Hey, setting question! Are fae capable of being influenced by other planes the way humanoid bloodlines can be? In the way a dwarf could have celestial blood or an orc be an aasimar, could a satyr, for example, become abyssaly tainted in such a way as to change their makeup?
Mainly asking because of a campaign I'm running. Wasn't sure if Baphomet-tainted satyr would be possible in-lore or if I should perhaps create a new goat-man demon.
Creative Director
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
To clarify on a point you raised on duplicating tech with magic, I though you said that it would be extremely difficult to replicate tech with magic, to the point where making a battery needs wish. Yet in this post you state that 'you can build the exact same thing as an iPhone with magic."
Could you please clarify your feelings on this point?
My comment was mostly aimed at the fact that the more you blur the lines between technology and magic, the less they become distinctive things and you end up with only one thing: magitech (or whatever you want to call it). That's fine if you want that in your game, but in Golarion it's valuable to have separate lines.
Think of it as the item version of why we generally don't give healing spells to arcane spellcasters, I suppose.
It helps us keep categories separate.
|
Creative Director
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
For instance, how would you quantify the "level" of the first Ford Motorcars plant? What is the "item level" of a Ford Model T? If it is above level 1, how did you find that many 3rd level/5th level workers to make it?
I wouldn't try. If I were making an RPG about Ford's foundation and the creation of the Model T, I'd start from scratch and build rules that would support that sort of more realistic approach. I wouldn't use Pathfinder.
Trying to quantify EVERYTHING in the game as real world, or trying to quantify EVERYTHING in the real world in game mechanics, can be a fun thought exercise, but it's not the best way to make fun fantasy games where elves fight demons.
|
Creative Director
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Let me see if I can phrase this well enough to be understood...
I feel like there's a continuum of how you could interpret the relationship between RPG rules and the world/setting of the RPG, with one end of it being "the RPG rules define the 'laws of physics' of the world' and the other end of it being "the RPG rules only really apply to how the players interact with the world, while the world itself works more on narrative fiat". Where on this spectrum do you see yourself?
I've always felt that the rules should exist to support the narrative and the world. I enjoy designing rules content, but I always approach it from the world/story first.
I'd put myself very far near the end of the spectrum on "the RPG rules only really apply to how the players interact with the world, while the world itself works more on narrative fiat."
You don't need a SINGLE RULE in order to build part of the game that doesn't directly interact with the PC. Otherwise, no one who writes fiction would ever have been able to write at all.
|
Creative Director
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Does that mean you don't see how the structure of the rules can communicate aspects of the World?
For example, that 3d6 for common people stats, shows how most people in the world have a particular range of stats and how common finding people with certain stats are.
It doesn't mean that at all. It does mean that a game ceases to be a fun game if the rules get so dense and complex by trying to do everything. You design a game as much (if not more) by what you DON'T quantify as a rule as you do by setting up the rules themselves.
There should be enough rules to tell the story, not so many rules that the rules themselves become the story.
If you build an RPG, there will be rules and not-rules. Preferring flavor over rules doesn't mean you hate the thing you don't prefer.
I was recently reading my old copy of the Inner Sea World Guide when I read this tidbit:
The widespread use of magic in the world has
stunted the advance of technology more than any other
factor, relegating those who seek to find new ways of doing
things to the role of crackpot and eccentric more often than
not. Technological advances in the Inner Sea, as a result, tend
to be limited to areas where magic isn’t as common (such
as the volatile Mana Wastes), stem from eras and nations
that for various reasons learned to fear magic, or hail from
areas where strange advanced intrusions from unknown
technological realms have made their presence known
This printed material seems to be direct contrast to your earlier statements that magic doesn't stunt technology or societal advancement. And seeing a the Lost Omens guide has no such technology/daily life chapter, it remains the most "up-to-date" material we have on Golarion's tech.
What are your opinions on this?
|
Creative Director
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I was recently reading my old copy of the Inner Sea World Guide when I read this tidbit:
The widespread use of magic in the world has
stunted the advance of technology more than any other
factor, relegating those who seek to find new ways of doing
things to the role of crackpot and eccentric more often than
not. Technological advances in the Inner Sea, as a result, tend
to be limited to areas where magic isn’t as common (such
as the volatile Mana Wastes), stem from eras and nations
that for various reasons learned to fear magic, or hail from
areas where strange advanced intrusions from unknown
technological realms have made their presence knownThis printed material seems to be direct contrast to your earlier statements that magic doesn't stunt technology or societal advancement. And seeing a the Lost Omens guide has no such technology/daily life chapter, it remains the most "up-to-date" material we have on Golarion's tech.
What are your opinions on this?
Those words from the Inner Sea World Guide remain accurate.
I see no conflict between how I've answered your questions and that quote from Inner Sea World Guide.
Golarion is a world where magic is dominant. Technology is not because magic does for that world what technology does for u s in this world. Therefore, magic has "stunted" the growth of technology.
Keep in mind that the high tech from Numeria isn't from Golarion.
|
Creative Director
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If I want to share a concept with you, I use a language, a system of rules and symbols to convey meaning.
Now, a rpg requires a much greater amount of info to be shared than a simple story, especially for logical thinkers rather than emotional thinkers. For example, if we write a story about Wanda the wizard, we don't need to tell the audience all her spells, rather, we only need to share the oned she uses.
However, in a rpg, it is up to the players to choose which spell to take, and thus they need to know not only what options are available, but also to understand the practical effects, especially when trying to be creative and needing to know how a spell will interact when not used normally.
All this extra information needs to be conveyed.
Some of that extra information is conveyed indirectly by establishing rules in such a way that they naturally imply things about the world beyond the obvious impact of the rule. I.e. noting that normal people have 3d6 for ability scores doesn't *only* tell you what to roll if you stat up a single npc, but it *also* tells you what to expect of normal people in general as a whole. For example, if there is a stone door and a whole village of people claim to have attempted to push the door open and failed, yet the door has no magic and also a DC requiring a strength of 8, then we can know they are lying because nearly everyone will be strong enough to open the door, a fact *indirectly* conveyed by the rules.
So do you accept the rules conveying indirect information like this?
Of course I do. I still prefer story to rules.
|
Creative Director
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
How do you determine what indirect information is being conveyed? How do you avoid ascribing something that the author didn't intend?
I can't. I know only what I'm trying to convey, and if a reader interprets that in a different way, I try to learn from that and apply it going forward.
|
Creative Director
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Hey! I have a question that's fitting for every game with a level up system. How do you explain level up in your game and how do you explain it in Pathfinder/Golarion? Of course the simplest and most obvious answer is that leveling up is just an abstraction of the experience you get fighting monsters, raiding dungeons and so on. That's fine, I mean, it's what most people do and what I also do. Lately though I've been thinking. Aside from metagame-y explanations about the difference between characters and NPCs, why are there NPC adventurers that never really level up or that level up really slowly? I think it's enough for most NPCs to just say that they don't go on adventures, they don't fight people/monsters, they don't delve into ancient ruins etc., so they obviously level up at a slower pace in life. But what about those that do this kind of stuff? The PCs, in comparison, level up really really quickly. APs generally take place in the course of in-game months and PCs level up from level 1 to almost 20 in that short time. Personally,as a PC I usually rationalise it thinking that I'm special and destined. But it's getting boring to give the same explanation every time. The whole point of this question is not to challenge the system though, I really want to hear from you how you explain it or would explain it if you had to, in-game, that is. Or to think together about different explanations, or to talk a bit about suspension of disbelief and so on. Because I find really hard to completely resort to suspension of disbelief for this. Thanks for your time! Have a wonderful day :)
I explain it as the PCs getting more experienced, more knowledgeable, and more powerful, in a way that's fun to track and that quantifies to the players a metric by which they can anticipate when the rewards for play will happen.
NPCs don't need this mechanic because they're not played, and therefore there's no player to anticipate their gain in power. A GM can just create whatever NPC they need for any encounter, including making previously established NPCs more powerful.
If you have an NPC adventurer in the party, adventuring alongside the PCs, then you as the GM just level that NPC up when it's needed for them to keep up with your need for them.
I don't mind at all if PCs level up quickly. That's fun. It's not fun to play the game for many sessions and never feel like you're progressing in your character's story.
In game, it's because the PCs are the ones who are taking up the task to do the job. The "destiny" or "fate" or "prophecy" angle doesn't work for me, and to be honest I never really worried about why I'm leveling up faster than the rest of the characters in the world when I'm playing the game. Be it a tabletop RPG, a computer RPG, or whatever.
In the end, it's still a game, so a metagame explanation is 100% okay. If someone were really that uncomfortable with the game parts of things, then I'd think they'd be more interested in writing or telling a story, perhaps a collaborative one with friends that's nothing different than the old-time practice of sitting around a campfire and spinning tales.
To me, that's fun, but it's MORE fun when there are stats and numbers and things to track your progress.
I feel like most players and GMs have a bit of a sweet spot in terms of campaign level where they're the most comfortable with the characters and enemies and everything--some love only low levels for the ease of endangering PCs, others like high levels for the bigger monsters/spells/heroes...
Do you have a favorite few levels for the players to be at when you are running a campaign? How about as a player? And has that changed much with the edition shift?
I was recently reading my old copy of the Inner Sea World Guide when I read this tidbit:
The widespread use of magic in the world has
stunted the advance of technology more than any other
factor, relegating those who seek to find new ways of doing
things to the role of crackpot and eccentric more often than
not. Technological advances in the Inner Sea, as a result, tend
to be limited to areas where magic isn’t as common (such
as the volatile Mana Wastes), stem from eras and nations
that for various reasons learned to fear magic, or hail from
areas where strange advanced intrusions from unknown
technological realms have made their presence knownThis printed material seems to be direct contrast to your earlier statements that magic doesn't stunt technology or societal advancement. And seeing a the Lost Omens guide has no such technology/daily life chapter, it remains the most "up-to-date" material we have on Golarion's tech.
What are your opinions on this?
Those words from the Inner Sea World Guide remain accurate.
I see no conflict between how I've answered your questions and that quote from Inner Sea World Guide.
Golarion is a world where magic is dominant. Technology is not because magic does for that world what technology does for u s in this world. Therefore, magic has "stunted" the growth of technology.
Keep in mind that the high tech from Numeria isn't from Golarion.
But didn't you say in an earlier post that magic IS NOT antithetical to a society's advancement?
And if magic is so stunting, why does SF exist? For that matter, why do any of the "mad scientist"-type advanced scientific equipment exist? If magic is so widespread as to actively stunt tech, why doesn't every house in every town in Golarion lit by continual flames by now? By sheer force of attrition, even if the local caster casts it once every month, every house should be lit in such a way by now, not to mention that an item w/continual flame on it is available in every thorpe essentially.
If magic stunts tech, it is either widespread enough we should have Eberron plus, and if it is not, then tech should naturally flourish.
|
Creative Director
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I feel like most players and GMs have a bit of a sweet spot in terms of campaign level where they're the most comfortable with the characters and enemies and everything--some love only low levels for the ease of endangering PCs, others like high levels for the bigger monsters/spells/heroes...
Do you have a favorite few levels for the players to be at when you are running a campaign? How about as a player? And has that changed much with the edition shift?
My preference is the whole thing. Starting at 1st level and organically going all the way up to 20th. I'm pretty comfortable running enemies at any of those levels, as well as playing characters at any of those levels.
But the first few levels are the most important for building your initial character's personality and the way they interact with the other PCs. You can come up with a novel for your character's backstory, but what happens in the first few sessions of a new campaign will do so much more to determine your PC's personality. I think that element might be my favorite overall, but only because it is so important to set up PC/party dynamics for the remainder of an entire campaign.
Hasn't changed much with edition shifts.
|
Creative Director
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
But didn't you say in an earlier post that magic IS NOT antithetical to a society's advancement?
And if magic is so stunting, why does SF exist? For that matter, why do any of the "mad scientist"-type advanced scientific equipment exist? If magic is so widespread as to actively stunt tech, why doesn't every house in every town in Golarion lit by continual flames by now? By sheer force of attrition, even if the local caster casts it once every month, every house should be lit in such a way by now, not to mention that an item w/continual flame on it is available in every thorpe essentially.
If magic stunts tech, it is either widespread enough we should have Eberron plus, and if it is not, then tech should naturally flourish.
Magic is not antithetical to a society's advancement. Magic making technology less important is not the same as that.
Sci-fi exists because not every story has magic in it, and because different writers prefer different stories. The existence of magic in fiction doesn't mean other elements in fiction can't exist. Just as in real life, diversity is VERY important for fiction and for genres. Some people like combining those genres. I very much do. Star Wars is proof that the mixing of what is essentially magic and science isn't an unusual preference... it's a combination that is VERY popular. That doesn't mean it's the best, nor that if you prefer a setting with no magic or no sci-fi that you're wrong. We're all different.
For Golarion, we try to make a diverse setting with a lot of different genres, so each group can find something in the world that they enjoy.
Saying that magic stunts text is NOT the same as saying settings like Eberron can't exist. Stunt does not mean cancel, first of all. Second of all, not everything I say is something that every content creator agress with. I had very little to do with building Eberron, beyond editing a few adventures in Dungeon Magazine, in any event. It's not a setting I'm particularly fond of, but that doesn't mean it's a bad setting or that people who like it are wrong. I love the fact that there are more settings for RPGs than I like, because RPGs are for everyone, not just one person.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
But didn't you say in an earlier post that magic IS NOT antithetical to a society's advancement?
And if magic is so stunting, why does SF exist? For that matter, why do any of the "mad scientist"-type advanced scientific equipment exist? If magic is so widespread as to actively stunt tech, why doesn't every house in every town in Golarion lit by continual flames by now? By sheer force of attrition, even if the local caster casts it once every month, every house should be lit in such a way by now, not to mention that an item w/continual flame on it is available in every thorpe essentially.
If magic stunts tech, it is either widespread enough we should have Eberron plus, and if it is not, then tech should naturally flourish.
Magic is not antithetical to a society's advancement. Magic making technology less important is not the same as that.
Sci-fi exists because not every story has magic in it, and because different writers prefer different stories. The existence of magic in fiction doesn't mean other elements in fiction can't exist. Just as in real life, diversity is VERY important for fiction and for genres. Some people like combining those genres. I very much do. Star Wars is proof that the mixing of what is essentially magic and science isn't an unusual preference... it's a combination that is VERY popular. That doesn't mean it's the best, nor that if you prefer a setting with no magic or no sci-fi that you're wrong. We're all different.
For Golarion, we try to make a diverse setting with a lot of different genres, so each group can find something in the world that they enjoy.
Saying that magic stunts text is NOT the same as saying settings like Eberron can't exist. Stunt does not mean cancel, first of all. Second of all, not everything I say is something that every content creator agress with. I had very little to do with building Eberron, beyond editing a few adventures in Dungeon Magazine, in any event. It's not a setting I'm particularly fond of, but that...
But isn't the fundamental difference between magic and tech that magic is hard to "industrialize" since it works on esoteric principles and is also mostly restricted to casters, while science and tech being that anybody with minimal instruction can use and learn them? Thus, in this way, wouldn't magic inherently stunt societal advancement?
|
Creative Director
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
But isn't the fundamental difference between magic and tech that magic is hard to "industrialize" since it works on esoteric principles and is also mostly restricted to casters, while science and tech being that anybody with minimal instruction can use and learn them? Thus, in this way, wouldn't magic inherently stunt societal advancement?
That depends 100% on the story you want to tell. Magic isn't real, so writers get to make the decisions about how it works in their stories as they wish.
It feels like this specific question/answer thing has been going in circles for days, and it seems apparent to me that I'm not capable of providing you the answer you're looking for, so I'm sorry. But let's move on to different topics.
Phantasm's Tall Man with his whole bag of interdimensional tricks of twisted science chases you into the Labyrinth of Leviathan.
Choose your fate!
The Tall Man's clutches, or Fun and Games with the Cenobites?
|
Creative Director
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Would someone’s true name be different from they’re given name in life or would it be exactly that. Do mortals get true names would it be different from planar true names?
P.S. how is your day going I hope well :)
Yup; a true name is different from your given name. Everything in theory has a true name, but most never learn it.
I know you don't like science fiction much, but do you have a favorite science fiction author?
|
Creative Director
|
I know you don't like science fiction much, but do you have a favorite science fiction author?
I do quite like science fiction, a lot. Just not as much as horror. If horror is at a 10 out of 10 for me, then science fiction is at about an 8 out of ten.
My favorite is Dan Simmons though.
I do quite like science fiction, a lot. Just not as much as horror. If horror is at a 10 out of 10 for me, then science fiction is at about an 8 out of ten.
My favorite is Dan Simmons though.
Have you read Song of Kali or Carrion Comfort? (Those are the only two of his I've read). Along those lines, what's your favorite Dan Simmons story?
|
Creative Director
|
Have you read Song of Kali or Carrion Comfort? (Those are the only two of his I've read). Along those lines, what's your favorite Dan Simmons story?I do quite like science fiction, a lot. Just not as much as horror. If horror is at a 10 out of 10 for me, then science fiction is at about an 8 out of ten.
My favorite is Dan Simmons though.
LOVED Song of Kali. I've tried to read Carrion Comfort twice, but couldn't get into it... not sure why.
My favorite Dan Simmons story is probably a tie between "Hyperion" and "The Terror."
|
Is "Urobian" a category name for aphorites/duskwalkers/ganzi or new seperate planar scion?Where's "Urobian" from again?
Not the original poster, and I know it's not a question (sorry :P ), but I know the answer:
In the PF2 Bestiary, in the Planar Scion section, there's this sidebar:As many types of planar scions exist as planes of existence, and even then there are significant differences between scions depending on the exact nature of their extraplanar forebears. Angelic scions are known as aasimars, fiendish scions are called tieflings, and monitor scions are urobians.
And I'm curious about them too. :O
|
Creative Director
|
Is "Urobian" a category name for aphorites/duskwalkers/ganzi or new seperate planar scion?Where's "Urobian" from again?Not the original poster, and I know it's not a question (sorry :P ), but I know the answer:
In the PF2 Bestiary, in the Planar Scion section, there's this sidebar:
As many types of planar scions exist as planes of existence, and even then there are significant differences between scions depending on the exact nature of their extraplanar forebears. Angelic scions are known as aasimars, fiendish scions are called tieflings, and monitor scions are urobians.And I'm curious about them too. :O
Ah; right! I knew I recognized the word but couldn't remember from where. I'll reply again to the original question in the next post. Thanks!
|
Creative Director
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Is "Urobian" a category name for aphorites/duskwalkers/ganzi or new seperate planar scion?
Urobian is the generalized term for monitor planar scions, in the same way aasimar is the generalized term for celestial planar scions and tiefling is the generalized term for fiendish planar scions.
Currently, we only have the three urobians in the game (aphorites, duskwalkers, and ganzi), but as we introduce new monitors we'll potentially introduce more urobians.
The word "urobian" was invented specifically for this purpose in the 2nd edition Bestiary, in any event.
If you don't mind saying, What printer did Paizo go with for the Pathfinder Pawns? They're exactly what I'm looking for a tabletop RPG I'm working on.
If you don't mind saying, What printer did Paizo go with for the Pathfinder Pawns? They're exactly what I'm looking for a tabletop RPG I'm working on.I don't know off the top of my head. I don't really interface with that part of the business.
That's fair. Thanks for replying anyway!
|
Creative Director
|
Are Imp Consulars still a thing in 2e?
I noticed some of their powers were transferred to the base Imp.
They are, but they're very rare and not something that we had room to cover in the Bestiary. I don't expect any of them to show up anytime soon unless they pop in as a creature in an adventure.
|
Creative Director
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Can kobolds of some kind be found in Apsu's realm, The Immortal Ambulatory? and what are Apsu's petitioners like?
Making an Aasimar Kobold for 2e and got me thinking about such things. Plus just one of my favorite deities that I constantly want to know more about.
No kobolds in the Immortal Ambulatory. We haven't said much specifically about Apsu's petitioners, but as with all petitioners their stats are pretty much as laid out on page 198 of Bestiary 2; they likely look like Medium metallic dragons.
You don't need there to be kobolds in the Immortal Ambulatory to have a kobold aasimar at all. Aasimars and the like can arise from SO many possibilities, and each one is different and unique in their own way. Most kobolds are lawful evil, of course, so one that's an aasimar gives you a great way to explain why your kobold isn't a greedy, cruel, trap-setting cave monster! ;-)
|
Creative Director
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Actually his question makes me think, I'm running a Strange Aeons game.
What happens to souls pledged to Great Old Ones and Outer Gods?
Unrevealed.
The Great Old Ones and Outer Gods don't care about their worshipers. They don't have petitioners in their realms (most of these divinities live on the Material Plane). What actually happens to the souls of those who worship them isn't something we've said much about, and for now I'm fine with keeping it a mystery.
Not everything needs an explanation, and keeping this mysterious helps to keep the strangeness about the Great Old Ones and Outer Gods.
Hi James!
What would a post office/letter delivery system look like on much of Golarion, particularly around the Inner Sea region? I imagine there's probably a fairly strong post-office-likesystem in and around the actual Inner Sea, but what sort of entity would you contact to get a letter from, say, Brevoy to Varisia? Would there be courier networks, would there be particular religions dedicated to such deliveries, would you reach out to the Pathfinders for a (theoretically) easy job?
Thanks!
|
So regarding Vordakai from Kingmaker and his backstory... Do you think any of other original Vordakai's apprentices survived to become undead? :D
|
Creative Director
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Hi James!
What would a post office/letter delivery system look like on much of Golarion, particularly around the Inner Sea region? I imagine there's probably a fairly strong post-office-likesystem in and around the actual Inner Sea, but what sort of entity would you contact to get a letter from, say, Brevoy to Varisia? Would there be courier networks, would there be particular religions dedicated to such deliveries, would you reach out to the Pathfinders for a (theoretically) easy job?
Thanks!
They're already there, but they're not centralized. Lots of different individual courier and delivery services, ranging from individuals to companies.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Is it the norm for half-orcs to be discriminated against wherever they go? Like, if you stopped at a small town or village, could you expect an angry mob or just a slightly cooler reception, or for there to be no difference at all? What about half-elves? I ask this mostly because the half-orc and half-elf entries still kind of retain a tone of possible discriminations vs the character that I feel is kind of outdated after decades worth of having these guys as PC races.
|
Creative Director
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Is it the norm for half-orcs to be discriminated against wherever they go? Like, if you stopped at a small town or village, could you expect an angry mob or just a slightly cooler reception, or for there to be no difference at all? What about half-elves? I ask this mostly because the half-orc and half-elf entries still kind of retain a tone of possible discriminations vs the character that I feel is kind of outdated after decades worth of having these guys as PC races.
Who discriminates and is discriminated against varies from region to region. There's no one "this ancestry is always discriminated against everywhere" blanket over Golarion.
There's a gross long history of half-orcs in particular being auto-discriminated against in RPGs, older Paizo products included, and we're trying to shed that entirely. But now and then it keeps popping up, alas.
Hi James! Hope the holidays have been treating you and yours well.
I am running RotR **spoilers ahead** (have been for 3 years now, very RP heavy and slow) and I have a Varisian dancer magus PC who I made a part of Iesha's caravan.
The stuff at Misgivings has past, and a part of the PCs story is that she had to deliver the news about Iesha. Already there are Varisians congregating in the town for Mvashti, who I have played up as sick.
As such, there are going to be some somber moments for the Varisians and my PCs as they attend funerals.
I've read a lot about Varisians, but couldn't find anything solid on how they do funerary rites. I know they are oft buried along the roads they passed upon. I also figure that with how colorful and vibrant the people are, as well as referring to other holidays, that the afair may be more a celebration of life than a somber gathering.
What do you think of how Varisians do funerals? And, bonus one, how important would a body be? The PCs never encountered Iesha, and I'm wondering if I should have the bereaved parents request the PC go back and attempt to find her, though they would know she may be in a ghoulish state.
Sorry this got long! For future questions, was this too much, or just right length wise? I don't want to bog you down much
|
Creative Director
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What do you think of how Varisians do funerals? And, bonus one, how important would a body be? The PCs never encountered Iesha, and I'm wondering if I should have the bereaved parents request the PC go back and attempt to find her, though they would know she may be in a ghoulish state.
Sorry this got long! For future questions, was this too much, or just right length wise? I don't want to bog you down much
Varisian funerals are in large part informed by the religion of the deceased and their family, as well as their region. Those in Varisia have strong traditions though, and the mainstay of that is that their funerals involve making sure that the deceased is buried in an area that's not too far from a road or well-known travel route. Many Varisians believe that dead people who don't get buried near a road, particularly if they were lost when they died, come back as undead known as trailgaunts. Further, the empyreal lord Ashava is the patron of many Varisians, and part of her theme is that she guides these lost souls from being lost.
So yeah, the bereaved parents in this case would absolutely want their daughter's body, no longer undead, returned to them.
And yeah, it was a bit wordy. The character backstory is interesting, but not super relevant to answering the question. The portion of your question that I cut from the quote doesn't really affect the question or answer itself. (The reason I prefer shorter questions is that when you quote a post, the site truncates it if it's too long, which almost always means that the actual question gets cut off and I have to manually re-insert it or scroll up through pages or have multiple windows open to reference the question at the time, which is a minor inconvenience when doing one question, but when I'm doing a dozen or so at once it an get very frustrating...).