Creative Director
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What is the monster that Kyra and Merisiel are fighting on the cover of Planar Adventures? It's such an awesome scene but I can't for the life of me identify it, guess I'll need to retrain my ranks in what I'm guessing is Knowledge (planes).
It's an astradaemon. See page 63 of Bestiary 2. And yes, it has different colored skin. Monsters don't always have the exact same coloration.
|
Creative Director
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Ooooo, how are you liking the Succubi’s new tricks in the Playtestiary?
I'm not gonna comment on playtest rules and my likes or dislikes of them. I want to let folks out there playtest and come to their own conclusions without me having influenced those conclusions. I'm not worried about my opinions being heard by the game's design team and the game's publisher, in any event. ;-P
|
Are all fiends in 2e bestiaries going to be referred as "adjective fiend(actual name)" format or just demons and devils? Kind of curious about what that will look like for daemons and such
On that note, realized while reading rakshasa's 2e bestiary entry that I don't know what is its "name"(like marai rakshasa or tataka rakshasa or such). Like umm, yeah, what is normal raksasa's name? I dunno how to list in bestiary along with other rakshasas
|
Creative Director
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Are all fiends in 2e bestiaries going to be referred as "adjective fiend(actual name)" format or just demons and devils? Kind of curious about what that will look like for daemons and such
On that note, realized while reading rakshasa's 2e bestiary entry that I don't know what is its "name"(like marai rakshasa or tataka rakshasa or such). Like umm, yeah, what is normal raksasa's name? I dunno how to list in bestiary along with other rakshasas
These are questions we're still making up answers to. We deliberately chose to list the fiends in the playtest bestiary as their adjective names (with actual names in parentheses), and did the same for things like xulgaths (troglodytes) because we had to choose one option and this is the one we currently prefer, but we're hoping to get feedback on it, as with all other things.
If we go with this for daemons, for example, we'll probably list them in ways like "Pestilence Daemon (Leukodaemon) and Death Daemon (Thanadaemon)."
We only have one rakshasa in the playtest bestiary, so we didn't have to answer the "what is its name" question. That question, in fact, was brought to my attention at the very last minute and I didn't want to rush to make up a name that I'd later regret for whatever reason, so instead this name's creation is delayed until we get to the point where the critter is going into a final print product... which may or may not be the first 2nd edition monster book.
Hi James,
How's it going today?
Also, I actually prefer the more specific name rather than the generic name for fiends. e.g. I prefer Demon, Vrock for instance
|
Creative Director
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Hi James,
How's it going today?
Also, I actually prefer the more specific name rather than the generic name for fiends. e.g. I prefer Demon, Vrock for instance
It's going very well; relaxing and quiet here at the office. In fact, it's so relaxing and so quiet that it's kinda hard getting actual work done on developing "Rise of New Thassilon." :-P
(One of the behind-the-scenes reasons we would prefer to switch to adjective names for these critters is that this lets us use the names in non-OGL products like novels or video games or other licensed products without worrying about stepping on the toes of words that are, in effect, not in the public domain and thus could get us in trouble, since the word "vrock," for example, is owned by Wizards of the Coast. The other option, to simply replace words like "Vrock" with a new nonsense made-up word wasn't as appealing for several reasons, but we're trying that out as well with things like the Xulgath (troglodyte) or Bloodseeker (stirge)).
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The changes between 3.5 and 4.0 were really rather immense. The changes between Pathfinder 1st edition and 2nd edition will not be.
Now that the playtest is out, do you still feel the changes between Pathfinder 1st edition and 2nd edition will not be as immense as the changes between 3.5 and 4.0 were?
Honestly interested in your thoughts (assuming you feel comfortable sharing them). Now that I've had a chance to dig into the playtest documents, the changes between Pathfinder 1st edition and 2nd edition feel pretty immense indeed - at least as immense as the changes between 3.5 and 4.0 were, and in many cases, even more so ...
|
Creative Director
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Now that the playtest is out, do you still feel the changes between Pathfinder 1st edition and 2nd edition will not be as immense as the changes between 3.5 and 4.0 were?
Honestly interested in your thoughts (assuming you feel comfortable sharing them). Now that I've had a chance to dig into the playtest documents, the changes between Pathfinder 1st edition and 2nd edition feel pretty immense indeed - at least as immense as the changes between 3.5 and 4.0 were, and in many cases, even more so ...
I didn't feel like 4th edition allowed me to play the same D&D games I enjoyed in 3rd edition. I do feel like Pathfinder 2 lets me play the same Pathfinder games I enjoyed in 1st edition. I'm not interested in going into deeper detail because this is the time for the rest of the world to give us feedback, not to potentially have opinions tainted or altered by something I say.
Remember, what you have now is not the final game. It's the playtest. It has some elements in there that won't be in the final game, and some elements in the final game aren't in the playtest. The point of the playtest is to allow as many people as possible to get their preferences heard.
Obviously we won't be able to satisfy everyone, but hopefully folks will give us a lot of great feed back and we'll take that and make the best final game we can... one that will allow us to continue to present the world and stories we did in 1st edition but with better rules, more elegant rules, and easier to implement rules.
|
Creative Director
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Oooo, have you ever put an Intellect Devourer into a T-Rex?
Nope.
The way I see intellect devourers these days is that they're starved for emotion and physical sensations; they can't get those in their real bodies (in part this manifests as their high damage reduction—they just don't feel pain), and ache to get them in borrowed bodies. They're more interesting to me when they inhabit us, in other words—or us-like creatures. Human-adjacent things. They're far creepier and scarier when they're using this power to masquerade as somethign that seems friendly and normal and not in and of itself dangerous.
The size difference between an intellect devourer and a tyrannosaurs is also weird to me for some reason. The idea of them physically replacing a brain is one of the neater creepy parts of them, and fitting in a T-Rex skull is aesthetically unpleasing to me.
In trapping inviting my non-RPG friends to playtest PF2. What would you suggest as the best 3-4 PF1 printed books to help them get immersed in Golarion?
I'm already getting "Sandpoint" (yay for that! Thank you!). I have PF1 Core Rulebook. I intend to do a bit of adventure writing using the PF2 rules.
What are a few other books that you would suggest I buy to bring them fully into this setting? I'm looking at creating a small 'lending library' for their use.
|
Creative Director
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
In
trappinginviting my non-RPG friends to playtest PF2. What would you suggest as the best 3-4 PF1 printed books to help them get immersed in Golarion?I'm already getting "Sandpoint" (yay for that! Thank you!). I have PF1 Core Rulebook. I intend to do a bit of adventure writing using the PF2 rules.
What are a few other books that you would suggest I buy to bring them fully into this setting? I'm looking at creating a small 'lending library' for their use.
Inner Sea World Guide
Beyond that, I'd go with Campaign Setting books that map to their interests. If they enjoy horror and dark fantasy, things like the Ustalav book Reign of Fear and Classic Horrors. If they enjoy high intrigue, things like the Taldor book. Etc.
But the Inner Sea World Guide is the best one to go to for the initial leap into the ocean.
Building off of Sandpoint though... if you want some books for them to immerse themselves in that region, I would suggest:
Sandpoint
Magnimar: City of Monuments
Classic Monsters Revisited (for the goblin article mostly)
Dungeons of Golarion (for the Hollow Mountain article mostly)
|
Creative Director
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Speaking of T-rexes,
How would you surprise the players with a dangerously intelligent dinosaur? Awakened is the obvious answer, but how could you make it creepier/scarier?
Reincarnate works well. That's sort of the route the Gorilla King stuff takes.
There's plenty of mind-swap spells in Occult Adventures, or possession mechanics for that matter.
Of course, those all involve a non-dinosaur soul getting a dinosaur body.
If you're talking full on dinosaur soul becoming intelligent, my favorite choices (barring awaken, of course) is to put a template like half-fiend, half-celestial, fey creature, or something like that on the dinosaur.
Of course, coming from the other direction, the animal lord template has some interesting possibilities...
Classic Monsters Revisited (for the goblin article mostly)
So that presents goblins in a way that is easy to transition to PF2 goblins?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Why does Nyarlathotep enjoy making people blow themselves up? Is he secretly a goblin or just enjoys watching planets go boom?
Why does Nyarlathotep enjoy making people blow themselves up? Is he secretly a goblin or just enjoys watching planets go boom?
All of the above?
|
Creative Director
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Classic Monsters Revisited (for the goblin article mostly)So that presents goblins in a way that is easy to transition to PF2 goblins?
No. It presents goblins in a way that makes them significant and scary threats to use against low level parties, revising them from the "Goblins are boring speed bump encounters" that they'd fallen into in D&D. "Classic Monsters Revisited" was written over a decade ago, and it plus the first adventure in Rise of the Runelords is the main reason goblins got so popular, and why we eventually decided to open them up in the playtest as PC races. But the goblins presented in "Classic Monster Revisited" are very much for GMs to use, not players.
|
Creative Director
|
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
Why does Nyarlathotep enjoy making people blow themselves up? Is he secretly a goblin or just enjoys watching planets go boom?
Think of him as a personification of all the things that are awful about humanity's urge to self-destruct and ruin themselves. Be it from war, internet toxicity, toxic masculinity, corruption, whatever. To call him a "goblin" is like calling the sun a spark from a failed fire.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So he's way better than a goblin then? Okay cool.
|
Creative Director
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
James,
Since some of the languages are being changed in the Playtest (like Giants now speaking Jotun and Undead speaking Necril), can I suggest removing Undercommon as a actual language and instead have it work like Common, with each area of the Darklands having its own default language?
I'm hesitant to make it more difficult for roleplaying encounters to occur by making it more difficult for people to talk to the PCs by removing languages expressly created to allow for talking.
"Jotun" isn't a new language, it's just replacing the word "Giant" as the language giants share.
"Necril" is a Golarion language that's served the same role as Common and Undercommon and the like as a shared language of undead, and we're moving it into the core.
Both of those exist to lessen the blocks to roleplaying that giving each giant and each undead their own unique languages would create.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Mr Jacobs, I noticed among the playtest changes to follower alignments for deities, that Sarenrae doesn't allow True Neutral anymore. Is this going to affect the church in places like Qadira? What with the Cult of the Dawnflower and such often skewing more Neutral. Also, its cool you answer all these questions like this; thanks for your time!
|
Creative Director
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Mr Jacobs, I noticed among the playtest changes to follower alignments for deities, that Sarenrae doesn't allow True Neutral anymore. Is this going to affect the church in places like Qadira? What with the Cult of the Dawnflower and such often skewing more Neutral. Also, its cool you answer all these questions like this; thanks for your time!
That's not going to affect the church really, no. The alignments listed are for clerics only. You can still be a non-cleric and worship Sarenrae and be neutral... you just won't be as faithful as someone who's worshiping according to Sarenrae's gospel. That means that there's going to be fewer, if any, clerics among that cult, which is absolutely intentional; if you don't follow a deity's ethics, you shouldn't be a cleric of her in the first place. You can certainly be a sorcerer with a divine bloodline, of course, or any other class. And I suspect in time we'll introduce other ways; classes or archetypes or the like, that will allow for more alignment variation but carry with them more obvious and apparent world lore to contextualize things about it.
|
Creative Director
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I know its been brought up in a lot of other threads but i figured i'd post it here directly in case no one else has.
Large/small weapons in the PF2 playtest. How do they work? Different die or additional dice?
I've got a player who's ready to go with their Half-orc giant totem barbarian but until we've figured out how their weapon even works we're just stuck in limbo
I'm still not answering rules questions here, particularly not for playtest clarifications. Those questions need to be asked in the playtest forums.
|
Creative Director
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Hi and well-met Loremaster Jacobs. Now that the Doom is upon us and the Universe quietly redesigns itself once more, what can you tell us about the fabled 4 Essences ?
Not much yet, from a world lore. At this point, they're simply the four types of magic that exist, an attempt by us to ramp back what became an out-of-control spell list sprawl in the later 1st edition books.
You can certainly be a sorcerer with a divine bloodline
Query: What do such characters imply for the Church of Razmir or places like Rahadoum?
When the countdown clock was introduced in the Pactstone Pyramid, were you intending at the time to have it coincide with the announcement of 2nd edition, or were you expecting it to be dealt with in an adventure path or some other product?
|
Creative Director
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
You can certainly be a sorcerer with a divine bloodlineQuery: What do such characters imply for the Church of Razmir or places like Rahadoum?
Razmir: This'll make ti even easier for Razmir's worshipers to do their thing and continue the party line.
Rahadoum: I suspect divine bloodline sorcerers will be treated just like clerics there. AKA: awfully.
|
Creative Director
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
When the countdown clock was introduced in the Pactstone Pyramid, were you intending at the time to have it coincide with the announcement of 2nd edition, or were you expecting it to be dealt with in an adventure path or some other product?
Nope; it was all coincidence and chance that it worked out. The first time we mentioned the concept was much earlier than Pactstone Pyramid, in fact. It was in like our 3rd or 4th adventure, which came out about the same time as the first volume of Rise of the Runelords. In that early era, we were making up a LOT of world content and lore on the fly to support backgrounds and histories and plots in the adventures. A lot of that content didn't stick and was left behind, but others carried on.
|
Creative Director
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Should we expect to see a Pathfinder Playtest FAQs soon?
I've already got a few questions that I think should be cleared up, and here's a sampling (I don't expect you to answer any of them here)
** spoiler omitted **
You'll need to watch the playtest forums and the blogs. The designers will be the ones handling this type of question and answer stuff. Whether or not there'll be an FAQ... we'll see!
In any event, as with ALL rules questions, I won't be answering playtest rules questions here. If folks have any questions about how the setting will potentially change due to the edition change, I WILL answer them here as I can, but keep in mind that a lot of those decisions are still pending feedback from the next few months of playtest.
And when you do ask... please limit your questions to one per post. Thanks!
|
Creative Director
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Golly it is hard to think of questions involving the Playtest when you won't answer rules questions... However, I think I have something.
The daily regaining of abilities concern a particular piece of text. "Once every 24-hour period, you can take a period of rest (typically 8 hours), and then prepare, which typically takes 1 hour."
Now, this 24-hour period is left without context. It could start at midnight, or dawn, dusk, midday, at the point that the previous rest started etc.
Among people I have spoken to, this rule is controversial. It is more consistent and easy to use then the incomplete rest-based rules provided in the Core Rulebook for 1e, but I cannot find any interpretation for this rule which when applied literally cannot be either exploited or overly restrictive.
My question is, if it came down to you, which system would you prefer to see implemented in 2e? a crunchy specific-times for specific class/ability like 1e that many people gloss over and gets increasingly difficult to understand with later releases OR an easier to understand symmetrical system like Playtest that can be interpreted a few wildly different ways, none of which are foolproof?
I like the rules as they stand, because it gives GMs and story writers (like us) the flexibility of saying when an NPC or person takes time to prepare, as according to their faith or philosophy or schedule.
For PCs, it's ALWAYS best to have all the players prepare at the same time, because it's a game, after all, and it makes game play disjointed to have something like this break up the flow of play multiple times a game day. Players who seek to cause trouble or exploit the rules should instead follow the GM's decision, which itself should be made in a way that supports the players as best as possible as a group. Players who don't do so and insist on trying to use rules to justify their "roud nail" are being disruptive and the table would probably be better off if they found another game to play, I think.
|
Creative Director
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
James, Have you seen the movie Winchester?
Yes. Apart from Hellen Mirren being amazing, as always, and apart from being fascinated by the Winchester Mystery House itself (the ONLY billboard in the Point Arena region where I grew up was one that advertised the Winchester Mystery House with a creepy grim reaper standing in front of a spooky house; the billboard itself stood in front of a row of twisted trees on the side of Highway 1, and it always fascinated me for the out-of-context element since Point Arena is about 4 hours north of the Winchester Mystery House)...
...I found the movie itself to be boring and cliched and disappointing, plot and story-wise.
|
Creative Director
|
So, I shouldn't bother watching it, then?
If you're a horror movie junkie like me, then it's maybe worth it for some good visuals and Hellen's acting. The attention to detail put into recreating the house is quite impressive.
But there's a LOT more better ghost movies and haunted house movies out there to see before this one. And the more into horror you are, the more likely it'll be that this one's worth skipping.
|
Creative Director
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
More into Sci-Fi than Horror. I can watch both Thing movies without batting an eye. What upcoming Horror movies have you the most interested?
Halloween
SuspiriaSlender Man
The Nun
Venom
Overlord
The Predator
Mandy
Pet Semetery
It: Chapter 2
Doctor Sleep
Have you seen Castle Rock yet?
|
Creative Director
|
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
Have you seen Castle Rock yet?
Yes. Love it!
It being on Hulu was also the spur in my side that I needed to finally get rid of cable TV and switch entirely over to just using internet for my entertainment. And in so doing, saving myself about $160.00 a month in payments to Comcast. WOO HOO!
|
Creative Director
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What's the rationale for formalizing the adventure paths' events in the setting? Previously we've had specific adventure paths that are written as sequels to earlier ones, and occasional comments in adventure paths about how to handle earlier events, but for the most part they've seemed to happen in isolation. Sometimes this has even been stated explicitly - the foreword of book 6 of Wrath of the Runelords, for instance, says
"remember, we at Paizo make no assumptions about when most Adventure Paths, including this one, begin in relationship to any others. Future Adventure Paths and products published by us will continue to assume that the Worldwound is still open, that Deskari and Areelu are still plotting, and that the crusaders are still traveling north to bolster Mendev’s borders. The time may come when we might decide to do a sequel of sorts to Wrath of the Righteous... but for now, that time is a long way off."
This isn't intended as a "gotcha" question - I can can see reasons for different policies or for changing the policies, and advancing the setting through PC adventures is way better than the old TSR approach of advancing it through novels. I'm just interested in the rationale, especially as it potentially makes it harder for people to run older APs out-of-order, or for Paizo to do future hardback compilations.
The rationale is that feedback from customers not only seems to indicate that this is what the majority of folks want, but it's the assumption that the majority of folks make anyway about our publications. A lot has changed in the decade-plus since we started doing Golarion content... the world of 2007 is a different one than that of 2018.
Going forward, it honestly won't make much of a difference for many Adventure Paths, since we will continue to look at placing them in areas we haven't yet told significant stories in, so there won't be any "prior canon" to catch up on.
You should STILL be able to run the APs out of order going forward unless we specifically do a sequel one. And you should, in most cases, be able to run a 1st edition or 3.5 edition AP in 2nd edition with minimal problem (beyond converting rules), either by playing it as "The events of this campaign took place 2 or 4 or 7 or whatever many years ago, so let's play it out and see how things ACTUALLY work in our version of the campaign setting" or by altering things a bit in your game as needed.
For example, if we assume the Worldwound has been closed, it will still remain infested with demons, and you could thus run Wrath of the Righteous in that era of Golarion as either a "If we win, we drive off all the demons" game or "Ooh a demon has reopened the Worldwound and we need to swoop in and close it before it goes back to what it was."
But for us, the edition change gives us the best possible chance to advance the timeline by a decade or so, to reflect the fact that the campaign setting we want to produce is not exactly the same as the one we did back in 2007.
And hardback compilations have ALWAYS a "ship in a bottle" type thing, where they get published and we've already had other content published that assumes their events have taken place.