At first I thought the Vault Builders created pechs. But then I found out that pechs are fey. That would mean they were not created by the Vault Builders, since fey originate from soul energy in the First World. So I ask you. Were pechs created by the Vault Builders? Or were they created by the First World but later forcefully enslaved by the Vault Builders?
Creative Director
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
So what is your preferred answer on how Savith managed to behead a true god? Like is it 1) She was just that bad ass 2) Ydersius is less powerful than most true gods 3) She had magical artifacts or something similar 4) she had divine help 5) Destiny/Extra ordinary circumstances 6) Something else?
1. She was just that bad ass.
As I mentioned in a previous post elsewhere just a few moments ago, part of the reason we don't give actual rules for deities is so that when we want to tell stories about them, we don't have to worry about justifying the plot with rules. Including stories where they interact with mortals. In a historical context. If/when they interact with PCs, we'll HAVE to include rules to a certain extent, but mostly in how the PCs are affected, not the deities themselves.
|
Creative Director
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
At first I thought the Vault Builders created pechs. But then I found out that pechs are fey. That would mean they were not created by the Vault Builders, since fey originate from soul energy in the First World. So I ask you. Were pechs created by the Vault Builders? Or were they created by the First World but later forcefully enslaved by the Vault Builders?
Fey are from the First World, but once they're created, others can come into being through other methods. The vault builders are pretty powerful, and they certainly had the capacity to create life. Including fey.
|
Creative Director
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Hi james,
from weapon size rules :"If a weapon’s designation would be changed to something other than light, one-handed, or two-handed by this alteration, the creature can’t wield the weapon at all."
Whats the meaning of "can't wield the weapon at all?
Does the weapon will be counted as an improvised one?
Can a medium sized barbarian with 30 str use a tree as an improvised weapon?
Thank you!
You should ask rules questions of your GM first, then the design team second, but your GM will get you a resolution much quicker. I try not to get into rules discussions here.
My take though is that you can carry a weapon that you can't wield (assuming you have the strength to do so), but you can't use it as a weapon.
A GM gets to decide if a thing, whatever it is, can serve as an improvised weapon.
It seems that outsiders and fey are created by the planes themselves, not by the biological parents. Am I right?
Then can I assume that, while the first pechs were indeed created by the Vault Builders, after the First World learned of this new fey race it began to create its own pechs as well? In other words, some pechs nowadays are not related to the Vault Builders at all, because they were created by the First World directly or were born from the descendants of the so called First World born pechs, not created by the pech parents who are the descendants of the first pechs created by the Vault Builders?
|
Creative Director
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Then can I assume that, while the first pechs were indeed created by the Vault Builders, after the First World learned of this new fey race it began to create its own pechs as well? In other words, some pechs nowadays are not related to the Vault Builders at all, because they were created by the First World directly or were born from the descendants of the so called First World born pechs, not created by the pech parents who are the descendants of the first pechs created by the Vault Builders?
No. The First World doesn't really work that way.
The Court of Ether is home to the twisted dark fey. Is it related to the blight? I ask this because I have always thought that all dark fey are blighted fey, or at least all dark fey like the blight and Cyth-V'sug very much.
Coldest weather you've ever experienced?
|
Creative Director
|
Coldest weather you've ever experienced?
It was probably around 15º F I guess? Never really kept track of temperatures on the cold side of things, since I grew up in California. I did keep track of them on the high side of things, and the hottest I remember experiencing was 117º F. That was pretty awful, and it was one of a few key factors that made me decide to move to Seattle in 1995.
If a fey or a human drinks water from a river that flows out of the blighted land, would he be infected with the blight? If so, the world will be doomed very quickly, because nothing can stop the influx of the blighted water and spores perfectly.
|
Creative Director
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
If a fey or a human drinks water from a river that flows out of the blighted land, would he be infected with the blight? If so, the world will be doomed very quickly, because nothing can stop the influx of the blighted water and spores perfectly.
When you say "blighted land" that, to me, is a generic term akin to "irradiated land" or "poisoned land" or "corrupted land." As such, whether or not the influence extends to river water and whether or not that affects a fey or human or whatever else depends entirely on the type of story that the writer wants to tell.
If you're talking SPECIFICALLY about the Blight in the Fangwood, check out book 5 of Ironfang Invasion for more info. I wasn't actually involved much in that product's nitty gritty details so I can't say much more about what we may or may not have said in text. But if I HAD... I'd say no, that the Blight there is something that affects the creatures and vegetation but not river water.
But if we HAD wanted to tell a story where the water flowing out of a region like that would potentially contaminate and doom the rest of the world, we would have said so. And regions downriver would have supported that with the proper flavor. Since they don't, that's pretty proof positive to me that the river water that flows out of the Blight is not something capable of spreading the Blight.
Greetings, mighty dire tyrannosaurus
Again, i ask for your wisdom.
Regarding Lepidstadt's Map, first published in Carrion Crown book 2, later in Rule of Fear, I was wondering if the city is supposed to have around some kind of wall.
Cause there are big sections of something that seems to be a city wall, but these structures do not cover the whole perimeter.
Can you explain what those structures are?
Is Lepidstadt build over what seems to be build over an higher ground, and therefore doesn't need walls in certain zones?
Undead are once-living creatures animated by negative energy or evil magic. I'm curious. Are there some undead animated by positive energy or good magic? I know most undead are evil and malevolent, but perhaps...?
|
Creative Director
|
Greetings, mighty dire tyrannosaurus
Again, i ask for your wisdom.Regarding Lepidstadt's Map, first published in Carrion Crown book 2, later in Rule of Fear, I was wondering if the city is supposed to have around some kind of wall.
Cause there are big sections of something that seems to be a city wall, but these structures do not cover the whole perimeter.
Can you explain what those structures are?
Is Lepidstadt build over what seems to be build over an higher ground, and therefore doesn't need walls in certain zones?
I can't. I didn't create the map, write the book, or develop it. If we didn't talk about a wall/partial wall in the description for Lepidstadt, then it's a non issue that doesn't really factor in to the city. Feel free to adjust as makes sense for your game.
|
Creative Director
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Undead are once-living creatures animated by negative energy or evil magic. I'm curious. Are there some undead animated by positive energy or good magic? I know most undead are evil and malevolent, but perhaps...?
No.
When positive energy animates an inanimate object, the result is a construct. But note this isn't a case of binary opposition. A LOT of things can create a construct, not only positive energy.
Duergar train giant spiders and other vermin to serve as mounts and guards. According to Kobolds of Golarion, giant ants serve kobolds as mounts and pack animals. But you have said several times that vermin can't be trained normally unless you have some sort of weird ability to interact with them, like mites. I'm not sure. Then how can duergar and kobolds ride vermin?
|
Creative Director
|
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Duergar train giant spiders and other vermin to serve as mounts and guards. According to Kobolds of Golarion, giant ants serve kobolds as mounts and pack animals. But you have said several times that vermin can't be trained normally unless you have some sort of weird ability to interact with them, like mites. I'm not sure. Then how can duergar and kobolds ride vermin?
In 1st edition, vermin had no intelligence, and thus it made no sense that they could be trained as animals.
We've scuttled that rule in 2nd edition. There is no "vermin" category anymore. Giant ants and giant spiders are animals. Not as smart as higher order animals like lizards and bears, but still animals, and as such they can be trained as animals.
We no longer have to bend rules or make up new rules to allow duergar and kobolds to ride beetles or spiders or whatever as a result; this is a great example of fixing a problem with the new rules to make things more elegant and easier to handle in our game.
I understand that in Second Edition duergar and kobolds can train vermin without problems. But what about in First Edition? Luckily, I found a relevant feat called vermin heart in Advanced Player's Guide. Can I assume that in First Edition those duergar and kobolds who train and ride vermin did that thanks to this feat?
|
Creative Director
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
I understand that in Second Edition duergar and kobolds can train vermin without problems. But what about in First Edition? Luckily, I found a relevant feat called vermin heart in Advanced Player's Guide. Can I assume that in First Edition those duergar and kobolds who train and ride vermin did that thanks to this feat?
It's a mistake in first edition, basically.
Feel free to fix it however you want. I've moved on to embrace the less obnoxious restrictions on things like giant spiders and am not interested in looking back at this point.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Rakshasas always have one reversed element of their anatomy, which gives away their fiendish nature. Common examples include having reversed hands, ears that face backward, elbows that bend outward, toes that go from the smallest on the inside to the big toe on the outside, or even reversed knees. But I honestly cannot find any reversed element from the art on page 61 of City in the Lion's Eye. Can you tell me where it is?
Thanks for all the answers! I keep this page tab pinned and check it regularly. Now for a question:
When is a medusa if it spins?
|
Creative Director
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Rakshasas always have one reversed element of their anatomy, which gives away their fiendish nature. Common examples include having reversed hands, ears that face backward, elbows that bend outward, toes that go from the smallest on the inside to the big toe on the outside, or even reversed knees. But I honestly cannot find any reversed element from the art on page 61 of City in the Lion's Eye. Can you tell me where it is?
Sometimes art messes up.
EDIT: I just looked at this illustration, and it's not messed up. The illustration shows the rakshasa in human disguise, so of course he wouldn't have any "tells" as to his true nature.
Am I the only one who thinks Milon Jeroth in City in the Lion's Eye looks like Clint Eastwood?
|
Creative Director
|
Am I the only one who thinks Milon Jeroth in City in the Lion's Eye looks like Clint Eastwood?
So far, yes. I'm unfamiliar with the art, since I wasn't involved in that Adventure Path beyond approval of the outline and approval of each volume before it went to the printer, at which point I do look at the book but only take note of significant errors or concerns that need to be fixed.
I just looked, and no, he doesn't look like Clint Eastwood at all to me.
Rakshasas always have one reversed element of their anatomy, which gives away their fiendish nature. Common examples include having reversed hands, ears that face backward, elbows that bend outward, toes that go from the smallest on the inside to the big toe on the outside, or even reversed knees. But I honestly cannot find any reversed element from the art on page 61 of City in the Lion's Eye. Can you tell me where it is?Sometimes art messes up.
EDIT: I just looked at this illustration, and it's not messed up. The illustration shows the rakshasa in human disguise, so of course he wouldn't have any "tells" as to his true nature.
I have always thought that those rakshasas who assume human forms would have one reversed element of their anatomy as well, since the art on page 68 of City in the Lion's Eye said so. But you said differently. Now I'm really ocnfused. Then can I assume that the art on page 68 of City in the Lion's Eye is wrong and those rakshasas who assume human forms wouldn't have any "tells" as to their true nature?
|
Creative Director
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I have always thought that those rakshasas who assume human forms would have one reversed element of their anatomy as well, since the art on page 68 of City in the Lion's Eye said so. But you said differently. Now I'm really ocnfused. Then can I assume that the art on page 68 of City in the Lion's Eye is wrong and those rakshasas who assume human forms wouldn't have any "tells" as to their true nature?
What's the point of a magic disguise if there's an obvious tell that ruins the disguise? Doesn't make sense.
After death, a rakshasa's soul seeks a new host to be reborn in, continuing the vile cycle of fiendish reincarnation over and over again. That means rakshasas are free from the River of Souls and Pharasma's judgement. But I thought that the multiverse will cease to exist once Pharasma judged all souls. Can I assume that the world will never end since Pharasma can never judge rakshasas and thus can never finish her job? Turns out we should thank rakshasas for contributing(albeit unconsciously) to the preservation of the multiverse.
|
Creative Director
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
After death, a rakshasa's soul seeks a new host to be reborn in, continuing the vile cycle of fiendish reincarnation over and over again. That means rakshasas are free from the River of Souls and Pharasma's judgement. But I thought that the multiverse will cease to exist once Pharasma judged all souls. Can I assume that the world will never end since Pharasma can never judge rakshasas and thus can never finish her job? Turns out we should thank rakshasas for contributing(albeit unconsciously) to the preservation of the multiverse.
Eventually a rakshasa doesn't reincarnate, either because it did enough to transcend or failed enough to just be "recycled".
Pharasma judging all souls doesn't end the multiverse, though. That's a result of the end, not the trigger of the end.
|
Creative Director
|
Hello James, I hope you've made it well into the new year!
I have a few questions, but will lead with a simple one I'm sure you might've gotten before. A while a go, I heard stirrings on the forums about you considering posting the Original statistics for Xandergul, the ones you had imagined for him. I was wondering if this was still a possibility?
I am aware this would be his first edition stats, but I must admit I am still extraordinarily curious to see the statistics of the two final runelords - Xanderghul and Zutha, as well as their weapons.
Hope the new year treats you well!
- Shadeworld
It's still a possibility, but not until we have the internal tools to present game content like that as blog posts easier. Currently, it's pretty onerous to set up blog posts like that, and even more so to correct errors once they're posted.
Azathoth is definitely the most powerful Outer God. Then according to your opinion who would be the second and third most powerful Outer Gods? Yog-Sothoth or Shub-Niggurath? Perhaps Nyarlathotep, Ubbo-Sathla or Ngyr-Korath?
|
Creative Director
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Azathoth is definitely the most powerful Outer God. Then according to your opinion who would be the second and third most powerful Outer Gods? Yog-Sothoth or Shub-Niggurath? Perhaps Nyarlathotep, Ubbo-Sathla or Ngyr-Korath?
I think Yog-Sothoth and Nyarlahtotep are more powerful than Azathoth, frankly, because Azathoth has no capacity to reason or plan or do anything other than react.
I've never heard of Nqyr-Korath. Gonna have to track that story down. I haven't read near enough Walter C. DeBill yet.
You once said Azathoth is more powerful than Rovagug. But if Yog-Sothoth and Nyarlathotep are more powerful than Azathoth, does that mean they are much more powerful than those most powerful deities like Pharasma and Rovagug?
Are there any modern mythos writers you recommend?
|
Creative Director
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Are there any modern mythos writers you recommend?
The ones who immediately come to mind would be...
Ramsey Campbell
John Langan
Laird Barron
Junji Ito
Caitlin R. Kiernan
Nathan Ballingrud
Stephen King
Thomas Ligotti
(I'm sure I forgot plenty of them...)
|
Creative Director
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You once said Azathoth is more powerful than Rovagug. But if Yog-Sothoth and Nyarlathotep are more powerful than Azathoth, does that mean they are much more powerful than those most powerful deities like Pharasma and Rovagug?
Maybe. But maybe not. To be honest... the "who's more powerful" thing doesn't really matter, since there aren't rules for deities. Who's the most powerful depends on the story being told. And "power" is not really something you can quantify if you don't have rules, anyway.
|
Are there any modern mythos writers you recommend?The ones who immediately come to mind would be...
Ramsey Campbell
John Langan
Laird Barron
Junji Ito
Caitlin R. Kiernan
Nathan Ballingrud
Stephen King
Thomas Ligotti(I'm sure I forgot plenty of them...)
Off to Amazon...
Does it amuse, bemuse, inspire or a little bit terrify you that you are an internet influencer who can mention a list of authors and send someone off to buy their books? :)