Hello sir,
I have a very important question that the lore of the setting hinges on.
What was Aroden’s Mother’s name?
Somewhat related follow up, what is the Golarion Equivalent of the name Maria?Thank you for your time.
No idea on Aroden's mother name.
...yet?
What gods the people at the Shory Empire worshiped predominantly and the Sky Masters in particular? Any LG, LN o NG one?
Question background: I am preparing a character for a Mummy's Mask game who is a descendant of the Shory. Exploring the ruins of Kho she would have found a spirit or familiar of an old aeromancer that insists to train her and direct her to Osirion for he knows Hakotep stole many of the Aeromantic Infandibulum secrets and wants his pupil to recover them to rebuild one of the Shory flying cities. I am interested to know what god such a familiar would worship and if that divine theme would be strong enough to give it an additional twist and make a Chosen One Paladin instead of a Wizard Aeromancer out of my character.
Creative Director
|
...yet?Hello sir,
I have a very important question that the lore of the setting hinges on.
What was Aroden’s Mother’s name?
Somewhat related follow up, what is the Golarion Equivalent of the name Maria?Thank you for your time.
No idea on Aroden's mother name.
It's not very high on my to-do list to figure out. As in I've never thought of it before. Erik might have more thoughts on it, I guess, but I do not.
|
Creative Director
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Hey Mr. Jacobs,
I have a fun question about a favorite topic of the rules, grappling in 1st edition pathfinder. In a recent session, it was pointed out that the grappling rules from the CRB state that, "Humanoid creatures without two free hands attempting to grapple a foe take a –4 penalty on the combat maneuver roll." A PC(standard human) insisted that this ruling let him attempt a grapple while both his hands were not free at a -4 penalty. I'm personally at a loss on how to process such a grapple and how ridiculous it sounds. The PC argues he should be able to grapple with his feet or chest while maintaining the items held in both of his hands. I feel this ruling was made for when attempting a grapple with a single hand and not for when both hands were occupied. I've scoured my rulebooks but I've been unable to find any other mention of grappling with both hands occupied. I turn to you for advice.
1. Is the official RAW that you can grapple with no free hands?
2. How would you rule this as RAI or as GM yourself?
3. This question doesn't relate to the previous ones at all. I feel that I understand the rules as a GM but I don't always get the RP right. What would you say is the most important detail in making characters and/or settings stick out to the PCs.
1) I tend not to answer rules questions here, since my answers only tend to cause more arguments than solve them. But this one's easy. A humanoid creature with no hands free can still try to grapple, but takes the –4 penalty. You can still grapple a foe with arms or legs if your hands aren't free, but it's tougher.
2) As above, as I see no issue whatsoever with the rule.
3) Descriptions, since without describing what the PCs experience in the setting they have nothing to go on.
4) Please keep questions to one per post, since numbered lists and long questions tend to get complicated quickly if a lot of people do them.
|
Creative Director
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What gods the people at the Shory Empire worshiped predominantly and the Sky Masters in particular? Any LG, LN o NG one?
Question background: I am preparing a character for a Mummy's Mask game who is a descendant of the Shory. Exploring the ruins of Kho she would have found a spirit or familiar of an old aeromancer that insists to train her and direct her to Osirion for he knows Hakotep stole many of the Aeromantic Infandibulum secrets and wants his pupil to recover them to rebuild one of the Shory flying cities. I am interested to know what god such a familiar would worship and if that divine theme would be strong enough to give it an additional twist and make a Chosen One Paladin instead of a Wizard Aeromancer out of my character.
I don't recall off the top of my head. The upcoming Mwangi book has a lot of details on local/regional deities and faiths, but I'm not gonna spoil that book's contents before it's out.
Until then, your best bet (if you don't want to use any of the hundreds of deities we've mentioned to date in books like Inner Sea Gods or Gods and Magic) is to make some flavor up on your own if you don't want to wait for next year for this book to be out.
Since Shenshen is now in world (as of Hell's Rebels), are there other APs she could be appropriately dropped into?
|
Creative Director
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Since Shenshen is now in world (as of Hell's Rebels), are there other APs she could be appropriately dropped into?
The best nomination there is Age of Ashes, part 3.
Alternately, she could show up as an antagonist in Hell's Vengeance.
Since Shenshen is now in world (as of Hell's Rebels), are there other APs she could be appropriately dropped into?The best nomination there is Age of Ashes, part 3.
Alternately, she could show up as an antagonist in Hell's Vengeance.
So she stays pretty much in Northern Cheliax (now the free state of Ravounel).
Did she ever find her mother (the druid Izorah)?
|
Creative Director
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Since Shenshen is now in world (as of Hell's Rebels), are there other APs she could be appropriately dropped into?The best nomination there is Age of Ashes, part 3.
Alternately, she could show up as an antagonist in Hell's Vengeance.
So she stays pretty much in Northern Cheliax (now the free state of Ravounel).
Did she ever find her mother (the druid Izorah)?
She gets around, and could show up in any Adventure Path if you want, but yeah for the most part in-world she's pretty focused in the Ravounal area. Never did find mom. As an NPC at least. When I played her ages ago as a PC she did eventually find her mom.
I'm curious about the relationship, if any, between the Dominion of the Black and the alghollthus on Golarion and elswhere?
Do they ...
get along?
try to murder each other immediately upon meeting?
cooperate on some selective projects? (Is so, what sort?)?
generally ignore each other as one is more space-going and the other is all about hanging around the depths of the oceans?
Thanks
Any thoughts you'd like to share about the season finale of Lovecraft Country?
|
Creative Director
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm curious about the relationship, if any, between the Dominion of the Black and the alghollthus on Golarion and elswhere?
Do they ...
get along?
try to murder each other immediately upon meeting?
cooperate on some selective projects? (Is so, what sort?)?
generally ignore each other as one is more space-going and the other is all about hanging around the depths of the oceans?
Thanks
They don't interact much at all. Alghollthus are deep unerwater OR deep underground and undterwater for the most part, while the Dominion of the Black is in deep space. Both are focused on humanity/all of those PC type people who live on the surface, but not so much beyond that in either direction.
That said, they do not get along and do clash when they encounter each other. They have pretty different goals and treat each other pretty much the same way they treat humans/etc.
|
Creative Director
|
Any thoughts you'd like to share about the season finale of Lovecraft Country?
It was fine. The whole series was for the most part great, with the exception of the mis-step in how they handled a certain character death I won't specifically cite here to avoid spoilers; that mistake in how they handled it almost made me stop watching, and my admiration of the show never fully recovered after it. It also felt like it really rushed some of the plot points all along, so that it was kinda tough to make sense of certain character arcs and choices and plot developments. Never so rushed that it was nonsensical, at least.
But that said, the way the show usurped and inverted the problematic parts of the genre (which grow FAR beyond the fact that Lovecraft was racist) while simultaneously embracing all the parts of the genre that I love was pretty miraculous, and I hope we see more seasons even though it did seem to pretty solidly end...
Hello Mr.Jacobs
I've a question regarding Monstrous Physique II, II and IV on Pf1, please dont disintegrate me:
You could cast one of those to become a Doppelganger.
It would net you the "Mimicry" Special Quality (because the spell permit it).
the problem is that Mimicry says:
"Its caster level is equal to its racial Hit Dice"
And as a Pc, probably I won't have Racial hit dices at all.
How to count my Cl? Does it mean I can't use Mimicry even if the spell openly declare it?
Thanks for your time!
|
Creative Director
|
Hello Mr.Jacobs
I've a question regarding Monstrous Physique II, II and IV on Pf1, please dont disintegrate me:
You could cast one of those to become a Doppelganger.
It would net you the "Mimicry" Special Quality (because the spell permit it).the problem is that Mimicry says:
"Its caster level is equal to its racial Hit Dice"And as a Pc, probably I won't have Racial hit dices at all.
How to count my Cl? Does it mean I can't use Mimicry even if the spell openly declare it?
Thanks for your time!
Mimicry is intended to be a monster ability, not a player character ability, and so no, you don't get to use it to its full advantage. If you can cast monstrous physique spells, you can cast other spells to change shape and you should use that method rather than trying to backdoor a spell into doing more than it's intended to allow.
Mimicry is intended to be a monster ability, not a player character ability, and so no, you don't get to use it to its full advantage. If you can cast monstrous physique spells, you can cast other spells to change shape and you should use that method rather than trying to backdoor a spell into doing more than it's intended to allow.
Thanks for your Reply Mr.Jacobs
I was referring on the very text of monstrous physique spells:"If the form you assume has any of the following abilities, you gain the listed ability: [...] Mimicry, Sound Mimicry, [...]"
And not some cheesy methods to go beyond the scope of the spells itself.
Since the Dopplegange(monstrous humanoid) its the only monster that would give a pc this ability, and it refers to "racial hit dice" for his Caster Level, I was quite puzzled of the outcome.
Thanks again for your time and sorry to bother you with these things
|
Creative Director
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Mimicry is intended to be a monster ability, not a player character ability, and so no, you don't get to use it to its full advantage. If you can cast monstrous physique spells, you can cast other spells to change shape and you should use that method rather than trying to backdoor a spell into doing more than it's intended to allow.Thanks for your Reply Mr.Jacobs
I was referring on the very text of monstrous physique spells:"If the form you assume has any of the following abilities, you gain the listed ability: [...] Mimicry, Sound Mimicry, [...]"
And not some cheesy methods to go beyond the scope of the spells itself.
Since the Dopplegange(monstrous humanoid) its the only monster that would give a pc this ability, and it refers to "racial hit dice" for his Caster Level, I was quite puzzled of the outcome.
Thanks again for your time and sorry to bother you with these things
Back in that edition we did our best to future proof spells like this. When published, the doppelganger was the only thing that had Mimicry, but we weren't sure if that would stay that way forever as we continued to publish monsters, for example.
In any event, no worries about "bothering me" since I'm here to answer questions, after all. Even when someone asks a rules question that doesn't actually bother me, because some times I feel like the answer I can give is non-controversial and won't cause internet explosions as people try to weaponize my words against their GMs or the design team or the folks who run Org Play... but even for questions that I feel do have this potential, I simply reply with the "I don't answer rules questions here" reply. That doesn't bother me. It's still an answer to the question, after all... just not the one that the questioner was hoping for.
|
Creative Director
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Necessary preamble:
I find it easy to pull individual ideas from published sources but it's apparently impossible to convert the other story types into a playable adventure for game systems like Pathfinder or D&D.Why are existing stories (comic, novel, cartoon, movie, TV series) so hard to convert to a tabletop RPG?
Because tabletop RPGs are interactive and social in a way that a comic, novel, cartoon, movie, or TV series is not.
For a movie (etc.), you are making a decision for yourself on how you want to be entertained. You know yourself and your limits and your interests, and as such can make informed decisions about those choices of entertainment without impacting anyone else, and you are one step removed from the events of the entertainment because you're observing it from a place of safety that has no actual repercussions.
For a tabletop RPG, you aren't doing it alone, and the choices you make do have repercussions on you, since you aren't one step removed. You're inhabiting a persona, a character, that while itself is fictional, is an extension of yourself and thus a part of you. And as such, and since its interactive, events in a tabletop RPG can impact others more significantly.
As an analogy, say you're deathly afraid of spiders. As such, you would not want to watch a movie called "Attack of the Spiders" because it would be unpleasant for you. But if that movie followed the same conditions as a tabletop RPG, then you could watch a movie called "Relaxing in the Park" and another viewer could cause spiders to swarm YOU, not a person you're observing.
When you're a GM, building stories for your friends, you know their limits and interests, and in theory your friends are friends with each other and know each others limits and interests, and there's a shared bond of trust that lets that group explore stories they all wish to explore.
When you're a publisher of a tabletop RPG, you don't know who's gonna play the game you publish, and as such it's not responsible to deliberately publish adventures that build on tropes and story elements that are known to be triggering or uncomfortable or antagonistic to a significant portion of society. You can ameliorate this by including content warnings (as we do when our stories verge into more mature content), but even then, the responsibility is on the GM and the players to ensure everyone at the table is there having fun, not getting offended or being made unwelcome.
Not every GM or player is mature or kind enough to do this.
What is your opinion on the possibilities of technological/magical development in Golarion? I mean just considering how the tech of the steam engine (and how to use it to actually power things) is out in the open, according to the Steam-Powered Clockwork lore, not counting any Technic league expatriates fleeing the country with their tech, or any magical advancements, Golarion's potential for advancement is already extremely high, and just ignoring it would be a waste.
Personally, I like the idea that, if someone makes some new, OP technology, a squad of high-level Inevitables teleport in and either beat you down or bully you into giving it up, and the party takes exception by making hunting them down to Mechanus their new mission, only to find out they had good reason to ensure that machine guns or nuclear bombs or lasers weren't suddenly unleashed on a world not ready for them. BUT, if they can find some way to neutralize it, an equal and opposite counter, the Inevitables are happy to leave you alone. Like if they made armor that applies full AC vs guns and half vs energy weapons (so KAC and EAC basically) and disseminate the knowledge to all nations of the world through a spell ritual or something.
|
Creative Director
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
What is your opinion on the possibilities of technological/magical development in Golarion? I mean just considering how the tech of the steam engine (and how to use it to actually power things) is out in the open, according to the Steam-Powered Clockwork lore, not counting any Technic league expatriates fleeing the country with their tech, or any magical advancements, Golarion's potential for advancement is already extremely high, and just ignoring it would be a waste.
Personally, I like the idea that, if someone makes some new, OP technology, a squad of high-level Inevitables teleport in and either beat you down or bully you into giving it up, and the party takes exception by making hunting them down to Mechanus their new mission, only to find out they had good reason to ensure that machine guns or nuclear bombs or lasers weren't suddenly unleashed on a world not ready for them. BUT, if they can find some way to neutralize it, an equal and opposite counter, the Inevitables are happy to leave you alone. Like if they made armor that applies full AC vs guns and half vs energy weapons (so KAC and EAC basically) and disseminate the knowledge to all nations of the world through a spell ritual or something.
That's the sort of thing that's more appropriate for a long term development going forward, and tends to render current information increasingly obsolete and, in time, will change the dynamic of the game entirely. It's not really something I'm eager to explore in Golarion as a result. Especially since there's already pretty much all of the technological/magical development we need in the setting to tell all the stories we want to know already. Especially considering places like Alkenstar and Numeria.
Yeah, you make sense. I suppose that will be up to your home games. For example, in my campaign, my PCs who play a crafter wizard (flavored as a mad tinkerer) and a cleric of Brigh (same, but even more so) have teamed up to modernize their Kingdom with steam engines and magical power/appliances. Also, Nex and Geb (moreso Nex) seem like really good examples of magic advancement. And apparently Molthune has automated constructs farming the fields-- in a country not particularly renowned to have many spellcasters, no less. It's just that according to the BP rules and the prexisting lore, I feel that Golarion should have a lot of "background industries" just hanging around mass-producing common goods.
But give the Inevitables plotline a thought, 'kay? ;)
|
Creative Director
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, you make sense. I suppose that will be up to your home games. For example, in my campaign, my PCs who play a crafter wizard (flavored as a mad tinkerer) and a cleric of Brigh (same, but even more so) have teamed up to modernize their Kingdom with steam engines and magical power/appliances. Also, Nex and Geb (moreso Nex) seem like really good examples of magic advancement. And apparently Molthune has automated constructs farming the fields-- in a country not particularly renowned to have many spellcasters, no less. It's just that according to the BP rules and the prexisting lore, I feel that Golarion should have a lot of "background industries" just hanging around mass-producing common goods.
But give the Inevitables plotline a thought, 'kay? ;)
Meh. Inevitables are a D&D monster that I kinda wish we'd had the guts to completely replace with aeons, to be honest. Of ALL the outsider groups, inevitables are the only ones that have zero mythological ground to stand on; they were 100% made up for D&D, and as such, we can't do much with them beyond the game books. There's a LOT more stuff regarding constructs that we've done in Pathfinder that I'm more interested in pursuing stories about... particularly the Numerian robots and the Jitskan constructs like automatons. Or Thassilonian clockworks, for that matter.
I understand that some folks like them... but I've never personally been a big fan of them.
There will continue to be inevitables showing up in stories and adventures we do, though, but it's not likely to be a story I'm heavily involved in.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
"It's not really something I'm eager to explore in Golarion as a result. Especially since there's already pretty much all of the technological/magical development we need in the setting to tell all the stories we want to know already."
One of the problems with this mindset is that it will contribute to a sense of stagnancy in the world. I have no desire to see Golarion or the Pathfinder Chronicles become like Forgotten Realms, where the whole place is deadlocked in stasis and their version of Alkenstar got nuked by plot-bombs.
I can already see the world advancing, mostly due to the fact that cannons are becoming widespread on naval vehicles (or so I've heard), though this is probably due to the legions of Skulls and Shackles players demanding their high seas pirate fantasy have cannons.
And also, even though Numeria is basically on lockdown, I do not believe the upper echelons of the Technic League who can teleport did not escape with at least some of their tech.
Essentially, I would like to ask this question: since guns are becoming more widespread (Knight Reclaimant has a revolver, Deadlands-style, and Alkenstar lore says that gun production is stepping up) do you see armies getting slaughtered by guns Last Samurai style? In essence, do you think armor will defend against guns effectively, or are we gonna have to throw out the armor lists like we did with Ultimate Combat/ISWG gun rules?
Does Malevolence contain any sanity rules or other subsystems?
|
Creative Director
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Essentially, I would like to ask this question: since guns are becoming more widespread (Knight Reclaimant has a revolver, Deadlands-style, and Alkenstar lore says that gun production is stepping up) do you see armies getting slaughtered by guns Last Samurai style? In essence, do you think armor will defend against guns effectively, or are we gonna have to throw out the armor lists like we did with Ultimate Combat/ISWG gun rules?
I don't feel like stagnancy is an issue, considering that in-world there's only been ten years or so, and we also try to not meddle TOO much in that expectation since we want to avoid trying to force GMs into finishing every Adventure Path in 6 months (or less) of game time.
I don't see armies getting slaughtered by guns, in any event. The death of magic and its replacement by science/technology is not a storyline we're interested in investigating with Pathfinder. Instead of stories where guns destroy the established norm, you'll see us explore stories where science and magic continue to interact in the same way we have been exploring them in the game.
|
Creative Director
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Does Malevolence contain any sanity rules or other subsystems?
It does not contain a sanity system, no. That's not really appropriate for Pathfinder.
It does introduce an expansion to the research rules presented in the Gamemastery Guide that works for investigating a haunted location via dreams (and while not directly supported, could EASILY be adjusted to research via visions or seances or the like). It also includes a new version of the phantasm haunt we first started exploring in the hardcover version of Curse of the Crimson Throne, and also introduces a new condition, "haunted", to the rules. This condition is pretty much only usable in the context of the adventure, but it can absolutely be used in other adventures that feature lots of haunted stuff.
"I don't see armies getting slaughtered by guns, in any event. The death of magic and its replacement by science/technology is not a storyline we're interested in investigating with Pathfinder. Instead of stories where guns destroy the established norm, you'll see us explore stories where science and magic continue to interact in the same way we have been exploring them in the game."
Could you explain this last sentence? And could you give some examples, since I don't see much overt evidence of this in any AP.
Also, what role, exactly, do you see guns playing in the world? That is, are they a war weapon or are they relegated to militias? Because I, for one, find the image of a assault rifle toting inquisitor (since they already get free proficiency with repeating crossbows) extremely cool ;)
|
Creative Director
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
"I don't see armies getting slaughtered by guns, in any event. The death of magic and its replacement by science/technology is not a storyline we're interested in investigating with Pathfinder. Instead of stories where guns destroy the established norm, you'll see us explore stories where science and magic continue to interact in the same way we have been exploring them in the game."
Could you explain this last sentence? And could you give some examples, since I don't see much overt evidence of this in any AP.
Also, what role, exactly, do you see guns playing in the world? That is, are they a war weapon or are they relegated to militias? Because I, for one, find the image of a assault rifle toting inquisitor (since they already get free proficiency with repeating crossbows) extremely cool ;)
Guns, and particularly the high tech things from Numeria, are built and balanced as if they were weapons or magic items. You can have a magic blunderbus. A gunslinger should fit right in with a party including a wizard or a cleric.
The role guns play in the world are primarily a solution to a need for a powerful ranged option that's not magic that functions in a region like the mana wastes, but in a region where magic works, they're either equal or less efficient. From a meta-perspective, they're meant to be an uncommon or unusual way to give a character a different look. From a rules perspective, they're meant to give players a new way to interact with combat and the like. In 1st edition it was to create a series of armor penetrating options that come with a risk of misfire. We don't have rules for how they work in 2nd edition, but rest assured they'll work different as the design team works to make them occupy a less disruptive space in the rules.
The existence of a modern assault rifle type weapon would not be something we'd include outside of the Numeria brand of "high tech weapons." If even then.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
"I don't see armies getting slaughtered by guns, in any event. The death of magic and its replacement by science/technology is not a storyline we're interested in investigating with Pathfinder. Instead of stories where guns destroy the established norm, you'll see us explore stories where science and magic continue to interact in the same way we have been exploring them in the game."
Could you explain this last sentence? And could you give some examples, since I don't see much overt evidence of this in any AP.
Also, what role, exactly, do you see guns playing in the world? That is, are they a war weapon or are they relegated to militias? Because I, for one, find the image of a assault rifle toting inquisitor (since they already get free proficiency with repeating crossbows) extremely cool ;)
Guns, and particularly the high tech things from Numeria, are built and balanced as if they were weapons or magic items. You can have a magic blunderbuss. A gunslinger should fit right in with a party including a wizard or a cleric.
The role guns play in the world are primarily a solution to a need for a powerful ranged option that's not magic that functions in a region like the mana wastes, but in a region where magic works, they're either equal or less efficient. From a meta-perspective, they're meant to be an uncommon or unusual way to give a character a different look. From a rules perspective, they're meant to give players a new way to interact with combat and the like. In 1st edition it was to create a series of armor penetrating options that come with a risk of misfire. We don't have rules for how they work in 2nd edition, but rest assured they'll work different as the design team works to make them occupy a less disruptive space in the rules.
The existence of a modern assault rifle type weapon would not be something we'd include outside of the Numeria brand of "high tech weapons." If even then.
The sad part about guns from 1e Ultimate Combat/ISWG is that they were utterly horrible to use if you weren't a gunslinger and/or using the horrifically OP pistolero or musketeer archetypes. You should have seen the look on one of my player's faces when I told him all the hoops he'd have to jump through to use guns as a rogue, let alone use them effectively. He could not have been more dejected if I killed his dog. The gunslinger was essentially Pathfinder's version of the 3.0 ranger, and guns were its sonic energy dilemma.
I often claim that Paizo should just say "to hell with realism!" (like it has been doing for a while now) and give us cartridge/clip/breech-loading firearms and revolvers and not force us to fuss about with black powder, paper cartridges, 30 second loading times etc. This is even supported by the fact that pepperboxes and double-barreled muskets (both "early" firearms) were not invented until the 1830s!
Anyways, I guess any decision that keeps the game fun for everyone and does not allow people to reenact GATE or the Last Samurai works for me. I am looking forward to the changes, so that I can adapt them to my 1e campaign.
(And by the way, Billy-Bob Boomstick the assault-rifle wielding Aasimar inquisitor/gunslinger will go down in history in my game!)
|
Creative Director
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
...had more to say about guns...
Regardless of how guns worked in 1st edition, we've learned a lot about both how to present them in the rules AND how gamers will react to the presence of guns in a fantasy setting—at the time, we were super timid about pushback and perhaps erred on the side of caution in making guns kinda awful for non-gunslingers.
In any event, please limit posts to this thread to questions, and please try to keep those questions short in length. This thread isn't the right place to do back and forth discussions; sorry!
Will the last book of Abomination Vaults or the first book of Fists of the Ruby Phoenix have ideas on how to connect the two APs?
|
Creative Director
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Will the last book of Abomination Vaults or the first book of Fists of the Ruby Phoenix have ideas on how to connect the two APs?
Other than it being a logical switch since you end Abomination Vaults at the exact level needed to start Ruby Phoenix, not much, no. Thematically, they are VERY different. The only through line between the two is that the PCs are doing hero stuff. There are no plot threads or easter eggs that span the two.
RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32, 2011 Top 16
|
Yeah, you make sense. I suppose that will be up to your home games. For example, in my campaign, my PCs who play a crafter wizard (flavored as a mad tinkerer) and a cleric of Brigh (same, but even more so) have teamed up to modernize their Kingdom with steam engines and magical power/appliances. Also, Nex and Geb (moreso Nex) seem like really good examples of magic advancement. And apparently Molthune has automated constructs farming the fields-- in a country not particularly renowned to have many spellcasters, no less. It's just that according to the BP rules and the prexisting lore, I feel that Golarion should have a lot of "background industries" just hanging around mass-producing common goods.
But give the Inevitables plotline a thought, 'kay? ;)
Meh. Inevitables are a D&D monster that I kinda wish we'd had the guts to completely replace with aeons, to be honest. Of ALL the outsider groups, inevitables are the only ones that have zero mythological ground to stand on; they were 100% made up for D&D, and as such, we can't do much with them beyond the game books. There's a LOT more stuff regarding constructs that we've done in Pathfinder that I'm more interested in pursuing stories about... particularly the Numerian robots and the Jitskan constructs like automatons. Or Thassilonian clockworks, for that matter.
I understand that some folks like them... but I've never personally been a big fan of them.
There will continue to be inevitables showing up in stories and adventures we do, though, but it's not likely to be a story I'm heavily involved in.
So are you saying that you'd have preferred Modrons instead of inevitables? :)
And if Inevitables are the only outsider groups which have zero mythological basis, can you share whatever you know about the mythological basis for modrons? I wasn't aware of one, so very curious. All I can think of is platonic solids or something similar.
|
Creative Director
|
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
So are you saying that you'd have preferred Modrons instead of inevitables? :)
And if Inevitables are the only outsider groups which have zero mythological basis, can you share whatever you know about the mythological basis for modrons? I wasn't aware of one, so very curious. All I can think of is platonic solids or something similar.
I'm saying I prefer aeons. As far as I know, there is no mythological basis for modrons either, but it's a topic I never looked into because I was never in a place where I had to do so, since modrons have never been a part of the OGL/SRD.
In fact, the snarky, irreverant part of me thinks Gygax invented modrons to justify someone's habit of using spare dice to represent creatures due to a shortage of actual lead miniatures.
|
Creative Director
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Will it employ some sort of very high level hunter like in Hangman's Noose or Crucible of Chaos?
What do you think of that element in horror adventures?
I'm not sure what sort of "element" you're talking about, unless you're asking if there's a foe in the adventure whose level is so high that the PCs would have no chance to defeat that foe if they met in combat? In that case, then no, it won't include that element on screen. There's absolutely a significant part of that going on off-screen, though... while this adventure is for low-level characters, the plot can result in a VERY high level threat to the Inner Sea Region if things go bad.
I think that putting a high level foe into any adventure as an element to either spur on the PCs is risky, but can be used well. "Carrion Hill" is the best example I can think of, where the PCs essentially have to go on an adventure and accomplish its several quests in order to face the main threat. They could, in theory, face the main threat without going on those sub-quests, but they'll be "punished for skipping the adventure" if they do so when they face a foe that they can't stand a chance against.
To me, that sort of plot works SO much better than a railroad that forces the PCs to follow a linear line of adventures. It's best to avoid plots where, when all is said and done, the players are left feeling that they wasted their time over several sessions when they could have just "skipped to the end."
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What is your opinion on Medieval Stasis? I know that radically changing the status quo of the setting is not something you wan to do in a roleplaying game, but what do you think of settings that embody this trope, such as the Forgotten Realms (where the main good guy organization, the Harpers, actually enforces medieval stasis)?
I mean, realistically, any society that has figured out how to use steam power to power robot dragons or just robots in general should have figured out rifling and clip-loading firearms and advanced communications networks far sooner, let alone with the aid of magic and the aid of the literal deity of magic (Nethys, who LOVES magitek) and the literal deity of machines and innovation (Brigh).
|
Creative Director
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
What is your opinion on Medieval Stasis? I know that radically changing the status quo of the setting is not something you wan to do in a roleplaying game, but what do you think of settings that embody this trope, such as the Forgotten Realms (where the main good guy organization, the Harpers, actually enforces medieval stasis)?
I mean, realistically, any society that has figured out how to use steam power to power robot dragons or just robots in general should have figured out rifling and clip-loading firearms and advanced communications networks far sooner, let alone with the aid of magic and the aid of the literal deity of magic (Nethys, who LOVES magitek) and the literal deity of machines and innovation (Brigh).
The point of Pathfinder is to provide a fantasy setting to do adventures in, not to present a simulation of advancing technology. Sounds like you're perhaps looking for a differently themed game?
If we advanced the setting's timeline by a few centuries, maybe we'd look into something like this, but that sounds an awful lot like just writing a new campaign setting.
What is your opinion on Medieval Stasis? I know that radically changing the status quo of the setting is not something you wan to do in a roleplaying game, but what do you think of settings that embody this trope, such as the Forgotten Realms (where the main good guy organization, the Harpers, actually enforces medieval stasis)?
I mean, realistically, any society that has figured out how to use steam power to power robot dragons or just robots in general should have figured out rifling and clip-loading firearms and advanced communications networks far sooner, let alone with the aid of magic and the aid of the literal deity of magic (Nethys, who LOVES magitek) and the literal deity of machines and innovation (Brigh).
The point of Pathfinder is to provide a fantasy setting to do adventures in, not to present a simulation of advancing technology. Sounds like you're perhaps looking for a differently themed game?
If we advanced the setting's timeline by a few centuries, maybe we'd look into something like this, but that sounds an awful lot like just writing a new campaign setting.
You know what? You're right. Logically speaking (from a meta-perspective), stasis is kind of necessary for a "normal" RPG.
But it's interesting to note that Pathfinder made 1d4chan's list of settings without medieval stasis.
|
Creative Director
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You know what? You're right. Logically speaking (from a meta-perspective), stasis is kind of necessary for a "normal" RPG.
But it's interesting to note that Pathfinder made 1d4chan's list of settings without medieval stasis.
Again, this isn't a discussion thread—please post questions. I'll answer. If there's a need for further discussion that's the point to take the topic and start its own thread. Thanks.
|
Creative Director
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Bit out of the blue, or void of space perhaps, but the Gray interest me greatly. Any possibility of having alien involvement--particularly ancestries--in the new system? Not that I'm not already looking to do some manual fanon insertions anyway.
There's absolutely a possibility, but it's not a big one. Those sorts of stories are for the most part more appropriate for Starfinder, after all.
I recently read an old article about "GNS" which postulated three kinds of player of RPGs: Gamist, Narrativist, Simulationist. For gamists, it's about winning, for narrativists it's about the story, and for simulationists its about depicting the setting, and the characters' actions in the setting, as realistically as possible.
I don't think (neither did the author of the article) that these are rigid divisions, most people being a bit of at least two, and maybe all three. I tend to Simulationist/Narrativist; I think you would be primarily Narrativist, but do you think you have a secondary tendency, and if so which one?
Bonus question: Is this whole "GNS" thing a bunch of hooey? :-)
|
Creative Director
|
I recently read an old article about "GNS" which postulated three kinds of player of RPGs: Gamist, Narrativist, Simulationist. For gamists, it's about winning, for narrativists it's about the story, and for simulationists its about depicting the setting, and the characters' actions in the setting, as realistically as possible.
I don't think (neither did the author of the article) that these are rigid divisions, most people being a bit of at least two, and maybe all three. I tend to Simulationist/Narrativist; I think you would be primarily Narrativist, but do you think you have a secondary tendency, and if so which one?
Bonus question: Is this whole "GNS" thing a bunch of hooey? :-)
I'd say I'm 40% narrativist, 30% gamist, 30% simulationist. And I view that relatively even split as being important as creative director, since I'm the creative director of Pathfinder (including the rules), not just the creative director of Golarion.
Adventures are my favorite game products, after all, and you can't do a great adventure without being great at story, rules, and simulation. They're the most difficult sort of thing to do well, I think, since they require strength in all three disciplines.
I don't think it's a bunch of hooey, but I do think that it's a bit too narrow in trying to limit its definitions. There's plenty of other reasons players enjoy RPGs, including the sense of team-building, to explore their own personality, to work through personal issues, to share creativity with others, and so on.
|
Creative Director
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I recently purchased Sandpoint, Light of the Lost Coast, which may be my favourite RPG book I've ever read. I'm curious, what would you speculate is behind the complex door deep in the Pit that can only be unlocked by the clockwork songbird?
Yay; glad you enjoyed Sandpoint! As for what's behind the door in the Pit... I know what I put there in the office campaign I ran for the folks here and that took place (among other places) throughout the Pit itself, but I'm not quite yet 100% resigned to the idea that this adventure will never see the light of day... it still has a chance to see print, so I don't really want to spoil it at this point.
I intentionally left it vague in the book, as a result, both to preserve spoilers for a potential published adventure, but also to encourage GMs to get creative. What should be behind the door though should be either the goal of an entire adventure, or an entrance to a brand new location of your own design. It's a chance to personalize the Pit to your game, and to reward PCs who open the door with a custom built by their GM treasure or opportunity.
If you DO put something there, it should be something noteworthy and significant. If not an artifact that you want to play a role in your game, then at the very least a collection of treasures for your PCs that's greater than any other treasure stash they've recovered so far. It should be memorable, like finding a dragon's hoard or digging up a hidden pirate treasure that the group's been tracking for multiple sessions.