| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The descriptions for the Dead Vault note that Asmodeus uses the plane like a prison for those beings he can't even allow to be rendered back into quintessence, such is the danger of what they know and have done.
What sort of knowledge or behaviour would constitute justification for being booted to the Dead Vault instead of just a good old' fashioned smiting? Discovering the spooky secrets of the Catafalque is something that comes to mind.
Not sure where you're getting information that Asmodeus uses the Dead Vault as a prison. There's nothing about that in the section on the Dead Vault in Planar Adventures, and it's not intended to be a prison plane owned by Asmodeus at all. Certainly Asmodeus has other prisons all over creation, some of which are certainly hard-to-reach and remote demiplanes, but the Dead Vault is not one of them.
The whole point of the Dead Vault is that it was created by a wide range of deities with one purpose—to imprison Rovagug. Asmodeus's role in that whole thing was pretty much just to turn the key in the lock that sealed the prison.
Other information about Asmodeus using the Dead Vault as his personal super-max prison is, pretty much, an error, in other words.
"Many have wondered about the Vault’s interior; as no
divine servitors of Rovagug encased within have everescaped, only dreams and visions sent by the imprisoned
god provide a clue. Much larger than the 20-mile-wide
lip of the Pit of Gormuz, the Dead Vault resembles a
gigantic hollow world, thousands of miles in diameter,
utterly devoid of light, and literally swimming with
a chitinous ocean of the Rough Beast’s frenzied, self-
cannibalizing servitors. But other things exist: entire
sections of the Darklands have been subsumed and
absorbed into the vault, especially parts of the lowest
layer and the bizarre creations of the Vault Keepers, as
well as packs of devils and others that somehow survive
amid the devouring anarchy.
These last prisoners raise yet more questions: Has
Asmodeus used the Vault as a repository for more than
just Rovagug? Does the god-fiend exercise his power over
its gates to condemn enemies to a certain, swift death or
eternal silence trapped within a realm to which only he
possesses the key?" - From Pathfinder Chronicles - The Great Beyond
Creative Director
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The descriptions for the Dead Vault note that Asmodeus uses the plane like a prison for those beings he can't even allow to be rendered back into quintessence, such is the danger of what they know and have done.
What sort of knowledge or behaviour would constitute justification for being booted to the Dead Vault instead of just a good old' fashioned smiting? Discovering the spooky secrets of the Catafalque is something that comes to mind.
Not sure where you're getting information that Asmodeus uses the Dead Vault as a prison. There's nothing about that in the section on the Dead Vault in Planar Adventures, and it's not intended to be a prison plane owned by Asmodeus at all. Certainly Asmodeus has other prisons all over creation, some of which are certainly hard-to-reach and remote demiplanes, but the Dead Vault is not one of them.
The whole point of the Dead Vault is that it was created by a wide range of deities with one purpose—to imprison Rovagug. Asmodeus's role in that whole thing was pretty much just to turn the key in the lock that sealed the prison.
Other information about Asmodeus using the Dead Vault as his personal super-max prison is, pretty much, an error, in other words.
"Many have wondered about the Vault’s interior; as no
divine servitors of Rovagug encased within have ever
escaped, only dreams and visions sent by the imprisoned
god provide a clue. Much larger than the 20-mile-wide
lip of the Pit of Gormuz, the Dead Vault resembles a
gigantic hollow world, thousands of miles in diameter,
utterly devoid of light, and literally swimming with
a chitinous ocean of the Rough Beast’s frenzied, self-
cannibalizing servitors. But other things exist: entire
sections of the Darklands have been subsumed and
absorbed into the vault, especially parts of the lowest
layer and the bizarre creations of the Vault Keepers, as
well as packs of devils and others that somehow survive
amid the devouring anarchy.
These last...
That information is many years and two editions out of date. Planar Adventures has the most up-to-date information now.
|
Creative Director
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Are you interested in doing more with the Astral and/or Ethereal Planes in P2?Yes.Yay!
Will Xill still be showing up or will something else take their place to move away from WoTC created material?
I suspect xills will return at some point. Probably with a new name; they're kinda in the ankheg and gelatinous cube category of monsters that were invented purely for D&D. We might rename them, might not. Dunno yet.
But I suspect that we'll be leaning a lot harder into sahkils for the primary villainous thing from the Ethereal Plane.
|
Are you interested in doing more with the Astral and/or Ethereal Planes in P2?Yes.Yay!
Will Xill still be showing up or will something else take their place to move away from WoTC created material?
I suspect xills will return at some point. Probably with a new name; they're kinda in the ankheg and gelatinous cube category of monsters that were invented purely for D&D. We might rename them, might not. Dunno yet.
But I suspect that we'll be leaning a lot harder into sahkils for the primary villainous thing from the Ethereal Plane.
If you do, and you focus in on Sahkil as the villains, does that open the opportunity for non-evil Xill?
|
Creative Director
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If you do, and you focus in on Sahkil as the villains, does that open the opportunity for non-evil Xill?Are you interested in doing more with the Astral and/or Ethereal Planes in P2?Yes.Yay!
Will Xill still be showing up or will something else take their place to move away from WoTC created material?
I suspect xills will return at some point. Probably with a new name; they're kinda in the ankheg and gelatinous cube category of monsters that were invented purely for D&D. We might rename them, might not. Dunno yet.
But I suspect that we'll be leaning a lot harder into sahkils for the primary villainous thing from the Ethereal Plane.
No. The nature of the xill's reproduction, which involves the use of gestating its young inside of the bodies of living creatures, is not really "compatable" with good. Xill are very much inspired by the alien from Alien[, in that they're vaguely humanoid monsters who use us as unwilling incubators. The concept of seeing a "non-antagonistic alien" show up in an Alien movie isn't something I'm particularly ever interested in seeing happen ever, and as an extension to that, I don't really wanna see non-evil xills.
Furthermore, I think it's very important that we keep some groups of monsters, particularly those who ARE monstrous in appearance, as monsters and don't blur the lines so much that every time a group encounters them it becomes a complex ethical question on how to deal with them. At least, as long as Pathfinder remains a game that at its core is a combat simulator. There need to be monsters out there who are remorselessly evil for us to be heroes in standing up to them. There's plenty of other creature options out there for us to be heroic in forging an understanding with, even the monstrous ones. Looking at the Ethereal Plane in and of itself, ether spiders already serve the role of "scary looking but not evil potential friends."
Are Akatas a paizo invention? They seem like a more paizo fit for the theme of "alien inspired monster that impregnates living things to reproduce".
|
Creative Director
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Are Akatas a paizo invention? They seem like a more paizo fit for the theme of "alien inspired monster that impregnates living things to reproduce".
They are 100% Paizo; they were created by Mike McArtor for the second adventure in Second Darkness.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Mr. James Jacobs,
I am curious. Why make male changlings?
So a shabti is essentially an afterlife whipping-boy. Is there a canon explanation for what happens to the soul that it stands-in for at judgment?
(One of my players in Strange Aeons is a shabti for whom I've concocted a backstory of being sent to Osiriani Hell for the crimes of a decadent pharaoh, and he is wondering what happened to his "progenitor". I don't mind inventing new stuff, but was curious if there's existing lore.)
|
Creative Director
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
So a shabti is essentially an afterlife whipping-boy. Is there a canon explanation for what happens to the soul that it stands-in for at judgment?
(One of my players in Strange Aeons is a shabti for whom I've concocted a backstory of being sent to Osiriani Hell for the crimes of a decadent pharaoh, and he is wondering what happened to his "progenitor". I don't mind inventing new stuff, but was curious if there's existing lore.)
Haven't put any thought into this, and I suspect those who came up with the shabti didn't either, unless it's just a delay for the soul on its trip and once the shabti dies it moves on.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
James,
How do you and the team over at Paizo come up with names for all the outsiders? Especially demons and devils, and figuring out their true names. Also, keeping them unique enough that you know THIS is a demon's name and THAT is a devil's name almost without being told. I've tried different name generators, but something always seems off when it's done that way. Might be how the letters and prefixes are randomized and merged. The Paizo crew always seems to have cool and menacing names in the published adventures.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Hi JJ,
In the LOCG Taldans are described as follows:
"Taldans typically have bronze, gold, or tawny skin; lightly curled brown hair; aquiline noses; and green, gray, or amber eyes".
Do Chelaxians still look like their 1st edition counterparts or have they been retconned to this description as well? Also, I've noticed many Taldans don't really look like this in official art - how prominent is this appearance in your opinion? I like it, but it doesn't seem all that typical to me...?
Thanks as always!
|
Creative Director
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
James,
How do you and the team over at Paizo come up with names for all the outsiders? Especially demons and devils, and figuring out their true names. Also, keeping them unique enough that you know THIS is a demon's name and THAT is a devil's name almost without being told. I've tried different name generators, but something always seems off when it's done that way. Might be how the letters and prefixes are randomized and merged. The Paizo crew always seems to have cool and menacing names in the published adventures.
Same as with anything. We make them up when we aren't taking something directly from folklore.
Making up a new name is a skill, and it takes time to get good at it. You can fiddle around with words by spelling other words backwards and rearranging letters to make them still speakable, use online name generators, adjust and adapt names from phonebooks or novels or whatever. And the more adventures and stories you read, the more those names will seep into your brain and help you build up your skills at making up names. And it's ABSOLUTELY helpful to know how words are constructed so that you make names that sound right, rather than just alphabet soup.
Now and then, I'll take a few hours to simply fill up a page of my notebook with names I make up using all of these methods, and then check them off as I use them in adventures.
Once you DO make a name up, do a google search for the name to see if there's one out there that does something else already. This is a great way to catch made-up names that might be foreign words with meanings you might not intend to associate with the name. Say the name out loud. Ask your friends to read the name and say it out loud. Mouthfeel is important for names as well as how they look written down. And don't forget to aim the FILTH detector at it; nothing makes a name lose its power and become a joke faster than accidentally naming someone something naughty.
|
Creative Director
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Hi JJ,
In the LOCG Taldans are described as follows:
"Taldans typically have bronze, gold, or tawny skin; lightly curled brown hair; aquiline noses; and green, gray, or amber eyes".
Do Chelaxians still look like their 1st edition counterparts or have they been retconned to this description as well? Also, I've noticed many Taldans don't really look like this in official art - how prominent is this appearance in your opinion? I like it, but it doesn't seem all that typical to me...?
Thanks as always!
Chelaxians still have their previous look. As for the Taldan description, we could have probably done better with that description and said something more appropriate for their art... AKA: caucasian European looks.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
No. The nature of the xill's reproduction, which involves the use of gestating its young inside of the bodies of living creatures, is not really "compatable" with good. Xill are very much inspired by the alien from Alien[, in that they're vaguely humanoid monsters who use us as unwilling incubators. The concept of seeing a "non-antagonistic alien" show up in an Alien movie isn't something I'm particularly ever interested in seeing happen ever, and as an extension to that, I don't really wanna see non-evil xills.
Furthermore, I think it's very important that we keep some groups of monsters, particularly those who ARE monstrous in appearance, as monsters and don't blur the lines so much that every time a group encounters them it becomes a complex ethical question on how to deal with them. At least, as long as Pathfinder remains a game that at its core is a combat simulator. There need to be monsters out there who are remorselessly evil for us to be heroes in standing up to them. There's plenty of other creature options out there for us to be heroic in forging an understanding with, even the monstrous ones. Looking at the Ethereal Plane in and of itself, ether spiders already serve the role of "scary looking but not evil...
I'm a Xill, and I find this offensive. Our biology dictates this form of reproduction for our continued existence. Is the only way we can fall under your paradigm of "good" to choose willing extinction? Is it ethical for you to categorize me as good or evil based upon a biological shortcoming over which I have no control?
If we're judging each other based upon how "ethically" we have evolved, should you be judged based upon the fact that you need to consume other living organisms to survive? Perhaps your lack of ability to photosynthesize makes you evil? Enforcing your cultural ideologies on another species is, in itself, a form of malice. Your rhetoric has caused my kind to be persecuted, hated, and scorned for merely wanting to survive.
Chelaxians still have their previous look. As for the Taldan description, we could have probably done better with that description and said something more appropriate for their art... AKA: caucasian European looks.
Thank you JJ, that helps a lot actually.
Another question, if you have the time - I remember you once said you didn't want Varisians to be a re-imagining of Romani people, and that it just happened, but wasn't the intent (maybe I misunderstood).
If Varisians are unlike Romani, is there some way you would describe them that hasn't come across until now? What were the inspirations for them? We know they can have different eye and hair colors, and possibly darker skin tones, but how do they dress, for instance - a lot of art portrays them similar to romanticized "Gypsies" in the vein of Esmeralda from The Hunchback of Notre-Dame, but I'm assuming that isn't ideal?
Thanks again!
|
Creative Director
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
No. The nature of the xill's reproduction, which involves the use of gestating its young inside of the bodies of living creatures, is not really "compatable" with good. Xill are very much inspired by the alien from Alien[, in that they're vaguely humanoid monsters who use us as unwilling incubators. The concept of seeing a "non-antagonistic alien" show up in an Alien movie isn't something I'm particularly ever interested in seeing happen ever, and as an extension to that, I don't really wanna see non-evil xills.
Furthermore, I think it's very important that we keep some groups of monsters, particularly those who ARE monstrous in appearance, as monsters and don't blur the lines so much that every time a group encounters them it becomes a complex ethical question on how to deal with them. At least, as long as Pathfinder remains a game that at its core is a combat simulator. There need to be monsters out there who are remorselessly evil for us to be heroes in standing up to them. There's plenty of other creature options out there for us to be heroic in forging an understanding with, even the monstrous ones. Looking at the Ethereal Plane in and of itself, ether spiders already serve the role of "scary looking but not evil...
I'm a Xill, and I find this offensive. Our biology dictates this form of reproduction for our continued existence. Is the only way we can fall under your paradigm of "good" to choose willing extinction? Is it ethical for you to categorize me as good or evil based upon a biological shortcoming over which I have no control?
If we're judging each other based upon how "ethically" we have evolved, should you be judged based upon the fact that you need to consume other living organisms to survive? Perhaps your lack of ability to photosynthesize makes you evil? Enforcing your cultural ideologies on another species is, in itself, a form of malice. Your rhetoric has caused my kind to be persecuted, hated, and scorned for merely wanting to survive.
You look more like a kobold than a xill to me. Maybe you need to upgrade your mirror to one of those new-fangled reflective models?
|
Creative Director
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Another question, if you have the time - I remember you once said you didn't want Varisians to be a re-imagining of Romani people, and that it just happened, but wasn't the intent (maybe I misunderstood).
If Varisians are unlike Romani, is there some way you would describe them that hasn't come across until now? What were the inspirations for them? We know they can have different eye and hair colors, and possibly darker skin tones, but how do they dress, for instance - a lot of art portrays them similar to romanticized "Gypsies" in the vein of Esmeralda from The Hunchback of Notre-Dame, but I'm assuming that isn't ideal?
Thanks again!
Romani traditions are in there for sure, but also some Spanish as well. But also purely fantasy stuff that riffs off of more modern traditions like the Goth subculture or old time maritime traditions transposed from ship-based travel to overland travel.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
|
Creative Director
|
You look more like a kobold than a xill to me. Maybe you need to upgrade your mirror to one of those new-fangled reflective models?The dragons kept telling me I wasn't really one of them, so I decided I was a "MITEY XILL!", instead.
Going forward, I need to reiterate that this is a place to ask questions of me. And preferably "real" questions rather than joke questions, since my patience for answering joke questions is not guaranteed to be at the same level at any one point.
|
Creative Director
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
** spoiler omitted ** How does this work? I'd have imagined they'd lose access to spells similarly to how a dead deity can't grant spells anymore.
Because...
AKA: HIs ability to grant spells is separate from his mythic powers. The "Deific" section on his stats on page 65 of "Temple of the Peacock Spirit" allow him to keep granting spells
|
|
** spoiler omitted ** How does this work? I'd have imagined they'd lose access to spells similarly to how a dead deity can't grant spells anymore.Because...
** spoiler omitted **
That's actually kind of amazing, and I will definitely need to keep that in mind for my own games. Wow. Love those interesting loopholes.
Got a question from our PFS group after running a particular scenario. Regarding the Cult of the Eye. They have many priests, but as per the canon lore, are any of them actual clerics of the Deluged God? Or are they more likely sorcerers and oracles who believe they were granted powers?
|
Creative Director
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
** spoiler omitted ** How does this work? I'd have imagined they'd lose access to spells similarly to how a dead deity can't grant spells anymore.Because...
** spoiler omitted **That's actually kind of amazing, and I will definitely need to keep that in mind for my own games. Wow. Love those interesting loopholes.
Got a question from our PFS group after running a particular scenario. Regarding the Cult of the Eye. They have many priests, but as per the canon lore, are any of them actual clerics of the Deluged God? Or are they more likely sorcerers and oracles who believe they were granted powers?
This isn't a deity yet. There aren't clerics of the so-called "Deluged God" but there might be oracles or divine sorcerers.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Going forward, I need to reiterate that this is a place to ask questions of me. And preferably "real" questions rather than joke questions, since my patience for answering joke questions is not guaranteed to be at the same level at any one point.
Noted. There was a serious underlying question in there I would like to ask however. Is there a specific cultural lens you apply when determining alignment in Pathfinder?
Is alignment determined by what counts as good/evil in a 2019 Western lens or is it determined by some in world Golarion lens? Because good and evil has a mechanical function in Pathfinder, does Golarion function under some sort of categorical imperative ethical system, instead of cultural moral relativism? If so, was this categorization created at the onset at the creation of Golarion? Was there some creator god that decided rules such as: "killing cow for food= not evil", "killing humans for food= evil", and taught these rules to Pharasma?
Alignment is so baked into Pathfinder, that the lore of good and evil itself is interesting.
|
Creative Director
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Going forward, I need to reiterate that this is a place to ask questions of me. And preferably "real" questions rather than joke questions, since my patience for answering joke questions is not guaranteed to be at the same level at any one point.Noted. There was a serious underlying question in there I would like to ask however. Is there a specific cultural lens you apply when determining alignment in Pathfinder?
Is alignment determined by what counts as good/evil in a 2019 Western lens or is it determined by some in world Golarion lens? Because good and evil has a mechanical function in Pathfinder, does Golarion function under some sort of categorical imperative ethical system, instead of cultural moral relativism? If so, was this categorization created at the onset at the creation of Golarion? Was there some creator god that decided rules such as: "killing cow for food= not evil", "killing humans for food= evil", and taught these rules to Pharasma?
Alignment is so baked into Pathfinder, that the lore of good and evil itself is interesting.
Alignment is determined by the modern cultural American lens, since it's written by modern Americans. Whether or not what we regard as good and evil today is still regarded as good or evil 1,000 years from now or was 1,000 years ago is irrelevant, since we're not publishing during those eras.
|
Creative Director
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
And if the Alignment axis is always based upon our current views of good and evil on Earth, does that mean Pharasma is constantly keeping an eye on Earth to determine how to judge people in Golarion?
As far as in-game stuff goes, yes. As far as the real world goes, no. Earth exists in the real world and in the Golarion universe, but they're not the same.
Now and then it also means that there'll be disconnects between what we publish and your own views, since my own interpretations of what is lawful or chaotic or good or evil or neutral are not guaranteed to match your own. Part of my job as Creative Director is to keep those interpretations logical within the context of Golarion. It's not my job to decide for the world whether cannibalisim or assassination or vigilantism or war or whatever is evil or good or lawful or chaotic, for example, but I do need to make those calls in products we publish.
|
Creative Director
|
Hi, JJ
I was confuse a PF2 feat:Courtly Graces
------------------------------------------------------------
You were raised among the nobility or have learned proper etiquette and bearing, allowing you to present yourself as a noble and play games of influence and politics. You can use Society to Make an Impression on a noble, as well as with Impersonate to pretend to be a noble if you aren’t one. If you want to impersonate a specific noble, you still need to use Deception to Impersonate normally, and to Lie when necessary.
------------------------------------------------------------
Does this mean if I don't choose this feat, and I will never use Society to Make an Impression on a noble or use Deception to Impersonate?Is this skill feat means "If you don't choose me, you can't do this"?
This is weird for me.
For example, a character grow in a noble family, learning lots of noble's knowledge, but for some reason he was framed to be a prisoner.
Three years, almost everyday he wants to revenage, just like Edmond Dantès.
For this character, I choose PRISONER BACKGROUND for him , because noble's life was not so important, but framed and be a prisoner made him now.
And now, in a noble's party, this character wants to use Society to Make an Impression on a noble, I think this is reasonable, for he has such backstory.
And then, GM said:you can't do this, because you don't have the "Courtly Graces" skill feat.
.......???
Please direct rules questions to the rules forums so the design team can notice them easier and so folks looking for advice will find it easier. This thread isn't really for rules answers.
That said, if a rule seems "weird to you" and your'e the GM, change it. If you're a player, talk to the GM. If you play in PFS, you'll need to just accept that some things are weird to you, I suppose.
In time, we'll be creating more and more backgrounds. With each one we publish, the avialable backgrounds will get more and more varied, and the chances of finding the exact one that's perfect for your specific concept for a character history will grow. In the meantime, you'll either need to work with what's available or chat with your GM to adjust things or make up brand new backgrounds.
|
Creative Director
|
| 10 people marked this as a favorite. |
If the Second Darkness AP had never been written, and you were being asked to introduce Drow to Golarion for the first time now, how would you integrate them?
I would, to be honest, consider NOT doing drow at all, and instead shifting the role of "spooky underground empire of evil humanoids" role to the urdefhans instead.
If I was told I have to integrate Drow, I'd look at having them be a chaotic neutral society that's all about reveling in the excess of life and being hedonistic and deep into emotions and spirituality, and would tie them to the worship of proteans rather than demons. I would keep them as a matriarchy and explore more their capacities for sculpting reality, be it via fleshwarping, stone shaping, crystal growing, and the like. I'd set them up as one of the races of the Darklands that COULD serve as allies but maybe as enemies, depending on context, and then lean in more heavilly on ghouls, duergar, xulgath, urdefhans, and serpentfolk to be the evil nations of the Darklands.
Which would be a pretty huge departure from the D&D drow tradition, so I'd also rename them into something else, probably. Or maybe have that role played by the munavri instead.
|
Creative Director
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Have you written any non-Pathfinder products since Expedition to the Ruins of Greyhawk?
I did some stuff for Kobold here and there in their guidebooks, and worked on Elder Evils and the Graz'zt article after Expedition for Wizards of the Coast.
The most significant thing I've had published that's not a Paizo product was a huge section of the Sandy Petersen Cthulhu Mythos for Pathfinder book—while it's for Pathfinder 1st edition rules, that text wasn't for Paizo. Not sure if that counts.
I've written a few monsters for Starfinder.
I've written plenty more for myself, but none of that's published yet. Some of it will never be published.
|
|
What is it about Golarion that has kept you so singularly focused for 12 years? I feel like it's uncommon.
A lot of campaign setting creators/leads seem to have fairly large side projects. (Even if they are their own boss and WoTC isn't forcing them off their own creations.) Wolfgang heads Midgard, but designed Tyranny of Dragons. Monte Cook is doing that Invisible Sun thing. Ed Greenwood writes other things besides Forgotten Realms. Etc.
|
Creative Director
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
What is it about Golarion that has kept you so singularly focused for 12 years? I feel like it's uncommon.
A lot of campaign setting creators/leads seem to have fairly large side projects. (Even if they are their own boss and WoTC isn't forcing them off their own creations.) Wolfgang heads Midgard, but designed Tyranny of Dragons. Monte Cook is doing that Invisible Sun thing. Ed Greenwood writes other things besides Forgotten Realms. Etc.
I really like Golarion for one thing. For another, the setting has so much variety in it that there's always somewhere new to go and explore. The setting is designed to be endlessly expandable and inclusive, without having to re-launch a new setting every time we come up with a new idea for an adventure.
That said, I've also been working on a post-apocalyptic RPG as well that I've been doing on my own that may someday see print, or may not.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If the Second Darkness AP had never been written, and you were being asked to introduce Drow to Golarion for the first time now, how would you integrate them?I would, to be honest, consider NOT doing drow at all, and instead shifting the role of "spooky underground empire of evil humanoids" role to the urdefhans instead.
If I was told I have to integrate Drow, I'd look at having them be a chaotic neutral society that's all about reveling in the excess of life and being hedonistic and deep into emotions and spirituality, and would tie them to the worship of proteans rather than demons. I would keep them as a matriarchy and explore more their capacities for sculpting reality, be it via fleshwarping, stone shaping, crystal growing, and the like. I'd set them up as one of the races of the Darklands that COULD serve as allies but maybe as enemies, depending on context, and then lean in more heavilly on ghouls, duergar, xulgath, urdefhans, and serpentfolk to be the evil nations of the Darklands.
Which would be a pretty huge departure from the D&D drow tradition, so I'd also rename them into something else, probably. Or maybe have that role played by the munavri instead.
*takes notes*
What areas or groups on Golarion most likely have a lot of contact with Proteans?
A hypothetical-
If you were to pick a core ancestry and decide they mostly worshiped Psychopomp Ushers, which would you assign that particular category to?
What areas or groups on Golarion most likely have a lot of contact with Proteans?None come to mind.
Some ganzi seem to have lots of contact with proteans... would you say that this could be a group that sees them regularly?
|
Creative Director
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Some ganzi seem to have lots of contact with proteans... would you say that this could be a group that sees them regularly?What areas or groups on Golarion most likely have a lot of contact with Proteans?None come to mind.
That's an ancestry, not a group.