Pathfinder Book of the Dead

Man I really hope there are necrografts in this book. Was looking over starfinder stuff recently and was reminded how cool bone blade was - a pathfinder 2e version of that would be so very cool. Especially if it was expanded a little, something to the effect of installing a bone version of a light, one handed weapon in ones arm that cannot be removed and grows back in 24 hours if destroyed.

Man I really hope there are necrografts in this book. Was looking over starfinder stuff recently and was reminded how cool bone blade was - a pathfinder 2e version of that would be so very cool. Especially if it was expanded a little, something to the effect of installing a bone version of a light, one handed weapon in ones arm that cannot be removed and grows back in 24 hours if destroyed.

Well, we were told that prosthetic limbs would be in Guns & Gears. So, expecting something similar in Book of the Dead isn't too hard to envision for this book, especially considering the precedent established in Starfinder books, as you mentioned. At least, I agree with you and hope that necrografts will be a thing in this book.

Gaulin wrote:

Man I really hope there are necrografts in this book. Was looking over starfinder stuff recently and was reminded how cool bone blade was - a pathfinder 2e version of that would be so very cool. Especially if it was expanded a little, something to the effect of installing a bone version of a light, one handed weapon in ones arm that cannot be removed and grows back in 24 hours if destroyed.

Well, we were told that prosthetic limbs would be in Guns & Gears. So, expecting something similar in Book of the Dead isn't too hard to envision for this book, especially considering the precedent established in Starfinder books, as you mentioned. At least, I agree with you and hope that necrografts will be a thing in this book.

Yeah I really think there's a good chance, but time will tell. I was surprised to learn recently that necrografts were actually also in 1st edition pathfinder as well, I had assumed they were a new starfinder thing. So that might make it even more of a possibility.

Ashanderai wrote:

Gaulin wrote:

Man I really hope there are necrografts in this book. Was looking over starfinder stuff recently and was reminded how cool bone blade was - a pathfinder 2e version of that would be so very cool. Especially if it was expanded a little, something to the effect of installing a bone version of a light, one handed weapon in ones arm that cannot be removed and grows back in 24 hours if destroyed.

Well, we were told that prosthetic limbs would be in Guns & Gears. So, expecting something similar in Book of the Dead isn't too hard to envision for this book, especially considering the precedent established in Starfinder books, as you mentioned. At least, I agree with you and hope that necrografts will be a thing in this book.

Yeah I really think there's a good chance, but time will tell. I was surprised to learn recently that necrografts were actually also in 1st edition pathfinder as well, I had assumed they were a new starfinder thing. So that might make it even more of a possibility.

I very much so second this. One of my favorite additions to 3.5 was the various types of grafts the system saw. In fact, one of my early PF1 characters backgrounds was that he was a soldier who defeated a dragon single-handedly, but sustained heavy damage to his heart and one of his eyes, and had the Dragons heart and one of its eyes grafted onto him in order to survive.

I actually think the idea of grafts is a fairly likely one. There have been a number of pieces of art in PF2 products that have featured at least one character with what appears to be a grafted arm of magical wood.

playable lich please

playable lich please

I think skeleton and ghoul have been indicated. Lich is likely too strong for an ancestry, but this at least provides the opportunity to look like one, or play a lich who's had something happen to their phylactery.

Lich archetype for spellcasters

CrimsonKnight wrote:

playable lich please

I think skeleton and ghoul have been indicated. Lich is likely too strong for an ancestry, but this at least provides the opportunity to look like one, or play a lich who's had something happen to their phylactery.

Skelton's were all but confirmed accidently(?) By Jason as an Ancestry. I recall someone basically saying it's an Ancestry instead of a Heritage because Skeletons dont have any actual physiology from their prior Ancestry to matter. Which... I'm not sure is wholly accurate. I feel like a creature with non-standard (i.e. Human-like) body may have some complaints. Lol

On the matter of Heritages, I believe Ghouls were soft confirmed with the initial announcement of the book, with a possible suggestion of them being a Heritage? Could be wrong.

Lich archetype for spellcasters

Would love to see this, alongside a Graveknight option for Martials. Maybe as a sort of "Ancestral Archetypes" using Ancestry Feats instead of Class or Skill Feats.

Any chance to have sleeping Vampire?

I now want Sparkling as a Heritage for Vampire ;-D

QuidEst wrote:

CrimsonKnight wrote:

playable lich please

I think skeleton and ghoul have been indicated. Lich is likely too strong for an ancestry, but this at least provides the opportunity to look like one, or play a lich who's had something happen to their phylactery.

Skelton's were all but confirmed accidently(?) By Jason as an Ancestry. I recall someone basically saying it's an Ancestry instead of a Heritage because Skeletons dont have any actual physiology from their prior Ancestry to matter. Which... I'm not sure is wholly accurate. I feel like a creature with non-standard (i.e. Human-like) body may have some complaints. Lol

However, I'm stoked for the idea. I'm so ready to explain how my Skeleton's Beastkin Heritage manages to subsist despite its lack of flesh. Those transformations are gonna be wild.
I'm actually pretty confident that Skeletons, and maybe any other Undead Ancestry we may get, probably isn't going to to be able to take any of the existent Heritages. Just a hunch. Considering how monster building works, I have a feeling any abilities related to your once living form may be voided. Which likely includes those from a Heritage. If any are actually allowed, I'd wager they'll be Undead specific Heritages only, if that. A Skeletal Ghoul seems interesting(?) to say the least. Lol

On the matter of Heritages, I believe Ghouls were soft confirmed with the initial announcement of the book, with a possible suggestion of them being a Heritage? Could be wrong.

GGSigmar wrote:

Lich archetype for spellcasters

Would love to see this, alongside a Graveknight option for Martials. Maybe as a sort of "Ancestral Archetypes" using Ancestry Feats instead of Class or Skill Feats.

I suspect we'll be able to use the Versatile Heritages, just based off how they're not restricted for other odd ancestries, and how cool some of things you could make are.

Like you could take ifrit stuff for a flaming skeleton! or you could take Aasimar for a weirdly holy skeleton, there's a lot of really 'weird' conceptual space there if they leave it open and let the player/GM deal with the flavor ramifications at their own tables.

I suspect we'll be able to use the Versatile Heritages, just based off how they're not restricted for other odd ancestries, and how cool some of things you could make are.

Like you could take ifrit stuff for a flaming skeleton! or you could take Aasimar for a weirdly holy skeleton, there's a lot of really 'weird' conceptual space there if they leave it open and let the player/GM deal with the flavor ramifications at their own tables

Given the customizable variant abilities present on Skeletons (and Zombies) within the Bestiary, I expect those kinds options to be either come from Ancestry Feats or Heritage/Lineage options. In the case of the of the Skeleton, which will be an Ancestry, I suspect their Heritages will cover this. I'd guess that the fluff behind their Heritages will primarily explain things "how you died, where you died, and how were you raised into undeath?" So, maybe a person who was killed in by a fire source or in a firey environment could rise as a Blazing Skeleton, while another is raised by an overwhelming abundance of necromantic energy, either through a spell or environment steep in it, and would be capable of releasing said energy in bursts. Alongside this, I expect some of the Ancestral Feats to follow the same flow of existent one's do and will allow you to take some of the Heritage abilities as Feats for more customization.

I just can't imagine that the rules would change much in regards to playable Undead vs enemy Undead; and really don't think that any abilities that stemmed from your time with the living will be relevant to the character building aspects of it. The reason we are seeing their inclusion now is because they changed the overall rules for undead, particularly in regards to their Constitution scores, which is enabling them to make them PC options. That was kind of why we didn't see them in PF1e outside of a character contracting it's source and the GM allowing them to take the template. So, I think most of the Undead based PC options, outside of maybe the Mortic (who I expect to see included as a Heritage maybe), may feature a clause that doesn't allow most/all of the current Versatile Heritage options. Kind of how the Beastkin states it can only be take by those with the Humanoid trait, preventing Conrasu, Leshy, and Sprites from taking it.

Random thoughts: I kind of hope this includes some expanded options for Ancestries/Heritages with unique relationships with undead creatures.

Key among these would be Dhampir. Including some more Feats, in particular Lineages, would be nice. In fact, if Vampires have their own section, a deeper dive into their lore would be welcomed.

Another idea are options for Android and Fleshwarp. It has been stated that Androids are capable of becoming undead, thanks to the organic nature of their bodies. Something to tie into that a bit would be interesting. And a Fleshwarp Heritage that maybe implies they were warpped by necromantic experiments seems neat too.

Could maybe expand Duskwalkers too, in so far as their progenitors disdane for undead. Orcs too, what with the Hold being near the Deadlands.

And again, Mortics. Mortics as Versatile Heritage that basically turns every Ancestry into their unique version of the Mortic (or generic version for those without specific forms) would be welcome.

Undead eidolon with Negative Healing.

I wonder if this manual will have a statblock for the Whispering Tyrant?

I wonder if this manual will have a statblock for the Whispering Tyrant?

Not a chance, IMO. He is /the/ big bad of 2e.

Berselius wrote:

I wonder if this manual will have a statblock for the Whispering Tyrant?

Not a chance, IMO. He is /the/ big bad of 2e.

Agreed. We'll only get that when it's time to take him out.

I wonder if this manual will have a statblock for the Whispering Tyrant?

We would probably get Mythic/ Epic rules first. The guy dueled gods!

Humbly,
Yawar

Is it wrong that I actually want to see Tar-Baphon achieve divinity? 'O.O

Is it wrong that I actually want to see Tar-Baphon achieve divinity? 'O.O

Nah, that's reasonable :)

I wonder if this manual will have a statblock for the Whispering Tyrant?

not him but maybe geb

Berselius wrote:

I wonder if this manual will have a statblock for the Whispering Tyrant?

Not a chance, IMO. He is /the/ big bad of 2e.

nah id say the big bad of this edition will be the 5th horsemen. they already changed his lore in the creation myth & said they want to make him unique plus we've already had the whispering tyrant as the BBEG for 1e give us something different for the ultimate enemy

keftiu wrote:

Berselius wrote:

I wonder if this manual will have a statblock for the Whispering Tyrant?

Not a chance, IMO. He is /the/ big bad of 2e.

nah id say the big bad of this edition will be the 5th horsemen. they already changed his lore in the creation myth & said they want to make him unique plus we've already had the whispering tyrant as the BBEG for 1e give us something different for the ultimate enemy

The problem with that is that Tar-Baphon wasn't defeated. He is still very much active and is being developed as one of THE overarching threats to the Inner Sea. In 1e, I'd say that fell to the gapping fissure of demons known as the Worldwound.

I'm all for having multiple big bad guys. But, the Whispering Tyrant is definitely the most prevalent issue at the moment. As it stands, the Fifth Horseman is hardly a problem. The other Four would be the bigger thorn given current events in Abaddon.

Tar-Baphon spent the bulk of 1e locked in a box before showing up in two climactic events to /not/ be slain in either. He’s hardly 1e’s main antagonist.

As for godhood… do you think Urgathoa wants that competition?

Pretty sure it's been suggested that Tar-Baphon has the support of Urgathoa, to the extent that she may have hidden his phylactery personally.

belgrath9344 wrote:

keftiu wrote:

Berselius wrote:

I wonder if this manual will have a statblock for the Whispering Tyrant?

Not a chance, IMO. He is /the/ big bad of 2e.

nah id say the big bad of this edition will be the 5th horsemen. they already changed his lore in the creation myth & said they want to make him unique plus we've already had the whispering tyrant as the BBEG for 1e give us something different for the ultimate enemy

The problem with that is that Tar-Baphon wasn't defeated. He is still very much active and is being developed as one of THE overarching threats to the Inner Sea. In 1e, I'd say that fell to the gapping fissure of demons known as the Worldwound.

I'm all for having multiple big bad guys. But, the Whispering Tyrant is definitely the most prevalent issue at the moment. As it stands, the Fifth Horseman is hardly a problem. The other Four would be the bigger thorn given current events in Abaddon.

what events in abaddon

The fact that the Fifth Horseman is said to be bound by the other Four Horseman in Abaddon. For the Fifth to be relevant, the current Four Horseman would have to be dealt with first.

I can see no way in which that might go poorly.

Depends on who you are I suppose. For the Fifth, it would probably be fantastic.

I'd be down to see the Four Horseman ride into Golarion in an AP. We've had a major conflict with Demons via the Worldwound and the Devil’s of Cheliax are an ever present thorn in the side of the wider Inner Sea region. A major event involving Daemons would be interesting to say the least.

----

But that isn't here nor there atm. Imo, the next major conflict is defiently with Tar-Baphon and the Whispering Way. Perhaps, we will see a surge of insurgent Undead who aren't beholden to the Whispering Tyrant and see his reign as a threat to their... erm... "livelihood". Could be an good place for an acceptance of civilized undead within the world. Places like Geb are likely tolerated at best.

Depends on who you are I suppose. For the Fifth, it would probably be fantastic.

I'd be down to see the Four Horseman ride into Golarion in an AP. We've had a major conflict with Demons via the Worldwound and the Devil’s of Cheliax are an ever present thorn in the side of the wider Inner Sea region. A major event involving Daemons would be interesting to say the least.

----

But that isn't here nor there atm. Imo, the next major conflict is defiently with Tar-Baphon and the Whispering Way. Perhaps, we will see a surge of insurgent Undead who aren't beholden to the Whispering Tyrant and see his reign as a threat to their... erm... "livelihood". Could be an good place for an acceptance of civilized undead within the world. Places like Geb are likely tolerated at best.

but again that requires mythic rules to fight him which honestly I want mythic rules more than anything else in 2e right now i hope that's one of the announcements at gencon for next year

I honestly don't see any requirement for mythic rules for that.

I honestly don't see any requirement for mythic rules for that.

he's a 26th lvl threat. anything beyond 25 Treerazer or the tarrasque requires mythic rules so the encounter balance remains

I don’t think mythic rules are needed to accomplish that goal however.

They weren’t required for Wrath of the Righteous.

And by that I mean they honestly didn’t add anything, just a bunch more number pushes here and there, hopefully P2’s equivalent will be more elegant and not get ditched.

But, WotR has the characters go Mythic I book 2.

But, agreed. I wouldn't say it would be required to face a mortal Tar-Baphon. I see no reason a group of 20th level characters couldn't manage it (albeit, likely with some difficulty). But, I'd prefer if Mythic was the direction they went with it, especially if he manages to gain divinity. When and I that happens is up in the air.

Regardless, the Whispering Tyrant, at this point, is definitely a more present and more likely an enemy to face than, say, the Fifth Horseman right now. Again, to get to the Fifth, that requires something be done about the other Four. I don't think Paizo is very likely to set them up to be be anything less than major players in an event; would be a shame not to. So, I don't think the Fifth is escaping his prison outside of an AP where, maybe, the PC's inadvertently release him themselves.

But, WotR has the characters go Mythic I book 2.

My point was that Mythic didn’t add anything to the story, they could have done Wrath without Mythic.

And look where else Mythic was used after… pretty much never, save an occasional enemy in a bestiary or AP. The PCs certainly didn’t get to use it, and PC options for Mythic weren’t published after to my knowledge.

I wonder if Tar Baphon might not be treated as a hazard like the Kaiju are in PF2e. Find and destroy the phylactery to neutralise the hazard so to speak.

I dunno Rysky...me and my friends came pretty darn close to defeat several times in WotR and were saved on several occasions by our mythic abilities. The final battle with Deskari is just BRUTAL to say the least! Also I'd venture to guess the Whispering Tyrant has been quite busy since gaining his freedom gaining even more power than he had before.

I mean, sure. But I think 2e's Action Economy could do wonders for Mythic rules. The new Proficiency tiers could work well with it too. Have a 5th tier over Legendary, call it Mythic, tie some neat Feats that require it and let you do some really cool things. Mages could gain access to more 10th level spells or be able to cast rituals alone. Just a few small ideas b

I don't think the idea isn't without merit. Wrath was made Mythic for the sake of showcasing the rules, even if they maybe weren't all that spectacular. Same way I'm sure we will probably get an Undead AP with Book of the Dead.

I mean, sure. But I think 2e's Action Economy could do wonders for Mythic rules. The new Proficiency tiers could work well with it too. Have a 5th tier over Legendary, call it Mythic, tie some neat Feats that require it and let you do some really cool things. Mages could gain access to more 10th level spells or be able to cast rituals alone. Just a few small ideas b

I don't think the idea isn't without merit. Wrath was made Mythic for the sake of showcasing the rules, even if they maybe weren't all that spectacular. Same way I'm sure we will probably get an Undead AP with Book of the Dead.

5th tier over Legendary would be in the vein of Epic (more powerful by getting past level 20) rather than Mythic (more powerful in parallel to gaining levels).

I want Tar-Baphon to raise Aroden's body as a divine undead and then inhabit it as the prelude to his apotheosis as an undead deity. And then, it's PCs' party time.

Honestly, I want a god of good or reformed undead before we get another evil undead god. Tar-Baphon has already proven that he's perfectly dangerous as "standard" undead. I don't think they need to elevate him to godhood in order to make him seem like a threat.

Honestly, I want a god of good or reformed undead before we get another evil undead god. Tar-Baphon has already proven that he's perfectly dangerous as "standard" undead. I don't think they need to elevate him to godhood in order to make him seem like a threat.

Arazni might end up there by the time we get 3e :p

I personally believe she’s the patron of the hidden undead in the Knights of Lastwall’s ranks.

Wow. Didn't know about those. Where did you find the info ?
I'd love to know more about them.

Wow. Didn't know about those. Where did you find the info ?

I'd love to know more about them.

Lost Omens Character Guide! And I’m sure we’ll see more in the KoL book once it comes out.

Honestly, I want a god of good or reformed undead before we get another evil undead god. Tar-Baphon has already proven that he's perfectly dangerous as "standard" undead. I don't think they need to elevate him to godhood in order to make him seem like a threat.

A good undead deity would be interesting. But, I don't think Tar-Baphon will put his goals to achieve godhood on hold till then.

The Raven Black wrote:

Wow. Didn't know about those. Where did you find the info ?

I'd love to know more about them.

Lost Omens Character Guide! And I’m sure we’ll see more in the KoL book once it comes out.

Sir Arok Gallowmere shall be pleased.

I'm surprised not to see more comments about the note that this book will include an adventure?!?

What levels will it be for? Will it be module-length? PFS scenario length? PFS quest/bounty length? Is it just an outline?

Have we ever had a Paizo rulebook-line book include an adventure before?

I'm surprised not to see more comments about the note that this book will include an adventure?!?

What levels will it be for? Will it be module-length? PFS scenario length? PFS quest/bounty length? Is it just an outline?

Have we ever had a Paizo rulebook-line book include an adventure before?

We've saved spoilers for Gen Con, of course, so tune-in!

I just hope it won't be a mini adventure.

caps wrote:

I'm surprised not to see more comments about the note that this book will include an adventure?!?

What levels will it be for? Will it be module-length? PFS scenario length? PFS quest/bounty length? Is it just an outline?

Have we ever had a Paizo rulebook-line book include an adventure before?

We've saved spoilers for Gen Con, of course, so tune-in!

Alright then, keep your secrets

--

But has anyone ever seen an adventure in a Paizo rulebook-line book before?? Is this as unprecedented as it feels?