Creative Director
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Hello James! Hope you can answer a lycanthropy (or theriomorphic, if you prefer!) question.
Lycanthope alignments puzzle me somewhat. The case has been made in numerous threads that because the base creature retains their intelligence that they should have the ability to modify their alignment. You of course have stated before that alignment in the bestiaries is not 'hard and fast' and is merely a representation of the common denominator of a race.
I suppose my question is, why do afflicted lycanthropes go through an alignment change, even in their base form?
I've considered that maybe the 'urge to hunt' supercedes human desires in the chaotic evil lycanthropes (werewolf, weretiger), though can't these urges be suppressed? A classic form of 'dealing with' lycanthropy is to put yourself through self imposed exile or isolation so you do not hurt others, which seems overall pretty on the good scale, to me.
Would love some input, thanks!
In 3rd Edition D&D, a lycanthrope's alignment changed to be the alignment listed in the Monster Manual.
That's not the case in Golarion. It's more organic. Your alignment doesn't change because you become a lycanthrope. It WILL change if you give in to the savage nature that lycanthropy tends to encourage. If you're bitten by a werewolf and you don't control your urges to run amok under the full moon and eat humans, you'll turn chaotic evil. If you can resist that, you won't change alignments. We leave that vague so that GMs and players can do what's best for their game. Some games prefer to play up the curse element of lycanthropy and evoke the horror roots of the idea. Others prefer to adopt a more benign approach. It's up to you.
Note that if there's NOT a social or other stigma against lycanthropy... there's no reason for your PCs to NOT run out and get bit, and that can create balance problems or disrupt stories you have planned. A world where lycanthropy isn't bad is not the world we assume when we create content for Golarion and Pathfinder.
|
Creative Director
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Is it true that all characters who act in a six second round are acting at the same time? If this is true, is it only true in a strictly thematic sense?
It's true. All actions in a round happen in the same six seconds. The reason it resolves in play one at a time in a turn order is because it's a group game and having everyone go at once is too complicated and, frankly, not fun.
|
Creative Director
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
1)How does Iomedae feel about money?
2)How much Wealth does the Church of Iomedae have?
3)Besides donations where does the Church of Iomedae get it's wealth from?
4)Do the citizens of Iomedae's realm engage in planar trade?
1) Since it helps her church flourish and survive, she approves of it. As a deity, she has no real use for it. And no I'm not gonna decide what gods use instead of money or if they do... that all falls under the "Deities are beyond our understanding" umbrella.
2) Plenty. I'm not gonna nail down a number because that may limit our story options in the future, and because I don't want to give you the idea I'm open to listing monetary holdings for every organization in the world. No time to do that.
3) From adventurers. From spellcasting. From selling magic items. From mercenary work. From government bodies that want to keep the church's presence in their area. I'm sure there are other sources, but those are the main ones.
4) If there's a society, trade is part of it. So ... yes.
|
Creative Director
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Howdy Mr. Jacbos. I have some questions on rules, and some RP stuff.
1). Does any polymorph effects, like that of wild shape, undead anatomy, etc. have to assume a specific form or could you use, say, undead anatomy to go into a huge skeleton instead of a regular sized skeleton?
2). **Magnimar**. I have currently set my new campaign in this awesome city, and I was wondering if you had any information on updates/improvements for the city? Like maybe specific stat blocks on some of the npcs, or even some different classes considering the tremendous amounts of updates since the release. Also, would Brigh be highly invested in the golemworks of Magnimar, Pug's contraptions, and the other inventors based in the city? It seems like she would be all over it.
3). This one is an odd request. In a high powered game i am playing in, I am a gestalt tiefling Slayer/Inquisitor of Pharasma(level dips for other abilities) and I am based of Death from Darksiders II(In game my other "siblings" have made appearances, mainly War.). I dual wield scythes, and I am on the way to killing some powerful demons/drow who seek to cause mayhem and death. The questions comes about as a part of my backstory. Who should my father be in game? I was thinking an Asura but since non of the demi-god Asura have actual stats or stories I was wondering If you had any ideas on this one. I understand that this is a huge question and probably not worth your time.
1) Unless it specifically says you can change size, you can't change size. And unless the spell specifically says you can adopt a specific individual's appearance, you can't.
2) I do. Some of them have been put in print; you might want to check out the City of Secrets comic books for these. I've done a LOT more work on it myself; had a campaign partially set there a few years ago, after all, but those notes aren't public. Brigh wouldn't be overly more interested in those parts of Golarion than any other construct creation stuff. Her church and worshipers sure might be. But they're very uncommon. There's not a big component of Brigh worship in Varisia, much less Magnimar.
3) I'm not that familiar with Darksiders... but why not have Pharasma be your mother? She doesn't need a father. She's the goddess of birth, after all. She can just have kids if she wants. If that's too much, then I'd go with a psychopomp father.
Somewhat on the topuc of Iomedean wealth and where it stems from: How closely intertwined are the Church of Iomedae and the ruling bodies of Mendev? (More detailed questions might show up when I have access to a better machine to type on.)
|
Creative Director
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Dear James Jacobs: One of the big shifts in 3.0/3.5/Pathfinder was a greater emphasis on planned character growth, versus organic character growth. The rules make it easier to start out a character above level 1, and the nature of feat trees (along with potential multi-classing synergy, which seems to now be part of class design) means that not only are players rewarded for planning their character growth, but they can be penalized for not doing so.
Is this movement towards planned character growth a positive or negative in your opinion? Do you think there is a market for games that encourage more organic, modular character growth, or was that an older style of play that has died off?
Furthermore, in previous editions of the game... there really WASN'T much of a way to customize your character as you leveled up, other than changing what sorts of spells you prepared. Pretty much every character was more or less the same. Even multiclassing was something you decided on when you started a character. Dual classing was only allowed to humans, and that was the only way to change course in your class and it was REALLY hard to do.
Which lead to repetition. The introduction of things like feats and prestige classes and an integrated skill system really helped to give variety to characters. And in Pathfinder, things like bloodlines and rage powers and all the rest further help you to build exactly the character you want onto the chasis of a base class.
I think the change is a positive. It makes the game more robust, and gives players and GMs alike MUCH better tools to tell the stories they want to tell.
Whether or not you as a player take the "I build my entire build at the start" or "I make choices for my next level when I level up, not before," or something in between... the fact is that all those options are legit, and they all work fine with the game. There's not one right way to do it.
Saying players are rewarded for planning their growth and can be penalized for not doing so may be true, but so is the opposite. If you plan your growth and then find magic items or gain special perks in play that would work better with a different focus, you can be just as penalized.
I think the older style of not having as many options for your characters and being able to customize them only via the magic items you happen to find are gone, and I don't miss them. Especially since I feel that the "organic, modular character growth" option still exists. That's pretty much how I build all of my characters in games I play. I have a general idea of what I want to do when I level up, but I also let the direction of the campaign advise and inspire my choices as I gain levels as well. Lots of other folks I know do the same thing. It's a mindset, and just because everyone in one particular group might have the same mindset doesn't mean that's the only way to play the game.
|
Creative Director
|
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
Does a tiefling's Darkness SLA count towards the second level arcane spell requirement for prestige classes? Example: tiefling 3rd lvl cleric, 1st lvl wizard qualify for mystic theurge?It's my firm opinion that no, it should not. The rules team ruled differently a while back, and I think that's an error, but no prestige classes have ever been designed with the notion that spell-like abilities function as spells for filling prerequisites.Not being able to use SLAs effectively renders many prestige classes entirely moot - take for example the Mystic Theurge, which even with the SLA trick, is arguably worse off due to needing to drop one caster level. If you do it in the traditional manner, without something like the 3.5 Practiced Spellcaster feat, you've pretty much made a fleshy paperweight. Is it the intention of the development team that these PrCs being entirely mechanically useless? Because as it is, if the ruling was changed the way you seem to desire, most of the caster PrCs seem to just be pointless fluff to pad out books.
Alternatively, is there any possibility of something akin to Practiced Spellcaster being introduced? Even if it were substantially weaker (1 or 2 caster levels, or a 1/1 split for theurges), it would go a long way toward making those sorts of PrCs viable without SLA cheese.
The game was designed so that spell requirements require spells, NOT things that are LIKE spells. And changing that definition years into a game's edition cycle causes problems.
Whether or not you think a class like Mystic Theurge is rendered moot by following the intended rules is more an issue with the design of that class and perhaps your overly rosy expectations and desires for a class that works better than others—the mystyc theurge, for example, is NOT meant to be a class that's greater than the sum of its parts. It's not supposed to be better than a cleric and a wizard. It's supposed to NOT be as good as a single classed cleric or wizard, as far as spell level access is concerned, but instead better on versatility. It's a class for people who want to play a more diverse role than a single-classed spellcaster, NOT the class for people who want access to higher level spells first. You want that... you stick with one class. That's the design intent of the game.
What folks who argue for letting spell-like abilities count for prestige class requirements is, in effect and in my opinion, folks arguing for rules-supported shortcuts and cheats to gain more power faster than the game designers originally intended. In a game that also has a vocal contingent of folks screaming that it's a "caster edition" and that martial characters suck compared to spellcasters... allowing spell-like abilities to grant these cheaty shortcuts only makes the situation worse. No thanks.
There is a similar option to Practiced Spellcaster. Check out the Magical Knack trait on page 329 of Advanced Player's Guide.
|
Creative Director
|
Does merciless butchery stack with mythic Dastardly Finish?
Merciless butchery
dastard mythic
Good question for the rules forum and a FAQ tag.
|
Creative Director
|
Somewhat on the topuc of Iomedean wealth and where it stems from: How closely intertwined are the Church of Iomedae and the ruling bodies of Mendev? (More detailed questions might show up when I have access to a better machine to type on.)
Currently, they're pretty much the same. Mendev is pretty much under total Iomedaen occupation at this point.
Mr JJ,
How are dwarves treated in Cheliax? Given their natural ordered, lawful inclination as a society, I'd imagine they'd fit in well, but the Chelish do seem a bit racist.
Would you say a patriotic Chelish dwarf would be common, uncommon but not unheard of, or rare?
|
Creative Director
|
Mr JJ,
How are dwarves treated in Cheliax? Given their natural ordered, lawful inclination as a society, I'd imagine they'd fit in well, but the Chelish do seem a bit racist.
Would you say a patriotic Chelish dwarf would be common, uncommon but not unheard of, or rare?
There's not a particularly unusual Chelish attitude toward dwarves (like there is toward halflings or strix). They're viewed by Thrune and the government as lesser citizens than Chelaxian loyalists, so there's some low-grade racisim going on there, but a dwarf can be successful in the nation. He/she can even join the church of Asmodeus or become a valued agent of Thrune or a well-respected business owner, etc. They're not super common in Cheliax though.
A patriotic Chelish dwarf would be very rare, but not unheard of.
Remember, dwarves tend toward lawful good alignment, and that's pretty opposite to Cheliax. Most dwarves would find living in Cheliax distasteful and would probably rather wage war on the nation than wage citizenship.
Mr JJ,
How are dwarves treated in Cheliax? Given their natural ordered, lawful inclination as a society, I'd imagine they'd fit in well, but the Chelish do seem a bit racist.
Would you say a patriotic Chelish dwarf would be common, uncommon but not unheard of, or rare?
There's not a particularly unusual Chelish attitude toward dwarves (like there is toward halflings or strix). They're viewed by Thrune and the government as lesser citizens than Chelaxian loyalists, so there's some low-grade racisim going on there, but a dwarf can be successful in the nation. He/she can even join the church of Asmodeus or become a valued agent of Thrune or a well-respected business owner, etc. They're not super common in Cheliax though.
A patriotic Chelish dwarf would be very rare, but not unheard of.
Remember, dwarves tend toward lawful good alignment, and that's pretty opposite to Cheliax. Most dwarves would find living in Cheliax distasteful and would probably rather wage war on the nation than wage citizenship.
Thanks. I'm trying to think of what kind of lawful dwarf would be interested in the shackles area, and the chaos and wild nature of the average pirates and citizens there just seems off-putting to such a character. I had thought a Chelish dwarf would naturally be inclined to investigate the area for his homeland, but it seems a little too snowflakey for me if that's the case.
Any other groups that frequent the region you think might make more sense for a dwarf to be a part of? Again, the idea I'm seeing is definitely more lawful, honorable, etc, but not necessarily good.
Do the class archetype abilities of the Titan Mauler (barbarian) stack with the abilities of the Titan Fighter (fighter)?
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Whether or not you think a class like Mystic Theurge is rendered moot by following the intended rules is more an issue with the design of that class and perhaps your overly rosy expectations and desires for a class that works better than others—the mystyc theurge, for example, is NOT meant to be a class that's greater than the sum of its parts. It's not supposed to be better than a cleric and a wizard. It's supposed to NOT be as good as a single classed cleric or wizard, as far as spell level access is concerned, but instead better on versatility. It's a class for people who want to play a more diverse role than a single-classed spellcaster, NOT the class for people who want access to higher level spells first. You want that... you stick with one class. That's the design intent of the game.
Fair enough - if it's the design intent that multiclassing is bad and people should almost always just stick to one class, it's the design intent; even if I don't agree, it's your product and not mine :)
There is a similar option to Practiced Spellcaster. Check out the Magical Knack trait on page 329 of Advanced Player's Guide.
Magical Knack and Practiced Spellcaster are extremely different though - all MK does is caster level, where PS provides additional spell slots and spells known. But if the design intent is that multiclassing is bad, it would make sense not to include a feat like that which encourages it.
|
Some more DM style questions.
1.) Do you believe that having kingdoms, countries or nations that are capable of handling high tier problems such as Nightshades, Fiends, or Old Dragons removes player agency ("Why do they even need us if they can take on a great wyrm themselves?!") or adds to the verisimilitude of the world ("Its nice to know that the world doesn't hinge entirely on four random weirdoes showing up periodically to clean out all these monsters")?
2.) Do you think its an overpowering factor to give most dragons the ability at higher tiers to assume a humanoid form?
3.) Do you think a dragon should use the treasure he has to equip himself (expending gp to buy rings of protection or dragon-sized cloaks of displacement or the like), or should a hoard primarily serve as a reward for a group stalwart enough to defeat it?
4.) In what situations would normal, non-planar, non-evil PCs find themselves on the wrong end of non-bound psychopomps? I absolutely love the guys, but I always find myself using them as setting dressing.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
And in the end... it IS a game. A certain level of metagaming should not only be expected, but allowed or even encouraged.
You have no idea how happy it makes me to hear you voice that opinion. I did an article about how metagaming in regards to fighting monsters is a good thing and I generally got a lot of backlash for it. Tons of people saying, "No! You're metagaming! You're making the barbarian too powerful and devaluing the bard!" and stuff like that.
The influence of deities in Golarion can reach as far as it needs to. Not every deity is worshiped in every town, city, nation, region, continent, planet, solar system, or galaxy in the universe (aka Material Plane), but they could POTENTIALLY be worshiped anywhere there. Just as Lamashtu and Asmodeus are worshiped on Earth and on Golarion, Sarenrae and Desna (for example) are worshiped on Golarion and on other worlds... such as Droffa (the modern incarnation of ancient Androffa).
The exact mix of deities changes from area to area. There are certainly other planets that incorporate some or all of GOlarion's deities, and others who don't incorporate any of them.
Younger deities like Iomedae are FAR less widespread, and it'd be very unlikely to see them worshiped off-planet, or indeed, even outside of the Inner Sea Region. (Norgorber is an exception. both because of his nature and because he's the oldest of the "locally ascended deities"). Whether or not she's worshiped on all planets, Pharasma does indeed judge the dead of all planets.
A planetary traveler is likely to find worshipers of different religions... but if they find those who worship similar ones, they'd mostly worship under the same names. Remember, Asmodeus and Lamashtu didn't change their names for Golarion.
Wow, that kind of makes Pharasma a really big deal compared to more localized deities. :) 3.5 got into the habit (or carried over the habit) of imposing a hierarchy of lesser and greater deities with divine ranks and so forth. Of course, Pathfinder doesn't have such rules for reasons you've already stated in this thread. But does this mean not all deities are equally powerful? I guess once you get to deity status, the only things that matter anymore for purposes of divine "junk waving" (I can't think of a less crude term, sorry) is the collective population of your religion across the material plane, and how many planets you have worshippers on.
Do the gods even care how many people worship them? Do they gain power from worship at all?
Even if Iomedae was at first unknown anywhere outside Golarion's star system, shouldn't her divinity ought to let her explore the rest of the material plane at will, if she so chose?
Are the gods capable of manifesting an avatar at will on every inhabited planet in the material plane simultaneously?
I highly doubt there'll ever be an Adventure Path involving Apostate. I can confirm, though, that they had no contact with Androffa; Golarion and Castrovel are the only two worlds in this system that have been visited by them.
I keep thinking back to Apostae as the Pathfinder version of Yonada...it's an intriguing mini-setting.
I have other questions...
Is there a PF equivalent of the Lady of Pain or City of Sigil?
What do the peoples of Pathfinder call their home star besides "The Sun"? (Much as 'the sun' is also called 'Sol' in English, mostly in SF.)
What name do the Androffans use for Golarion's sun?
Has the proper interstellar distance between the home stars of Golarion and Earth ever been established or implied, whether in Reign of Winter or any other canon source?
How about the distance between Golarion's sun and Droffa's home star?
|
Creative Director
|
Mr JJ,
How are dwarves treated in Cheliax? Given their natural ordered, lawful inclination as a society, I'd imagine they'd fit in well, but the Chelish do seem a bit racist.
Would you say a patriotic Chelish dwarf would be common, uncommon but not unheard of, or rare?
There's not a particularly unusual Chelish attitude toward dwarves (like there is toward halflings or strix). They're viewed by Thrune and the government as lesser citizens than Chelaxian loyalists, so there's some low-grade racisim going on there, but a dwarf can be successful in the nation. He/she can even join the church of Asmodeus or become a valued agent of Thrune or a well-respected business owner, etc. They're not super common in Cheliax though.
A patriotic Chelish dwarf would be very rare, but not unheard of.
Remember, dwarves tend toward lawful good alignment, and that's pretty opposite to Cheliax. Most dwarves would find living in Cheliax distasteful and would probably rather wage war on the nation than wage citizenship.
Thanks. I'm trying to think of what kind of lawful dwarf would be interested in the shackles area, and the chaos and wild nature of the average pirates and citizens there just seems off-putting to such a character. I had thought a Chelish dwarf would naturally be inclined to investigate the area for his homeland, but it seems a little too snowflakey for me if that's the case.
Any other groups that frequent the region you think might make more sense for a dwarf to be a part of? Again, the idea I'm seeing is definitely more lawful, honorable, etc, but not necessarily good.
The Shackles is a true melting pot. ANYone with a reason to be there can be there, but I suspect that one reason that's more common than most (barring being someone who was born there) is that you went there to escape something back home. The Shackles are where you go to either hide or to be a pirate. Or both.
|
Creative Director
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Whether or not you think a class like Mystic Theurge is rendered moot by following the intended rules is more an issue with the design of that class and perhaps your overly rosy expectations and desires for a class that works better than others—the mystyc theurge, for example, is NOT meant to be a class that's greater than the sum of its parts. It's not supposed to be better than a cleric and a wizard. It's supposed to NOT be as good as a single classed cleric or wizard, as far as spell level access is concerned, but instead better on versatility. It's a class for people who want to play a more diverse role than a single-classed spellcaster, NOT the class for people who want access to higher level spells first. You want that... you stick with one class. That's the design intent of the game.Fair enough - if it's the design intent that multiclassing is bad and people should almost always just stick to one class, it's the design intent; even if I don't agree, it's your product and not mine :)
There is a similar option to Practiced Spellcaster. Check out the Magical Knack trait on page 329 of Advanced Player's Guide.Magical Knack and Practiced Spellcaster are extremely different though - all MK does is caster level, where PS provides additional spell slots and spells known. But if the design intent is that multiclassing is bad, it would make sense not to include a feat like that which encourages it.
The design intent is that multiclassing diversifies at the cost of specialization. That's neither good nor bad. It's trading one strength for a different strength. If you personally feel that different strength isn't as good as the first... don't do it. Others disagree. The game has more than enough room for everyone to have different opinions as to what's good or bad.
If you want higher caster levels and access to spells sooner... Multiclassing is bad.
If you want to be more diverse and have more options and be able to switch roles in the party more quickly and easily... Multiclassing is good.
Another way to look at it—the larger your party is, the more likely you'll have bases covered, and the less likely multiclassing will be a good choice because you're just tyrying to cover bases other players already cover. If you have a smaller party, perhaps one where you DON'T have the resources to cover, say, healing and offensive spells and defensive spells and damage and protection, then multiclassing can be a lifesaver.
What's good for one group isn't good for the other. And not every option needs to be equally excellent, nor CAN they be. Otherwise, there would BE no options. Just one choice for everything. That's boring.
|
Creative Director
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Some more DM style questions.
1.) Do you believe that having kingdoms, countries or nations that are capable of handling high tier problems such as Nightshades, Fiends, or Old Dragons removes player agency ("Why do they even need us if they can take on a great wyrm themselves?!") or adds to the verisimilitude of the world ("Its nice to know that the world doesn't hinge entirely on four random weirdoes showing up periodically to clean out all these monsters")?
2.) Do you think its an overpowering factor to give most dragons the ability at higher tiers to assume a humanoid form?
3.) Do you think a dragon should use the treasure he has to equip himself (expending gp to buy rings of protection or dragon-sized cloaks of displacement or the like), or should a hoard primarily serve as a reward for a group stalwart enough to defeat it?
4.) In what situations would normal, non-planar, non-evil PCs find themselves on the wrong end of non-bound psychopomps? I absolutely love the guys, but I always find myself using them as setting dressing.
1) Yes. The whole point of the game, in my opinion, is that a powerful few heroes (or villians, if you switch things on its head) are there to change the fate and destiny of the world by stepping up and doing the things that the rest of the world can't. If you have nations who are capable of defending themselves perfectly from high-level threats, or similarly you have a large cast of NPCs who can do the job for them... what's the point of making a PC? That starts to get close to just reading fantasy novels to each other, while you watch or listen to other characters do things. It's unrewarding. And for that matter, by the time those "four random weirdos" are high enough level to do the nation-saving stuff... they're hardly random weirdos at that point. They're the main characters. The heroes. The whole point of the story. Nothing random about that at all. And in fact... weird is a GREAT way to be distinctive in your heroisim. Or villiany. The norms don't get stories.
2) Nope.
3) Depends entirely on the dragon, but as with ANY monster who has a treasure of anything other than "NPC gear," take care that if you do allow it to use its treasure to equip itself that you don't blow out its CR numbers. If you do so, you should raise the CR as appropriate.
4) Psychopomps are neutral. Like elementals or wolves or man-eating plants or gray oozes. They can oppose PCs for plenty of reasons, including "they just don't like you." Of course, it's best to figure a way out to include them more logically; I'd recommend checking out the adventures in which they feature to see some examples (the 2nd Mummy's Mask adventure comes to mind).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Is it unreasonable for some of us to actually hope that Paizo never reveals the actual backstory behind characters like Archmage Nex, Count Ranalc, Runelords other than those already detailed, etc, simply so we can tell whatever story we like about those characters without it conflicting with the Official Story?
|
Creative Director
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Wow, that kind of makes Pharasma a really big deal compared to more localized deities. :) 3.5 got into the habit (or carried over the habit) of imposing a hierarchy of lesser and greater deities with divine ranks and so forth. Of course, Pathfinder doesn't have such rules for reasons you've already stated in this thread. But does this mean not all deities are equally powerful? I guess once you get to deity status, the only things that matter anymore for purposes of divine "junk waving" (I can't think of a less crude term, sorry) is the collective population of your religion across the material plane, and how many planets you have worshippers on.
Do the gods even care how many people worship them? Do they gain power from worship at all?
Even if Iomedae was at first unknown anywhere outside Golarion's star system, shouldn't her divinity ought to let her explore the rest of the material plane at will, if she so chose?
Are the gods capable of manifesting an avatar at will on every inhabited planet in the material plane simultaneously?
I keep thinking back to Apostae as the Pathfinder version of Yonada...it's an intriguing mini-setting.
I have other questions...
Is there a PF equivalent of the Lady of Pain or City of Sigil?
What do the peoples of Pathfinder call their home star besides "The Sun"? (Much as 'the sun' is also called 'Sol' in English, mostly in SF.)
What name do the Androffans use for Golarion's sun?
Has the proper interstellar distance between the home stars of Golarion and Earth ever been established or implied, whether in Reign of Winter or any other canon source?
How about the distance between Golarion's sun and Droffa's home star?
Yup; Pharasma IS a big deal. Working as intended. Not all deities are equally powerful. Pharasma is MUCH more powerful than, say, Iomedae, who's a relatively new deity. The scale on which deities function exists... but it's not one we've quantified, nor is it likely to ever be one we quantify. That said... I do have in my head a rough ranking of power for the core 20 and a lot of the other deities, and may some day do something with that in print.
The deities do care how many worshipers they have, but that doesn't grant them power. It grants their religion power though, and their religion (and those who worship that religion) is pretty much how a deity works their will on the world of mortals. More worshipers = more influence on a mortal world, but doesn't impact the deity's personal strength or power.
In time, perhaps Iomedae's religion will spread... but the key word there is "time." The amount of time that, say, Desna or Asmodeus or Sarenrae or Rovagug have been around pretty much turns the amount of time Iomedae's been around into a statistical anomoly barely worth noting. It's like comparing humanity's rule over the planet to the rule of the Dinosaurs... or to the age of the universe. Or to put another way... if Iomedae is a grain of sand's worth of power, then Sarenrae would be all the sand on the planet's worth. And Pharasma is all the sand in the universe that was or will be or has ever been. If you're a creature that gets crushed by a single grain of sand... it doesn't matter how many grains worth that single grain of sand is less or more powerful than. You're still crushed.
The deities can manifest avitars at will wherever and whenever they want. They usually don't, because directly interacting with mortals in that way tends to break fate, cause "arms races" with other deities doing the same, and messes with reality.
There is no PF equivalent of the Lady of Pain or the city of Sigil. We do have Axis, a city the size of a plane, but it serves a very different purpose than Sigil.
They just call it the sun.
The Androffans never really had a name for Golarion's sun, since by the time they got here and noticed it, they had MUCH more important things on their minds (such as not dying) than to name things they only just encountered.
Nope, nor will it be, beyond it being intergalactic.
Same... although I suspect Droffa's closer to Golarion than either are to Earth.
|
Creative Director
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Quick one since I'm starting a campaign involving Thassilon.
How is the name "Xin" pronounced?
It rhymes with "Sin." Get it? :-P
The "X" at the start sounds the same as it does in front of the word "xylophone."
If you pronounce it the same way as you'd say "ZIN" you'd be close enough.
|
Creative Director
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Is it unreasonable for some of us to actually hope that Paizo never reveals the actual backstory behind characters like Archmage Nex, Count Ranalc, Runelords other than those already detailed, etc, simply so we can tell whatever story we like about those characters without it conflicting with the Official Story?
Depends on the creature. I absolutely intend to some day reveal more about the rest of the Runelords. Erik Mona's the one who's in charge of Nex and Count Ranalc; he knows what he wants to do with them but he hasn't yet had the time to write about them yet, but if he gets the time, and that time matches with the will to write, he shall.
It's not unreasonable to hope we'll reveal more some day. It IS unreasonable to expect us to do so before we want to or before we feel the time is right.
Quick one since I'm starting a campaign involving Thassilon.
How is the name "Xin" pronounced?
It rhymes with "Sin." Get it? :-P
The "X" at the start sounds the same as it does in front of the word "xylophone."
If you pronounce it the same way as you'd say "ZIN" you'd be close enough.
Makes sense considering he's the founder of......Sin Magic.
/BadPun
Somewhat on the topuc of Iomedean wealth and where it stems from: How closely intertwined are the Church of Iomedae and the ruling bodies of Mendev? (More detailed questions might show up when I have access to a better machine to type on.)Currently, they're pretty much the same. Mendev is pretty much under total Iomedaen occupation at this point.
I hadn't actually thought about it before, but that puts a very interesting context on the witch-hunts carried out in Kenabres by Hulrun Shappok. The witch-hunts of the Third Mendevian Crusade targeted mostly the native people of Mendev and Sarkoris, and the end result was the entrenchment of Iomedaeans like Shappok into Mendev's government. Would I be right to suddenly suspect that to be intentional?
|
Creative Director
|
Quick one since I'm starting a campaign involving Thassilon.
How is the name "Xin" pronounced?
It rhymes with "Sin." Get it? :-P
The "X" at the start sounds the same as it does in front of the word "xylophone."
If you pronounce it the same way as you'd say "ZIN" you'd be close enough.
Whoa whoa whoa. The "X" at the start of "xylophone" is pronounced like an "s" and not a "z"?
(I've lurked here for two years, love the fact that you do this thread James, and yes the first time I'm actually asking a question is to ask "English, how does it work?")
Yup. X is a complicated letter!
|
Creative Director
|
Only along one axis. They do have law in common after all. And most dwarves tend towards the surly side of lawful good.
Remember, dwarves tend toward lawful good alignment, and that's pretty opposite to Cheliax. Most dwarves would find living in Cheliax distasteful and would probably rather wage war on the nation than wage citizenship.
Doesn't matter. Lawful good and lawful evil are not friends regardless of axis.
|
Creative Director
|
I hadn't actually thought about it before, but that puts a very interesting context on the witch-hunts carried out in Kenabres by Hulrun Shappok. The witch-hunts of the Third Mendevian Crusade targeted mostly the native people of Mendev and Sarkoris, and the end result was the entrenchment of Iomedaeans like Shappok into Mendev's government. Would I be right to suddenly suspect that to be intentional?Somewhat on the topuc of Iomedean wealth and where it stems from: How closely intertwined are the Church of Iomedae and the ruling bodies of Mendev? (More detailed questions might show up when I have access to a better machine to type on.)Currently, they're pretty much the same. Mendev is pretty much under total Iomedaen occupation at this point.
The witch-hunts were not official endorsements by Iomedae, and caused more harm than good. Including that element, along with there being a lot of crusaders who aren't there to serve Iomedae and/or fight demons as much as they are there to loot was also intentional.
Yup. X is a complicated letter!Quick one since I'm starting a campaign involving Thassilon.
How is the name "Xin" pronounced?
It rhymes with "Sin." Get it? :-P
The "X" at the start sounds the same as it does in front of the word "xylophone."
If you pronounce it the same way as you'd say "ZIN" you'd be close enough.
Whoa whoa whoa. The "X" at the start of "xylophone" is pronounced like an "s" and not a "z"?
(I've lurked here for two years, love the fact that you do this thread James, and yes the first time I'm actually asking a question is to ask "English, how does it work?")
Am I reading this wrong or are you stating that Xylophone is not pronounced zai-low-fown, and that it is instead pronounced sai-low-fown?
Because the question Duker asked is whether or not the X in xylophone makes an 'S' or a 'Z' sound and you responded with, "Yup."
Every dictionary an English speaking person I've ever encountered pronounces xylophone with a Z, not an S.
|
Creative Director
|
Am I reading this wrong or are you stating that Xylophone is not pronounced zai-low-fown, and that it is instead pronounced sai-low-fown?Because the question Duker asked is whether or not the X in xylophone makes an 'S' or a 'Z' sound and you responded with, "Yup."
Every dictionary an English speaking person I've ever encountered pronounces xylophone with a Z, not an S.
Oh! I mis-read that previous post.
It's a "z" sound at the start of xylophone. As it is in front of Xin.
X is still a complicated letter.
|
Could the Legalistic curse for oracles work for oracles who AREN'T allied with Hell but still place a high value on honoring their word and maintaining their integrity? I have a character idea this is perfect for, but as it stands, Legalistic implies your oracle powers come from Hell, that its penalties are a punishment for disobedience and must be struggled against or circumvented with careful wording (it come from Blood of Fiends, implying that it's mainly for tieflings).
|
Creative Director
|
Could the Legalistic curse for oracles work for oracles who AREN'T allied with Hell but still place a high value on honoring their word and maintaining their integrity? I have a character idea this is perfect for, but as it stands, Legalistic implies your oracle powers come from Hell, that its penalties are a punishment for disobedience and must be struggled against or circumvented with careful wording (it come from Blood of Fiends, implying that it's mainly for tieflings).
Talk to your GM.
I'd not allow it, but I would design a custom curse that would work better for that build. Other GMs might not care about diluting the flavor of what's supposed to be an infernal-themed curse.
|
Creative Director
|
Will you ever make another thread to continue this or will the be a foreverthread?
This thread's going fine as it is. If we hit some sort of limit that makes the thread stop, then someone will likely start a new thread. I didn't start this one, and I won't start the next, but I currently see no reason to start a new one anyway.
|
|
Is it true that all characters who act in a six second round are acting at the same time? If this is true, is it only true in a strictly thematic sense?It's true. All actions in a round happen in the same six seconds. The reason it resolves in play one at a time in a turn order is because it's a group game and having everyone go at once is too complicated and, frankly, not fun.
If I take a full attack with a bow on my turn, can I hold the bow in one hand and have the other hand free at the end of my turn?
If so, can this free hand be used for things like Crane Wing or Deflect Arrows, which require a free hand (outside my turn) to use?
I've been working on an idea I had in case my players experience a TPK. The idea is, rather than have the campaign end or have everyone roll up new characters, I'll let the characters die and end up in the afterlife as unique outsiders (essentially their characters will remain unchanged but will get custom templates appropriate to their plane/deity's outsider). They'll then have to go on a quest to return to their mortal bodies. However, two of my players' characters present problems.
One character is a LG fighter who worships Gorum (casually at best). I'm unsure whether to have this character end up as an archon (since he's lawful good), a protean (since Gorum is CN), or an azata (since Gorum resides in Elysium, if I'm not mistaken).
The other character I'm unsure about is an alchemist/master chymist. This character is true neutral in his normal alchemist form, however he becomes chaotic neutral in his mutagenic form. In both states he is a very devout worshipper of Pharasma, going out of his way to destroy undead. I'm thinking this character should return as an aeon (since he's neutral) or a psychopomp (since he's neutral and worships Pharasma). I doubt he'd end up a protean, but I'm not really sure what to do if he uses his mutagenic form as an outsider. The only options I can see for that would be to say he can't assume his mutagenic form as an outsider, have his alignment shift when he uses his mutagenic form (which would result in an outsider with an alignment that doesn't match its subtype), or I guess he could change from a neutral outsider to a protean, temporarily (this one's pretty weird, and doesn't make much sense).
Anyways, I'm kind of stumped. I'm probably overthinking things, but I was wondering what you would do with these cases. Thanks for reading through all that, and for any insight or ideas you might have.
For reference:
Alignment: A master chymist actually has two alignments (see the mutagenic form ability). The only restriction on these alignments is that they cannot be exactly the same.
Mutagenic Form (Ex): A master chymist's mutagenic form is an alter ego that has a different personality than her normal form, an outgrowth of the mental changes caused by the mutagenic potions she has consumed over the course of her career.
...
The mutagenic form even has his or her own alignment (which is selected by the player, but must be different from the master chymist's normal alignment). The change in alignment only affects the master chymist while in her mutagenic form.
|
Creative Director
|
What would you say were the narrative themes and ideas explored in Shackled City back in Dungeon Magazine? Had I known how things were going to end up, I'd have bought the issues from my town's old bookstore before it closed down. :(
There weren't really any intentional themes and ideas explored overall in that first AP. Being the first one, it wasn't really outlined and pre-planned to NEAR the extent of even Age of Worms.
|
Creative Director
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If I take a full attack with a bow on my turn, can I hold the bow in one hand and have the other hand free at the end of my turn?
If so, can this free hand be used for things like Crane Wing or Deflect Arrows, which require a free hand (outside my turn) to use?
You can certainly do that, I suppose, but some GMs would probably get annoyed at those shenanigans.
|
Creative Director
|
I've been working on an idea I had in case my players experience a TPK. The idea is, rather than have the campaign end or have everyone roll up new characters, I'll let the characters die and end up in the afterlife as unique outsiders (essentially their characters will remain unchanged but will get custom templates appropriate to their plane/deity's outsider). They'll then have to go on a quest to return to their mortal bodies. However, two of my players' characters present problems.
One character is a LG fighter who worships Gorum (casually at best). I'm unsure whether to have this character end up as an archon (since he's lawful good), a protean (since Gorum is CN), or an azata (since Gorum resides in Elysium, if I'm not mistaken).
The other character I'm unsure about is an alchemist/master chymist. This character is true neutral in his normal alchemist form, however he becomes chaotic neutral in his mutagenic form. In both states he is a very devout worshipper of Pharasma, going out of his way to destroy undead. I'm thinking this character should return as an aeon (since he's neutral) or a psychopomp (since he's neutral and worships Pharasma). I doubt he'd end up a protean, but I'm not really sure what to do if he uses his mutagenic form as an outsider. The only options I can see for that would be to say he can't assume his mutagenic form as an outsider, have his alignment shift when he uses his mutagenic form (which would result in an outsider with an alignment that doesn't match its subtype), or I guess he could change from a neutral outsider to a protean, temporarily (this one's pretty weird, and doesn't make much sense).
Anyways, I'm kind of stumped. I'm probably overthinking things, but I was wondering what you would do with these cases. Thanks for reading through all that, and for any insight or ideas you might have.
For reference:
Alignment: A master chymist actually has two alignments (see the mutagenic form ability). The only restriction on these alignments is that...
I generally don't plan for TPKs. I prefer to empower the players with hero points and "get out of death free cards" given them by supernatural powers as rewards earlier in games... a very limited resource to be sure, but one they can use to keep from having a sudden turn of bad luck turn into a TPK.
When a TPK does happen... I prefer to let the event itself suggest a way to salvage things... or I just take the opportunity to start a new campaign.
A character who's not good is unlikely to like having his character forcefully transition into a good outsider, even if you let his alignment stay the same.
I'd not worry about the TPK, or if you are, have NPCs at hand to come rescue the PCs, or turn a TPK into a TPC (total party capture) and run a prison break adventure after.