to play it.

Yes, returning to Cheliax!

Alatrism or alatry (Greek: from the privative ἀ- + λατρεία (latreia) = worship) is the recognition of the existence of one or more gods, but with a deliberate lack of worship of any deity. Typically, it includes the belief that religious rituals have no supernatural significance and that gods ignore all prayers and worship.

Of course the Greeks have a term for it!

The thing is that fundamentals like bodily autonomy and informed consent are being violated; Petitioners who reach the Boneyard are forced into 1/8 portals, or are judged to be worthless to the gods and held prisoner in the Boneyard until they fall apart.

Petitioners could make a boat and set sail across the cosmos if they were allowed. But, then some gods/planes would be fed fewer souls, so such a "set sail for the unknown" fate for petitioners is arbitrarily deemed a crime punishable by soul oblivion.

It's an interesting "accidental" that earth religions don't deal with. Those religions claim exclusivity; there is *only* the one/two/ect destinations for souls. This makes it so that there is no agent/tyrant limiting / eliminating choice, because there is no where else the souls *could* go.

Ah, now I think I'm understanding where the hate is coming from. "All earth religions claim there is only one/two/etc. destinations for souls"? Should we start with one of the real world religions from which much fantasy has been inspired? The Greeks said that the underworld consisted of Tartarus, Asphodel Meadows, and Elysium. More than the one or two you seem to think is the norm. Many animist religions believe that the spirits of the deceased stay and continue to influence the world of the living. I could go on and on about the diversity of religions and their beliefs, including how the gods manipulate mortals or mortals' agency is tied into where they end up in the afterlife. However, we're talking about a game that also draws on the diversity of humanity as we know it.

I'm wondering where you are getting the idea of soul oblivion. Merging with other souls to create a stabile realm of like-minded souls seems to sound pretty peaceful to me, especially once you're beyond the pain and suffering of the Universe.

steelhead wrote:

That is not true. I would be very interested to see where your claim that she ‘invented the concept of mortals’ comes from. My understanding is that the First World was the original experiment by many of the gods - not just Pharasma - and the concept of souls and primessence (is that the correct term?) was created when the gods realized they needed a balance to the chaos of the Maelstrom and the growing demonic plane.

This is spread out a bit, and I want to clarify this was not Phar alone, and is often credited in ways like "primordial deities."

But 100% yes. The concept of a mortal soul, mortals themselves, and the whole life-death cycle, was an invention of the gods. POSIWID (The purpose of a system is what it does) and all the gods benefit from Pharasma's system feeding them souls. We can easily say that the outcome of this soul cycle feeding the gods is "why" it was invented.

Or you can easily say that the creation of the universe with a stability that also balances the planes was a benefit to both the gods and mortals. The gods (the vast majority of them) don't eat souls. Mortals did not exist before the gods created them. Mortals were not created just to be eaten by the gods. You keep making hyperbolic statements that don't reflect the actual original impetus, nor the current state of affairs.

I did learn/re-learn just now that apparently Gnomes made the switch from immortal fae to mortal beings because Pharasma waved her hand in an act of collective punishment and made it so. In hindsight, something like that would need the intervention of a rather "Big Gun" god to change the fundamental nature of a whole species like that.

Kinda wild to think about all the gnomes that had their immortality taken away like that, and that Phar is capable of doing it to other fae species if she wants. Don't try to copy her River of Souls idea guys, else she might enslave your entire species in her soul-cycle and give yall the...

Once again the hyperbole. In one paragraph you say how the gnomes made the switch - note the active agency there. Then in the same sentence you put the blame on Pharasma, when in fact, the bleaching occurs because SOME gnomes decided they wanted to live in the Universe rather than the First World. Some gnomes got to the boring world called Golarion and they discovered that their souls were so tied to the exciting, constantly changing First World that they would die if they didn't do something to keep themselves occupied, like collecting things. All the gnomes who stayed in the First World never had this problem. That sounds more like a disease of the soul, much like many races in our real world are affected specifically by their environments. Yet, you want to pin it on your favorite straw god.

I'm absolutely fascinated by how much of all the woes in Golarion you are placing at Pharasma's feet. From what I'm reading, all of this hate is based on reading a couple novels, wikipedia pages, and comic books. The setting is a lot more interesting than this very black and white vision you have that a neutral deity is at the root of all evil. It's unfortunate you can't see the wonderfully rich tapestry that is the Pathfinder setting.

As far as I know, Pharasma literally invented the concept of mortals (and mundane, non-soul matter itself) to eat/use their souls, which is why the fae of the first world getting to ~reincarnate on the spot, and *not* getting sucked into the river of souls upon death was seen as a failure.

Pharasma very much indisputably rules the universe as a singular tyrant to a degree I have never seen in another fictional setting. It's honestly impressive that it holds up that well without sounding implausible/ridiculous. She just has that much leverage over all the outsiders who are stuck in a forever arms race.
If one side decides to do the right thing and give mortals more agency, that could reduce their soul intake and they'll fall behind the rising demon tide, etc.

That is not true. I would be very interested to see where your claim that she ‘invented the concept of mortals’ comes from. My understanding is that the First World was the original experiment by many of the gods - not just Pharasma - and the concept of souls and primessence (is that the correct term?) was created when the gods realized they needed a balance to the chaos of the Maelstrom and the growing demonic plane. The First World was the experiment that made them come to this understanding. Giving mortals the choice to decide where they would end up was a compromise between all the gods.

Once again, Trip.H, I’d be interested to see where you’re getting that information because I might need to rethink my multi-planar campaign if you have information that I’m missing about the Golarion setting.

As a player with a monk who follows the Laws of Mortality, she would just shrug and say, ‘arguing that we should give up our freedom from capricious gods now because we’re all going to be judged by them later hasn’t convinced me. Why should I give up my freedom now if the end result is going to be the same regardless of what I do?’

I would also like to clamor, as I believe a 2E tech guide will be easier to pull off after SF2 comes out. Providing a more rounded book with tech rules specifically for Pathfinder would be great as baseline game assumptions are different (earlier and easier access to flight is a thing in SF, correct?). Additionally, more and updated lore on the region will provide a fantastic resource!

Maybe we’re getting this with the tease of two new Impossible class play-tests? One can only hope.

i appreciate all the perspectives shared here.

I was considering doing PFS to get a chance to be a player rather than just GMing.

Rather than repeating everyone’s benefits from above, I want to say that this is one of the things I appreciate most about PFS. Before playing in society I was the primary GM. I quickly learned that gaming on the other side of the screen is fun, helps you learn Pathfinder from a different perspective since 2E is premised on the rules for characters being different than the rules for monsters, and it gives you insight into a variety of GMing styles. That last has really helped me decide what I like in playing the game and has given me good ideas on how to improve my GMing.

Yes, as Andostre has pointed out, the pre-Remaster material is still usable. In fact, the newest hardcover adventure, Prey for Death, references stat blocks from the Bestiary 3. The chromatic dragons can be used as is, much as any of the older creatures.

I’m currently GMing an Extinction Curse campaign that has been running for four years. I use the Monster Core rulebook if the creatures have been updated from before the Remaster, if not then the older creatures work just as well. It’s the same rules and if there is any question about renamed rules, abilities, or spells then Archives of Nethys will clear up any possible differences by comparing the Remaster and previous rules.

In short, don’t worry about ‘making the game Remastered.’ There’s not much difference in the rules.

Based on my experiences with the two groups, the key is to play with people who want to play regularly and are prepared to consistently set aside time on a fixed schedule to do so; you need everyone in the group to have the attitude that (for example) Thursdays from 7 pm to 11 pm is game night and that takes priority over every competing social commitment bar emergencies and major holidays.

This is the key to my recent success with an Extinction Curse campaign that is about four years in as we are just starting the fifth book. Taking lessons from the successful campaigns I mentioned above, and a number of failures over the years, I decided that I was going to finish this AP come the Nine Hells or high water. We started during the pandemic so it’s always been an online game.

Despite only two original players in the six person PC team, with only one original character remaining, we’ve maintained the game over the years and are on track to finish. I’ve maintained this momentum by emphasizing Tsubutai’s comments to all prospective new players. We’ve had at least eight players drop from the campaign for a variety of reasons, but the current group is going strong.

I’m looking forward to seeing the completed review. I was debating whether to even try to save my battle oracle with a rebuild into a new class and have heard the animist is a viable option. Once I get the book and read through it, I might return here for some ideas. Thanks for putting this together.

Nahoa has never seen ice before? Has his power never generated it before? Interesting, but also worrisome. Nahoa seems to be giving in far to much to the divine power his items have given him. Almost as if he's experiencing arrogence from the possessing the power. Could the ice now be a side effect of that?

I think he doesn’t know what hailstones are (I’m not sure about ice specifically) because he’s from a region of the world in Golarion that doesn’t have that type of weather. Paizo’s equivalent to Earth’s Polynesian islands provides a nice background for making characters who haven’t experienced all of what there is in their world.

My battle oracle might take a significant change to make it worthwhile in PFS. He was already ranged, so that might work in my favor. However, following all the bad press, he’s not high on my list for remastering because it might take a notable amount of work to either make him functional as an oracle with the same flavor and style, or get to the point where I realize that it’ll take a completely different rebuild, including class shenanigans.

Great story and it really makes me want to give the animist a try! I also like the tie to Book of the Dead, reminding everyone that pre-Remaster content is still valid and not going away.

Most importantly to this discussion, not all dragons have the Terrifying Presence aura. I love what Paizo has done with dragons, making them less cookie-cutter, tying them to the magical traditions, and providing a diversity of frightening creatures that can fit whatever campaign narrative the GM has in mind! However, assuming that ALL dragons scare the pants off people with a particular aura is demonstrating meta-gaming that I would discourage in my own campaigns. Someone with Recall Knowledge might know that most dragons have that presence, but that’s still a steep RK check.

I agree with Henro about a lich with a mortal’s appearance going against the Whispering Way. However, if your Tar-Baphon enjoys manipulating mortals, then he would surely understand the value of using illusion to appear like them when necessary. He would rather show his true form most of the time to convey his power and spread terror in the hearts of the living, but a good illusion can go far towards drawing in the weak-willed with promises of power!

I'm bummed this is for Awakened Animals and not all of the Howl options! Surely including some Merfolk and Minotaurs wouldn't spoil the fun?

I don’t think they’d spoil the fun, and would definitely add to it!

My awakened animal character would be a wolverine monk who travels with his well-armored minotaur friend. Their favorite opening tactic, if his friend gets a higher initiative, is for the minotaur to use the Friendly Fling feat to get my character into melee range for a claw strike.

Since leadership made it into GM Core, I was hoping it would be fixed to provide a little more fun, with a nod towards what was intended when first created. It was supposed to provide an option for gathering useful allies and creating a PC’s organization. Although it still operates to make an organization, that becomes more a lesson in spreadsheet tedium to document all the lower-level noncombatant NPCs—not what most people want to do in their RPGs. These NPCs, even the higher-level lieutenants, are not strong enough to help the PCs in combat. I am guessing the subsystem was designed to get away from players taking the 1st edition leadership feat so they have an army of followers, thereby unbalancing game play in combat, or allowing an army of scroll and potion creators. However, I think it is possible to have both these things under the subsystem.

I want to see what people’s experience with the leadership subsystem has been. Do you think it needs to be changed or does it work for the needs of your group? How have you used leadership in your game? Do you have ideas of how it should be used? How can it be altered to be more interesting?

As if I wasn’t already looking forward to rebuilding my champion with Player Core 2, this excellent story makes me even more excited about the release. Thanks for a great low level tale! Now that I think about it, we’ll have to rebuild my son’s barbarian as well.