Pathfinder Roleplaying Game: Book of the Damned (PFRPG)

(Not Hermaphroditic, the word you were looking for is Intersex)

Hmm, while the writeup does call out progenitor Erinyes like they only come from them, and their craftiness and ariel strength it also says they combine the brute force of other Devils (Barbed, Bone, and even Pit Fiends) and while that may be a flavorful comparison it could also be more literal and be talking about Devils that willingly chose to undergo the process, that involves fleshwarping and infernal tinkering that "defies even the Arhdevil's scrutiny."

I can see Devils having a high rate of body Dysphoria, moreso than any other Outsider, with all them being made with male bodies whereas other Outsider's genders run the gamut, in addition to misogynistic and oppressive system they live in.

Of course this all comes from a Cis person rambling and not the artist and author.

(Not Hermaphroditic, the word you were looking for is Intersex)

Hmm, while the writeup does call it out progenitor Erinyes like they only come from them, and their craftiness and ariel strength it also says they combine the brute force of other Devils (Barbed, Bone, and even Pit Fiends) and while that may be a flavorful comparison it could also be more literal and be talking about Devils that willingly chose to undergo the process, that involves fleshwarping and infernal tinkering that "defies even the Arhdevil's scrutiny."

I can see Devils having a high rate of body Dysphoria, moreso than any other Outsider, with all them being made with male bodies whereas other Outsider's genders run the gamut, in addition to misogynistic and oppressive system they live in.

Of course this all comes from a Cis person rambling and not the artist and author.

(kk thanks for the update I was wondering what the appropriate term there was)

Yeah that's kind of the point. The mixing of an exclusively female species of devil with a group of mixed genders and getting a character with a more trans or intersex look that is created by the Queen of the Erynies is a compelling idea and something I want to see explored further, I just wanna know if that was a conscious decision when they sat down to the art work, a decision of the artist's they just went with after the fact, or something they totally didn't notice or think about.

CorvusMask wrote:

Sepsidaemon's picture btw bothers me .-. I think I saw picture of that being summoned by caster in that placeholder art for Monster Summoner's Handbook,(that same pic is in this book too) So wait, does that mean Sepsidaemon looks similar to outsider that was being summoned in that picture, or that Sepsidaemon is based on picture that featured outsider that didn't previously exist?

In the original Book of the Damned Volume Three, we ordered an illustration of a spellcaster conjuring a daemon. What we got was the art of that green pteranodon-headed daemon being conjured, and due to complications arising from ordering all the art at the same time, that daemon's look ended up being SIGNIFICANTLY different than the look for the phasmadaemon, to the point that the two were entirely different. And so for many years, that piece of art (which we reused as placeholder art, as you noted), wasn't illustrating a monster anyone could use or summon in the game.

Getting specific art for that daemon to support it as an actual monster was something I've been trying to correct ever since. It just took half a decade or so to do it.

Wow, I had no idea ._. I always thought before that it was just outsider I hadn't seen yet from some source. Cool to that you guys finally got chance to make monster for the image :D

Question: is the Executioner Devil supposed to be coded as trans or hermaphroditic? The write up uses female pronouns and they are heavily associated with Eiseth but the art feels very coded masculine or potentially tran female. I've been mulling this over for a bit now and though I think the art is awesome and potentially raises some interesting questions about gender dynamics in the fires of the Pit I want to pick the brain of the art department and see if this was their intent or was something unintentional.

No, that's not the intention. I'm not interested in "coding" an evil creature to be trans, or associating Hell with the same. No thanks.

This is CERTAINLY not information we give to our artists. The actual art order for the executioner devil was as follows:

"This female devil has a very large and hulking body, with muscular arms and legs. She has several intricate horns on her head, some of which curll forward around her face. She wears red metal breastplate armor and carries a big executioner's axe in her hands."

Could someone maybe give a few hints as to what Nameless the Sahkil Tormentor is like? Been interested in whatever its supposed to be since I saw its name in Bestiary 5.

doc the grey wrote:

Question: is the Executioner Devil supposed to be coded as trans or hermaphroditic? The write up uses female pronouns and they are heavily associated with Eiseth but the art feels very coded masculine or potentially tran female. I've been mulling this over for a bit now and though I think the art is awesome and potentially raises some interesting questions about gender dynamics in the fires of the Pit I want to pick the brain of the art department and see if this was their intent or was something unintentional.

No, that's not the intention. I'm not interested in "coding" an evil creature to be trans, or associating Hell with the same. No thanks.

This is CERTAINLY not information we give to our artists. The actual art order for the executioner devil was as follows:

"This female devil has a very large and hulking body, with muscular arms and legs. She has several intricate horns on her head, some of which curll forward around her face. She wears red metal breastplate armor and carries a big executioner's axe in her hands."

Kk good to know, but follow up question:

Does that mean we can't have Trans Fiends going forward? I know there have been issues with representation and the complexity of context when it comes to gender identity and racial inclusion before (Whore Queens/Queens of Midnight jump to mind) but doesn't denying the complete possibility of having an Infernal Duke who's also like, a Trans Man or what gender identity is like beyond the binary in The Pit fly in the face of that?

Could someone maybe give a few hints as to what Nameless the Sahkil Tormentor is like? Been interested in whatever its supposed to be since I saw its name in Bestiary 5.

Think the paranoid voice in the back of your head with a pulse. It hides in your head and whispers just enough to make you think you heard something but not enough for you to be sure, he's the blur on the edge of your vision that makes you think that your door just creaked open and someone snuck in, she's the thing that makes the phrase "You look tired" from Dr. Who crush kings.

In a word, Dope.

That said, it suffers from one of the most annoying editing decisions amidst all the freaking smaller quasi/demideities in its section.

As the creators of the Pathfinder game, what we print reflects on who we are. We make specific choices as to who is what, and what is who, in ways that we want and that we feel best represents who we are and why we do this.

Given the current political climate, Paizo's corporate soul, and my personal feelings, now is absolutely NOT the right time for us to publish something like a "trans fiend." I doubt there's EVER a right time for that, frankly.

And frankly, bringing up Folca in the same post is crossing the proverbial streams. The fact that we put a creepy character like Folca in the game has nothing to do with gender identity, and bringing it up in the same post as an attempt to try to justify the potential existence of trans fiends is gross.

I really appreciate the choices Paizo makes about how to be inclusive in its products.

Thanks, James.

And going forward, let's move on to other topics anyway, like discussing what's in the book.

I'll start!

How did people like what we did with the Kytons, be it the first reveal of their demigods or the revelation of the name of the entire race of them as "velstracks"? That new name is something I've been pushing for us to do for a long time, since what these monsters are in Pathfinder has diverged SIGNIFICANTLY from their much more limited role in D&D. They are, in many ways, a brand new caste of outsider, and now that they have their own name, I feel like they can finally move on.

Special thanks to Wes for finally coming up with a great sounding name in the first place after many years of me poking and prodding him to do just that! :-D

OH! One other thing! What did folks think about us putting a huge section of in-world excerpts from the Book of the Damned at the end of the book? That was a tough decision to make; it sets up a big swath of the text as flavor only, and we tried to make it easy to read while keeping the "in-world" look of it. I hope it works! I'm pretty delighted with how it turned out, in any event.

KaiserBruno wrote:

Could someone maybe give a few hints as to what Nameless the Sahkil Tormentor is like? Been interested in whatever its supposed to be since I saw its name in Bestiary 5.

Think the paranoid voice in the back of your head with a pulse. It hides in your head and whispers just enough to make you think you heard something but not enough for you to be sure, he's the blur on the edge of your vision that makes you think that your door just creaked open and someone snuck in, she's the thing that makes the phrase "You look tired" from Dr. Who crush kings.

In a word, Dope.

That said, it suffers from one of the most annoying editing decisions amidst all the freaking smaller quasi/demideities in its section.

That is suitably creepy. Much different than what I thought he/she/it would be though (was thinking it had to do with the fear of being forgotten). What is the annoying editing descision for it if I may ask?

I'll be honest, I'm less than enthused about the kyton/velstracs change. Well, unless you keep the singular and plural as "velstracs". I love the (to a native English speaker's ears) alien-ness of nouns that are the same for singular and plural, even more so if they end in "s". You might just refer to the "common" kyton as a velstrac to avoid confusion.

As far as the large chunk of in-world material, I'm fine with it. This is really a Golarion-specific book as compared to a generic PfRPG book. It's not like all of the precursor books didn't have quite a bit of of the same type of thing.

As the creators of the Pathfinder game, what we print reflects on who we are. We make specific choices as to who is what, and what is who, in ways that we want and that we feel best represents who we are and why we do this.

Given the current political climate, Paizo's corporate soul, and my personal feelings, now is absolutely NOT the right time for us to publish something like a "trans fiend." I doubt there's EVER a right time for that, frankly.

And frankly, bringing up Folca in the same post is crossing the proverbial streams. The fact that we put a creepy character like Folca in the game has nothing to do with gender identity, and bringing it up in the same post as an attempt to try to justify the potential existence of trans fiends is gross. ** spoiler omitted **

I understand that your work and that of your co-workers reflects the decisions and mindset of the company and the individuals that work there and the political climate being what it is I completely understand the decision to not do that now.

But doesn't not covering it, even as a hypothetical in the far flung future also help gloss over the chance to explore a lot of the issues that come from the experiences of those who are in those positions as trans individuals in our world now?

Like using Hell as a space to talk about the s&+$ty things that people in trans community have to deal with just socially by exploring the sociocultural structure of say Dis is potentially powerful opportunity that with the right team could be as powerful as any other story of injustice in the same way that The chattel slavery of halflings in Cheliax and the commiserate Bellflower Network work as a way for us to explore, discuss, and grow our empathy for those who suffered under the horror that is/was the chattel slavery of the American South.

Or doesn't it run the risk of creating a setup where by not having villains or fiends that can be trans/intersex or otherwise we put them on a pedestal or other unforeseen fridge horror like say, the idea that Hell grinds those groups out in the reshaping process? Now, realize I'm not saying someone write a fiend that is evil because they are trans or what have you, but that by not allowing even the opportunity for us to have say, a grand pit fiend villain at the end of a campaign who is just also a Trans woman or using Hell's role as a literal reflection of the worst aspects of humanity as a way to talk about say, how this trans man executioner devil defected from Dis after being unable to find acceptance and then forming like a mercenary company of other similarly disaffected devils or even stumbling into Arshea (or even the PCs) and finding an accepting voice for who they identify as and then rising to redemption just as dangerous through erasure?

Like, I don't think you'll have all the answers to these questions and I don't think they are simple to enough that any of us can just blurt them out here on a message-board but they feel like important things to ask now before they get shouted later ya know?

Now as for the Folca thing, sorry to give that impression I wasn't intending to make ANY association between the depredations of Folca and the plights of the trans community and for what it's worth I am truly sorry.

I was just trying to say that, Paizo, to me, has always seemed willing to present the tools/content for their developers and GMs explore A LOT of the complex, beautiful, and sometimes horrifying aspects of the world we live in and understands the powerful positive effect having those things in an interactive medium as tools and options can bring to our understanding of those groups and their struggles as they give us the ability to walk in their shoes in ways that passive media like film or books can only dream of and through that potentially grow our empathy. With that in mind, it felt odd to me that your statement seemed to imply that somehow approaching the discussion of the plights of that community or the complex relationship that has developed therein, even as an option for just personal games was a bridge too far, but having stuff like Folca floating around was just fine felt really off. The existence of Folca but that potential wall to the aforementioned content was me trying to illustrate that point and again I apologize if anyone felt I was mixing one with the other and I apologize to you personally that my words came off that way.

How did people like what we did with the Kytons, be it the first reveal of their demigods or the revelation of the name of the entire race of them as "velstracks"? That new name is something I've been pushing for us to do for a long time, since what these monsters are in Pathfinder has diverged SIGNIFICANTLY from their much more limited role in D&D. They are, in many ways, a brand new caste of outsider, and now that they have their own name, I feel like they can finally move on.

Special thanks to Wes for finally coming up with a great sounding name in the first place after many years of me poking and prodding him to do just that! :-D

I appreciated that there was plenty of kyton content! They're my friend's favorite race of fiends, so it was pretty cool to get to share with them. Going to be buying them the PDF. The name reveal is okay, but I do hope it's not going to be a big switch. "Velstrac" is cool, but doesn't evoke connections with all the old material.

OH! One other thing! What did folks think about us putting a huge section of in-world excerpts from the Book of the Damned at the end of the book? That was a tough decision to make; it sets up a big swath of the text as flavor only, and we tried to make it easy to read while keeping the "in-world" look of it. I hope it works! I'm pretty delighted with how it turned out, in any event.

It's cool, but I really would have loved more "crunch" content for the minor fiends types. Getting the boon and demigod information was cool, but the boons were massively weaker for understandable reasons (e.g. rakshasa gets a spell as a 2/day capstone, demon lord gives it 3/day as the second ability). And I get that it makes sense for there to be more incentive to worship more powerful beings, but if I've got a themed character for something other than the big three (or to a lesser extent, kytons- the chain feats are really nifty), the book gives me less than I was hoping for.

I really appreciate that you're asking for and listening to feedback on here!

Since that was a lot of negative feedback (in large part because I had some niche interests in the book), I'd like to also mention that I really enjoyed the cool and creative boons, and getting so many of them! It was also cool to have updated prestige classes to go with them, as well as advice for how to handle the existing deific obedience prestige classes. And I did like this book enough to get it as a gift for my friend!

Also: I think the Queens of the Night will probably get full stats as well, since they got a lot of focus in this book.

Several of my campaigns now require Mahathallah's stats... well... stat! :)

And going forward, let's move on to other topics anyway, like discussing what's in the book.

I'll start!

How did people like what we did with the Kytons, be it the first reveal of their demigods or the revelation of the name of the entire race of them as "velstracks"? That new name is something I've been pushing for us to do for a long time, since what these monsters are in Pathfinder has diverged SIGNIFICANTLY from their much more limited role in D&D. They are, in many ways, a brand new caste of outsider, and now that they have their own name, I feel like they can finally move on.

Special thanks to Wes for finally coming up with a great sounding name in the first place after many years of me poking and prodding him to do just that! :-D

OH! One other thing! What did folks think about us putting a huge section of in-world excerpts from the Book of the Damned at the end of the book? That was a tough decision to make; it sets up a big swath of the text as flavor only, and we tried to make it easy to read while keeping the "in-world" look of it. I hope it works! I'm pretty delighted with how it turned out, in any event.

I'm still digesting everything (So. Much. To. Read) but I'm loving everything so far, velstracks is interesting, I haven't really gotten to their chapter yet (though I did love you coming up with Inviadiak for Shadow Demons awhile back). Lack of mechanical stuff be damned (pun not intended), this has been one of my favourite Paizo books ^w^

You and everyone else involved did an awesome job, James.

doc the grey wrote:

KaiserBruno wrote:

Could someone maybe give a few hints as to what Nameless the Sahkil Tormentor is like? Been interested in whatever its supposed to be since I saw its name in Bestiary 5.

Think the paranoid voice in the back of your head with a pulse. It hides in your head and whispers just enough to make you think you heard something but not enough for you to be sure, he's the blur on the edge of your vision that makes you think that your door just creaked open and someone snuck in, she's the thing that makes the phrase "You look tired" from Dr. Who crush kings.

In a word, Dope.

That said, it suffers from one of the most annoying editing decisions amidst all the freaking smaller quasi/demideities in its section.

That is suitably creepy. Much different than what I thought he/she/it would be though (was thinking it had to do with the fear of being forgotten). What is the annoying editing descision for it if I may ask?

Throughout the book, many of the greater fiends that have epithets (like the Nameless also being known as, Upon an Empty Throne) don't have those epithets written alongside their names or anywhere else for that matter save their write up. This can make the write ups EXTREMELY confusing to read as you get instances where your reading one characters writeup and suddenly this weird title or series of words pops up like "The Wandering" or "Upon an Empty Throne" and you'll have no clue who or what they are talking about and no context for the epithet unless you're really lucky or remember it from a bestiary or some other book the fiend has been mentioned in before.

This is particularly annoying with the minor divinities like the Daemon Harbingers or the Sahkil Tormentors who have maybe two or three sentences each and that therefore can have this change eat up like half their entry. It's super distracting to be reading through a character and then have to open up Pathfinder wiki or one of the older books to figure out if Upon an Empty throne is either his epithet, another character they interact with, or an item they use for each of the dozens of guys you find. This will likely be even more annoying to newer GMs and players as without preexisting exposure to some of these names from other sources the conclusion that these are actually epithets and not just really odd typos is even less likely to occur.

I wish there was more info on entities other than thirty billion demon lords. Would have allowed asura, divs, rakshasa, and sahkil a chance to have boons as interesting as they deserve.

I wish there was more info on entities other than thirty billion demon lords. Would have allowed asura, divs, rakshasa, and sahkil a chance to have boons as interesting as they deserve.

I'm mad that they cut all the sacred colors and animals from this book that they had in Inner Sea Gods. Those were so awesome and added a ton of contextual flavor that is sorely missed and would aid greatly in a lot of these entries particularly these short ones. Yang-gant-y-tan suffers in particular, as his obedience requires you to throw a live bat at people but without the context of that bats are his sacred animal the whole thing just feels really out of place. Like I can see someone reading this and going, "Why do his followers throw bats at people? Is that his shtick?" lol.

"velstracks" is growing into me. I'm not a native english speaker, so I might be using a complete different pronunciation, but to my ears it sounds both reptilian and insectoid. Very alien.

My only complaint is not even a mention of the Cabal devils....was also hoping Alazhra would make an appearance....but at least we got Mestama...

Other than that I'm really liking ;)

was also hoping Alazhra would make an appearance

She's -exceptionally- obscure :)

nighttree wrote:

was also hoping Alazhra would make an appearance

She's -exceptionally- obscure :)

She's also not a fiend, and as such doesn't really merit much discussion in a book whose primary goal is to spend its word-count talking about fiends. This is also why we didn't really talk about other evil deities who dwell on the outer planes, like Ghlaunder, Achaekek, or Dahak. Urgathoa's an exception since she's one of the core deities, and Zyphus kinda rides on her proverbial coattails.

Also, since I knew at the time of developing Book of the Damned that Planar Adventures would be coming along next year, I wanted to save SOME content about Hell, Abaddon, and the Abyss for that book. ;-)

This has been my favorite CS book in the last year so far, although the new job makes me so exhausted I can barely get through a few pages in bed before I start falling asleep (Not the authors faults...walking 2 miles a day + infinite grading and lectures makes one tired).

That said I like that so far, practically every fiend demigod has a little bit of new interesting info I was unaware of, like Areshkagal cults being BFFs with Nyarlothotep, or the weird relationship Ghlaunder and Apollyon have with one another. and Eiseth is pretty awesome, both in the design of the art and description. I definitely would like to see the Queens in a future bestiary volume (And Abraxas, whose write up definitely makes it sound like he would pose a nasty fight for any group).

I am glad we are getting more info on Kytons. Although what I would really really really like to see is for someone to bribe Wes Schneider to write a CS volume on them. Their interesting enough that more new material would definitely be fun to see, and honestly I find the more "original" creations of Paizo a bit more interesting than devils and demons, which were already pretty fleshed out before Pathfinder even came around.

Wait there's a Planar Adventures book and it's not been news-ed?!! How did I not know about this?!!

Also I love the artwork for Apollyon.

Wait there's a Planar Adventures book and it's not been news-ed?!! How did I not know about this?!!

Also I love the artwork for Apollyon.

It was announced at Gen Con (as far as I know) but I suspect for lots of folks that announcement was lost in the mayhem of Starfinder.

Ah! Well that would happen as Owen K Stephens and Sutter have 'stellar' personalities. ;)

But cool. Any chance we can SEE details or even outline of said book?

OH! One other thing! What did folks think about us putting a huge section of in-world excerpts from the Book of the Damned at the end of the book? That was a tough decision to make; it sets up a big swath of the text as flavor only, and we tried to make it easy to read while keeping the "in-world" look of it. I hope it works! I'm pretty delighted with how it turned out, in any event.

I liked that it was included. Unfortunately, the font and its color is quite hard for me to read. My eyes don't want to focus, which given the subject matter is apt I guess, but it is annoying.

Thomas Seitz wrote:

Wait there's a Planar Adventures book and it's not been news-ed?!! How did I not know about this?!!

Also I love the artwork for Apollyon.

It was announced at Gen Con (as far as I know) but I suspect for lots of folks that announcement was lost in the mayhem of Starfinder.

James, is that the (then) unannounced project you were working on? Or that is still a mystery?

Well. I liked the book enough to have paid $10 for it, but I despise the type used for the back section of excerpts. It's basically unreadable for me.

Oh well. Like I said, the rest of the book makes the purchase worth it. I generated a couple ideas while reading it, which is always the point.

Ah! Well that would happen as Owen K Stephens and Sutter have 'stellar' personalities. ;)

But cool. Any chance we can SEE details or even outline of said book?

In time we'll certainly have more to say on Planar Adventures, but not quite now. And we don't actually publicly reveal our book outlines.

James, is that the (then) unannounced project you were working on? Or that is still a mystery?

One of them, yes.

Okay fair. I was just hoping for some deeper insights than "It's book about the planes!" I mean it's cool and all but you know...

Also like the artwork for Orcus. Very him.

What's the actual street date of this book?

It looks like it's shipping from Paizo. The PDF is available today. But, online sources are saying Oct 10. My FLGS that I get my PF stuff from usually sets the books on the shelf the day they get it, even if it's before the street date, and when I inquired about it, they looked at me funny.

Anyway, my long winded point is, I have a business trip next week, and was hoping to see the book on the shelf so I could take it with me. So, now I'm wondering if I should plan a book hunt while on my trip (I'll have a rental car, whoooo!) or if I should just order direct and have it waiting when I get home in a week....

I suppose I could just snag the PDF for now, and can read it on the plane on my Surface...

KaiserBruno wrote:

Could someone maybe give a few hints as to what Nameless the Sahkil Tormentor is like? Been interested in whatever its supposed to be since I saw its name in Bestiary 5.

Think the paranoid voice in the back of your head with a pulse. It hides in your head and whispers just enough to make you think you heard something but not enough for you to be sure, he's the blur on the edge of your vision that makes you think that your door just creaked open and someone snuck in, she's the thing that makes the phrase "You look tired" from Dr. Who crush kings.

In a word, Dope.

That said, it suffers from one of the most annoying editing decisions amidst all the freaking smaller quasi/demideities in its section.

I don't get the Dr. Who reference, but I like when someone calls something I wrote "dope." That's a cultural tag I can get, and thanks! I like my little sahkil fear babies and I love when others love them too.

I'm sorry that the use of the epithets in running text was confusing since those didn't show up in any prominent place elsewhere in the book. I feel the language and grammar in each section where those are used suggests that the capitalized phrase is another name or term for the demigod, but I can see where people might find it unclear. It would have been great to include that with the name in the header or even in the table, but the realities of how making a book works and what can fit on a page messed with some of that.

As the creator of the divs and sahkils, I obviously would have loved to see the not demons, devils, daemons get a bunch more space, but fitting everything into a book is always a tricky endeavor.

doc the grey wrote:

KaiserBruno wrote:

Could someone maybe give a few hints as to what Nameless the Sahkil Tormentor is like? Been interested in whatever its supposed to be since I saw its name in Bestiary 5.

Think the paranoid voice in the back of your head with a pulse. It hides in your head and whispers just enough to make you think you heard something but not enough for you to be sure, he's the blur on the edge of your vision that makes you think that your door just creaked open and someone snuck in, she's the thing that makes the phrase "You look tired" from Dr. Who crush kings.

In a word, Dope.

That said, it suffers from one of the most annoying editing decisions amidst all the freaking smaller quasi/demideities in its section.

I don't get the Dr. Who reference, but I like when someone calls something I wrote "dope." That's a cultural tag I can get, and thanks! I like my little sahkil fear babies and I love when others love them too.

I'm sorry that the use of the epithets in running text was confusing since those didn't show up in any prominent place elsewhere in the book. I feel the language and grammar in each section where those are used suggests that the capitalized phrase is another name or term for the demigod, but I can see where people might find it unclear. It would have been great to include that with the name in the header or even in the table, but the realities of how making a book works and what can fit on a page messed with some of that.

As the creator of the divs and sahkils, I obviously would have loved to see the not demons, devils, daemons get a bunch more space, but fitting everything into a book is always a tricky endeavor.

Its a reference from the earlier seasons of the rebooted Dr. Who, I believe either 9th or EARLY 10th. He helps raise one of the side characters to Prime Minister but her meteoric rise causes her to start to slide into the megalomaniacal and the Doctor beats her with a simple phrase that basically so breaks her confidence that she becomes paranoid and loses her base. Felt like a solid reference point for Nameless.

As for the epithets that's kind of what I figured as I read it but it still makes it super awkward to read. I hope it doesn't throw too many people off but I think more than a few people are going to get confused reading these even if they figure it out a few times before lol. Part of me wishes this thing had a rear cover like the soft cover books of the damned with all the names and stuff just shoved back there lol. Maybe a flavor page like the other ones in the back that just has all of them scrawled in that bloody font or something.

As for the dope comment no problem man. It was well deserved. I've got critiques for this book but where it shines it shines and so far the Sahkils are really shining (though I think shadowing might be a more accurate adjective for them ^-^).

I like both kyton and velstracks name, in general I like that fiends usually have different names than what mortals call them(like all demons having "subject x demon" as what mortals might call them).

I did not know kytons before PFRPG and I like what you have done with them. So I will stay with kytons

Also it is easier to say for me :-)

Douglas Muir 406 wrote:

Why can't we have PrCs with full casting?

Because of the design philosophy that wants to make multiclassing and prestige class options be tough choices rather than no-brainers.

I understand that, but please consider the possibility that you're taking it too far. Too many Paizo PrCs are /bad/ choices -- suboptimal, mechanically weak. I understand the history; I'm old enough to remember the wince-inducing excesses of 3.x, with its ridiculously overpowered prestige classes. But the pendulum may have swung too far in the opposite direction.

Bringing it back to the Diabolist specifically: I have probably given more attention to the Diabolist PrC than any human being on Earth alive today. I wrote the Guide To The Diabolist which is, in its current edition, nearly thirty pages long. (I freely acknowledge this is excessive, but the damned thing just grew. It started out at maybe a quarter that size, but, well, it turned out to be a deep topic.) I looked at how it interacted with other classes, how best to play it, feats, spells, best races, flavor stuff, you name it. Why? Well, at first because I was one of the editors of the Way of the Wicked AP, and that got me deeply engaged with how to design and play evil PCs. And then I came to realize that the Diabolist was a really good Prestige Class: flavorful, fun, and balanced.

It was balanced because it avoided most of the problems that plague other PrCs. On one hand, it didn't force the players to make annoying, limiting choices like giving up caster levels. On the other, it did place important limitations on them (alignment, damnation) with interesting consequences. It gave benefits that scaled with level (the imp companion, the Cha bonuses) but that were inherently limited by being thematic, aligned, or specialized.

We can see that it was balanced because powergamers were not flocking to play Diabolists. I've been talking to people about their play experiences with Diabolists for nearly five years on these forums. People generally enjoyed playing them, sometimes a lot -- but nobody, player or GM, ever said the Diabolist was OP, dominated the campaign, or was unbalanced. It was a fun, well designed PrC that neatly filled a thematic niche without being overly strong or annoyingly feeble.

It wasn't broken. It didn't need fixing.

Doug M.

Considering that spellcasters are bit of "game changers", I think its fair that spellcasting prestige classes give a little less spell levels :P I mean at max level they can still cast those level 9 spells anyway, it doesn't make them much weaker just because they can cast it one time less without a feat.

Basically I think you are making big deal out of something that not everyone even considers a problem.

Dood, it lost one spellcaster level. That's it. It's not broken or useless now (and as JJ pointed out you can take those 2 feats to fix that even). Like 3.5 Full Casting PrCs are pretty much a straight upgrade for Wizards.

"We can see that it was balanced because powergamers were not flocking to play Diabolists."

This is a kinda ridiculous claim to make, you know that right? "I didn't see anyone I deem a powergamer try to take it so it's not broken" is a meaningless and unprovable statement.

For reference, a LOT of people on these boards deem the Haunted Heroes' Pact Wizard archetype completely broken... and yet I haven't seen anyone at all playing one and out of all the recruitments I've been in I've only seen 1 submitted.

The HHH Pact Wizard is so brokenly overpowered that even the most appalling munchkins shrink from it in shame.

Todd Stewart wrote:

nighttree wrote:

was also hoping Alazhra would make an appearance

She's -exceptionally- obscure :)

She's also not a fiend, and as such doesn't really merit much discussion in a book whose primary goal is to spend its word-count talking about fiends. This is also why we didn't really talk about other evil deities who dwell on the outer planes, like Ghlaunder, Achaekek, or Dahak. Urgathoa's an exception since she's one of the core deities, and Zyphus kinda rides on her proverbial coattails.

Also, since I knew at the time of developing Book of the Damned that Planar Adventures would be coming along next year, I wanted to save SOME content about Hell, Abaddon, and the Abyss for that book. ;-)

Ah...and see there has been so little information about her I didn't know that :P Hopefully she makes an appearance in Blood of the cauldron ;)

OH! One other thing! What did folks think about us putting a huge section of in-world excerpts from the Book of the Damned at the end of the book? That was a tough decision to make; it sets up a big swath of the text as flavor only, and we tried to make it easy to read while keeping the "in-world" look of it. I hope it works! I'm pretty delighted with how it turned out, in any event.

It was beautifully done and crucial to the presentation of the book. It made me feel like I was actually reading the ranting and ravings of a slowly corrupting angel, and the art style and font instantly made me think of books like the Necronomicon or the little journal in cabin in the woods. To me, this was the most delightful part of the Book of the Damned.

I in general love the in universe flavor texts whenever they show up in paizo products, especially since they can be shown as handouts to players or at least to give them a taste of things :D

"We can see that it was balanced because powergamers were not flocking to play Diabolists."

This is a kinda ridiculous claim to make, you know that right? "I didn't see anyone I deem a powergamer try to take it so it's not broken" is a meaningless and unprovable statement.

I've been following the Diabolist on these forums since I started writing that darn Guide back in 2012, and I've probably talked to... I don't know, a couple of dozen people who've played or GMed one. It's not just "powergamers don't play it". It's "everyone likes it, nobody thinks it's unbalanced or OP". Right now, it's exactly what a PrC should be: people play it and enjoy it, but nobody's rushing to play it in order to abuse it or powergame. People play it, have fun with it, and move on.

Taking the two feats: on one hand, I appreciate that they came up with a fix for the lost levels. On the other, it's a little bit like cutting off my foot and then saying, oh hey, there is the option of this awesome prosthetic! I mean, yes the plastic foot is better than no foot, so thank you for that, but why did you have to cut off my foot in the first place?

But this is veering towards a general discussion of PrC design. That's a topic I have strong opinions about (if you can't guess) but OT for this particular thread.

Doug M.

Considering that spellcasters are bit of "game changers", I think its fair that spellcasting prestige classes give a little less spell levels :P

Tier envy is such a thing that even The Order of the Stick references it. But that's hardwired into 3.x, and I don't think nerfing the options for the higher-tier classes is the answer.

Basically I think you are making big deal out of something that not everyone even considers a problem.

You're talking to the guy who wrote a thirty-page guide to a particular prestige class. I'll answer to "mildly obsessive". In a good way, of course.

Doug M.

I'm talking about GM perspective, not PC perspective, level 7-9 spells are capable of giving me headache when they essentially make it impossible for enemy's encounters do anything to counter them :p I'm in the camp who believes that "Originally Gygax didn't even intend those to be usable by PCs and meant them for powerful scrolls and such, since back then in that edition spellcaster exp amount for levels were they could cast those was ridiculously high compared to other classes" hearsay thing. Heck, technomancer is awesome prestige class even before they released the feat that allows you to get those spellcasting levels back. I don't allow that feat for level 9 casters in general because level 9 casters are really powerful even if they miss couple spell levels(I've seen max level dragon disciple :' D), level 6 casters on other hand yeah they kind of need it since they get less spells anyway and aren't as game changing.

Anyhoooooooo, I wanna go back to the topic of the thread, so anyway, now that people have had some time to read through stuff, what is your opinion on specific fiendish divine entity groups?

Like I can start: On Queen of Nights, I find it interesting how all four of them have somewhat sympathetic reasons for turning into evil, with emphasis on "somewhat".

I mean, on surface all of their reasons sounds sympathetic 1) "did evil in desperation to find out where her siblings were" 2) "did evil thing for what she thought was for greater good" 3) "was horrified to find out how she was going to die" and 4) "was disgusted by smugness of mortals" but when you look closer the sympathetic part falls apart 1) "found out she loves torture" 2) "seems self delusional about reason she did it, like she sounds like she thought for sure everyone would applaud her and promote her" 3) "well if we are giving immortal beings pass for being afraid of death, I guess we gotta give passes for liches and everyone else willing to do horrible things to avoid the inevitable" 4) "ok so she went from 'how dare those inferior mortals feel lust towards me' to killing people out of boredom and wanting to take over Nirvana? That is pretty big escalation"

I guess that is part of being evil/fallen servitors of good/neutral deities, but I do find it interesting its sort of a theme among them.

The fact that we put a creepy character like Folca in the game has nothing to do with gender identity, and bringing it up in the same post as an attempt to try to justify the potential existence of trans fiends is gross.

I just want to say I like what was done with Folca. I don't like Folca, obviously, but he's been so well designed as to find every single part of his existence repulsive, from his design to his domains to the boons he grants. It's honestly really impressive.

James Jacobs wrote:

The fact that we put a creepy character like Folca in the game has nothing to do with gender identity, and bringing it up in the same post as an attempt to try to justify the potential existence of trans fiends is gross.

I just want to say I like what was done with Folca. I don't like Folca, obviously, but he's been so well designed as to find every single part of his existence repulsive, from his design to his domains to the boons he grants. It's honestly really impressive.

For my part of that all I'm both proud and yet hideously disturbed. Thank you. I guess? XD