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

[Voyd211]

If you read the spoilers, do you have any opinions on how the Evas would be classified after that little infodump?

[donato]

James Jacobs wrote:

donato wrote:

With the coming Mythic rules, I'm very excited at the possibility of an adventure dealing with Tar-Baphon, who I've come to refer as the 'Final Boss of Pathfinder.' If and when a Tar-Baphon adventure is created, would it be more along the lines of an adventure path or a super-module?

Unknown.

I wouldn't call him the "Final Boss of Pathfinder," though. That's probably a better title for Rovagug.

You're probably right on that. I guess I consider Tar-Baphon the ultimate challenge before things start becoming deific.

[James Jacobs]

Archpaladin Zousha wrote:

James Jacobs wrote:

Archpaladin Zousha wrote:

Okay, more heraldry questions. Sorry if these are becoming annoying.

What's the rule about organizations like the Knights of Ozem, Aldori Swordlords or Eagle Knights, etc. in regards to family crests? Is there a universal crest for the order that all members must wear on their shields or tabards like a uniform, or would individual knights retain their family crests, or design their own in the event that they don't have nobles like Andoran, or the rare instance of a commoner becoming elevated to the nobility for their deeds?

At this point, there are no rules. We haven't done much with heraldry at all in Golarion beyond what's been done in Knights of the Inner Sea.

I see. So what would your personal opinion on the matter be?

Also, do you need to join the Aldori Swordlords to learn how to use an Aldori Dueling Sword? In some recent stuff there's been descriptions of the families like the Khatorovs who favor the dueling sword, but I think I remember that one of the requirements of joining the Aldori Swordlords is that you need to change your name to Aldori, abandoning your previous family ties and cementing your loyalty to the Swordpact and only to the Swordpact.

Honestly? My opinion is that heraldry is in the same category as guns and sailing ships—it's a real-world hobby and interest that has a LOT of crossover between games and real-world lore, and as such it's one of those topics that folks tend to get really nitpicky about and that folks tend to expect great depths of detail in the rules as to how it works in game.

I can absolutely understand this, since I'm like that with some elements of the game (sailing ships and dinosaurs plus more). I'm not all that into heraldry though, and as such I don't really want to get into a big discussion about how the heraldry of Golarion works nor do I really want to do much in print about it at this time. If I were to do something about it, I'd make a big deal about it and do a LOT of research into real-world heraldry so that it DOES satisfy those who enjoy heraldry and expect (perhaps unfairly so) real-world levels of detail about all of Golarion's heraldry.

In fact, I'm probably going to have to get into this a little bit in the Wrath of the Righteous Adventure Path, since there's a lot of crusade stuff in that AP.

But for now, I'm not ready to discuss heraldry, simply because I don't know enough about the subject in real-life in order to make the right calls and decisions for Golarion.

You do not need to join the Aldori Swordlords in order to learn how to use that sword. Some of the Swordlords have spread that knowledge out into the world, and at this point it's possible to find training (AKA justify taking the feat) beyond their organization. That said, the actual Swordlords are unlikely to look with kindness and pride upon an outsider flaunting their traditions.

[James Jacobs]

LazarX wrote:

James Jacobs wrote:

Rysky wrote:

Would a coupling between a Coautl and a human produce an Aasimar?

Assuming such a pairing is possible, no... it would produce a half-celestial. If that half-celestial then went on to have a child with a human... THAT child would be an aasimar.

Presumably the range of celestials that could pair with Humans (or other creatures) are those with the Change Shape ability.

Depends on the GM's preferences for their game.

[James Jacobs]

Voyd211 wrote:

If you read the spoilers, do you have any opinions on how the Evas would be classified after that little infodump?

I didn't really read the spoilers; it exceeded my constantly changing and arbitrary wordcount limit of information that I have time to absorb.

My semi-informed opinion would be that they should be outsiders, since it seems to me that the word "eva" is a corruption of the word "deva" and in Pathfinder, devas are outsiders.

[Orthos]

James Jacobs wrote:

Voyd211 wrote:

If you read the spoilers, do you have any opinions on how the Evas would be classified after that little infodump?

I didn't really read the spoilers; it exceeded my constantly changing and arbitrary wordcount limit of information that I have time to absorb.

That's kind of Evangelion in a nutshell, to be honest. It's weird and bizarre and nigh-not-understandable like that =)

[Voyd211]

It's actually short for "Evangelion," but I reasoned that, being clones of Angels, that yes, they would be outsiders.

Insane, world-ending, Angel-munching, mind-screwing and terrifying outsiders, but outsiders all the same.

[Archpaladin Zousha]

James Jacobs wrote:

Archpaladin Zousha wrote:

James Jacobs wrote:

Archpaladin Zousha wrote:

Okay, more heraldry questions. Sorry if these are becoming annoying.

What's the rule about organizations like the Knights of Ozem, Aldori Swordlords or Eagle Knights, etc. in regards to family crests? Is there a universal crest for the order that all members must wear on their shields or tabards like a uniform, or would individual knights retain their family crests, or design their own in the event that they don't have nobles like Andoran, or the rare instance of a commoner becoming elevated to the nobility for their deeds?

At this point, there are no rules. We haven't done much with heraldry at all in Golarion beyond what's been done in Knights of the Inner Sea.

I see. So what would your personal opinion on the matter be?

Also, do you need to join the Aldori Swordlords to learn how to use an Aldori Dueling Sword? In some recent stuff there's been descriptions of the families like the Khatorovs who favor the dueling sword, but I think I remember that one of the requirements of joining the Aldori Swordlords is that you need to change your name to Aldori, abandoning your previous family ties and cementing your loyalty to the Swordpact and only to the Swordpact.

Honestly? My opinion is that heraldry is in the same category as guns and sailing ships—it's a real-world hobby and interest that has a LOT of crossover between games and real-world lore, and as such it's one of those topics that folks tend to get really nitpicky about and that folks tend to expect great depths of detail in the rules as to how it works in game.

I can absolutely understand this, since I'm like that with some elements of the game (sailing ships and dinosaurs plus more). I'm not all that into heraldry though, and as such I don't really want to get into a big discussion about how the heraldry of Golarion works nor do I really want to do much in print about it at this time. If I were to do something about it, I'd...

I understand. I don't even really know that much about heraldry myself anyway. I just tend to research these things as much as possible so when I write character backstories I don't contradict canon, which I generally consider sacrosanct, or historicity, mainly because I don't want to make mistakes that it's too late to correct once the game starts (like a character inspired by the Roman legions using a spear, when the typical legionnaire was kitted out with a pilum, which is meant for throwing and engaged in hand-to-hand combat with a short sword, you would not BELIEVE how much flak I caught for that!)

And that makes sense with the Swordlords. Now that I think about it, a lot of my questions seem to be about the interactions between members of noble houses joining military or knightly orders of some sort, and the degree to which one supersedes the other. I have to have more variety in my characters.

[Felidaeus01]

If you want to play a neutral cleric who shepherds the dead to their final resting place, who views undead such as vampire and liches as "avoiding death and worthy of destruction", but simply views regular undead as bags of skin and bones held together by magic and a tool given to you by your deity, which god would you worship?

Pharasma is straight out. Charon maybe? Is he even valid in PFS?

[Garrett Guillotte]

Felidaeus01 wrote:

If you want to play a neutral cleric who shepherds the dead to their final resting place, who views undead such as vampire and liches as "avoiding death and worthy of destruction", but simply views regular undead as bags of skin and bones held together by magic and a tool given to you by your deity, which god would you worship?

Pharasma is straight out. Charon maybe? Is he even valid in PFS?

Might I interest you, brother, in this pamphlet about our good friend Zyphus?

Please take care not to cut yourself on the paper, mind.

[SpoCk0nd0pe]

Hey James,

I have actually a rules question that might be an oversight in the rulebooks (dunno were else to ask it):

Can an illusion: pattern spell effect a creatures mind that cannot physically perceive the illusion? If no, why can't you defend against color spray like you can against Loathsome Veil?

I made a post in the rules question forum, but I think only a staff member can help:

Color Spray on unconscious creatures? (that was why the issue came up, my last post sums up why this is kind of a bigger problem with the illusion rules).

Thanks in advance!

Greets,

Spock

[James Jacobs]

Felidaeus01 wrote:

If you want to play a neutral cleric who shepherds the dead to their final resting place, who views undead such as vampire and liches as "avoiding death and worthy of destruction", but simply views regular undead as bags of skin and bones held together by magic and a tool given to you by your deity, which god would you worship?

Pharasma is straight out. Charon maybe? Is he even valid in PFS?

That type of character is not well-supported in Golarion. Intentionally.

Worshiping evil deities is also awkward and not recommended for PFS because we often use the evil deities for bad guys; if you worship an evil deity, you need to recognize and be comfortable with the fact that some day you might go on an adventure where completing the adventure and earning the reward may well cause you to fall out of favor with your deity... or if you stick to your faith, you might not be able to earn the adventure's rewards. It's a type of character that really doesn't translate well to PFS but works better in a home game where the GM and your fellow players can adjust and come to terms with the unusual character.

Nethys is probably your best bet for someone who wouldn't care if you simply viewed undead as tools... but the spells that you use to make undead remain Evil spells, so that's something you and your GM will need to work out. And that's something that will probably cause you problems in PFS... especially if you have players who have characters who are all about smiting undead and are themselves not tolerant of undead allies.

Playing the "I'm not evil but I use undead as tools" character is really just not a great idea at all for something like Pathfinder Society. I do not recommend you do this.

[James Jacobs]

Garrett Guillotte wrote:

Felidaeus01 wrote:

If you want to play a neutral cleric who shepherds the dead to their final resting place, who views undead such as vampire and liches as "avoiding death and worthy of destruction", but simply views regular undead as bags of skin and bones held together by magic and a tool given to you by your deity, which god would you worship?

Pharasma is straight out. Charon maybe? Is he even valid in PFS?

Might I interest you, brother, in this pamphlet about our good friend Zyphus?

Please take care not to cut yourself on the paper, mind.

Zyphus is also an evil deity, and has SPECIFICALLY appeared in several PFS scenarios as the bad guy cult. He was one of the specific deities I was alluding to in my previous post.

Again: I recommend saving your evil or evil-friendly character ideas for home games. You'll save yourself AND all the other PFS players you'll be playing with in the future a lot of frustration.

[James Jacobs]

SpoCk0nd0pe wrote:

Hey James,

I have actually a rules question that might be an oversight in the rulebooks (dunno were else to ask it):

Can an illusion: pattern spell effect a creatures mind that cannot physically perceive the illusion? If no, why can't you defend against color spray like you can against Loathsome Veil?

I made a post in the rules question forum, but I think only a staff member can help:

Color Spray on unconscious creatures? (that was why the issue came up, my last post sums up why this is kind of a bigger problem with the illusion rules).

Thanks in advance!

Greets,

Spock

You're right. That's a rules question. It should head on over to the rules forum so folks can FAQ it. And it looks like you did that already, so I have nothing else to say on this but the following:

Patience, as always, is the best quality for these questions.

[vonFiedler]

First of all, I'm well aware that I can do whatever I want when I'm the GM for a home game. There are three reasons I'm bringing this issue up;

1. I can find no official sentiment on the matter.
2. It's a problem that has come to a head to in my gaming circle (where I am not the only GM).
3. It's an especially annoying dealbreaker for me.

What I'd like is some answer either A; taking into account the following, convincing me exactly WHY things work they are written and that it was intended, or B; listen to my complaints. I know people were heard when they complained about Tief ages (and thanks for that).

I'm talking about any spell or effect that affects humanoids but does not affect Tieflings or other player characters. At least for Tiefs, and by extension Aasimar, I find this to be a grievous oversight when it comes to the flavor of the species. Tieflings are not even necessarily half outsider (as is the case with a certain CoT character), most have ancestral blood and by player fiat could have as weak a bloodline as sorcerers do. So they are often more human than Half-Elves or Half-Orcs, but not from a RAW standpoint? For instance; my main is a Tiefling who absolutely refuses to acknowledge that she isn't human. She's in denial to be sure, but, she shouldn't effectively be a monster. I'll walk away from any table where she isn't a humanoid, and no, I don't rely on Enlarge Person or anything like that. It just screams to me that it's an oversight, like the Tiefling ages were, that for Tiefs to be Outsiders it has to be at the exclusion of being Humanoid. Again, Half-Elves and Half-Orcs are still human, in spite of having typically less human blood than Tieflings. Cause that's the classic character struggle right? Being a child of two worlds, just like Mr. Spock. Being BOTH. And for a Tiefling doubly so, as they might not even want anything to do with their other heritage. Certainly in the world of Golarion this leads to many being racist against Tiefs, same with Half-Elves and Half-Orcs. But the difference is that it is effectively JUSTIFIED racism, that Tiefs AREN'T humanoid, AREN'T human.

Ok, so not everyone is going to play their Tiefling the same way. And how does this affect things like Ifrits, Fetchlings, etc., if people don't care about flavor? Well, it kinda flies in the face of basic game balance in general. Charm Person is a level 1 spell. It can be pretty good, even battle ending. It has its drawbacks to be sure. Like that +5 bonus to the save, or the need to make opposed Cha to get them to do anything really significant. Oh and it also only affects humanoids. So it won't always be useful. But it's only a Level 1 spell. So later you get a better version that affects anything. There are many spells with this sort of balancing factor, like Daze. But it begs the question; why humanoids? Well, there are several generalizations that come with humanoids. For starters, they are mooks. Charm Person won't hit that dragon, or those will-o-wisps, or that end of campaign lich, but it will hit the rank and file bandits that tried to mug you at level 1. Second, humanoids are generally defined by class levels. Third, you can usually count on your party being humanoid. Charm Person might be situational, but you can usually come to PFS with Enlarge Person prepared. Then you are fighting for your life in a potential TPK with 3 Aasimar Fighters as allies. Whoops! It may have been one thing (arguable) when Tiefs were the bad guys, but now that they are playable it just makes no sense that they can't be affected by spells balanced to affect Players, things defined by class levels, and to a degree mooks (I've seen a LOT of Tiefling mooks in my time).

I realize Tiefs as outsiders only is pre-PF. But I wouldn't love PF as much as I do if it didn't routinely slap some sense into the absurdity that is 3.x (seriously, try rereading those old books without facepalming).

So why does it work this way? Is this just a holdover from 3.0 or is there more to it than that?

[xellos]

Paz wrote:

James,

Given that you're a fan of found footage films and horror mockumentaries, have you had chance to see the BBC drama Ghostwatch?

If not, I highly recommend it. For anyone not familiar with early 90s UK TV, it's worth being aware that the four main actors are actually well-known BBC TV presenters appearing 'as themselves'.

I will echo this recommendation, and also recommend reading about the controversy surrounding its first showing in the UK, which is quite interesting in itself.

The hidden things found in the film itself are a lot of fun. My wife believes that some scenes in Paranormal Activity 3 appear to be derived from or homages to Ghostwatch.

[Glutton]

How do you feel about the Spinosaurus being statted up as more powerful that the Tyranosaurus? Not so much historical accuracies, just gut reaction.

[Albatoonoe]

Do zombies (and other applicable undead) rot or does the negative energy keep them "pristine"?

As a follow up, are alchemical zombies partially fuel by negative energy, and do they rot?

[Hulk'Thar]

When using the kusarigama with both hands (not using it as a double weapon) are we attacking with the ball for bludgeoning damage and does that end grapple on crits? Can we also use it in this manner (with both hands and not as a double weapon) for trips? I ask because the item description appears to be fluff since it mentions blocking (which isn't a property of this weapon) and doesn't explicitly redefine the range when used as a double weapon such as the double-chained kama. From the real life uses of this weapon I could see how the ball end could be used for both grappling (wrapping the chain around the head or arms) or tripping (wrapping the chain around the legs and pulling). Using the sickle for reach attacks doesn't seem to make sense, but not all mechanics are supposed to translate to real life I guess. Anyway, can you explain what you think or know the intention of this weapon to be?

[James Jacobs]

vonFiedler wrote:

...asked questions about Tieflings...

It works that way because the fact that Tieflings and Aasimars are NOT humanoids. They are different; they're MORE than humanoids.

That's one of the main reasons why they're not core races, and instead are in the Bestiary.

As with any non-core race, if you use them as PCs, you may run into problems with game balance and game play.

For me, personally? I love the fact that there are non-humanoid options for NPCs and PCs alike such as Tieflings and Aasimars. It adds a welcome variety to the game. It works that way because we, the designers of the game, want it to work that way.

And as for saying "Try to read some of those books without facepalming..."

... keep in mind that I helped write several of those books.

[Set]

James Jacobs wrote:

The complexities of shipping and producing globes aside... the reason it's not in the store yet is because it's still WAY in first draft form. I'm not interested in revealing anything that implies accuracy until I'm happy with the way it looks.

That makes sense, and I suppose it also makes sense to always leave a little room 'off the edge of the map' with a notation like 'here there be dragons,' so that if an awesome idea strikes later, it can be slotted into the parts left undeveloped.

[James Jacobs]

Glutton wrote:

How do you feel about the Spinosaurus being statted up as more powerful that the Tyranosaurus? Not so much historical accuracies, just gut reaction.

Since I'm the one who statted both dinosaurs up... I feel it's accurate. Spinosarurus was larger than Tyrannosaurs, after all. Being bigger doesn't mean you're better. Otherwise... we'd all have Jupiter envy.

[James Jacobs]

Albatoonoe wrote:

Do zombies (and other applicable undead) rot or does the negative energy keep them "pristine"?

As a follow up, are alchemical zombies partially fuel by negative energy, and do they rot?

Zombies are kept from rotting further by the necromantic energies that infuse them. Same for alchemical zombies.

Otherwise, all zombies would have shelf lives of only a few months; more or less depending on the environment. And that means that like 98% of every zombie encounter in every RPG adventure ever written suddenly doesn't work.

[James Jacobs]

Hulk'Thar wrote:

When using the kusarigama with both hands (not using it as a double weapon) are we attacking with the ball for bludgeoning damage and does that end grapple on crits? Can we also use it in this manner (with both hands and not as a double weapon) for trips? I ask because the item description appears to be fluff since it mentions blocking (which isn't a property of this weapon) and doesn't explicitly redefine the range when used as a double weapon such as the double-chained kama. From the real life uses of this weapon I could see how the ball end could be used for both grappling (wrapping the chain around the head or arms) or tripping (wrapping the chain around the legs and pulling). Using the sickle for reach attacks doesn't seem to make sense, but not all mechanics are supposed to translate to real life I guess. Anyway, can you explain what you think or know the intention of this weapon to be?

It's a real world weapon. I would start by checking out real-world videos of it in action and go from there. Just type "Kusarigama demonstration" in You Tube... or watch Samurai II: Duel at Ichijoji Temple. That movie has a really cool scene involving one of them.

Otherwise... these are good questions for the rules board and for FAQ attention.

[Ravingdork]

In the Core Rulebook, the short sword is listed on the equipment table as "sword, short." In Ultimate Equipment, it is listed as "shortsword."

Which is the OFFICIAL correct designation for the weapon in Pathfinder? What should I be putting on the stat blocks?

SHORT SWORD or SHORTSWORD?

[vonFiedler]

James Jacobs wrote:

And as for saying "Try to read some of those books without facepalming..."

... keep in mind that I helped write several of those books.

If it's any consolation, I only facepalm now having been exposed to Pathfinder. Things that I took for granted years ago now can seem very silly.

James Jacobs wrote:

It works that way because the fact that Tieflings and Aasimars are NOT humanoids. They are different; they're MORE than humanoids.

That's one of the main reasons why they're not core races, and instead are in the Bestiary.

As with any non-core race, if you use them as PCs, you may run into problems with game balance and game play.

For me, personally? I love the fact that there are non-humanoid options for NPCs and PCs alike such as Tieflings and Aasimars. It adds a welcome variety to the game. It works that way because we, the designers of the game, want it to work that way.

But what if not all Tiefs and Aasimar want to be more than human? Or, from the glass is half empty angle, what if they don't want to be "less" than human? What if they want to be MORE than Tieflings? MORE than Outsider? That's a gripping character struggle, but it's a battle already lost. Though I guess it'd be a fun houserule to say that Level 20 Tiefling monks become human...

I cannot entirely naysay the merits of, as you say, having non-humanoid options. Unfortunately, every single one of them is part-human and can claim these same issues. Even Dhampirs can say they are "persons", and they have to put up with negative energy affinity!

[Alleran]

James Jacobs wrote:

Alleran wrote:

3) If a more powerful deity than Aroden were killed, would there be similar results around the world? Or would they depend on the deity?

[...]

2) The Skull of Ydersius could be destroyed with a Mage's Disjunction. Would this cause similar aftereffects as doing it by the suggested method of destruction?

3) Other than serpentfolk, what (named) entities in particular might be interested in getting a hold of Ydersius' dead divine essence to increase their own power?

[...]

1) Did anything similar happen when Aroden died? Nobody appears to have detected any sense of rage, sorrow or similar emotion like Ydersius and the serpentfolk as far as Aroden's death was concerned.

3) It's not necessarily true that Aroden's death caused ANY of those other events. What happens when a deity dies varies deity by deity.

2) No.

3) Anyone who wants to gain mythic power, or wants a revitalized demigod to owe them a favor.

1) No, but all of his clerics became ex-clerics, which caused widespread panic, fear, depression, and madness among his followers.

Many thanks for the answers to these. I have a couple of follow-up questions:

1) Are deities in Golarion linked with/personifications of particular fundamental forces, or can they become personifications of fundamental forces through ascension? For example, Pharasma as a representation of death or Groetus of the end times, or the 3rd edition theory of Asmodeus as the multiversal incarnation of an entire alignment (Lawful Evil).

2) If it wouldn't produce the same effects, would destroying the Skull of Ydersius with a disjunction still produce SOME sort of reaction on a wide scale, since it's still basically killing a god? Or would it free his essence in some form instead?

3) To use Forgotten Realms as an example for this question, the Chosen of Mystra carry around some of Mystra's essence, and as a result they have access to certain magic-themed abilities, in particular the Silver Fire. Would becoming Mythic through absorbing Ydersius' essence result in a character's mythic abilities being "themed" along lines that are similar to Ydersius' own attributes/portfolio?

3a) If so, will the full Mythic rules, when they're published, include varied routes to take for a Mythic character who has absorbed the essence from a dead/dying deity to become Mythic? In Ydersius' case, I'd probably expect serpentfolk-themed Mythic powers, for example.

4) Did Aroden's clerics notice immediately that he was dead (like everybody suddenly having a "Eureka" moment, except this Eureka was that their god had died), or did they not realise it until they went to prepare spells and found out that they couldn't?

5) In the wake of his death, were/are there still Oracles (who don't draw from a specific deity like clerics do) who still attempted/attempt to follow Aroden's tenets and teachings without switching to Iomedae? How are they received in the Inner Sea region?

[Ken Pawlik]

Hi James Jacobs,

1. How's it going?

2. What is the correct pronunciation of "Sahuagin?"

3. Will there be any encounters with qlippoth in the Wrath of the Righteous AP?

4. Souls for Smuggler's Shiv and The Red Hand of Doom have been the most enjoyed published adventures I've run for my group. Thanks! If I can run only one other James Jacobs penned adventure for them, which one should it be?

5. Are there any non Paizo RPG books you're particularly looking forward to this year?

6. Is there any chance that one of your freelance gigs is writing an epic adventure for Call of Cthulhu?

[Azaelas Fayth]

Saw-ha-wah-gin according to the old D&D Pronunciation guide.

[Alleran]

As an unrelated question to my ones above:

Which Runelords were the most prolific in terms of spell creation, from greatest to least? If that's too much to ask, which were the top two? I would assume that Xanderghul and Sorshen, given their status as Runelords who were never overthrown, would have had the most time to develop new magic (and that the Runelords of Sloth were probably the ones who developed the fewest... when they get around to it... any day now...), while the others weren't around for as long.

[Midnight_Angel]

Hello James!

I have some quick questions about succubi, and the possible consequences of their... interaction with mortals:

1) (according to PRD) "A succubus drains energy from a mortal she lures into an act of passion, such as a kiss. The succubus's kiss bestows one negative level. The kiss also has the effect of a suggestion spell, asking the victim to accept another act of passion from the succubus."

Does the succubus have to use either of the abilities, or can she choose whether or nor to drain her lover's energy, and whether or not to compel him to continue?

2) Unless my rules-fu left me, a child from a demon and a human will be a half-fiend. However, in case of a Succubus, the result will be an Alu-Demon (which is a full demon in its own right, complete with Extraplanar and Alignment subtypes). Is there a deeper reason for that, or is this one just something that remained from earlier editions?

3) Does 2) imply that the earliest possible generation for a Tiefling would be a great-grandchild (as any grandchildren of the Succubus would be children of Alu-Demons, and thus half-fiends, rules-wise)?

4) Would you, as a GM, really put the 'Pitborn' statblock shifts on such a creature? In my opinion, +STR, +CHA, -INT is a rather poor reflection on its ancestor's abilities; I'd be more inclined to place +DEX, +CHA, -WIS...

Thanks for your time!

[Midnight_Angel]

One more question, if I may...

I am aware that this one is a rules question; however, I'd like to ask how you would handle things...

Detect Evil has a special table entry dedicated to 'aligned outsiders', who ping much more strongly than normal creatures.

Now, what is an 'Aligned Outsider' in the context of this rule?
a) An Outsider who has the alignment in question?
b) An Outsider who has the corresponding alignment subtype?

As a GM, I use the second option, as it makes little sense to me to have e.g. an evil Sylph bard give a greater reading on the Evil-O-Meter than her (equally evil) elven bodyguard... while on the other hand, being evil incarnate (aka having the (Evil) subtype) is a pretty good reason to give off a larger 'Ping'.

[Midnight_Angel]

Okay, three time's a charm, if I may...

1) The ARG states that Changelings are always female. Question: How come? Do their hag mothers only conceive females in the first place? Is any male offspring a hag might produce genetically unable to survive, reducing in stillborn males? Do hag mothers kill (and/or devour) any male offspring?

2) Same question, but for the offspring of Succubi (aka Alu-Demons)

3) Different topic: Are any of the Azata stated in the Bestiaries ony existent in one gender? Are there any male Brijidines, or Lillends? Female Bralanis?

[Azaelas Fayth]

Hey James Jacobs, You might have answered this but...

What do you honestly think of some of 4e's minor design choices?

Things like Residuum and Modular Enchantments.

[LazarX]

vonFiedler wrote:

It just screams to me that it's an oversight, like the Tiefling ages were, that for Tiefs to be Outsiders it has to be at the exclusion of being Humanoid. Again, Half-Elves and Half-Orcs are still human, in spite of having typically less human blood than Tieflings. Cause that's the classic character struggle right? Being a child of two worlds, just like Mr. Spock. Being BOTH. And for a Tiefling doubly so, as they might not even want anything to do with their other heritage. Certainly in the world of Golarion this leads to many being racist against Tiefs, same with Half-Elves and Half-Orcs. But the difference is that it is effectively JUSTIFIED racism, that Tiefs AREN'T humanoid, AREN'T human.

It's worth reminding the poster that Elves, Orcs ARE considered Humanoid. So being half human and half Elf or Orc may make you less Human, but you're still a full blooded Humanoid. Whereas Outsiders, even if they take Human shape, are NOT Humanoid at all. So yes, as an Asimar or Tiefling, you're considerably less Humanoid than an Half-Elf or Half-Orc, even if you look more "Human".

[SpoCk0nd0pe]

James Jacobs wrote:

You're right. That's a rules question. It should head on over to the rules forum so folks can FAQ it. And it looks like you did that already, so I have nothing else to say on this but the following:

Patience, as always, is the best quality for these questions.

Thanks, I'll try that :)

[James Jacobs]

Ravingdork wrote:

In the Core Rulebook, the short sword is listed on the equipment table as "sword, short." In Ultimate Equipment, it is listed as "shortsword."

Which is the OFFICIAL correct designation for the weapon in Pathfinder? What should I be putting on the stat blocks?

SHORT SWORD or SHORTSWORD?

Short sword, with a space, is correct.

[James Jacobs]

vonFiedler wrote:

James Jacobs wrote:

And as for saying "Try to read some of those books without facepalming..."

... keep in mind that I helped write several of those books.

If it's any consolation, I only facepalm now having been exposed to Pathfinder. Things that I took for granted years ago now can seem very silly.

James Jacobs wrote:

It works that way because the fact that Tieflings and Aasimars are NOT humanoids. They are different; they're MORE than humanoids.

That's one of the main reasons why they're not core races, and instead are in the Bestiary.

As with any non-core race, if you use them as PCs, you may run into problems with game balance and game play.

For me, personally? I love the fact that there are non-humanoid options for NPCs and PCs alike such as Tieflings and Aasimars. It adds a welcome variety to the game. It works that way because we, the designers of the game, want it to work that way.

But what if not all Tiefs and Aasimar want to be more than human? Or, from the glass is half empty angle, what if they don't want to be "less" than human? What if they want to be MORE than Tieflings? MORE than Outsider? That's a gripping character struggle, but it's a battle already lost. Though I guess it'd be a fun houserule to say that Level 20 Tiefling monks become human...

I cannot entirely naysay the merits of, as you say, having non-humanoid options. Unfortunately, every single one of them is part-human and can claim these same issues. Even Dhampirs can say they are "persons", and they have to put up with negative energy affinity!

Tieflings and aasimars are very much persons. They refer to themselves as persons, as do most every other persons.

That has nothing to do with their type. "Person" and "people" are not game terms and as such they are not bound by rules. The part of something like "charm person" that makes it not work against tieflings is the fact that the spell specifically targets only humanoids. Technically, the spell should perhaps be called "charm humanoid" but ALL of our spells are generally not associated with exact rules stuff on purpose.

Fireball, for example, doesn't create a perfect sphere in game.

Storm of vengeance doesn't actually have any benefits if cast to get revenge.

Finger of death doesn't automatically kill folks.

And so on.

[HangarFlying]

James Jacobs wrote:

Stuff about Tieflings and Aasimars.

So...tieflings or aasimars cannot be affected by a hold person spell? Hmm, can I tell my group that they are retroactively TPK'd due to

Spoiler:

having cast hold person on Nualia as a last-ditch attempt to survive the encounter.

What the heck, it was a pretty cool battle, so I guess I'll let it slide...this time. *Evil Maniacal GM Laugh*

[James Jacobs]

Alleran wrote:

1) Are deities in Golarion linked with/personifications of particular fundamental forces, or can they become personifications of fundamental forces through ascension? For example, Pharasma as a representation of death or Groetus of the end times, or the 3rd edition theory of Asmodeus as the multiversal incarnation of an entire alignment (Lawful Evil).

2) If it wouldn't produce the same effects, would destroying the Skull of Ydersius with a disjunction still produce SOME sort of reaction on a wide scale, since it's still basically killing a god? Or would it free his essence in some form instead?

3) To use Forgotten Realms as an example for this question, the Chosen of Mystra carry around some of Mystra's essence, and as a result they have access to certain magic-themed abilities, in particular the Silver Fire. Would becoming Mythic through absorbing Ydersius' essence result in a character's mythic abilities being "themed" along lines that are similar to Ydersius' own attributes/portfolio?

3a) If so, will the full Mythic rules, when they're published, include varied routes to take for a Mythic character who has absorbed the essence from a dead/dying deity to become Mythic? In Ydersius' case, I'd probably expect serpentfolk-themed Mythic powers, for example.

4) Did Aroden's clerics notice immediately that he was dead (like everybody suddenly having a "Eureka" moment, except this Eureka was that their god had died), or did they not realise it until they went to prepare spells and found out that they couldn't?

5) In the wake of his death, were/are there still Oracles (who don't draw from a specific deity like clerics do) who still attempted/attempt to follow Aroden's tenets and teachings without switching to Iomedae? How are they received in the Inner Sea region?

1) That bit is not set in stone. A lot of the "rules" about what deities can or can't do are mutable and unwritten and subject to arbitrary change as we want, because these "rules" don't yet exist. They probably NEVER will. We do that on purpose.

2) The effects of destroying the skull with a disjunction spell would indeed provoke a reaction—but that would likely be limited to serpentfolk. It might drive them all insane; it might wake them all up but turn them all into degenerates, or it might not kill Ydersius; it just might make him angrier. Using disjunction to destroy an artifact is breaking the rules to a certain extent, and that means the GM gets to use that rules breaking however she wants.

3) Maybe.

3a) I don't know. I've not had a chance to look at the rules yet; they're still in flux.

4) Pretty much immediately, yes.

5) At the time of his death, they were looked at with hope. But those who still exist now are generally regarded as lunatics and crackpots.

[James Jacobs]

Ken Pawlik wrote:

Hi James Jacobs,

1. How's it going?

2. What is the correct pronunciation of "Sahuagin?"

3. Will there be any encounters with qlippoth in the Wrath of the Righteous AP?

4. Souls for Smuggler's Shiv and The Red Hand of Doom have been the most enjoyed published adventures I've run for my group. Thanks! If I can run only one other James Jacobs penned adventure for them, which one should it be?

5. Are there any non Paizo RPG books you're particularly looking forward to this year?

6. Is there any chance that one of your freelance gigs is writing an epic adventure for Call of Cthulhu?

1) Good!

2) I say: saw-WHO-a-gin. Sounds kinda like with Saw Who Again. Whether or not that's correct depends on if you say it in my earshot. ;-P

3) Mabye. Depends if any of the authors put any qlippoth in the adventures. I didn't ask for any, but they get to make lots of those choices on their own.

4) Thanks for the kind words! At this point, the adventure I'm the most proud of is probably Burnt Offerings.

5) Atomic Age Cthulhu! And pretty much any other Call of Cthulhu book Chaosium publishes.

6) Nope. All my freelance gigs at the moment are for Paizo. That said... one of my lifelong industry hopes and dreams is to write a Call of Cthulhu adventure.

[Azaelas Fayth]

Burnt Offerings is possibly my current favorite Adventure available...

[James Jacobs]

Alleran wrote:

As an unrelated question to my ones above:

Which Runelords were the most prolific in terms of spell creation, from greatest to least? If that's too much to ask, which were the top two? I would assume that Xanderghul and Sorshen, given their status as Runelords who were never overthrown, would have had the most time to develop new magic (and that the Runelords of Sloth were probably the ones who developed the fewest... when they get around to it... any day now...), while the others weren't around for as long.

That's not something I ever thought about. I would say that the runelords of Sloth are the least productive on these lines, and that Xanderghul and Sorshen were the most productive simply because they lived a LOT LOT LOT longer than the other runelords.

[James Jacobs]

Midnight_Angel wrote:

Hello James!

I have some quick questions about succubi, and the possible consequences of their... interaction with mortals:

1) (according to PRD) "A succubus drains energy from a mortal she lures into an act of passion, such as a kiss. The succubus's kiss bestows one negative level. The kiss also has the effect of a suggestion spell, asking the victim to accept another act of passion from the succubus."

Does the succubus have to use either of the abilities, or can she choose whether or nor to drain her lover's energy, and whether or not to compel him to continue?

2) Unless my rules-fu left me, a child from a demon and a human will be a half-fiend. However, in case of a Succubus, the result will be an Alu-Demon (which is a full demon in its own right, complete with Extraplanar and Alignment subtypes). Is there a deeper reason for that, or is this one just something that remained from earlier editions?

3) Does 2) imply that the earliest possible generation for a Tiefling would be a great-grandchild (as any grandchildren of the Succubus would be children of Alu-Demons, and thus half-fiends, rules-wise)?

4) Would you, as a GM, really put the 'Pitborn' statblock shifts on such a creature? In my opinion, +STR, +CHA, -INT is a rather poor reflection on its ancestor's abilities; I'd be more inclined to place +DEX, +CHA, -WIS...

Thanks for your time!

1) A succubus can choose not to do special attacks when she lures a victim into an act of passion, yes. If you trust her not to do that after you ask her not to, you deserve the negative levels you're about to get, though.

2) That will be explained in detail in "Demons Revisited." In a nutshell, what determines if the offspring is a half fiend or a half succubus or an alu-demon depends on specific combinations of which one of the sexual partners gets pregnant, what the succubus's change self is doing, and other factors.

3) A child of an alu-demon would be a half-fiend. A child of a half-fiend or a half-succubus is a tiefling.

4) Yes, I would. By the time you get to "pitborn," the things that affect you are not the specific demon's lineage but the raw chaos and evil of the demon race as a whole.

[James Jacobs]

Midnight_Angel wrote:

One more question, if I may...

I am aware that this one is a rules question; however, I'd like to ask how you would handle things...

Detect Evil has a special table entry dedicated to 'aligned outsiders', who ping much more strongly than normal creatures.

Now, what is an 'Aligned Outsider' in the context of this rule?
a) An Outsider who has the alignment in question?
b) An Outsider who has the corresponding alignment subtype?

As a GM, I use the second option, as it makes little sense to me to have e.g. an evil Sylph bard give a greater reading on the Evil-O-Meter than her (equally evil) elven bodyguard... while on the other hand, being evil incarnate (aka having the (Evil) subtype) is a pretty good reason to give off a larger 'Ping'.

An aligned outsider is an outsider that has the corresponding alignment subtype.

[LazarX]

James Jacobs wrote:

Alleran wrote:

As an unrelated question to my ones above:

Which Runelords were the most prolific in terms of spell creation, from greatest to least? If that's too much to ask, which were the top two? I would assume that Xanderghul and Sorshen, given their status as Runelords who were never overthrown, would have had the most time to develop new magic (and that the Runelords of Sloth were probably the ones who developed the fewest... when they get around to it... any day now...), while the others weren't around for as long.

That's not something I ever thought about. I would say that the runelords of Sloth are the least productive on these lines, and that Xanderghul and Sorshen were the most productive simply because they lived a LOT LOT LOT longer than the other runelords.

I imagine that being the only two who were actually there from start to finish might advantage them on that area. Sorshen however is described as the most manipulative. I could see that most of what's credited as "her" work may be what she connived out of others as a supremely talented and evil enchantress would. She might have even shagged most of it from Xin himself as she has been said to have possibly gone as far to seduce him as well. It would mean that she was also spared much of the risk of the actual experimentation involved.

[James Jacobs]

Azaelas Fayth wrote:

Hey James Jacobs, You might have answered this but...

What do you honestly think of some of 4e's minor design choices?

Things like Residuum and Modular Enchantments.

I actually haven't looked at 4th edition much at all. I don't need to look at it to do my job, which is less about rules and more about everything else associated with Golarion. I need to be an expert in PATHFINDER'S rules, and having other very similar systems' rules in my head tends to muddy those waters.

That said... I absolutely DO have opinions about 4th edition's design choices—more on the choices made to the flavor of the game and its traditions than on the actual rules side. But I prefer to keep those opinions to myself.

[James Jacobs]

Midnight_Angel wrote:

Okay, three time's a charm, if I may...

1) The ARG states that Changelings are always female. Question: How come? Do their hag mothers only conceive females in the first place? Is any male offspring a hag might produce genetically unable to survive, reducing in stillborn males? Do hag mothers kill (and/or devour) any male offspring?

2) Same question, but for the offspring of Succubi (aka Alu-Demons)

3) Different topic: Are any of the Azata stated in the Bestiaries ony existent in one gender? Are there any male Brijidines, or Lillends? Female Bralanis?

1) Because of the way hag reproductive cycles work, they only produce daughters.

2) Again—that's gonna be covered in detail in the upcoming Demons Revisited book.

3) When we stat up an outsider, I'd say that unless we say otherwise, the outsider is almost always of the gender the original one was statted up as... but they can be of any gender (including hermaphroditic or aesexual genders).

[James Jacobs]

HangarFlying wrote:

James Jacobs wrote:

Stuff about Tieflings and Aasimars.

So...tieflings or aasimars cannot be affected by a hold person spell? Hmm, can I tell my group that they are retroactively TPK'd due to ** spoiler omitted ** What the heck, it was a pretty cool battle, so I guess I'll let it slide...this time. *Evil Maniacal GM Laugh*

Correct. Hold person only works on humanoids. Dominate person and charm person and enlarge person and reduce person as well. Tieflings and aasimars are not legal targets for those spells. It's one of the reasons they're not core races, and one of the hidden advantages of playing one of those races as opposed to a core race.

Which actually resulted in a DELIGHTFUL scene in my office game a few weeks ago, when Jason Bulmahn's arrogant character tried to use his dominate person spell against Rob McCreary's irreverent and reactionary character during an argument over why it's okay for Jason's character to inflict friendly fire damage on fellow PCs and if so why it's okay for Rob's character to use a trick shot from a gun to knock Jason's character down with a humiliating trip-shot. Rob's been kinda quiet about the fact that his character is an aasimar, and when that character first joined the group some of the players picked up on some of the clues he was giving out and confirmed his race as aasimar, but Jason either missed that session or didn't pay attention.

So when Jason's character confidently cast dominate person on her (something he'd been offline cackling and gleefully anticipating doing to a fellow party member for the entire campaign once he got dominate person), the fact that it simply didn't work completely caught him off guard and freaked him out. Which pleased me, since as a GM I enjoy seeing players get surprised by the game, and surprising the lead designer of the game is kinda hard to do without totally cheating.