|
James are there Dwarven colonies/out posts in Varisia? I am trying to write a backstory for my Dwarven Hunter. He is currently employed training animals for the Riddleport thieves guild and acting as a trouble shooter for the same.
I would like him to come from an area near Riddleport as most people who are not adventures tend to stick close to home.
Creative Director
|
I'd also like to chime in my thanks to you for your presence here and trying to make the internet a better place. Also for all of Hell's Rebels, as its my favorite adventure path.
Hmm... I suppose I question too.
Is there any further information on Golarion's tarrasque other than ISG? Or any details on Rovagug's other spawn?
Thanks! :D
There's a whole article about the Spawn of Rovagug in Pathfinder #24, and a few of them show up in Inner Sea Bestiary, and Mythic Realms has more info as well.
|
Creative Director
|
James are there Dwarven colonies/out posts in Varisia? I am trying to write a backstory for my Dwarven Hunter. He is currently employed training animals for the Riddleport thieves guild and acting as a trouble shooter for the same.
I would like him to come from an area near Riddleport as most people who are not adventures tend to stick close to home.
Absolutely. The biggest one is Janderhoff, which is actauly a Sky Citadel. There's plenty of dwarves living throughout the rest of Varisia as well. Check out the Riddleport gazetteer in Pathfinder #13 for several example dwarves who live there, as well.
|
Creative Director
|
Noble Scion Prestige Class
lvl 2
Greater Leadership (Ex)
At 2nd level, a noble scion gains the Leadership feat as a bonus feat. He can recruit a cohort up to one level lower than himself. At 10th level, he can recruit a cohort of the same level as himself.How many cohorts does the PC get.
My player believes thanks to an email between himself and Jacobs, that he can have 3 cohorts.
take the leadership feat is granted the leadership feat and the servant gained later on at 9th or 10th.
How many actual cohorts are gained via this prestige alone and can the player still take the leadership feat?
Your player needs to realize that you, as the GM, get to make those calls in game, not me. That's one of two primary reasons I'm so hesitant to address/answer rules questions here, and I apologize for enabling the situation.
The prestige class only lets you recruit a single cohort. Unless something flat out says "you may have multiple cohorts" or the like... the base rules for cohorts remain the same.
What this prestige class is doing is not granting you an extra cohort, but instead raising your cohort's level cap. It's a bit poorly worded, but in effect, if you have a cohort who's levelcapped at your level –1, when you hit 10th level in this prestige class, your cohort's level increases to equal your level.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
In the Game Mastery Guide NPC Gallery, under "Nobles" is the Noble Scion (not the PrC). In the description of this NPC is the comment "A noble scion might be appointed to lead a lance of cavarly (CR 9)". So, what in Golarion is "a lance of cavalry"?
Gary Gygax wrote that Henchmen among other things are an "excellent defense against the machinations of rival player characters". Did you or players you know ever recruit them in that light?
It's fine if someone asks a question more than once. Don't let it bother you, and don't use it as an opportunity to shame other posters, please. Not classy.
I offer my apologies. It was not my intention to shame him, though I do admit what I said came across as such. It wasn't so much that he asked it again (Had he did so in a month, I probably would have forgotten about it and not noticed), but that he asked so soon after asking before, so I was more confused than anything. Still, I accept that I stepped out of line.
Apologies to Oncoming Storm as well, and thanks for explaining the reasoning.
Got a question as well. A rather sizeable question:
As a published author and creative writer, I'm assuming you've had your work misinterpreted. Not in a rules sense (Oh, that means I can get ten attacks a round at Level 3?) but in a thematic and tonal sense. I am wondering if you can recall any particularly noteworthy instances of misinterpretation, and how you dealt with it, or decided it wasn't a big enough issue to worry about. Some general themes come to mind:
The first is misinterpretation that inclusion implies support. That is, since you had a character do X, that must mean you, or Paizo in general, supports X. One example I can think of was a person who despised Cayden Cailean, thinking that they were a god of alcoholism and drug abuse, and hating how he could be considered Good at all because of that.
The second, somewhat nicer, is where they take the theme of the work, usually due to extrapolating several examples, as much different (Usually much darker) than you intended. Examples would be interpreting the Care Bears as fascist thought police, or the Smurfs as communist propaganda.
Kind of related/inverted to the above is what TV Tropes has listed as Draco In Leather Pants, where what was supposed to be a diabolical villain has his/her evil deeds whitewashed by the fans, usually for reasons of "He/She's so dreamy!" Maybe not to that degree, but ever had a case where what was supposed to be a despicable villain was instead taken as a tragic figure, or similar alternate take on a character?
Perhaps misinterpretation is a strong word, so let me change it to alternate interpretation. Any noteworthy examples of an alternate interpretations of one of your writings that stand out in your mind?
Hi James
Hope you are well :-)
A coule of questions:
When you GM how strictly do you enforce encumberance for player characters?
We tend to handwave it within reason i.e. not carryng around a lot of loot but not caring whether your clothes and tanglefoot bag weighs too much.
What about the rule that to be able to sneak attack, a rogue has to be able to reach a vulnerable spot?
While a halfling might have trouble sneak attacking a stone giant, it starts up discussions about what constitutes a vulnerable spot.
|
Sorry for another question so soon after the last but something occurred to me. It's common-enough knowledge in Cheliax that silver weapons (whether alchemical silver, silversheen or mithral) bypass a devil's DR to the point where there's specific slang in regards to it, such weapons being called "dealbreakers." Would that mean that the materials used to make such weapons are banned by the Thrune government? If a would-be rebel wanted such a weapon, would they most likely need to turn to smugglers in order to get it?
And an alignment question: would a LG monk who joins a clandestine organization that opposes Thrune rule (specifically like the Children of Westcrown in Council of Thieves) would they be able to maintain the Lawful aspect of their alignment, as a monk's path to enlightenment doesn't necessarily entail following THE LAW? Or would it be more productive/less prone to causing alignment debates, for the character to be a Neutral Good Warpriest of the Sacred Fist archetype, whose restrictions are only that their alignment be within one step of their deity's (Iomedae in this particular hypothetical case)?
|
Creative Director
|
In the Game Mastery Guide NPC Gallery, under "Nobles" is the Noble Scion (not the PrC). In the description of this NPC is the comment "A noble scion might be appointed to lead a lance of cavarly (CR 9)". So, what in Golarion is "a lance of cavalry"?
A "lance of cavalry" in this case is a group of people mounted on horses and armed with lances of the right level and number to be a CR 9 encounter. The phrase "lance of cavalry" means nothing in particular other than implying just that; lance-wielding horseriders.
|
Creative Director
|
As a published author and creative writer, I'm assuming you've had your work misinterpreted. Not in a rules sense (Oh, that means I can get ten attacks a round at Level 3?) but in a thematic and tonal sense. I am wondering if you can recall any particularly noteworthy instances of misinterpretation, and how you dealt with it, or decided it wasn't a big enough issue to worry about. Some general themes come to mind:
The first is misinterpretation that inclusion implies support. That is, since you had a character do X, that must mean you, or Paizo in general, supports X. One example I can think of was a person who despised Cayden Cailean, thinking that they were a god of alcoholism and drug abuse, and hating how he could be considered Good at all because of that.
The second, somewhat nicer, is where they take the theme of the work, usually due to extrapolating several examples, as much different (Usually much darker) than you intended. Examples would be interpreting the Care Bears as fascist thought police, or the little blue jerks as communist propaganda.
Kind of related/inverted to the above is what TV Tropes has listed as Draco In Leather Pants, where what was supposed to be a diabolical villain has his/her evil deeds whitewashed by the fans, usually for reasons of "He/She's so dreamy!" Maybe not to that degree, but ever had a case where what was supposed to be a despicable villain was instead taken as a tragic figure, or similar alternate take on a character?
Perhaps misinterpretation is a strong word, so let me change it to alternate interpretation. Any noteworthy examples of an alternate interpretations of one of your writings that stand out in your mind?
I have my work misinterpreted every time someone runs an adventure I wrote or developed. Sometimes the misinterpretation improves things, but often, in my opinion, it lessens things (doesn't mean that it didn't improve things for the group that made the misinterpretation). An example that comes to mind is folks misinterpreting Barzillai Thrune's banning of "night tea" as him taking a political stand on birth control. While that's an interesting interpretation, that's 100% not what I intended. Barzillai is merely trying to make things awkward and uncomfortable for the people of Kintargo by outlawing simple pleasures—drinking tea in the evening is something that Kintargans enjoy, as is the taste of mint.
Misinterpretation is absolutely the right word for it. In fact, some of the misinterpretations that vex me the most is when a freelancer gets something wrong and it sneaks into print! :P
|
Creative Director
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
When you GM how strictly do you enforce encumberance for player characters?
We tend to handwave it within reason i.e. not carryng around a lot of loot but not caring whether your clothes and tanglefoot bag weighs too much.What about the rule that to be able to sneak attack, a rogue has to be able to reach a vulnerable spot?
While a halfling might have trouble sneak attacking a stone giant, it starts up discussions about what constitutes a vulnerable spot.
When I GM I more or less completely ignore encumbrance. It's clutter and makes the game annoying. I assume that if the PCs loot a dungeon, that they move that loot out in waves as needed during the hours of the day that we're not tracking once the dungeon is defeated. Sometimes, if I get the feeling that a character is being ridiculous ("Isn't that the 10th tapestry you looted?") I'll do an audit, but that's more of a spur of the moment thing.
Consequently, I actually ADORE encumbrance in video games. I really really love the tactical element and planning element that comes with deciding what to bring and what to leave behind.
I think that the whole POINT of sneak attack is that the rogue is able to reach a vulnerable spot. If you think a halfling wouldn't have a good way to deal a debilitating painful sneak attack wound to a hill giant... you've never stubbed your toe hard enough to cause the toenail to flip up like an open car hood. Having a sword stabbed in under the nail would be comparable.
|
Creative Director
|
Sorry for another question so soon after the last but something occurred to me. It's common-enough knowledge in Cheliax that silver weapons (whether alchemical silver, silversheen or mithral) bypass a devil's DR to the point where there's specific slang in regards to it, such weapons being called "dealbreakers." Would that mean that the materials used to make such weapons are banned by the Thrune government? If a would-be rebel wanted such a weapon, would they most likely need to turn to smugglers in order to get it?
And an alignment question: would a LG monk who joins a clandestine organization that opposes Thrune rule (specifically like the Children of Westcrown in Council of Thieves) would they be able to maintain the Lawful aspect of their alignment, as a monk's path to enlightenment doesn't necessarily entail following THE LAW? Or would it be more productive/less prone to causing alignment debates, for the character to be a Neutral Good Warpriest of the Sacred Fist archetype, whose restrictions are only that their alignment be within one step of their deity's (Iomedae in this particular hypothetical case)?
Materials to build silver weapons are not banned in Cheliax; silver is too valuable and useful, and Chelish folks understand the need for silver weapons for defense, and devils are arrogant enough to feel that in most hands, silver weapons wouldn't make a difference anyway.
A lawful good character who joins a rebellion can indeed maintain their alignment, but it'd be tricky and they'd have to make hard decisions every single day. My suggestion for a player in such a game? Save the lawful character for a different campaign, unless you are LOOKING for a roleplaying challenge, the GM has the patience and interest to deal with it, and the other players aren't going to be frustrated and annoyed by it..
Why do think lawful alignment is so heavily tied to legal adherence?
The descriptions are contradictory in a few places regarding lawful alignment, so why do you think the legal adherence version seems to be so prevalent as to be almost unchallenged?
|
Creative Director
|
Why do think lawful alignment is so heavily tied to legal adherence?
The descriptions are contradictory in a few places regarding lawful alignment, so why do you think the legal adherence version seems to be so prevalent as to be almost unchallenged?
Because law is legal.
And because following orders/following laws is a very simple concept to grasp, so it's one that goes unchallenged.
So James the Party is now level 8 and we have had 2 deaths so far. (Bright players). Last night I nearly killed another character. The issue I have has is that its the same player. This is his 3rd character, should I lighten up on him? I haven't been killing him on purpose I was just playing the monsters as they are.
|
Creative Director
|
So James the Party is now level 8 and we have had 2 deaths so far. (Bright players). Last night I nearly killed another character. The issue I have has is that its the same player. This is his 3rd character, should I lighten up on him? I haven't been killing him on purpose I was just playing the monsters as they are.
I've had players like that in games I've played or run, and in most cases, it's because the player either doesn't get tactics (more common) or enjoys taking risks and isn't too concerned about having to replace characters. If the latter, you don't need to do much at all, since the player's playing the game he wants to play. If the former, that can be a problem, especially if the risks keep putting the party in danger. That SHOULD be self-regulating with the other players helping to keep the risk taker from being outlandish.
In either case, I'd suggest talking to the player to see if there's a solution. If the player is frustrated and annoyed, then you might want to lighten up on him or, even better, warn him when something he's attempting has a good chance to result in death. "Do you REALLY want to run into the room alone?" for example, rather than just taking him at his word and not allowing for "take baksies."
And talk with the group as a whole. It may not be a problem if the whole group, including the player, is fine with it.
Communication is the route to solving the problem, in any event.
THAT SAID: You say you "play the monsters as they are," but I suspect that doesn't include "some monsters are dumb or less tactic-minded or more foolish than others," even among the same monsters. You should, now and then, play monsters as creatures that sometimes make bad or poor choices. Not only does it help verisimilitude to see one of the three ogres in the group accidentally do something that provokes a bunch of attacks of opportunity accidentally, but it also helps to build trust between you and your players, since you're obviously not trying to callibrate every single stat block to be 100% optimized in every way.
I've a couple questions after reading a post about artists which basically boiled down to most artists and creative types end up regretting and hating a lot of their work XD
with that in mind, If you could take back or change one class feature or ability thats already in print what would it be?
Oh also, can you explain how one decides is a class gets 2+ 4+ or more skill points, my GM thought it was meant to represent that a class was more classically trained if they had more skill points but I raised Barbs get 4 and fighters get 2. Not to mention wizards are like one of the most trained classes and they get 2 too I believe. Now we're both curious lol.
|
Creative Director
|
I've a couple questions after reading a post about artists which basically boiled down to most artists and creative types end up regretting and hating a lot of their work XD
with that in mind, If you could take back or change one class feature or ability thats already in print what would it be?
Oh also, can you explain how one decides is a class gets 2+ 4+ or more skill points, my GM thought it was meant to represent that a class was more classically trained if they had more skill points but I raised Barbs get 4 and fighters get 2. Not to mention wizards are like one of the most trained classes and they get 2 too I believe. Now we're both curious lol.
I tend to avoid answering questions like these because it's too easy for people with agendas to take those answers and use them against me or Paizo to troll folks.
Beyond that, the choices for class design/abilities, including how many skill points a class gets, are choices that the design team makes, not me. I make those choices on my own for classes I design for my own games, such as "Unspeakable Futures," but that's got no real bearing on the published Pathfinder classes really.
THAT SAID, I do know that the reasoning from design and WotC before them is that wizards only get 2 per level for 2 reasons:
1) They have high Intelligence scores, so regardless they'll have more skill points than 2 per level anyway.
2) The focus of the wizard is supposed to be the use of arcane magic to solve problems, not skills. If you want an arcane spellcaster who uses skills as well, that's the bard's niche. Giving wizards more skill points poaches from the bard, in the same way giving bards more spell casting power or selection poaches from wizards.
1. Are you involved in the production of Horror Adventures in any direct fashion?
1a. If yes, what did you have the most fun working on?
1b. If no, what part that you've gotten to look at are you the most jazzed to see in the wild?
2. What's your... favorite is always hard/variable by day, so let's say top five horror movies of the 1980s?
3. In a purely hypothetical sense,if you could go back and tweak any one element of the Council of Thieves AP, what would you go after?
|
Creative Director
|
1. Are you involved in the production of Horror Adventures in any direct fashion?
1a. If yes, what did you have the most fun working on?
1b. If no, what part that you've gotten to look at are you the most jazzed to see in the wild?2. What's your... favorite is always hard/variable by day, so let's say top five horror movies of the 1980s?
3. In a purely hypothetical sense,if you could go back and tweak any one element of the Council of Thieves AP, what would you go after?
1) Not really. I compiled the list of recommended viewing and reading that makes up two pages of the appendix, but had no involvement with the book itself.
1a) N/A
1b) My favorite part is Chapter 6, which was mostly written by Wes Schneider, and discusses how to run and play a horror game and has very little rules content but a LOT of great advice that, if followed, will make horror games more fun without the need for a single new rule at all.
2) Top five horror movies from the 80s:
- 1: John Carpenter's The Thing
- 2: Re-Animator
- 3: Prince of Darkness
- 4: Hellraiser
- 5: Aliens
3) Two way tie: I would revisit book 2 to address concerns of misogyny (at the very least make it clear that what elements ARE in there that are misogynistic are intentional and reflections of bad guys in the adventure the PCs need to defeat) and I would rebuild the sewer exploration portion of the 1st adventure to be a standard map exploration with actual set encounters instead of a needlessly complex "Build Your Own Sewer" rule section that sacrifices interesting encounters in favor of dungeon design theory crafting.
...
I think that the whole POINT of sneak attack is that the rogue is able to reach a vulnerable spot. If you think a halfling wouldn't have a good way to deal a debilitating painful sneak attack wound to a hill giant... you've never stubbed your toe hard enough to cause the toenail to flip up like an open car hood. Having a sword stabbed in under the nail would be comparable.
I think I didn't write that properly because I agree that the rogue can always find something that is a vulnerable point. I merely tried to think of an example that potentially could mean trouble for the rogue...
So why is the stipulation, that the rogue has to be able to reach said vulnerable point, in the rules?
To me it just opens up for annyoing discussions about what is a vulnerable point and potentially disruptive arguments back and forth about it.
Other questions:
How are word limits for adventure length decided?
Are the somewhat flexible or are they set in stone?
I ask because to me it would seem hard to meet for example 20.000 words EXACTLY
as always thanks for taking the time to answer our questions :-)
3) Two way tie: I would revisit book 2 to address concerns of misogyny (at the very least make it clear that what elements ARE in there that are misogynistic are intentional and reflections of bad guys in the adventure the PCs need to defeat) and I would rebuild the sewer exploration portion of the 1st adventure to be a standard map exploration with actual set encounters instead of a needlessly complex "Build Your Own Sewer" rule section that sacrifices interesting encounters in favor of dungeon design theory crafting.
I'm DMing this very adventure and would like to avoid making the female player awkward so I have to ask: What are the misogynistic elements that should be downplayed or addressed?
edit: Edited for clarity
Do oni only have one life or do they "respawn" after a while? The reason I'm asking is because the lore says the mask oni is to cowardly to commit suicide in hopes of returning as a "proper" oni.
So James the Party is now level 8 and we have had 2 deaths so far. (Bright players). Last night I nearly killed another character. The issue I have has is that its the same player. This is his 3rd character, should I lighten up on him? I haven't been killing him on purpose I was just playing the monsters as they are.I've had players like that in games I've played or run, and in most cases, it's because the player either doesn't get tactics (more common) or enjoys taking risks and isn't too concerned about having to replace characters. If the latter, you don't need to do much at all, since the player's playing the game he wants to play. If the former, that can be a problem, especially if the risks keep putting the party in danger. That SHOULD be self-regulating with the other players helping to keep the risk taker from being outlandish.
In either case, I'd suggest talking to the player to see if there's a solution. If the player is frustrated and annoyed, then you might want to lighten up on him or, even better, warn him when something he's attempting has a good chance to result in death. "Do you REALLY want to run into the room alone?" for example, rather than just taking him at his word and not allowing for "take baksies."
And talk with the group as a whole. It may not be a problem if the whole group, including the player, is fine with it.
Communication is the route to solving the problem, in any event.
THAT SAID: You say you "play the monsters as they are," but I suspect that doesn't include "some monsters are dumb or less tactic-minded or more foolish than others," even among the same monsters. You should, now and then, play monsters as creatures that sometimes make bad or poor choices. Not only does it help verisimilitude to see one of the three ogres in the group accidentally do something that provokes a bunch of attacks of opportunity accidentally, but it also helps to build trust between you and your players, since you're obviously not trying to...
I swear I am playing monsters realistically and I do take their intelligence into consideration. In this case they were fighting an intelligent undead that he managed to piss off royally. But Yeah I should talk with him about tactics because there are some issues there.
|
Creative Director
|
...
I think that the whole POINT of sneak attack is that the rogue is able to reach a vulnerable spot. If you think a halfling wouldn't have a good way to deal a debilitating painful sneak attack wound to a hill giant... you've never stubbed your toe hard enough to cause the toenail to flip up like an open car hood. Having a sword stabbed in under the nail would be comparable.
I think I didn't write that properly because I agree that the rogue can always find something that is a vulnerable point. I merely tried to think of an example that potentially could mean trouble for the rogue...
So why is the stipulation, that the rogue has to be able to reach said vulnerable point, in the rules?
To me it just opens up for annyoing discussions about what is a vulnerable point and potentially disruptive arguments back and forth about it.Other questions:
How are word limits for adventure length decided?
Are the somewhat flexible or are they set in stone?
I ask because to me it would seem hard to meet for example 20.000 words EXACTLYas always thanks for taking the time to answer our questions :-)
Because that line of text is defining what a sneak attack is, as opposed to a regular attack. It also gives the otherwise dry rules a tiny splash of flavor (something we don't do enough, in my opinion). The stipulation is also there to make sense when we do a monster like an ooze or elemental or the like that does NOT have a vulnerable point, and thus can't be sneak attacked. But unless a monster's description specifically gives it that power, it has vulnerable points. The game does not enumerate those points for every monster because that would be clutter, and because we don't use hit locations in Pathfinder anyway so it'd be a waste of time and space.
If a monster is vulnerable to critical hits, it has vulnerable spots, and gamers who argue about whether or not any one rogue can sneak attack a creature are losing sight of the fact that they're there to play a game, not argue. Alas, too many gamers forget that.
The question of whether or not your rogue can hit that vulnerable spot IS modeled by the rules—it's your attack roll versus the monster's Armor Class when the rogue attempts a sneak attack.
The word limits for adventure length are decided by how many pages the actual product is going to have, modified by how many pieces of art we're putting in the book and how many non-adventure elements are in the book. A page of text with no art generally has about 900 words. It gets a lot more complicated than that when you add different size art and text that isn't solid words (like stat blocks or headers). Wordcounts are somewhat flexible. As a general rule, you want to get within 5% of your wordcount, and even then the final product will need adjustment to fit, since the only point we know EXACTLY how many words are in a book is after it's done.
|
Creative Director
|
3) Two way tie: I would revisit book 2 to address concerns of misogyny (at the very least make it clear that what elements ARE in there that are misogynistic are intentional and reflections of bad guys in the adventure the PCs need to defeat) and I would rebuild the sewer exploration portion of the 1st adventure to be a standard map exploration with actual set encounters instead of a needlessly complex "Build Your Own Sewer" rule section that sacrifices interesting encounters in favor of dungeon design theory crafting.I'm DMing this very adventure and would like to avoid making the female player awkward so I have to ask: What are the misogynistic elements that should be downplayed or addressed?
edit: Edited for clarity
The play in the adventure is written by and for a society that has misogynistic elements—Asmodeus is the MOST misogynistic deity in the core 20. Basically, if there's elements in the adventure that are misogynistic, present them as things that the villains are doing OR present them as things that ignorant people who can be shown the error of their ways by the PCs are doing. I haven't actually gone back and looked at the adventure specifically for these elements yet, and it's been many years since I've looked at it at all; I'm just responding to some posts I've seen elsewhere on these boards that claim the adventure is misogynistic. When we presenting misogyny in our products, it should be as an evil thing that villains do; whether or not that came across clearly in the text of the adventure or not is in part up to you and your group. It certainly didn't come across clearly for at least one group.
|
Creative Director
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Do oni only have one life or do they "respawn" after a while? The reason I'm asking is because the lore says the mask oni is to cowardly to commit suicide in hopes of returning as a "proper" oni.
An oni is a native outsider. As such, its soul is separate from its body. When its soul dies, it goes on to the Boneyard to be judged. Whether or not it gets reincarnated as a new oni, as a different creature entirley, or sent on to another plane to become a petitioner or to get turned into quintessence or whatever depends on the individual oni's destiny and fate.
Do oni only have one life or do they "respawn" after a while? The reason I'm asking is because the lore says the mask oni is to cowardly to commit suicide in hopes of returning as a "proper" oni.An oni is a native outsider. As such, its soul is separate from its body. When its soul dies, it goes on to the Boneyard to be judged. Whether or not it gets reincarnated as a new oni, as a different creature entirley, or sent on to another plane to become a petitioner or to get turned into quintessence or whatever depends on the individual oni's destiny and fate.
huh so oni get judged after death? thanks I assumed because they were originally evil spirits who took forms I assumed when they died they either ceased to be all together or they went back to being spirits I never assumed they would be judged like everyone else.
|
Creative Director
|
huh so oni get judged after death? thanks I assumed because they were originally evil spirits who took forms I assumed when they died they either ceased to be all together or they went back to being spirits I never assumed they would be judged like everyone else.Do oni only have one life or do they "respawn" after a while? The reason I'm asking is because the lore says the mask oni is to cowardly to commit suicide in hopes of returning as a "proper" oni.An oni is a native outsider. As such, its soul is separate from its body. When its soul dies, it goes on to the Boneyard to be judged. Whether or not it gets reincarnated as a new oni, as a different creature entirley, or sent on to another plane to become a petitioner or to get turned into quintessence or whatever depends on the individual oni's destiny and fate.
Again; Oni are native outsiders. They get their souls judged just like aasimars and tieflings do.
Again; Oni are native outsiders. They get their souls judged just like aasimars and tieflings do.huh so oni get judged after death? thanks I assumed because they were originally evil spirits who took forms I assumed when they died they either ceased to be all together or they went back to being spirits I never assumed they would be judged like everyone else.Do oni only have one life or do they "respawn" after a while? The reason I'm asking is because the lore says the mask oni is to cowardly to commit suicide in hopes of returning as a "proper" oni.An oni is a native outsider. As such, its soul is separate from its body. When its soul dies, it goes on to the Boneyard to be judged. Whether or not it gets reincarnated as a new oni, as a different creature entirley, or sent on to another plane to become a petitioner or to get turned into quintessence or whatever depends on the individual oni's destiny and fate.
I know thank you for answering my questions.
Mr. James Jacobs,
In your estimation is reincarnation a good explanation for some of the sorcerer bloodlines? Such as being a reincarnated celestial or fiend?
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
What are the influences for the Star Towers (i just read about them on Mythic Realms)?
The myth of Leviathan/Tiamat has anything to do with the story of Serenrae and the gods against Rovagug?
Have you ever seen The Gamers: Dorkness Rising (or any of The Gamers series)?
Do you ever wish some of those feats mentioned that joanna had were real feats?