Pathfinder Lost Omens: Knights of Lastwall

I'm only a few pages in, and I already love the book...

A really nice detail that I've noticed that I haven't seen mentioned anywhere else is that, if you look at the page borders, rather than featuring the Pathfinder Society symbol in the top left corner like every other Lost Omens book, you instead have the symbol of the Knights of Lastwall. This, alongside the knightly standard-like page title backgrounds, make for a really nice tweak on the usual graphic design.

(I also really enjoyed this treatment in the Mwangi Expanse book - keep 'em coming!)

What, exactly, is a knight, on Golarion?

The word has an interesting etymology. Comes from Old English "cniht" meaning "boy, youth, servant".

As a big fan of Planescape's idiosyncratic cant, bless whoever wrote the "Knightly slang" section.

Has it been sanctioned for PFS yet?

A few times the book refers to a 'Flame', presumably as some kind of knightly unit, akin to the established Lights (the small individual squads) and Blazes (rarely-formed out of several Lights for special missions), but it's never elaborated upon. An editing slip-up, perhaps?

I'm only a few pages in, and I already love the book...

Knights of Lastwall:

Whoever decided to name the squires after Cassisian angels, deserves a packet of cookies, because now I am inadvertantly a Knight of Lastwall by virtue of my nickname. Thank you whomever did that bit

My developers—Eleanor Ferron and Luis Loza, who both deserve a ton of credit for the great ideas here!—asked me to provide a place for more "classical" squire-youths in the order. It seemed like an obvious step to name them after 'little angels', particularly with the easy and pleasant-sounding shortening. ^_^

As a big fan of Planescape's idiosyncratic cant, bless whoever wrote the "Knightly slang" section.

I'm glad you like it! They asked me to come up with a bunch of slang terms the Knights might use, and I had a lot of fun with it. :D

(My philosophy of slang, particularly for combat groups, is that it should be quick, snappy, easily belted out under pressure. Hence a lot of one- or two-syllable words. The exceptions are stuff like curses or battle cries, like "wrath and woe".)

A few times the book refers to a 'Flame', presumably as some kind of knightly unit, akin to the established Lights (the small individual squads) and Blazes (rarely-formed out of several Lights for special missions), but it's never elaborated upon. An editing slip-up, perhaps?

That's... probably my fault. ^_^; My initial draft had the Sentinels calling the squads "Lights" and the Reclaimers using "Flames", but somewhere that ended up being left behind. But here and there I probably messed it up or misremembered. (This was a lot of words, y'all!)

I love this book but why are boons not included for the new divine entries?

I did just notice one thing in the Enemies portion of the Relationships section. It says that "Geb is the only place in Avistan where the Whispering Way is allowed to operate openly" (pg 20). Shouldn't that say in Garund? Nothing major, just highly noticeable after reading Book of the Dead and Cradle of Quartz.

Out of intrest are a certain Knight and Gnome couple in this book at all either as a mention or as art?

Out of intrest are a certain Knight and Gnome couple in this book at all either as a mention or as art?

Buttons and Fenn Tunwalker, a halfling and gnome couple, get a shared page, but I'm not sure if that's who you're referring to.

Was meaning Keren and Zae.

Was meaning Keren and Zae.

In that case, no, Ctrl+F gives me no results on either of those names.

Quick question on the Knightly Training section:
It implies that Knights of Lastwall may select any of these feats regardless of the class trait, i.e. in theory, a Wixard can take Agile Shield Grip, despite it being a Champion or Fighter Feat.
Is this the correct interpretation?

Quick question on the Knightly Training section:

It implies that Knights of Lastwall may select any of these feats regardless of the class trait, i.e. in theory, a Wixard can take Agile Shield Grip, despite it being a Champion or Fighter Feat.
Is this the correct interpretation?

Assuming you're referring to:

The following new feats are available to Knights of Lastwall; members have access to all the feats without separate access entries in each feat. When you take a feat with a class trait other than your own, it loses traits that don’t apply to your class.

Which I believe is simply a way of saying "all these feats are uncommon but have an implicit Knights of Lastwall membership Access clause", and the bit about class traits is standard for class feats with multiple class traits.

Quick question on the Knightly Training section:

It implies that Knights of Lastwall may select any of these feats regardless of the class trait, i.e. in theory, a Wixard can take Agile Shield Grip, despite it being a Champion or Fighter Feat.
Is this the correct interpretation?

Unfortunately not.

The following new feats are available to Knights of Lastwall; members have access to all the feats without separate access entries in each feat.

"Access" is a specific rules term that allows a given character to freely take a specific uncommon or rare option, even though such options would normally require GM permission to take. In other words, a character who is a Knight of Lastwall can take any uncommon option in the section whose prerequisites they meet without needing to ask the GM for permission to take the option. Essentially, these options are effectively common for Knights of Lastwall characters.

However, all other requirements and prerequisites for these options still apply, even though they're "common" for you. You can still only take feats if it has a trait with your class.

At 1st level and every even-numbered level thereafter, you gain a fighter class feat.

A fighter gains fighter class feats that they use to take feats with the fighter trait. If you're a wizard, you gain wizard class feats to take feats with the wizard trait. Even if you have access to Agile Shield Grip as a wizard, you still need to be a champion or fighter to take it. There are ways to do this, such as with a multiclass dedication, but by default, whenever you gain a class feat, it can only be used to take a feat with that class's trait.

Finally, there's one last bit which might need clearing up.

When you take a feat with a class trait other than your own, it loses traits that don’t apply to your class.

The last line of the Knightly Training opening is just saying if you happen to take a feat that has more the one class trait, you drop any class traits other than the one for your class. e.g. If my fighter takes Agile Shield Grip, which has the champion and fighter trait, it loses the champion trait and is solely a fighter feat at the point.

Hope this clears things up!

Removed some posts and quotes that were not pertinent to the product discussion.

Thank you, Luis. It was the second line that threw me

Bit late to the party, but finally got a chance to look at this, and had to come ask about something. Namely, the Throwing Shield Adjustment. I noticed that it (unlike the Grand Bazaar Shield Augmentation alternative) has no clause about applying Runes. Which is a real shame, because a proper throwing shield would be really cool to use as a primary weapon, especially if you can pick up something like Ricochet Stance (or, if this changes, a Returning rune) but without the ability to apply runes it's just not going to be viable in the long run.

Where does it say you can't apply runes?

Where does it say you can't apply runes?

Shields are explicitly not weapons and you can't put runes on them. The shield boss and spikes are attached weapons and the augmentation in grand bazaar say you can put runes on them.

Cori Marie wrote:

Where does it say you can't apply runes?

Shields are explicitly not weapons and you can't put runes on them. The shield boss and spikes are attached weapons and the augmentation in grand bazaar say you can put runes on them.

Yeah, this made me sad when I saw the throwing shield attachment couldn't have runes. For those looking for the rule on no runes on shields:

Nethys Link

Or if Nethys is down, Core Rulebook pg 277

"A shield can’t have runes added to it. You can
also buy and attach a shield boss or shield spikes to a
shield to make it a more practical weapon. These can be
found on Table 6–7. These work like other weapons and
can even be etched with runes."

I just want to say even though the art in paizo books are routinely excellent, I thought that the art in this book was a step up from even that high bar.

I especially liked the illustrations of Ginalta Havenbrook, Falayna, Gendowyn, the Chapter 3 two-page art, and the Lastwall Priest.

I'm curious as to why out of all the lost Omens stuff this one isn't on roll20. I mean abomination vaults and book of the dead are there but not this one?

I'm curious as to why out of all the lost Omens stuff this one isn't on roll20. I mean abomination vaults and book of the dead are there but not this one?

They just added Pathfinder Lost Omens: Character Guide. They are catching up in order.

I'm curious as to why out of all the lost Omens stuff this one isn't on roll20. I mean abomination vaults and book of the dead are there but not this one?

Neither Abomination Vaults or Book of the Dead are Lost Omens products.

Folks,

I am happy to announce that the content of this Source Book is now featured in TOS 2ᴺᴰ PRO edition v.15!

More details can be found here.

Happy Gaming!
The Only Sheet