... Although there are no other cities or towns on the island, there is one other enclave on Mediogalti - the Crimson Citadel, headquarters of the Red Mantis. Only members of the sect know exactly where the fortress is, although foolish explorers of the island occasionally catch glimpses of it atop a jungle hill a few miles inland from the city of Ilizmagorti...
P. 196
Red Mantis wrote:
...Headquarters: Ilizmagorti, the island of Mediogalti...
The Mediogalti Island entry appears to indicate that the headquarters of the Red Mantis is the Crimson Citadel, a location some miles remote from Ilizmagorti. So, should the Red Mantis 'Headquarters' line in fact read: 'Headquarters: Crimson Citadel, Mediogalti Island'?
Edit:
The Red Mantis entry itself on page 196 may need rewording, as it confuses the jungles with the city of Ilizmagorti: '...The Red Mantis headquarters is the Crimson Citadel, a castle hidden in the jungles of the Garundi port city of Ilizmagorti on the island of Mediogalti...' This reads to me as if Ilizmagorti is full of jungle and that hidden somewhere in that jungle in Ilizmagorti is the Crimson Citadel.
Hmm. The Red Mantis entry does go on to say '...While the Red Mantis power base is centered on the city of Ilizmagorti...', and there does appear to be reference to Red Mantis members between missions spending time in cover identities in Ilizmagorti in the Mediogalti Island entry on pages 96-97...
I think I would still prefer to see the Crimson Citadel listed first and foremost as the headquarters of the Red Mantis, but can see that a case might be made for mentioning Ilizmagorti too as a sort of 'clubhouse' where the rank and file hang out in between missions.
Comment/observation:
When the Lastwall entry gets revised, it might be nice to see more about the Shining Crusade. For example at present it's stated that 'General Arnisant sacrificed himself to imprison Tar-Baphon', but there are no details, though there is mention of how in a key confrontation the lich attempted to destroy the general but failed, destroying the general's shield instead.
The Timeline on page 202 also refers in the 3832 AR entry to Iomedae as a 'heroine of the Shining Crusade', but there is absolutely no mention at all in the current Lastwall entry to anything that she may have done in the Shining Crusade, which seems somewhat odd. (Was that down to lack of space?)
Seeing mention of some of the crucial battles against the Tar-Baphon might be useful (old battlefields and events which took place on them offer certain possibilities for adventure hooks) although granted some of these may actually be in Ustalav or Belkzen.
(Hmm, actually there might be a whole book in this about the Shining Crusade for the Chronicles line.)
P. 254
The Index entry 'Gnome' should read 'Gnomes'?
Hopefully that's the last of those. Singular Index entry, plural used elsewhere in book, I mean... :)
I have made a few additions and changes here and there, beyond sorting out the page numbers which had been shifted by two. For example the Varisians line in the original Index directs the reader to pages 144-147 (the entire Varisia entry) amongst others, despite the fact that the word 'Varisian' is not used once on page 145 or 146; the ethnic diversity of the Varisia region leaves me in some doubt that what information is presented on pages 145 and 146 could be assumed even in 'default' to be about Varisians, so I have adjusted this part of the Varisians reference line in the index I present above from '144-147' to '144, 147'. There were a few other such sweeping references to an entire regional entry made which I have adjusted down, and one or two additions, such as expanding the lines of references for the major regions with coasts on the actual Inner Sea to include references to their mentions in the Trade entry, and expanding the Trade entry reference line to include the first page of the Isger entry, where trade in the context of the Conerica Straits gets what I consider a significant mention.
With a good deal more time, I would have liked to expand this Index further, but computer time has been in short supply this past week alas, and with the revision impending, I am unclear how valuable putting in effort to expand (rather than just correct) the first edition Index would be. :-?
And to save the effort of googling for those for whom English may not be their first language, the 'AKA' which I have used as shorthand in places is an abbreviation for 'Also Known As'. :)
I’ve had a dig around in the old product threads for the Campaign Setting and discovered far fewer posts reporting errata than I thought had been made; maybe there's a vein of threads buried somewhere in the Chronicles archives which I had confused the product threads with, as I thought that there were some error posts around beyond what’s already on this thread.
Anyway, the posts (or excerpts from them) which I spotted on my search through the products threads are as follows (links to original posts posted after each post quoted):
“Deussu” wrote:
…"The Inner Sea Reigon" (map), "Shpinx Head" (Osirion entry map), missing some punctuation (like a period in the end of a sentence) (bard entry), "Unkown" (Worldwound, same typo twice) etc…
I am interested in "Shadowtongue" on page 110 of the Nidal section. Who else speaks it, or is there going to be any elaboration on this language? (I don't wish to waste a linguistics rank.)
Shadowtongue is covered a little bit more in the section on languages in Chapter Five of the book; it's basically just the national language of Nidal.
Comment:
Actually, Shadowtongue does not appear to be mentioned in the current Languages entry.
A few comments I have collected from a much longer post by Set; besides the query about Azlant, there were some specific questions about cleric domains too, which I have not copied as I assume that these are covered by the Rules of the PFRPG (although if you wish to check the original post, as with others I quote here I have linked to it afterwards):
“Set” wrote:
…?) The Lost Kingdoms section (p 222-223) has a write up on Azlanti, but no picture of their former territory. References to former ruins going on to become cities of Andoran or Taldor, and being watched by the elves of the Mordant Spire, make it possible to place it by looking at *another* map, but since those locations aren't marked on the map on 223, the location of Azlanti is not real clear to someone not already familiar with where Andoran, Taldor, etc. are located…
… !) Some of the 'Lesser Groups' on p 198-199 are evocative and cool. I'd love to play around with the Blackfire Adepts or the Coils of Ydersius or the Old Cults (both the Coils and Old Cults also allow me to use my Freeport stuff, both the Serpentfolk / Yig parts and the Unspeakable One stuff, with the Old Cults also allowing a slice of Dragon Below madness and some Far Realms Lovecraftian 'goodness.'). Glorious. The Iridian Fold are intriguing as well, with a possible hint that the mysterious Iridian women have been in plain sight all the time, if one wants to go that route...
….) For a weapon that's widely considered inferior to crossbows (according to page 237), the Firearms themselves are pretty darn buff, with two of them able to fire multiple times a round, unlike most crossbows (barring the use of a special feat) and even the single-shot guns requiring only a move action to reload. Perhaps they should take longer to 'pack their wad' and whatever?…
Mike McArtor did respond respond to Set’s post, including answering the Azlant point:
“Mike McArtor” wrote:
“Set” wrote:
…?) The Lost Kingdoms section (p 222-223) has a write up on Azlanti, but no picture of their former territory.
That's because Azlant would not be on that map, even if it wasn't sunk. It's way off to the west, beyond the borders of that particular cartographic masterpiece…
Still, would it be possible - if the Lost Kingdoms map is retained - to maybe indicate directionality to Azlant with regard to that map? (An arrow pointing westwards off the map with the words ‘To Azlant’?)
(There was actually a lengthy post made *here* by Jason Nelson including material which was cut for ‘space reasons’, but unfortunately it pertains to Appendix C, the NPCs, and so is probably not that helpful to the revision.
So, in summary, a few punctuation/grammatical errors, a couple of map problems, and the absence of Shadowtongue (mentioned in the Nidal entry) from the Languages section, to report from those posts.
And as a reminder there were various views expressed by posters regarding details that they’d like to see in a revision on the ‘New PDF once the Golarion Campaign Setting is revised?’ thread. (And also substantial discussion of firearms and Alkenstar… ;) )
Apologies for those times where I have occasionally accidentally repeated myself (or others), for those posts where I have misquoted the Campaign Setting and had to come back to correct myself later, or for those where I may have been a touch too grouchy/pompous/smart-alecky.
I hope that by and large the posts I have made have been of some help, both to those using the current version, and to the process of producing the revision.
I suspect I will occasionally continue to post as I see things, but for now I have (however temporarily) cleared my schedule of 'to make' posts on the subject of the Campaign Setting.
Apologies for those times where I have occasionally accidentally repeated myself (or others), for those posts where I have misquoted the Campaign Setting and had to come back to correct myself later, or for those where I may have been a touch too grouchy/pompous/smart-alecky.
I hope that by and large the posts I have made have been of some help, both to those using the current version, and to the process of producing the revision.
I suspect I will occasionally continue to post as I see things, but for now I have (however temporarily) cleared my schedule of 'to make' posts on the subject of the Campaign Setting.
LOTS of help, Charles! I can't thank you enough for all the feedback you've given us on this thread, it's VERY valuable. (I'm gonna put a "special thanks to Charles Evans" in the credits page of the revised book as a result, and once it's published I'll make sure you get a copy of the new book as thanks!)
Apologies for those times where I have occasionally accidentally repeated myself (or others), for those posts where I have misquoted the Campaign Setting and had to come back to correct myself later, or for those where I may have been a touch too grouchy/pompous/smart-alecky.
I hope that by and large the posts I have made have been of some help, both to those using the current version, and to the process of producing the revision.
I suspect I will occasionally continue to post as I see things, but for now I have (however temporarily) cleared my schedule of 'to make' posts on the subject of the Campaign Setting.
LOTS of help, Charles! I can't thank you enough for all the feedback you've given us on this thread, it's VERY valuable. (I'm gonna put a "special thanks to Charles Evans" in the credits page of the revised book as a result, and once it's published I'll make sure you get a copy of the new book as thanks!)
Some small scale window-dressing which shouldn't take too long to fix... :)
Sample names for characters listed out of alphabetical order:
P. 10
(Gnomes)
Male:
'Krolmnite' and 'Kremernesh' are listed the wrong way round.
Female:
'Besh' and 'Bagi' are listed the wrong way round.
'Lini' and 'Lim' are listed the wrong way round.
P. 18
(Azlanti)
Male:
'Alamander' and 'Akorian' are listed the wrong way round.
'Erodel' and 'Ellismus' are listed the wrong way round.
'Iogorian' and 'Illsmus' are listed the wrong way round.
'Othollo' and 'Ostarian' are listed the wrong way round.
'Ureste' and 'Udhomar' are listed the wrng way round.
As an aside, isn't there a mage from Atlantis in DC's comics called Arioch, the same as another of your listed Azlanti male names? ;)
Female:
'Aswaithe, Amesducias, Aliandara' should be listed 'Aliandara, Amesducias, Aswaithe'.
'Estrude' and 'Emalliandra' are listed the wrong way round.
'Iomestria' and 'Iaome' are listed the wrong way round.
P. 26
(Kellid)
Male:
'Gannok' and 'Ganef' are listed the wrong way round.
Female:
'Varka' and 'Valki' are listed the wrong way round.
P. 28
(Mwangi)
Male:
The Bonuwat names 'Baobo' and 'Banibani' are listed the wrong way round.
P. 36
(Varisians)
Male:
'Katallin' is several places out of sequence. It should come between 'Iozif' and 'Marduzi'.
Apologies for those times where I have occasionally accidentally repeated myself (or others), for those posts where I have misquoted the Campaign Setting and had to come back to correct myself later, or for those where I may have been a touch too grouchy/pompous/smart-alecky.
I hope that by and large the posts I have made have been of some help, both to those using the current version, and to the process of producing the revision.
I suspect I will occasionally continue to post as I see things, but for now I have (however temporarily) cleared my schedule of 'to make' posts on the subject of the Campaign Setting.
LOTS of help, Charles! I can't thank you enough for all the feedback you've given us on this thread, it's VERY valuable. (I'm gonna put a "special thanks to Charles Evans" in the credits page of the revised book as a result, and once it's published I'll make sure you get a copy of the new book as thanks!)
Thanks again! :-)
Uhh, this is so you can get me to work on the next revision as soon as possile, isn't it? ;)
Quips aside, though, I'm not quite sure what to say. 'I'm pleased to have been of service' comes into it, and I feel I should probably say again that you folk at Paizo did an amazing job putting the first edition Campaign Setting together from scratch and publishing it, even with errors, under time pressure from GenCon. A lot of what I'm doing feels like I'm just dotting the 'i's' and crossing the 't's'.
On a practical note, it occured to me that 'The Mwangi Legacy' sidebar on page 29 and 'Ruincaster' sidebar on page 107 might have a bearing for the Serpent's Skull Adventure Path if that's taking place in the Garundi jungles (and assuming that the concept of some of the jungle ruins as 'places of power' remains in the setting).
...and clash with the warclans of the Hold of the Mammoth Lords...
Aaargh! I had this section up for a different reason earlier in the thread and missed the 'Hold of the Mammoth Lords' should be 'Realm of the Mammoth Lords' error. Consider it reported now.
Also on a 'Hold of the Mammoth lords' theme:
P. 14
Half-Orcs, Favored Regions wrote:
...Absalom, Belkzen, Cheliax, Hold of the Mammoth Lords, Isger, Katapesh, Nex, Nidal, Realm of the Mammoth Lords, River Kingdoms, the Shackles, Ustalav, Varisia...
I'm not sure what happened here. I think there was confusion caused by 'Belkzen', also known as 'Belkzen, Hold of'. Since both Belkzen and Realm of the Mammoth Lords are already on the list I assume that 'Hold of the Mammoth Lords' is a complete error, though based on the presentation of the names of the Hold of Belkzen and Realm of the Mammoth Lords in chapter 2 and the use of the Realm of the Mammoth Lords in Favored Region entries throughout Chapter 1, it seems that it would be correct to remove 'Belkzen from the list, and change 'Hold of the Mammoth lords to 'Hold of Belkzen'.
So the final (corrected) list of favored regions for half-orcs should in fact read something like this:
'Absalom, Cheliax, Hold of Belkzen, Isger, Katapesh, Nex, Nidal, Realm of the Mammoth Lords, River Kingdoms, the Shackles, Ustalav, Varisia'
Off-topic, on the basis of Favored Regions in Chapter 1, The River Kingdoms are apparently inhabited mostly by Half-Elves, Half-Orcs, and Varisians...
Taldor may be next door to the River Kingdoms, but apparently Taldans (even though they'll put up with Galt) just will not touch the River Kingdoms. Maybe it's those Varisian thieves that put them off. :)
(Edit) Or since Varisian thieves get everywhere, on second thoughts maybe Taldan prejudice against half-orcs...
Reminder of updates needed for the revision of the Campaign Setting:
P. 32
Tian, Favored Regions wrote:
...Absalom, Katapesh, Lands of the Linnorm Kings, Realm of the Mammoth Lords, Tian Xia, Varisia...
Question, paraphrased (asked this past Tuesday in the Paizo chat): Why aren't there Tian in Irrisen?
Response from chat:
James Jacobs wrote:
...Because the trade routes across the Crown of the World come down to either side of Irrisen, and because Irrisen is pretty closed to newcomers...
P. 156
The Crown of the World wrote:
...Most travelers stick to the well-worn Path of Aganhei, named for the Tien explorer who first charted it several thousand years ago. The treacherous route leads from Hongal in the northern reaches of Tian Xia through a winding series of ice ravines and open arctic wasteland before finally reaching the Icestair in the Realm of the Mammoth Lords, where a mighty glacier forms a natural descent to the hard earth of Avistan...
Question, paraphrased (Asked this past Tuesday in the Paizo chat): Umm, the Campaign Setting is pretty clear that the main route across the Crown of the World goes to Icestair?
James Jacobs wrote:
...Yeah; like I said earlier, the two main trade routes end up in Mammoth Lords and Linnorm Kings. The East route eventually works its way down the Sellen River basin, while the West hits Kalsgard and heads down the coast.
There'll be more talk about the Western trade route through Kalsgard in the revised book...
So, basically this is a reminder that the Western trade route needs a mention in the revised Lands of the Linnorm Kings entry, and probably that the Crown of the World entry will need revising too. (The Realm of the Mammoth Lords describes part of this route also, for the record, though that may not need revision to take into account the western route.)
As a further thought on this subject, I have the impression that the eastern route via Icestair has been long established; however, I imagine that the Worldwound opening up in the past century can't have helped it's popularity much; maybe the western route via Kalsgard (or at least a rise in its use) is a recent development since the opening of the Worldwound? Before the Worldwound, travelers via Icestair had an easyish journey across Sarkoris to the Sellen tributaries; now they have to go through Belkzen (crawling with occasionally warring orcs) to avoid the demons...
As a further reminder, it might be an idea to make sure that the twenty major deity entries all share useful common information, such as how each deity shows their favour or displeasure and holy book. (This assumes that more space is available for each deity; it's posible that there might not be, otherwise the Campaign Setting might be stepping on the toes of the Gods and Magic book too much.)
Questions:
Will the Denizens of Leng get an entry as an organization (or set of organizations, as I imagine their must be some factions or cliques that work at odds to one another) in the Revised Campaign Setting?
Will the be information (or at least mentions) of some of the additional planes from 'The Great Beyond' such as Leng and the Dimension of Dreams?
Will the Denizens of Leng get an entry as an organization (or set of organizations, as I imagine their must be some factions or cliques that work at odds to one another) in the Revised Campaign Setting?
Unlikely; they're a pretty minor group and there's a lot more important ones to talk about.
Charles Evans 25 wrote:
Will the be information (or at least mentions) of some of the additional planes from 'The Great Beyond' such as Leng and the Dimension of Dreams?
The Denizens of Leng however are a useful group, in that you can use them in a campaign with relative ease. Indeed as far as I recall they have shown up in both the Rise of the Runelords Adventure Path and Legacy of Fire Adventure Path (plus there was a piece of fiction in Wayfinder #1 about them too, if fan products count).
A GM can drop them in almost anywhere as mysterious merchants with an agenda too esoteric for PCs to fathom, as possible employers, or as villains of a piece.
They have a lot more scope for usage than, say, the Lumber Consortium in most games set outside of Andoran, although given the Lumber Consortium feature in modules (and PFS scenarios too?) I can see that there would be good reason for the Lumber Consortium to continue to feature in the Campaign Setting.
Edit:
They also popped up in one of this year's RPGSuperstar Round 5 proposals...
LOTS of help, Charles! I can't thank you enough for all the feedback you've given us on this thread, it's VERY valuable. (I'm gonna put a "special thanks to Charles Evans" in the credits page of the revised book as a result, and once it's published I'll make sure you get a copy of the new book as thanks!)
Thanks again! :-)
James, any idea btw on when the next revision/reprint will be released? Also, how many printings have been done? And I assume most of the earlier errors mentioned (by most thorough Charles!) have been fixed at whatever printing is out now?
The Denizens of Leng however are a useful group, in that you can use them in a campaign with relative ease. Indeed as far as I recall they have shown up in both the Rise of the Runelords Adventure Path and Legacy of Fire Adventure Path (plus there was a piece of fiction in Wayfinder #1 about them too, if fan products count).
A GM can drop them in almost anywhere as mysterious merchants with an agenda too esoteric for PCs to fathom, as possible employers, or as villains of a piece.
They have a lot more scope for usage than, say, the Lumber Consortium in most games set outside of Andoran, although given the Lumber Consortium feature in modules (and PFS scenarios too?) I can see that there would be good reason for the Lumber Consortium to continue to feature in the Campaign Setting.
Edit:
They also popped up in one of this year's RPGSuperstar Round 5 proposals...
But since the denizens of Leng don't have stats in the Bestiary, I'm a little bit wary on playing up their role in Golarion's hardcover. And even though they've popped up a lot in adventures that doesn't mean that, globally, they have a big footprint. They're supposed to be pretty subtle too.
They've certainly seen more usage than the Lumber Consortium, but the Lumber Consortioum in the world itself is something that is more well-known. (although they're SO regional that I suspect they're probably going to move OUT of the organizations chapter and just get mentioned in the text of the nation itself to make room for more organizations or other stuff).
James, any idea btw on when the next revision/reprint will be released? Also, how many printings have been done? And I assume most of the earlier errors mentioned (by most thorough Charles!) have been fixed at whatever printing is out now?
We're aiming to have the revised book out in September. Depending on how much of a pill the book is, though, it could slip to October or even November... but we're HOPING for September. The book's only been printed once, though... all of the errors in this thread will be addressed in the revised edition due out in September, but for now they're all in the only printing currently in print.
Several gnome-related observations.
First of all, the First World, doesn't really get any mention in the Current Campaign Setting, beyond what is covered in the Gnomes entry in Chapter 1. It might be worth giving it a mention in with the other planes stuff, if there's space, or a sidebar in the Gnomes entry if some reorganization can be done there.
Secondly:
P. 10
Gnomes wrote:
...While the stocky, wrinkled talespinners of the oldest gnome enclaves claim that their unmatched curiosity drove them to exploration, the eldest dragons and reclusive aboleths speak of a devestating catastrophe wrecking the gnome's fey realm in a reflection of the destruction brought upon Golarion by the Starstone. Some sages even suspect that the race fled its homeland solely to wash suspicion from its mischievous hands...
The 'race fled its homeland solely to wash suspicion from its mischievous hands' reads to me as a very confusing and muddled up metaphor. In what way does running away from something equate to 'washing suspicion'? Surely running away if there's already some suspicion as to your culpability in something simply creates extra suspicion that you were responsible, at the very least suggesting you are trying to flee the consequences of what you have done?
The passage quoted is also one of those which blames the Starstone specifically for bringing destruction on Golaron, when it should be the Earthfall?
Is the implication of this passage supposed to be that the gnomes generally arrived in Golarion round about the time of the Earthfall? It's possible that it can be read that way.
NB
It occurs to me that the Fellnight Queen material has been developed since the release of the Campaign Setting, and that the arrival of the gnomes on Golarion might be in some way tied to that?
Thirdly (and finally on gnomes for now):
P. 10
Gnomes (flavour text) wrote:
...strangled a highway robber with his knobby hands...
As general comment, I'm not sure where it could be fit in, but an indication of if or which countries have courier systems or dispatch-riders might be useful somewhere. If it's any help on this topic, the following exchange took part in a Pathfinder Chat a while back:
Pathfinder Chat, 29th September, 2009 wrote:
‹Charles Evans› james Jacobs: Ah. Stamps! Do any nations on Golarion have postage/courier systems for public use?
‹James Jacobs› Charles Evans: Probably. No stamps, though.
‹Charles Evans› James Jacobs: I assume the 'empires' have some sort of official courier system for government use?
‹Charles Evans› (Cheliax, Taldor, the eastern empires)
‹James Jacobs› Charles Evans: Probably. A different one for each nation, I suspect.
On the subject of Trade and/or The Inner Sea, assuming that ships rely on lighthouses/beacon fires to indicate safe harbours or reefs, is there activity in any areas by wreckers using false lights on some nights to lure ships onto rocks? (The idea is the ship runs aground and breaks, and the wreckers then go down to pillage the cargo that washes ashore.)
It occurs to me that spellcasters with sufficiently powerful magic able to imitate the brilliance of a regular lighthouses or beacon fires may offer Golarion-based wreckers somewhat more flexibility in when and how they can deploy, than historical wreckers of the real world (and possibly options even for underwater salvage before a ship's owner can get their own team to a site).
On the subject of Trade and/or The Inner Sea, assuming that ships rely on lighthouses/beacon fires to indicate safe harbours or reefs, is there activity in any areas by wreckers using false lights on some nights to lure ships onto rocks? (The idea is the ship runs aground and breaks, and the wreckers then go down to pillage the cargo that washes ashore.)
It occurs to me that spellcasters with sufficiently powerful magic able to imitate the brilliance of a regular lighthouses or beacon fires may offer Golarion-based wreckers somewhat more flexibility in when and how they can deploy, than historical wreckers of the real world (and possibly options even for underwater salvage before a ship's owner can get their own team to a site).
Spellcasters in Golarion aren't that common. It's easy to get that impression by reading adventures and playing the game, but remember that window into the world is skewed toward one of adventure. That's where the majority of the world's spellcasters and powerful creatures more or less gravitate to. Everyday life in Golarion is more mundane than that, and spellcasters generally don't do things like work as lighthouses or street lamps. This is mostly because we LIKE the flavor of a more real-world setting where the streets have oil lamps or lighthouses are "normal."
We're aiming to have the revised book out in September. Depending on how much of a pill the book is, though, it could slip to October or even November... but we're HOPING for September. The book's only been printed once, though... all of the errors in this thread will be addressed in the revised edition due out in September, but for now they're all in the only printing currently in print.
Ok, thanks!
I think I will just wait until the reprint makes it presence. I am no rush to get this book right now.
General comment (artwork):
Whilst the image on page 70 (in the Cheliax entry) has been commented on previously, (soul sucking erinyes???), I'm not sure that the artwork on page 62 has had comment. It's very atmospheric artwork, but I'm not sure why it's there or what the tie in to Andoran (in which entry it features) is? It appears to depict some sort of disagreement over a payment or agreement of some sort, but I can't see anything particularly 'Andoran' about it. The entries on page 68 are about government (continued from the previous page) and Almas; is it supposed to depict the start of the revolt against Cheliax, perhaps? If so, something in the Andoran entry about the revolt starting off with a disagreement over taxes might help to lend context to the image.
Whilst the image on page 70 (in the Cheliax entry) has been commented on previously, (soul sucking erinyes???), I'm not sure that the artwork on page 62 has had comment. It's very atmospheric artwork, but I'm not sure why it's there or what the tie in to Andoran (in which entry it features) is? It appears to depict some sort of disagreement over a payment or agreement of some sort, but I can't see anything particularly 'Andoran' about it. The entries on page 68 are about government (continued from the previous page) and Almas; is it supposed to depict the start of the revolt against Cheliax, perhaps? If so, something in the Andoran entry about the revolt starting off with a disagreement over taxes might help to lend context to the image.
There's going to be a LOT of new art in the revised book. One of the goals for each opener is to make sure that the openers for each nation actually capture the feel of that nation or region. And you're right that the picture on page 62 doesn't really do that at all.
By page 68, I meant page 62. Sorry, I've been a bit under the weather since Tuesday, hence the lack of posts at all on Wednesday. Starting to recover now (touch wood).
One more minor tidying up suggestion for now:
Back on the first page of this thread, I believe that I commented to the effect that it might help with readability if the different regions in the names of the suggested names for Tian were bolded (to highlight them and make them stand out from the lists of names that follow). The same would also probably help the names for the Mwangi tribes on page 28, and for that matter their favored regions and favored deities too.
For example:
Favored Regions:
Bekyar - Bloodcove, Desolation Cape, Sargava, the Shackles, Sodden Lands; Bonuwat - Bloodcove, Mwangi Coast, Rahadoum...
Edit:
I cannot find 'Desolation Cape' (listed on page 28 as a favored region for the Bekyar tribe) named on the Mwangi or Region Map. Is this because it's 'off map' to the south (and in fact the southern extent of the continent of Garund)? Information on page 29 seems to possibly support this possibility.
If so, as with Azlant on the 'Lost Kingdoms' map, it might be useful to have at least a label 'To Desolation Cape' and arrow to indicate directionality on the Mwangi map and Region map.
...Furs and amber and strong drink, that's what gets you through the dark winter days when the ice cracks at the end of the bay and you hear the linnorm scales scrape along the surface...
Minor nitpick:
I have a feeling that whatever punctuation should be used between 'drink' and 'that's', it should be punctuation other than a comma. It feels more like a dash to me, but maybe a colon or semicolon.
Hmm. Module D3 'The Demon Within', refers to a 250 mile radius dimensional lock created by a major artifact known as the Demonscope.
It seems to me that this is very important information about that area and that it might be worth mentioning this in the Mendev entry, and marking the location of Clydewall Keep where the Demonscope is kept on the Region map (or a more detailed Mendev/Worldwound map if one is included) - it perhaps also might be worth indicating the extent of this dimensional lock effect.
Hmm. Module D3 'The Demon Within', refers to a 250 mile radius dimensional lock created by a major artifact known as the Demonscope.
It seems to me that this is very important information about that area and that it might be worth mentioning this in the Mendev entry, and marking the location of Clydewall Keep where the Demonscope is kept on the Region map (or a more detailed Mendev/Worldwound map if one is included) - it perhaps also might be worth indicating the extent of this dimensional lock effect.
As in many of the first year or two of the modules, there wasn't a very tight "quality control" on canon development. A 250 mile radius dimensional lock effect is a SIGNIFICANT effect, and not necessarily one that I want to preserve. I haven't yet had a chance to actually read through "The Demon Within," as a matter of fact, but as I start to work more focused on the revised campaign setting I'll be reading ALL of the modules, I suspect, in an attempt to determine if any unfortunate strangeness on the scale of nearly a 200,000 square mile zone that blocks dimensional travel needs to be explained or retconned or whatever.
In any event, I suspect that the modules will be the ones receiving the bulk of the retconning in the cases where it has to happen.
Some sort of dimensional lock style effect up there on the border between Mendev and the Worldwound would be useful though to explain why demons don't just magically pop over the border and slaughter some sleeping mortals (tremendous fun to some demons, I'm sure) before magically popping back out again. (The wardstones also get some information in D3, but as far as I can see apparently aren't much more than a mystic fence, which presents a barrier sufficient to keep out the hordes of demons unable to fly or burrow.)
There are some additional demons (Chatterers and Son of Perdition) listed in the D3 bestiary which might figure for the Abyssal book, if they're not at least mentioned in passing in it already. The Son of Perdition used a possession mechanic, which could perhaps be updated to square with information in the Council of Thieves adventure path.
There are some additional demons (Chatterers and Son of Perdition) listed in the D3 bestiary which might figure for the Abyssal book, if they're not at least mentioned in passing in it already. The Son of Perdition used a possession mechanic, which could perhaps be updated to square with information in the Council of Thieves adventure path.
Both the chatterer swarm and the son of perdition aren't actual demons. They don't have the demon subtype, nor do they have all of the normal demon traits (such as telepathy or the ability to summon other demons). They're certainly interesting creatures, though; I particularly like how the chatterers get inside people and ride them around. They'll probably be mentioned in "Lords of Chaos" in a section that talks about "other denizens of the Abyss" or something like that.
Given that at least gillmen Azlanti could be assumed to have spread from the Arcadian Ocean and Inner Sea, I'm curious as to why the favored regions only represent the coast of Avistan, and why (modern) Azlanti are apparently not found along the coast of Garund too?
Is this an error of omission?
I am aware that there was some discussion of this subject (and other Azlanti related matters) in last Tuesday's Paizo chat, and to some extent I have made this post as a reminder of this odd absence from the list of favored regions.
With regard to the rest of the Azlanti entry on pages 18-19, depending on how the next adventure path develops certain details, the statement on page 18 (and associated material) that '...Today, there is no more Azlant. The god Aroden was the very last pure-blooded scion of that once-proud race, and with his recent demise the line is now extinct...' may need revision.
Page 19 also makes a Starstone reference: '...Elves tend to distrust humans of Azlanti heritage, remembering the battles of ancient days before the fall of the Starstone, when the aboleth-backed scions of Azlant toppled the great cities of the elvenfolk and forced the race to abandon Golarion through interplanetary gates...'
(edited, tag expanded, just to be safe)
Actually, why did the Elves for the most part abandon Golarion? Material from Second Darkness seems to indicate that at least some elves evacuated to avoid Earthfall rather than because they were withdrawing from Azlanti agression.
Second Darkness spoilers:
Spoiler:
Information regarding the replica Celwynvian in The Armegeddon Echo specifically indicates (page 35) that the evacuation of Celwynvian was ordered because of the coming Earthfall. Furthermore, an Azlanti is living at ease in Celwynvian in a luxurious mansion (The Armegeddon Ech, page 37) which I feel would not be the case if the elves of Celwynvian were fighting the Azlanti, or had been doing so recently. That particular Azlanti does know that his people are in conflict with the aboleths, however, though he is confident his people can deal with whatever surprises the aboleths are cooking up.
It occurs to me that Celwynvian may have been independent of Kyonin in the time before the Earthfall, and that the elves of Kyonin may have withdrawn from a war with the Azlanti, whilst the elves of Celwynvian enjoyed much more cordial relations with the humans.
I hope that (so far as the GenCon rush allows) spirits are high there at Paizo. The first edition of the Campaign Setting was Ennie award winning, after all, and I see no reason why (unless Ennie rules bar it) the revision shouldn't be in with a shot at the appropriate Ennies. :)
If the Campaign Setting revision release date has been pushed back, could it be made one of the the official 2010-2011 'season' hardback releases on your schedule, and maybe expanded further, or does the need to get print copies available over-ride other considerations?
I hope that (so far as the GenCon rush allows) spirits are high there at Paizo. The first edition of the Campaign Setting was Ennie award winning, after all, and I see no reason why (unless Ennie rules bar it) the revision shouldn't be in with a shot at the appropriate Ennies. :)
If the Campaign Setting revision release date has been pushed back, could it be made one of the the official 2010-2011 'season' hardback releases on your schedule, and maybe expanded further, or does the need to get print copies available over-ride other considerations?
Actually, the Gazetteer version won an Ennie as well, so the Golarion setting has in fact won the gold for "Best Setting" twice. Which leads me to believe that we certainly COULD submit the revised book to the Ennies again, although it would have to be for the 2011 Ennies since the revision is coming out after the 2010 Ennies submissions close.
The need to get the book back in print overrules the possibility of the revised Campaign Setting replacing one of the regularly scheduled hardcovers... as does the fact that we don't release world-setting material in the RPG Hardcover line. That'd annoy subscribers.
With regard to the forthcoming Serpent's Skull Path, I know there's been some chat of late on Tuesday nights, and that some things are still being sorted out/defined.
Is there a chance that the aboleths created Azlant and the Azlanti primarily as tools to use against the serpentfolk? To do things in environments where they themselves or more regular servants/slaves would not be comfortable operating in?
With regard to the forthcoming Serpent's Skull Path, I know there's been some chat of late on Tuesday nights, and that some things are still being sorted out/defined.
Is there a chance that the aboleths created Azlant and the Azlanti primarily as tools to use against the serpentfolk? To do things in environments where they themselves or more regular servants/slaves would not be comfortable operating in?
Nope.
Azlant is an entire continent. Just as there are multiple groups and plotlines and events going on in, say, Garund or Avistan, there were multiples in Azlant. Not EVERYTHING in Azlant has to do with aboleths. In fact, most plotlines in Azlant would have nothing to do with aboleths.
In other words, the aboleths and the serpentfolk really don't have any links whatsoever. They're pretty much separate "bad guys" who the folk of Azlant had to deal with. The concept that aboleths are so overwhelmingly important in Azlant's history that they need to be involved every time we mention Azlant would be akin to having to mention the Runelords every time we publish an adventure or a supplement set in the Inner Sea region.
So having set Azlant running, the aboleths for the most part kept a pretty much 'hands off' approach?
(Or is aboleth involvement in the establishment of Azlant overstated, are you saying?)
So having set Azlant running, the aboleths for the most part kept a pretty much 'hands off' approach?
(Or is aboleth involvement in the establishment of Azlant overstated, are you saying?)
With the exception of Earthfall, which is basically the aboleths getting sick of the humans of Azlant and their claims of power and superiority, the aboleths actually had a very subtle interaction with Azlant. After all, if there were a hot war between Azlant and aboleths, it's not very likely that the Azlanti would have been so cocky and arrogant about their power, since it would have been obvious that the aboleths were a force to be reckoned with.
The fact that the END of Azlant was the result of Earthfall, which was caused by Aboleths, and the fact that we really haven't said much about Azlant before Earthfall at all, paints an inaccurate picture, I guess, of the importance aboleths played on Azlant.
It'd be like taking a snapshot of Europe at the height of the plague and not stopping to look at anything for the previous 1000 years, really. A lot more happened in Europe other than the plague... and a lot more happened in Azlant than Earthfall.
The shape changing abilities of the Bronze, Gold, and Silver dragons have changed under PFRPG, and some mechanism is need to explain how some of them can live in human cities unnoticed for years given the much shorter duration of the ability now. (If it is a mechanism which could apply to other dragon types, then given the appearance of Kazavon in the history of the setting that might be useful too.) Okay, thanks... :)
To add to my earlier comment from page 8 of this thread, it occurs to me that perhaps this might rate a sidebar, along with some other information on Dragons and their roles in Golarion in an expanded 'Other Races' entry. (Maybe also include a marketing reference to Classic Dragons Revisited for more in-depth information on dragons in Golarion, if it's considered fair to refer to a 3.5 product (or at least the dragon stat blocks are) in a revised Campaign Setting.)
Also on the subject of other races:
P. 40
Other Races, Tieflings wrote:
...In Infernal Cheliax, the fiend-blooded tieflings act as interlocutors between the ruling para-castes and the infernal courts of Hell, making them tolerated but not entirely trusted...
I have the impression from much more recent Council of Thieves (and Cheliax sourcebook material) that Paizo's take on tieflings in Cheliax has shifted since the Campaign Setting was written, and that tieflings generally are regarded with contempt and as expendable slaves, unless they can really prove themselves.
And a minor possible error I picked up, whilst checking the Cheliax entry again:
P. 71
Cheliax, Senara wrote:
...Deep within the Hell-spawn-infested Whisperwood...
'Hell-spawn-infested' should be 'hellspawn-infested'?
As a footnote to this post, the actual current Cheliax entry doesn't itself seem to have anything additional to add on the positions of tieflings in Chelish society, the note in the earlier Other Races entry perhaps having been considered sufficient comment.
Uh oh, the dwarves and orcs are causing a mess.... P. 7
Dwarves wrote:
...Elves, for example, are weaklings who abandoned the world and allowed orcish dominion during the Age of Darkness...
As an aside to the main point to come, this is fallacious logic. If the elves were 'weaklings' in dwarven perspective, then what in the nine hells did the dwarves expect the elves to have been able to do about orcs? Dwarven psychology may be a long way short of rational, however.
It also doesn't seem likely to me that the dwarves had actually met any elves (except possibly drow who were 'going down' as the dwarves 'came up'?) until the elves returned from Sovyrian during the Age of Enthronement, so any view regarding what the elves might have been able to do about orcs seems to have been developed as a 'what if' game by dwarven historians in recent history: 'What if the elves of that empire our ancestors never actually had any contact with had hung around on Golarion to meet the orcs whom our ancestors did later on fight?'
The Timeline (page 201) has nothing on it which indicates an 'orcish dominion' during the Age of Darkness. The main events outlined for the Age of Darkness are Earthfall in -5293 AR (at which point the elves leave or have left), a dwarven 'empire' (although perhaps 'union' might be a more appropriate description at this point, as the dwarves are still on the move) being formed in -5133 AR, a vicious pogrom by the dwarves causing the orcs to arrive on the surface in -5102 AR (incidentally indicating that the dwarves are in the clear ascendance here at this stage of the dwarf/orc fight), and the dwarves arriving on the surface in -4987 AR. If the orcs (who arrived on the surface before the dwarves) did establish 'dominion' on the surface during the Age of Darkness, it isn't mentioned in the current timeline.
P. 14
Half-Orcs wrote:
...Half-orcs have existed in Golarion since the first battles between orcs and humans in the dying days of the Age of Darkness, when the Quest for Sky of the ancient dwarves pushed the brutal orcs from their subterranean homes to the surface world. In that moment, defeat erupted into victory as the orcs easily subjugated the fearful, sickly humans of the benighted world. Orcs ravaged central and northern Avistan for centuries before the rebellious humans and their dwarven and halfling allies, emboldened by the sun's return, cast their new masters from their gruesome thrones...
Again, this is referring to events which do not feature in the current timeline. It is also making the assumption that during the whole Age of Darkness, the sun did not shine, when it has been established in earlier posts on this thread that the literal sun-being-constantly-blotted-out phase of the Age of Darkness may have been very short lived, and that the Age of Darkness was as much a metaphor for a period of cultural and societal breakdown on the surface.
'Half-orcs have existed in Golarion since' should be 'Half-orcs have existed on Golarion'? (Unless 'in' is meant in the sense of underground??? Golarion is the world here, not a continent.)
Half-orcs wrote:
...The deep interior of the Kodar Mountains hides ramshackle cities teeming with orcs, while the Menador range - cleared of orcs in the early days of the Age of Enthronement - once more echoes with savage wardrums...
...From Cheliax in the south to the Hold of the Mammoth Lords in the north, the bloody promise of orcish vengeance and slaughter is ever-present...
I think I've already mentioned elsewhere that 'Hold of the Mammoth Lords' is not a country name.
The quoted pieces indicate that the Menador Mountains in Cheliax apparently have orcs in, however. The Cheliax entry makes no mention of orcs in Cheliax. The Cheliax book makes no mention of trouble with orcs in Cheliax. In fact with the possible exception of Isger, it seems to me that none of the nations along the Menador Mountains are likely to have an 'orc problem', as Cheliax, Nidal, and Molthune are all militarily strong, and Druma's treasuries can presumably throw merceneries at any 'orc problem' until it goes away. And since Andoran, Druma, and Cheliax all have an interest in the stability of Isger, (see the Isger entry) it also seems unlikely any orc 'problem' in Isger could last for long.
As a concluding comment for now, I would like to observe that the half-orc entry seems to be as much about the history of orcs in Golarion (some of which does not seem directly half-orc related) as about actual half orcs. If there's so much around about orcs which is so important to Golarion history that it's worth mentioning (as indeed there may well be - if the orcs did dominate the surface for a time during the Age of Darkness, that could certainly do with a mention on the Timeline, for example) then why not write an entry, section, or sidebar specifically about orcs somewhere (presumably not a full two-page spread as orcs are not considered a PC race), and keep the half-orc entry to being about half-orcs?
Okay, that ended up longer than I thought it would. Hope it all makes sense.
...-5293 Earthfall. The Starstone tumbles to Golarion, creating the Inner Sea and kicking off a thousand years of darkness. Azlant and Thassilon destroyed. Elves depart Golarion...
Coming back to this entry, It occurs to me that the order in which the events are listed is potentially misleading, as the elven exodus happened before the Starstone arrived if I understand correctly. The elven exodus could be listed before the Starstone mention, to avoid this.
Also, as a minor quibble, the entry could be taken to indicate that the entirety of the elves left Golarion. In view of the elves who stayed, either underground or otherwise, 'Elves depart Golarion' could be either 'Many elves depart Golarion' or 'Most elves depart Golarion'.
This one is probably one for the longer term and the four hundred odd page third edition Campaign Setting, or maybe a Pathfinder article, but following on from the discussion of Nocticula (and her hairstyle) in last night's chat what about an entry on Golarion fashion at some point in the mid to long term future? Possibly (if in Pathfinder) as part of a social encounters article? Whilst a local sheriff desperate to solve a goblin problem in a small rural community might not care how a group of sellswords look (so long as they seem vaguely honest and reliable) the movers and shakers of Taldan society might expect a group of potential employees to attend a night at the opera or to show up at a masked ball. (I seem to recall that back in the days of Dungeon in The Prince of Redhand there was a function of some kind that the PCs were supposed to make some effort to turn up at in a presentable fashion.)
At the moment this is just a vague and nebulous idea I have, but it would be fun to have artwork of Valeros fighting against the epic menace that is a bowtie at some point, needing assistance from Kyra as usual, whilst Ezren stands nearby in sartorial elegance (illusion magic?) looking bemused....
Hmm. I wonder how Merisiel would cope with fashion. Maybe we'll see later on in Kingmaker... :)
At the moment this is just a vague and nebulous idea I have, but it would be fun to have artwork of Valeros fighting against the epic menace that is a bowtie at some point, needing assistance from Kyra as usual, whilst Ezren stands nearby in sartorial elegance (illusion magic?) looking bemused....
Hmm. I wonder how Merisiel would cope with fashion. Maybe we'll see later on in Kingmaker... :)
Nice! One of my all time favourite issues of Dungeon has Prince of the Redhand, and the art of the iconics all dressed up. Especially fitting the tieflings dress!
And with that, and with the Advanced Player's Guide, PF 35, and PF 36 all heading to the printer and officially off our plates within the next hour or so, I'm now officially starting work on the revision of this book for REALS.
In fact, according to my 320-page pagination, I've already got 22 pages ready for layout. Of course, 14 of those pages are chapter openers, and at least two are full-page maps, but still! PROGRESS!
Thanks again to everyone (especially you, Charles!) for all the feedback. Feel free to continue offering feedback on this thread or elsewhere, but from this point on, chances of feedback directly influencing the book can only diminish as sections get locked down and sent to Sarah for layout.
I've been somewhat distracted (and not sleeping too well due to stress) by British electoral events of late. Now that we finally seem to have got a government locked down and the pound is hopefully going to stop dropping on the markets, there are a few things I can hopefully get back to commenting on/reporting. Thanks for heads-up, on the need for urgency.
Edit:
Oooh, maps gone to layout! I hope you have the pugwampis extracted from the cartography department this time and the cities/borders are all in the right place. :D
(Don't forget to check the Andoran map for 'Piren's Bluff', too, to make sure that it is 'Piren's Bluff' if you go with supporting the more frequent Last Baron module usage instead of the the original Campaign Setting 'Perin's Bluff'.) ;)
Creative Director
