>>Ask *James Jacobs* ALL your Questions Here!<<


Off-Topic Discussions

26,701 to 26,750 of 83,732 << first < prev | 530 | 531 | 532 | 533 | 534 | 535 | 536 | 537 | 538 | 539 | 540 | next > last >>

Hello again, oh dread reptile of elf-fancying and wordery! Just wanted to present you with a funny Jade Regent scenario our group got into last night and ask for your take on some questions it brought up...

The party is now is the Forest of Spirits, just a day or two into the area. Since mid-book 3, we've had a quasit bound to our service using the

:
blood geas cast by that magic tetsubo in book 2
because he was harmless and we could use the intel and extra scouting capability he might provide. Honestly, we've kind of forgotten about him at most times except when we get into town and force him to change shape into an animal that doesn't talk so he's not given away. Anyways, he's complaining about being bored a lot and so my cleric of Sarenrae offered to slap him back to the Abyss with a Dispel Evil on the condition (via the effect above) that he never accept any evolution into a higher form of demon. This triggered what was, quite honestly, the most hotly involved debate our group has had in months, as everyone but the slightly-crazy rogue knows he's a little monster and wouldn't care about killing him but we're also evenly divided on whether this is just an excessively mean thing to do to the plane-transmogrified soul of a vicious psychopath (btw, our party is all NG/CG). So, questions:
1) Could I cast Dispel Evil on this little twerp without also getting rid of the binding effect I listed, if I worded or cast it correctly?
2) If the answer to number 1 is yes, does the fact that I sent him back to the Abyss do anything that might compromise the effectiveness of said constraint? For example, might he simply evolve without actually trying to for some reason?
3) The quasit might actually be fond of the party's rogue (i know, it's a vicous, psycho liar, but the rogue's also crazy, so whatever). It even said it planned to evolve into a succubus for him one day which excited the rogue (again, this guy is crazy). Can demons actually evolve if they do enough (probably evil) stuff while on the Prime, or is a trip back home to the Abyss necessary?
4) As a cleric of Sarenrae, am I already in hot water by tolerating the existence of a magically bound and harmless demon in our midst? Please note, though I found it hilarious as a player, my character was against the idea in person and simply overruled by popular vote.
5) The rogue is actually taking sorcerer levels to qualify for arcane trickster. Is it possible to eventually take an already-existing creature like this as an Improved Familiar if he takes the proper feats and such?
6) If taking the quasit as a familiar isn't an option and he's taken by the rogue as a cohort instead via the Leadership feat, what class levels would you think are best/funniest to add to the quasit's stat block?
7) Our GM named the quasit Quigley and most of the non-essential NPCs in our caravan (drivers, cooks & such) are named after the Muppets. Based on what you know about us so far, how crazy is our group on a scale of 1 to 10?


Cerberus Seven wrote:
7) Our GM named the quasit Quigley and most of the non-essential NPCs in our caravan (drivers, cooks & such) are named after the Muppets. Based on what you know about us so far, how crazy is our group on a scale of 1 to 10?

Cerberus, You've given James a 10th of one percent of what our group is like. If you really want a good accounting you need to tell some better stories.

Spoilered for space issues:

The Weirdness:
We once killed a demon with 400 forks. Someone in the group once looted an entire mansion, meaning they took the floorboards, the walls, the doors, the doorknobs, the sinks, the plumbing, etc... We were in a pitched space battle and one of the party members turned everyone into squirrels. Most of the adventures nowadays usually contain a very adult XXX theme somewhere in them. A Gnome Queen in our Kingmaker game rode an awakened Mammoth named "Snuffles" into battle. The DM gave a new player an expanded Rod of Wonder and the player used it multiple times each session, even after fireballing himself in the face and almost dying on the spot. A NPC asked us to stop the tigers that killed her parents and then jumped in the way when we were ready to shoot them with a laser cannon to save them; We shot anyway. We stack dice on the heads of sleeping players. We kept one campaign universe going from 1996 to 2010. We once needed names for crew members on a spelljamming vessel and ended up with a crew of Sailor scouts and other anime characters. we didn't know a new guy's name for 6 months and called him by his character name in public; He didn't correct us (Granted his character was named Bob).

The Saneness:
When one player went to college and tried to find a group, he did not stay with the group who had a girl who introduced herself as Arwen and claimed to be Arwen from the lord of the rings and played a character named Arwen. The core of the group has somehow remained friends for close to 20 years. We have kept the Sunday slot for gaming for that same amount of time. We all have decent jobs and aren't crazy.

That'll probably help James decide if we're loonies. :P

EDIT: James, are we loonies or just typical gamers?

~Tundra

Paizo Employee Creative Director

Swashbucklersdc wrote:

James,

Hope your holidays went well!
Is there any plans on doing a druid archetype, more on the lines of like the urban druid, that gives up Wild Shape for the ability to change into more humanoid (monstrous humanoid, giant, etc) forms using A Thousand Faces type line?

Not that I know of. There's not a lot of archetypes in the works right now, in fact, aside from what'll be showing up now and then in the Player Companion line.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Lucent wrote:

James,

1) If the aboleth are an agnostic species (they acknowledge the gods, but refute them), and the Azlanti were their slaves/servants, why were the Azlanti allowed to worship gods? Would their culture not have been shaped to see such perceptions as foolish or improper?

2) If religion was not an Aboleth design for the Azlanti, why was it not snuffed out sooner?

3) Is there any possibility that the Aboleth destroyed Azlant because they foresaw the ascension of an Azlant-born deity? (and how silly did they feel when they inadvertently brought about his ascension?)

4) Do Aboleth possess genetic memory (which is a great idea, to your credit) as was described in Lords of Madness ?

5) Will we be seeing more types of Aboleth now that the Veiled Master is out of the bag?

6) Aboleth adventure path please! (You could even theme the chapter titles after Lovecraft works, like The Shadow out of Azlant) :D

1) The aboleths didn't really control humanity's fate and all that to that extent; they were behind-the-scenes manipulators but not dictators or overlords. They didn't anticipate the advent of faith, and didn't really regard it as a major source of trouble.

2) Because they didn't think it was worth the effort to snuff out.

3) Nope; they destroyed Azlant because they got tired of humanity's arrogance and willfullness and faith and free-will and all that. They did not even consider the fact that pulling down asteroids from space to pelt Golarion might bring down something even remotely like the Starstone.

4) Probably not.

5) Perhaps.

6) An aboleth adventure path has been one of the ones I've known we'll eventually do from the start of Golarion, similar to Jade Regent or Reign of Winter. We'll get to an aboleth one some day.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

Damon Griffin wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
smashthedean wrote:


4) After the mythic rules, what are the chances of seeing some sort of "Mythic Golarion" campaign book that expands on some of the mythic personalities in the world and opportunities for mythic adventures?

4) There will be PLENTY of Mythic books for Golarion.

Hmmm. I'm still on the fence about the whole Mythic thing (at least as of the playtest) and was considering suspending the appropriate subscription line just long enough to skip it (thanks, Customer Service, for making that option possible, BTW) but given the above statement I worry that this may cause me problems.

The upcoming "...Righteous" AP I'm not too worried about; I plan to continue my AP sub uninterrupted even if I don't play most of them. But if future rulebooks/companions/etc. are going to start incorporating Mythic rules, then

(1) to what extent will those elements be presented as optional/sidebar?, and;

(2) will books incorporating Mythic rules be clearly identified as such?

1) In Wrath of the Righteous, the mythic rules will not be presented as optional at all. They are going to be a fundamental part of the campaign. If you want to play Wrath of the Righteous without Mythic, you'll probably need to have your player characters progress on the fast XP track and you'll probably still need to add in a few significant side adventures here and there to keep their XP flowing. And there'll be lots of mythic foes in the game for PCs to fight that, if you don't want to use them, you'll need to replace with non-mythic foes.

2) As much as current books indicate when they're incorporating content from any of our books. We're very much looking at supporting Mythic Adventures at least as much as we support Ultimate Combat, for example. AKA: Not all the time, but now and then. More if folks really like it. Less if folks are less into the rules. Time will tell.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

Memento Mortis wrote:

Are you a miniatures person? That is to say, is the acquiring and painting of miniatures a part of the hobby that appeals to you?

What are your favorite miniatures? Least favorite?

I own a lot of miniatuers, but I barely have the time to paint them. Very few of my minis are painted, but I wish I did have more time to paint. Other hobbies, such as video games or movies or writing or whatever, often end up taking up the time I'd otherwise use to paint minis. I don't have a favorite/least favorite miniature.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

AbsolutGrndZer0 wrote:


Ewww... yeah MMOs are the one remaining place where Macs still have that "software" issue... Um I forget the name, but do you have one of those Windows emulators? If you don't, you might look into it. Secret World is quite worth it.

To get an idea of the kind of stuff that goes on in the game itself you can play this web-based game based on the end of the world and preparing to survive it (and if you ever do end up playing the actual game, completing this web-game will get you cool swag in the actual MMO, just save the CD-keys you get when you complete each chapter)

www.themorninglight.org That's the website of an in game organization, which is something Secret World did... there are TONS of real world websites they created that you must in game use real-world Google to do research to solve quests.

There's several MMOs that run fine on Macs. Warcraft, for example. Or Lord of the Rings apparently runs on Macs now too.

And while it's true that you can do emulators... I've actually got PLENTY of video games right now to keep me busy between Xbox, PS3, and games that DO support macs.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

Gregg Helmberger wrote:
What's a cool place in Golarion that most players there don't know about but should?

Ummmm... players? Or do you mean characters?

Paizo Employee Creative Director

LazarX wrote:
I was reading your commentary about Desna and the Dark Tapestry. Are you familliar with Dark Energy and the Big Rip?

Yup.


Guild Wars 2 has a Mac client too, I've heard.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

AlgaeNymph wrote:

** spoiler omitted **

2. What would Sorshen do with all those imps infesting Korvosa?

3. Would Sorshen want anything like the Ministry of Truth to control Korvosa through institutionalized propaganda (monuments, books, the removal of such when against her goals, etc.)?

4. Given that it was decadent and (presumably) chaotic evil, how did Xin-Eurythnia's manage to function?

5. How much did runelords, particularly Sorshen, use genie wishes?

6. Who would Sorshen get along with better, efreet or marids?

7. I occasionally read about an NPC being charmed or dominated so long that the spell's no longer needed. About how long would that take?

8. When bardic performance requires an audible component, could that be as simple as talking or does it require singing or a musical instrument.

9. If bards are arcane spellcasters then where do their healing spells come from? Come to think of it, where do their spells come from in general if not through study, innate power, or divine grace?

"A character who goes without sleep should become fatigued; that's what happens in real life, after all."

10. In that case, doesn't that mean that androids needn't sleep since they're immune to fatigue? Yes, they'd still need to rest to regain spells but they can stay awake and rest, can't they?

1) Chance and fate, combined with the fact that I wanted to tell the story about Illeosa finding them, not some other chump.

2) Ignore them. That's a "below her interest level" concern.

3) Maybe.

4) What "it" are you talking about here?

5) Not much. Genies are more of a Qadira/Katapesh theme.

6) Marids.

7) As long as the story needs it to take.

8) An audible component can be music from an instrument, singing, oration, comedy, or anything that makes entertaining noise.

9) Bards are arcane spellcasters; their magic does not come from a divine source, but from their own skill at manipulating ambient magic around them via artistry. The same way a wizard works, really, but rather than bring their smarts to the situation, they bring their poetry and artisitc sense and personality to do the same.

10) In that case, an android wouldn't need to sleep, but they would do so anyway since they're programmed to be like humans. And I'd also say that if you go for TOO long without sleep, you'd get exhausted.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Diego Rossi wrote:

I agree that intentionally setting up an encounter that the group can't win is bad gameplay, at the same time I don't see why people should be rewarded for purposely crippling themselves.

I don't see how a "obviously) melee character" that become "useless" if the enemy is flying can exist. Every class has the ability of using some missile weapons, carrying them don't encumber you too much and they came hand in plenty of situations.
The character will lose effectiveness and you should take that in account when designing the encounter, but he will be hardly useless unless the player has totally disregarded the idea of giving him any ranged capability.

In your experience, you have encountered players that really become useless in a ranged fight?
Do you feel that becoming less efficient is the same thing as becoming useless?

It's not rewarding someone for purposely crippling a character to not build encounters designed so that they can't win. That's adversarial GMing and that's not a good way to approach the responsibility of running a game at all. You, as the GM, are there to provide a game that's entertaining for the players. If you fall into the trap of being a confrontational or adversarial GM, your players wont have fun, and you'll find yourself without a game group.

I've seen plenty of PCs who aren't efficient in all situations all the time. As a GM, I try to vary the encounter builds so that things get mixed around, and players who come to feel that their characters have inefficiencies and are annoyed at that generally take steps to find SOMETHING to do to shore that up on their own.

Becoming less efficient is NOT the same as becoming useless. That's hyperbole.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

AinvarG wrote:

I have a paladin that is useless in a ranged fight with one exception.

He has taken the Iomedaean Sword Oath. His only ranged option (since we are up to our eyebrows in the Abyss at the moment, it's not a bad option) is Alignment Channel (Evil).

I'm not complaining. It's been a little frustrating a few times, but the flavor of the feat felt right for the character. If the GM puts us up against flying foes, that's just intelligent design on his part. And my character is very effective in melee, so ranged foes give others a chance to shine.

I do wish, having spent the feat for the Oath and restricting my options, that there was a way to improve on the benefits of the feat - work my way up to taking Greater Weapon Focus, for example. To make this a question, how would you adjudicate such a request, James?

A paladin in this situation is well-advised to drop a handful of gold on a bow and arrows or something like that. Smite works perfectly well with ranged weapons, remember!

In your case, if you're a paladin of Iomedae, I would point out that she's all about swordfighting, not archery. If you want to be an archery-focused paladin, Erastil is a better themed deity.

Dark Archive

James Jacobs wrote:
AlgaeNymph wrote:

"A character who goes without sleep should become fatigued; that's what happens in real life, after all."

10. In that case, doesn't that mean that androids needn't sleep since they're immune to fatigue? Yes, they'd still need to rest to regain spells but they can stay awake and rest, can't they?

10) In that case, an android wouldn't need to sleep, but they would do so anyway since they're programmed to be like humans. And I'd also say that if you go for TOO long without sleep, you'd get exhausted.

That, or they'd go insane and start killing all the redshirts. ;)

Silver Crusade

Before Earthfall, if Karzoug had a Clash of the Kingslayers-style WMD, which fellow Runelord would he have been most likely to send it against?

Paizo Employee Creative Director

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Cerberus Seven wrote:

...because he was harmless and we could use the intel and extra scouting capability he might provide. Honestly, we've kind of forgotten about him at most times except when we get into town and force him to change shape into an animal that doesn't talk so he's not given away. Anyways, he's complaining about being bored a lot and so my cleric of Sarenrae offered to slap him back to the Abyss with a Dispel Evil on the condition (via the effect above) that he never accept any evolution into a higher form of demon. This triggered what was, quite honestly, the most hotly involved debate our group has had in months, as everyone but the slightly-crazy rogue knows he's a little monster and wouldn't care about killing him but we're also evenly divided on whether this is just an excessively mean thing to do to the plane-transmogrified soul of a vicious psychopath (btw, our party is all NG/CG). So, questions:

1) Could I cast Dispel Evil on this little twerp without also getting rid of the binding effect I listed, if I worded or cast it correctly?
2) If the answer to number 1 is yes, does the fact that I sent him back to the Abyss do anything that might compromise the effectiveness of said constraint? For example, might he simply evolve without actually trying to for some reason?
3) The quasit might actually be fond of the party's rogue (i know, it's a vicous, psycho liar, but the rogue's also crazy, so whatever). It even said it planned to evolve into a succubus for him one day which excited the rogue (again, this guy is crazy). Can demons actually evolve if they do enough (probably evil) stuff while on the Prime, or is a trip back home to the Abyss necessary?
4) As a cleric of Sarenrae, am I already in hot water by tolerating the existence of a magically bound and harmless demon in our midst? Please note, though I found it hilarious as a player, my character was against the idea in person and simply overruled by popular vote.
5) The rogue is actually taking sorcerer levels to qualify for arcane trickster. Is it possible to eventually take an already-existing creature like this as an Improved Familiar if he takes the proper feats and such?
6) If taking the quasit as a familiar isn't an option and he's taken by the rogue as a cohort instead via the Leadership feat, what class levels would you think are best/funniest to add to the quasit's stat block?
7) Our GM named the quasit Quigley and most of the non-essential NPCs in our caravan (drivers, cooks & such) are named after the Muppets. Based on what you know about us so far, how crazy is our group on a scale of 1 to 10?

A quasit dispelled back to the Abyss without his master's soul has nothing to bargain with, and is more likely to be crushed and destroyed than anything else.

As for the specific game questions... I'm actually not all that familiar with Jade Regent's details beyond its 1st part (which I wrote) and the overall plot (which I outlined). More detailed questions about Jade Regent are better aimed at Rob McCreary.

1) Dispel evil would, if successful, dispel all the evil-associated elements in the question. Whether or not the "binding effect" is affected depends on if it were evil as well.

2) That's up to the GM. Again... without his master's soul or something equally valuable, a quasit has no footing to bargain "promotions." Banishing a quasit is essentially as effective as killing it as far as removing its evil from the world is concerned.

3) Normally no. A quasit "evolving" to a more powerful demon is not the norm for demons; most demons are what they are and stay that way forever. Devils are more about the evolution and promotion to more powerful forms.

4) Sarenrae's faith doesn't have "kill all demons" tunnel vision. Remember, redemption is a big part of your faith as a worshiper of Sarenrae, and if you can redeem the quasit and make it not be evil, that's a greater triumph than merely banishing or killing it. In the meantime, keeping it trapped and in a place where you can contain its evil is a not terrible option.

5) Sure, although he'd have to be chaotic evil to take a quasit as a familiar.

6) Spellcasting classes work best for quasits. They're Tiny, and as such, they provoke attacks of opportunity when they attack with melee stuff after all.

7) I'd say, with a 1 being not crazy and 10 being super crazy, your group's at about a 7.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Tundra Dragondust wrote:
Cerberus Seven wrote:
7) Our GM named the quasit Quigley and most of the non-essential NPCs in our caravan (drivers, cooks & such) are named after the Muppets. Based on what you know about us so far, how crazy is our group on a scale of 1 to 10?

Cerberus, You've given James a 10th of one percent of what our group is like. If you really want a good accounting you need to tell some better stories.

Spoilered for space issues:
** spoiler omitted **

** spoiler omitted **...

Hmmm.

Maybe 7.6 or 7.75.


James Jacobs wrote:
Gregg Helmberger wrote:
What's a cool place in Golarion that most players there don't know about but should?
Ummmm... players? Or do you mean characters?

Well, I did mean players, but since you brought it up, both. :-)


hi james hope you had a great christmas...i got the shackled city hardcover for christmas so far im loving it..was wondering was this the first adventure path that you guys did...what do you think of it..and lastly what was the best gift you got this year.


James Jacobs wrote:
What "it" are you talking about here?

I misplaced an apostrophe from the 1st draft of the question.

Given that it was decadent and (presumably) chaotic evil, how did Xin-Eurythnia manage to function as a city?

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Justin Sluder wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
AlgaeNymph wrote:

"A character who goes without sleep should become fatigued; that's what happens in real life, after all."

10. In that case, doesn't that mean that androids needn't sleep since they're immune to fatigue? Yes, they'd still need to rest to regain spells but they can stay awake and rest, can't they?

10) In that case, an android wouldn't need to sleep, but they would do so anyway since they're programmed to be like humans. And I'd also say that if you go for TOO long without sleep, you'd get exhausted.
That, or they'd go insane and start killing all the redshirts. ;)

Stop me if you've heard this one.

A couple of androids walk into a bar and start KILLING ALL HUMANS!


James Jacobs wrote:
AinvarG wrote:

I have a paladin that is useless in a ranged fight with one exception.

He has taken the Iomedaean Sword Oath. His only ranged option (since we are up to our eyebrows in the Abyss at the moment, it's not a bad option) is Alignment Channel (Evil).

I'm not complaining. It's been a little frustrating a few times, but the flavor of the feat felt right for the character. If the GM puts us up against flying foes, that's just intelligent design on his part. And my character is very effective in melee, so ranged foes give others a chance to shine.

I do wish, having spent the feat for the Oath and restricting my options, that there was a way to improve on the benefits of the feat - work my way up to taking Greater Weapon Focus, for example. To make this a question, how would you adjudicate such a request, James?

A paladin in this situation is well-advised to drop a handful of gold on a bow and arrows or something like that. Smite works perfectly well with ranged weapons, remember!

In your case, if you're a paladin of Iomedae, I would point out that she's all about swordfighting, not archery. If you want to be an archery-focused paladin, Erastil is a better themed deity.

I think the issue that AinvarG was bringing up is that a paladin using an Iomedaean Sword Oath loses the feat if he uses any other weapon at all until he atones. Essentially, every emergency use of a bow costs 2500g.

...Suddenly, I really want to play a paladin who carries around a set of throwing returning longswords.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

Gregg Helmberger wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
Gregg Helmberger wrote:
What's a cool place in Golarion that most players there don't know about but should?
Ummmm... players? Or do you mean characters?
Well, I did mean players, but since you brought it up, both. :-)

Hmmm... that's actually kinda hard to answer, since all players (and all characters) have different interests and desires. I dunno!

Paizo Employee Creative Director

watchmanx wrote:

hi james hope you had a great christmas...i got the shackled city hardcover for christmas so far im loving it..was wondering was this the first adventure path that you guys did...what do you think of it..and lastly what was the best gift you got this year.

Yup; Shackled City was the first Adventure Path Paizo did, although the hardcover revision was more like the 3rd one we did; there was a lot of work to revise and represent that Adventure Path.

My best gift? Hmmmm... Farcry 3 is gonna be fun, but my favorite gift is probably the poster of "The Legend of Boggy Creek" my sister got me.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

AlgaeNymph wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
What "it" are you talking about here?

I misplaced an apostrophe from the 1st draft of the question.

Given that it was decadent and (presumably) chaotic evil, how did Xin-Eurythnia manage to function as a city?

Same way most other chaotic evil societies function; by ruling through fear and power. Drow cities work this way. Might literally makes right in such a society.


James Jacobs wrote:
AinvarG wrote:

I have a paladin that is useless in a ranged fight with one exception.

He has taken the Iomedaean Sword Oath. His only ranged option (since we are up to our eyebrows in the Abyss at the moment, it's not a bad option) is Alignment Channel (Evil).

I'm not complaining. It's been a little frustrating a few times, but the flavor of the feat felt right for the character. If the GM puts us up against flying foes, that's just intelligent design on his part. And my character is very effective in melee, so ranged foes give others a chance to shine.

I do wish, having spent the feat for the Oath and restricting my options, that there was a way to improve on the benefits of the feat - work my way up to taking Greater Weapon Focus, for example. To make this a question, how would you adjudicate such a request, James?

A paladin in this situation is well-advised to drop a handful of gold on a bow and arrows or something like that. Smite works perfectly well with ranged weapons, remember!

In your case, if you're a paladin of Iomedae, I would point out that she's all about swordfighting, not archery. If you want to be an archery-focused paladin, Erastil is a better themed deity.

The feat I referred to restricts the character from using any melee or ranged weapon other than a longsword in exchange for qualifying for feats as though he has four levels of fighter. That makes Weapon Specialization possible. The GM also let use a 3.5 feat that required Focus and Spec. I just wish, since I have agreed to restrict my options so much, that the feat would allow me to continue with the Focus/Spec/Grt Focus/Grt Spec chain.

Do you think that is reasonable?


Matrix Dragon wrote:

I think the issue that AinvarG was bringing up is that a paladin using an Iomedaean Sword Oath loses the feat if he uses any other weapon at all until he atones. Essentially, every emergency use of a bow costs 2500g.

...Suddenly, I really want to play a paladin who carries around a set of throwing returning longswords.

Yeah, and I love that idea!

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
AinvarG wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
AinvarG wrote:

I have a paladin that is useless in a ranged fight with one exception.

He has taken the Iomedaean Sword Oath. His only ranged option (since we are up to our eyebrows in the Abyss at the moment, it's not a bad option) is Alignment Channel (Evil).

I'm not complaining. It's been a little frustrating a few times, but the flavor of the feat felt right for the character. If the GM puts us up against flying foes, that's just intelligent design on his part. And my character is very effective in melee, so ranged foes give others a chance to shine.

I do wish, having spent the feat for the Oath and restricting my options, that there was a way to improve on the benefits of the feat - work my way up to taking Greater Weapon Focus, for example. To make this a question, how would you adjudicate such a request, James?

A paladin in this situation is well-advised to drop a handful of gold on a bow and arrows or something like that. Smite works perfectly well with ranged weapons, remember!

In your case, if you're a paladin of Iomedae, I would point out that she's all about swordfighting, not archery. If you want to be an archery-focused paladin, Erastil is a better themed deity.

The feat I referred to restricts the character from using any melee or ranged weapon other than a longsword in exchange for qualifying for feats as though he has four levels of fighter. That makes Weapon Specialization possible. The GM also let use a 3.5 feat that required Focus and Spec. I just wish, since I have agreed to restrict my options so much, that the feat would allow me to continue with the Focus/Spec/Grt Focus/Grt Spec chain.

Do you think that is reasonable?

Not really. you're getting value for your oath in whatever four levels of fighter will qualify you for. The feat is really intended to give mileage to Iomedae's clerics, who would get the most bang for the buck on this. In retrospect it's all amatter of deciding whether 2 extra points of damage per swing was worth it. Everyone has moments where they wind up being benched. Unless all of your encounters remained ranged, you'll probably be okay in the end.

Paizo Employee Creative Director

AinvarG wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
AinvarG wrote:

I have a paladin that is useless in a ranged fight with one exception.

He has taken the Iomedaean Sword Oath. His only ranged option (since we are up to our eyebrows in the Abyss at the moment, it's not a bad option) is Alignment Channel (Evil).

I'm not complaining. It's been a little frustrating a few times, but the flavor of the feat felt right for the character. If the GM puts us up against flying foes, that's just intelligent design on his part. And my character is very effective in melee, so ranged foes give others a chance to shine.

I do wish, having spent the feat for the Oath and restricting my options, that there was a way to improve on the benefits of the feat - work my way up to taking Greater Weapon Focus, for example. To make this a question, how would you adjudicate such a request, James?

A paladin in this situation is well-advised to drop a handful of gold on a bow and arrows or something like that. Smite works perfectly well with ranged weapons, remember!

In your case, if you're a paladin of Iomedae, I would point out that she's all about swordfighting, not archery. If you want to be an archery-focused paladin, Erastil is a better themed deity.

The feat I referred to restricts the character from using any melee or ranged weapon other than a longsword in exchange for qualifying for feats as though he has four levels of fighter. That makes Weapon Specialization possible. The GM also let use a 3.5 feat that required Focus and Spec. I just wish, since I have agreed to restrict my options so much, that the feat would allow me to continue with the Focus/Spec/Grt Focus/Grt Spec chain.

Do you think that is reasonable?

I suppose... as long as there's no fighters in your group who are jealous.

But at the same point... you knew the restrictions and disadvantages before taking the feat, so it might just be better to ask the GM if you can "back out" of that option and take a different feat.

Not every feat is a great choice for every character.


Our group is running through a homebrew set in Numeria. We ran into a little snag that we figured you might be able to adjudicate. For someone born in the region or has spent a considerable amount of time learning about Starfall Tech, what Knowledge Skill do you think would be most appropriate. Or, instead, would you advocate a new Knowledge (Technology) as some of my group have suggested?

Thanks James!


James,

you mentioned that the Shoanti were modeled after Native Americans (from tribes that were near your hometown, if I'm not mistaken). What real life tribes, in particular, inspired which Shoanti tribes? Also, what specific practices or themes from those tribes helped flavor the barbarians of Varisia?

Thanks,
Abyssian


Thanks for the replies.

It's probably just a suboptimal, but flavorful, choice. I don't think it's any more attractive to a cleric. With the use of the grandfathered feat, he gets an extra +2 to hit and +4 to damage.

I don't see any reason why allowing Greater Weapon Focus and Greater Weapon Specialization would be game-breaking or inappropriate for a character that has sworn to use no other weapon.

I have no desire to back out the feat, I just think I should be able to go farther forward with it.

Happy New Year!

Grand Lodge

James Jacobs wrote:
AinvarG wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
AinvarG wrote:

I have a paladin that is useless in a ranged fight with one exception.

He has taken the Iomedaean Sword Oath. His only ranged option (since we are up to our eyebrows in the Abyss at the moment, it's not a bad option) is Alignment Channel (Evil).

I'm not complaining. It's been a little frustrating a few times, but the flavor of the feat felt right for the character. If the GM puts us up against flying foes, that's just intelligent design on his part. And my character is very effective in melee, so ranged foes give others a chance to shine.

I do wish, having spent the feat for the Oath and restricting my options, that there was a way to improve on the benefits of the feat - work my way up to taking Greater Weapon Focus, for example. To make this a question, how would you adjudicate such a request, James?

A paladin in this situation is well-advised to drop a handful of gold on a bow and arrows or something like that. Smite works perfectly well with ranged weapons, remember!

In your case, if you're a paladin of Iomedae, I would point out that she's all about swordfighting, not archery. If you want to be an archery-focused paladin, Erastil is a better themed deity.

The feat I referred to restricts the character from using any melee or ranged weapon other than a longsword in exchange for qualifying for feats as though he has four levels of fighter. That makes Weapon Specialization possible. The GM also let use a 3.5 feat that required Focus and Spec. I just wish, since I have agreed to restrict my options so much, that the feat would allow me to continue with the Focus/Spec/Grt Focus/Grt Spec chain.

Do you think that is reasonable?

I suppose... as long as there's no fighters in your group who are jealous.

But at the same point... you knew the restrictions and disadvantages before taking the feat, so it might just be better to ask...

Or, the Paladin could start throwing some longswords...

Contributor

AinvarG wrote:

Thanks for the replies.

It's probably just a suboptimal, but flavorful, choice. I don't think it's any more attractive to a cleric. With the use of the grandfathered feat, he gets an extra +2 to hit and +4 to damage.

I don't see any reason why allowing Greater Weapon Focus and Greater Weapon Specialization would be game-breaking or inappropriate for a character that has sworn to use no other weapon.

I have no desire to back out the feat, I just think I should be able to go farther forward with it.

Happy New Year!

The problem is that those bonus feats that are Fighter specific are basically the only real class features the Fighter has, aside from Weapon / Armor training and Bravery. By allowing a feat to let you qualify for Fighter Feats, you're kind of giving away a Fighter class feature to anyone at the price of a feat. As far as I know, only the Magus and the Samurai have the ability to take Fighter feats.


I'm about to start GMing Rise of the Runelords (Anniversary Edition). I'm very excited about this, obviously, and I'm thinking of ways to make the experience really memorable for the players. I don't have to make any changes to the text because it's freakin' brilliant. I've been in the game for enough decades to know plenty of general GM tricks. I intend to make Sandpoint as vibrant as possible and to make the key NPCs sympathetic and interesting. My mind is already racing with ways to make the Kreegs more horrible than they already are, to make the Runeforge oppressive and unsettling, and to make the overall menace palpable and urgent. However, I've never experienced this campaign either as a player or a GM, and who better to ask for advice than you? So my question is this: what's the one piece (or more, if you're feeling exceptionally generous) of campaign-specific advice you'd give me to get the very most out of this AP and give my players the best time possible?


Alexander Augunas wrote:
The problem is that those bonus feats that are Fighter specific are basically the only real class features the Fighter has, aside from Weapon / Armor training and Bravery. By allowing a feat to let you qualify for Fighter Feats, you're kind of giving away a Fighter class feature to anyone at the price of a feat. As far as I know, only the Magus and the Samurai have the ability to take Fighter feats.

I've taken up more than my share of bandwidth with my question and follow-up comments. To avoid further thread-hijack, I will stand down. I appreciate everyone's thoughts on the matter.

Do you have big plans to ring in the New Year, James?


AinvarG wrote:
Matrix Dragon wrote:

I think the issue that AinvarG was bringing up is that a paladin using an Iomedaean Sword Oath loses the feat if he uses any other weapon at all until he atones. Essentially, every emergency use of a bow costs 2500g.

...Suddenly, I really want to play a paladin who carries around a set of throwing returning longswords.

Yeah, and I love that idea!

This could be doable with a Blinkback Belt actually. You'd only get two throws per round I think, but it would save you the cost of the returning enchantment.


Dear Mr. Jacobs,

Do you, upon occasion, enjoy recreational alcoholic beverages?

If so, do you favor one particular kind over another?

If so, which one(s)? And would you consider yourself a connoisseur of said type of alcoholic beverage?

If the first answer is no, please disregard.

Thank you


James Jacobs wrote:


You mean "Necropolis?" I'm actually running that for several folks here at Paizo every other Thursday. It's pretty deadly... but it's not nearly big enough to be an Adventure Path. Furthermore... we've not yet used an Adventure Path to update a previous company's adventure, so that'd be weird in and of itself.

Necropolis is an under-appreciated third edition gem. I asked Frog God if there was any chance they'd work with that setting but was told they don't have the rights anymore.

Lantern Lodge

LazarX wrote:
AinvarG wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
AinvarG wrote:

I have a paladin that is useless in a ranged fight with one exception.

He has taken the Iomedaean Sword Oath. His only ranged option (since we are up to our eyebrows in the Abyss at the moment, it's not a bad option) is Alignment Channel (Evil).

I'm not complaining. It's been a little frustrating a few times, but the flavor of the feat felt right for the character. If the GM puts us up against flying foes, that's just intelligent design on his part. And my character is very effective in melee, so ranged foes give others a chance to shine.

I do wish, having spent the feat for the Oath and restricting my options, that there was a way to improve on the benefits of the feat - work my way up to taking Greater Weapon Focus, for example. To make this a question, how would you adjudicate such a request, James?

A paladin in this situation is well-advised to drop a handful of gold on a bow and arrows or something like that. Smite works perfectly well with ranged weapons, remember!

In your case, if you're a paladin of Iomedae, I would point out that she's all about swordfighting, not archery. If you want to be an archery-focused paladin, Erastil is a better themed deity.

The feat I referred to restricts the character from using any melee or ranged weapon other than a longsword in exchange for qualifying for feats as though he has four levels of fighter. That makes Weapon Specialization possible. The GM also let use a 3.5 feat that required Focus and Spec. I just wish, since I have agreed to restrict my options so much, that the feat would allow me to continue with the Focus/Spec/Grt Focus/Grt Spec chain.

Do you think that is reasonable?

Not really. you're getting value for your oath in whatever four levels of fighter will qualify you for. The feat is really intended to give mileage to Iomedae's clerics, who would get the most bang for...

Get a second longsword with the throwing and returning enchants. Problem solved, now you can still smite evil in the name of Iomedae, even if they are pesky flying demons. Or get the feat Throw Anything, and carry extra swords.


Contingency and Teleport. Oh great & powerful Tyrant Lizard. Can you think of a module or time when a wizard cast a Contingency Tport with the added proviso where his companions also left with him?

I thought I remembered an old Greyhawk module where one of the Circle did exactly that, but it sorta backfired, as the rest of the Circle didn’t want to go, in effect snatching defeat from the jaws of Victory.

Would you allow such a use in your games?


1. What are the cultural similarities and differences between Xin-Eurythnia and a stereotypical drow city?

2. When Sorshen wakes up, how concerned would she be about people knowing who she is? Would she want to cow the world with her power or surprise them in their ignorance?

3. How would Sorshen feel about Sermignatto Writing a tell-all book about her and the other runelords?

4. Why didn't Sorshen bother to transcribe the names of the incubi she embedded in her lighthouse? Is she sexist or are incubi stigmatized?

5. How did Sorshen organize her closest minions? Did she give each one a specific role ("You're in charge of the city infrastructure, you're in charge of the economy, etc.") or did she just make demands and let her minions figure it out for themselves?

6. How do you feel about the minion rules in Way of the Wicked?

7. How would you scale said minion rules to, say, a runelord's level?

8. What in-world reason would the runelords have for not using genie wishes? "Genies are more of a Qadira/Katapesh theme" wouldn't matter to wizardly despots as much as it does game designers?

9. How much did the runelords use glabrezu wishes?

10. When I asked "Are all elves European-looking or are there any African-looking ones as well?" I meant on Golarion. I ask because Kwava is from the Mwangi Expanse but is rather Caucasian-looking (Pathfinder #13, p.35, 38) So, why doesn't he look more African?


James,

Given House Ardoc's preference for constructing golems and distaste of non magic users where would Gunslingers and Alchemist fit in their family/ranks?


Would you OK a item crafter in your game adding the same item to itself if it was reasonable and made sense? For instance, say a Wizard or Magus filled up a Blessed Book (unlikely, but possible), so he decides duplicate another Blessed Book on top of the one he's already got. In effect, he's merging two Blessed Books together, to get a spellbook with 2,000 pages.

There are other combinations like this, but the Blessed Book is the easiest one to explain. I was wondering about your thoughts on it before proposing it to my GM.

Sovereign Court

Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

1. Where do Undines live/exist in Golarion?

2. Would the coast of Jalmeray be a suitable place for a Undine colony/city?


Hi James !

I copy here my questions from that topic : http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2pb60?Dragon-Empires-Gods-and-the-Great-Beyond

I am trying to figure on which planes live the gods worshipped in Tian-Xia.

There are the easy ones :
- Fumeiyoshi --> Abaddon
- General Susumu --> Hell
- Irori --> Axis (but not mentioned in the Great Beyond)
- Kofusachi --> Elyseum
- Lady Nanbyo --> Abyss
- Qi Zhong --> Nirvana
- Shizuru --> Heaven
- Tsukiyo --> Heaven
- Yaezhing --> Hell

There are the ones on the "I am not sure" wing :
- Hei Feng --> boundary between the elemental planes of Air and Water ?
- Lao Shu Po --> Abaddon ? (it does not fit very well her portfolio)
- Sun Wukong --> Elyseum or Maelström ?
- Yamatsumi --> Earth ?

And there this 2 who are totally problematical for me :
- Daikitsu --> ???
- Nalinivati --> ???
That's my only real problem with the Great Beyond : there is neither a neutral plane (apart from the boneyard) nor a "nature plane". Would there be one of those, it would be fine.
So, where live the goddess of agriculture and the goddess of fertility ?

(and I'am still trying to figure why Gorum live in Elyseum and not in Maelström, considering his/its nature)

Liberty's Edge RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32, 2011 Top 16

With the end of the year approaching, what were your top 5 movies this year? (top 10 if you want to go nuts).

Also, have you seen Django Unchained? I thought it was great and had some wonderful performances - quite possibly my favorite Tarentino movie.


What advice do you have for rookies attending Paizocon?

Paizo Employee Creative Director

Memento Mortis wrote:

Our group is running through a homebrew set in Numeria. We ran into a little snag that we figured you might be able to adjudicate. For someone born in the region or has spent a considerable amount of time learning about Starfall Tech, what Knowledge Skill do you think would be most appropriate. Or, instead, would you advocate a new Knowledge (Technology) as some of my group have suggested?

Thanks James!

Knowledge (technology) is a good idea for starters, but only if you started the campaign with that as an option. Otherwise, Knowledge (engineering) is the best choice.

26,701 to 26,750 of 83,732 << first < prev | 530 | 531 | 532 | 533 | 534 | 535 | 536 | 537 | 538 | 539 | 540 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Gamer Life / Off-Topic Discussions / >>Ask *James Jacobs* ALL your Questions Here!<< All Messageboards