1) Why the hell Megafauna exists? Have you already compared the arsinoitherium with rhinoceros? Are they all not just dire animals?
The word "dire" in front of everything is kind of boring. That's probably why they chose to use crazy, latin words instead.
2) Why Ninja and Samurai are not archetypes, as are the kensai and geisha?
It has nothing to do with them being Oriental classes, if that is your assumption. By definition, an Alternate class is one that dramatically alters the class's theme in some way; for example, a Samurai loses the Cavalier's focus on Teamwork for personal prowess and the Ninja trades a bunch of core Rogue abilities for ki powers. Kensai and geisha don't make major changes to the Monk / Bard's class themes.
6) Which the quality control of Paizo upon the new created material? Many players are already apprehensive to see the new books lose quality over time, as has happened in earlier versions (aka 3e). So...?
Bah. This is my least favorite discussion on the forums. When people moan and groan about a book's "quality," I've noticed that nine times out of ten, they're upset because Paizo didn't add that ONE thing that they felt the book absolutely had to have in order to make them want to buy it. I think it's part of the problem of calling a book "Ultimate X," as James himself said earlier in this thread, it connotes that it is the definitive source of information for the given topic, and people stop focusing on the cool gems of the books (Construct Creation rules, Airships and vehicles, etc) and instead lament like a child at Christmas over that one BB gun they didn't get.
I personally have never seen a deduction of quality in any of the books. Grammatical errors happen in publishing. Rules that make sense in one person's head may need clarification towards another. I reread my stuff ALL the time (even my posts) and cringe at the grammatical errors I find. I like to think that despite that, I keep the quality of my posts up :-P.
@Golden-Esque
1) If you mean "latin", from Latim America, that's not a word that have in our vocabulary. :D
But, if you mean the latin language, still, I believe the text must be write in a single pattern, so, dire would be the "correct". The "latin" adjective or another thing you desire in the creatures, that's why there are campaign settings.
2) Kensai and Geisha was just examples. I mean that's wasn't really necessary. In the APG, UM and UC are several archetypes that modify the base classes as well as the ninja and the samurai, and by no means became alternate. But this really don't signify nothing, and the classes are nice. I just wanna know why they make them alternate and not just archetypes.
6) I didn't say the books already have low quality (actually, they are excellent). And also didn't mean any rule or material as low quality. I wanna know what they think to do later, to avoid the need for a new edition (that sucks), as the WotC made. In the last days/publishings of the 3e, the material was truly bad. So many classes/prestige classes/rules with the lowest quality ever, and a huge unbalanced between all things.
3) I designed the initial build for the alchemist. My favorite in the APG is probably the witch. The biggest change I would have made is to the summoner—I would have replaced the "build it yourself" eidolon with pre-packaged outsiders that match up to existing outsiders akin to how we present animal companions for druids.
I just agreed to let one of my players play a Synthesist. Why did I do that, James?
Hnnnnghr I would've been all over this. I would totally and wholeheartedly endorse this being published as an archetype or alternate rule somewhere down the road. The sooner the better, really.
Now. Down to business. Tell us about your vacation?
RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32, 2011 Top 16
|
Who creates the inside front and back covers of the APs? They're one of my favorite parts of each volume since Legacy of Fire, but they seem to be uncredited. Whoever puts them together, great job! (I know the visual look is probably Sarah, as the art director, and that's a big part of that portion of the book being cool, but I'm wondering about the writing.)
Also, do you have certain freelancers that you purposefully assign certain level ranges for APs or modules? It seems that you tend to write the 1st installment whenever you write one, and Neil Spicer seems to often do #5 or #6. Do you feel that some writers are particularly good at low, mid, or high level content?
So, I am designing two characters that are friends from the Mana Wastes (specifically Alkenstar... one is a Trophy Hunter Ranger) but I want one to be a Wizard... now at first this might seem to not work, but magic DOES exist in the Mana Wastes, it's just rare and Primal, right? So, if I gave her the Primalist archetype from Inner Sea Magic, would that work both to explain why she's a wizard in the Mana Wastes and why she's a Primalist?
After reading ultimate combat, I came across a line that raised some questions for me about the Totem Warrior archetype for the Barbarian class.
Totem rage powers grant powers related to a theme. A barbarian cannot select from more than one group of totem rage powers; for example, a barbarian who selects a beast totem rage power cannot later choose to gain any of the dragon totem rage powers (any rage power with “dragon totem” in its title), unless she has the totem warrior archetype.
(emphasis mine)
Totem Warrior
A barbarian often has a special totem that is the patron of her tribe. While individual totems vary, those in the tribe that call upon a totem receive similar abilities. Totem warrior barbarians can select from the following rage powers.
Rage Powers: The totem warrior is based entirely upon his totem rage powers. In addition to the totem powers themselves, the following rage powers complement the totem warrior archetype (depending on the totem chosen): animal fury*, low-light vision*, night vision*, raging climber*, raging leaper*, raging swimmer*, and swift foot*.
Totem Warrior makes no sense to me as an archetype as written. Every archetype offers some benefit at some cost. The benefit of Totem Warrior is that you can take multiple totems. What is the cost? The only thing I can see that can be interpreted as a cost, as written, is the selection of rage powers limited to those listed.
And if there is no cost, that makes this a purely flavor choice, to be or not to be a Totem Warrior. However, it is a flavor choice that overrides a rule, specifically that "A barbarian cannot select from more than one group of totem rage powers."
And if a rule can be overridden by a flavor decision on a mechanical level, then why is it a rule in the first place? Wouldn't it be better as a flavor statement from the start to avoid confusion, i.e. "Most barbarians do not select from more than one group of totem rage powers; however, those that do are known as Totem Warriors"
As written, the last sentence of the first paragraph sounds like a list should follow. The second paragraph looks similar the final paragraph of other archetypes ("the following rage powers complement the totem warrior archetype"). Is the list of "complimentary powers" the list of "powers they can select from?" Is it an all-inclusive list?
The benefit of Totem Warrior is that you can take multiple totems. What is the cost?
The "cost" is probably that you've basically just agreed to spend well over half of your Rage Powers on various totems :-P. Sure, you can do it whenever you want, but to make taking that Archetype worthwhile, you're going to want to go into multiple totems, right?
Creative Director
|
1) Why the hell Megafauna exists? Have you already compared the arsinoitherium with rhinoceros? Are they all not just dire animals?
2) Why Ninja and Samurai are not archetypes, as are the kensai and geisha?
3) Did you already play with armor as DR and wounds and vigor variant rules in your games? What do you think about it?
4) Why in the Ultimate MAGIC, the single ranger archetype lose its spells?
5) There is some thought in progress to redesign the rules in a simpler way?
I guess some things could be simplified in order to avoid mention of examples in new books/materials.
For example: whenever any creature or ability has a percentage chance to avoid a critical, there is a need to mention that the ability functions like the armor ability fortification.
In my opinion, it should be: the creature has light fortification.6) Which the quality control of Paizo upon the new created material? Many players are already apprehensive to see the new books lose quality over time, as has happened in earlier versions (aka 3e). So...?
7) There is some talk about the publication of any material related to Pathfinder in portuguese (especially in Brazil)?
See ya!
1) Megafauna exists because, frankly, they're cool. Variety is what makes monster books fun.
2) Ninja and samurai are actaully archetypes; they're just a lot more detailed than the kensai and the geisha.
3) I haven't used those subsystems. I actually MUCH prefer armor and hp as they work in the base game.
4) Because it gains magic stuff in place of those spells.
5) Redesigning the rules to be simpler? If only we had a Beginner's Box coming out in a few months that did just that!
6) I'm not sure this is really a question... there seems to be words missing from it.
7) We're constantly looking to partner with companies in other countries to provide translations, but the status of those projects is not something I keep up on.
|
Creative Director
|
As for the concept of "dire" animals...
In the real world, dire wolves existed. They were prehistoric wolves.
Dire versions of other animals did not exist.
When 3rd edition came around, dire wolves had already been in the game from pretty much the start; Gygax put them and lots of other megafauna (such as titanothers or balucitheriums or mastodons) into the game. But 3rd edition, for whatever reason, chose not to keep prehistoric mammals in the game, and instead replaced them with dire versions of animals as tougher versions.
It's not an aesthetic or philosophical choice I would have made, and I argued to do away with all dire animals save the dire wolf in Pathfinder, but got overruled because we wanted to keep backwards compatibility. I kind of got my way anyway, though, since I used the real-world prehistoric animal names along with the dire names.
As for why we list some of them under the heading of megafauna... that's because that lets us group these animals together in two per page formats like we do with dinosaurs, so we can get twice as many into the book.
|
Creative Director
|
3) I designed the initial build for the alchemist. My favorite in the APG is probably the witch. The biggest change I would have made is to the summoner—I would have replaced the "build it yourself" eidolon with pre-packaged outsiders that match up to existing outsiders akin to how we present animal companions for druids.I just agreed to let one of my players play a Synthesist. Why did I do that, James?
Hnnnnghr I would've been all over this. I would totally and wholeheartedly endorse this being published as an archetype or alternate rule somewhere down the road. The sooner the better, really.
Now. Down to business. Tell us about your vacation?
Not sure. I not only don't allow synthesists in my game... I no longer allow summoners in my game as well. They just don't fit into the world I like to run games in.
Vacation so far has been pretty good; went to Palo Alto to attend my sister's wedding over the weekend, and now I've got "Operation New Kitty" starting up.
|
Creative Director
|
Who creates the inside front and back covers of the APs? They're one of my favorite parts of each volume since Legacy of Fire, but they seem to be uncredited. Whoever puts them together, great job! (I know the visual look is probably Sarah, as the art director, and that's a big part of that portion of the book being cool, but I'm wondering about the writing.)
Also, do you have certain freelancers that you purposefully assign certain level ranges for APs or modules? It seems that you tend to write the 1st installment whenever you write one, and Neil Spicer seems to often do #5 or #6. Do you feel that some writers are particularly good at low, mid, or high level content?
The ones we did for Legacy of Fire were written by Wolfgang Baur; I believe we did credit him on the credits page for those.
The inside covers for pretty much every other AP are created in-house. The art's by artists we commission normally; the words, when we need words for them, are written by us in house. Usually me, Rob, Wes, or James Sutter.
I don't normally assign certain freelancers specific level ranges. It's mostly about when freelancers are available, and what their particular strengths are at. If we have an adventure that involves a strange social situation like a play or a trial, I tend to try to get Rich Pett to write those, for example; level is irrelevant.
Some writers are indeed better at specific level bands, but I try not to let the writers get too comfortable. Keeping them challenged keeps them sharp!
|
Creative Director
|
So, I am designing two characters that are friends from the Mana Wastes (specifically Alkenstar... one is a Trophy Hunter Ranger) but I want one to be a Wizard... now at first this might seem to not work, but magic DOES exist in the Mana Wastes, it's just rare and Primal, right? So, if I gave her the Primalist archetype from Inner Sea Magic, would that work both to explain why she's a wizard in the Mana Wastes and why she's a Primalist?
Sure!
|
Creative Director
|
...asked questionsa bout totem warrior barbarians...
Not sure. That's more of a Jason question, but I suspect the answer has something to do with the fact that he wanted totem warriors to focus on a single totem, and not "multiclass" their totems.
I've actually not looked much at that archetype at all; have had no need to yet, so I don't have much more input on it.
|
Creative Director
|
James, thanks to your work I have gone ahead and bought the 30th anniversary edition of Call of Cthulhu. My question is, what published adventures would you recommend?
The best two adventures ever published for Call of Cthulhu are "Masks of Nyarlathotep" and "Beyond the Mountains of Madness."
"Masks" just got reprinted recently, so that's probably the best bet.
|
|
I believe the text must be write in a single pattern, so, dire would be the "correct". The "latin" adjective or another thing you desire in the creatures, that's why there are campaign settings.
Like actual taxonomy is written in a single pattern, like in reality? Oh, wait, actually it is not written in a single pattern. ;D
@James:
you feel that the Craft construct feat is really needed in the game? They already require Craft weapon and armor and Craft wondrous item. I feel that adding another feat on top of that is a bit excessive as generally the players will not be building countless constructs in their career and even if they were the constructs aren't so powerful for the level at which you build them.
What adventure path would you recommend to a beginning DM and do you have any advice how to convert it to a group of 6-7 people starting at level 4.
(I started with the Crown of the Kobold King module, but want something more coherent)
Big up! for answering all the questions.
So I have two questions that pertain to the same general subject:
1) why was the racial restriction kept on the arcane archer?
It seemed out of place with the change the dwarven defender underwent to stalwart defender and I'm curious as to what influenced the decision to keep the elf/half-elf restirction
2) why was the alignment restriction kept on the assassin?
I get why it might be there since they were that way in 3.5, but the capstone ability for rogues is pretty similar to the death attack ability, yet they don't get an alignment restriction (not to mention there is no restriction on the poisoner archetype).
Personally I rule 0 these restrictions away, and it's not a huge issue I'm just curious what the dev team's logic was for these.
|
Creative Director
|
you feel that the Craft construct feat is really needed in the game? They already require Craft weapon and armor and Craft wondrous item. I feel that adding another feat on top of that is a bit excessive as generally the players will not be building countless constructs in their career and even if they were the constructs aren't so powerful for the level at which you build them.
There needs to be some method of crafting constructs, and it needs to be tough to qualify for since it can end up being similarly complex to the game as leadership. Further... it's not necessarily one we expect players to take anyway; that's why it's in the Bestiary and not the Core Rules.
I think it works fine as it stands.
|
Creative Director
|
What adventure path would you recommend to a beginning DM and do you have any advice how to convert it to a group of 6-7 people starting at level 4.
(I started with the Crown of the Kobold King module, but want something more coherent)
Big up! for answering all the questions.
Well... I would actually still start with the 1st installment of an AP, even though the players are 4th level, honestly. They'll have an easy time of the first adventure, but the first adventure is where and when a lot of the AP's groundwork is laid.
In any case, I think I'd probably recommend Carrion Crown to a beginning GM. It's got the right combination of good reviews and relatively simple mechanics (no kingdom building or extensive sandbox elements like you get in Kingmaker or Serpent's Skull, and no exotic stuff like you get in Jade Regent).
|
Creative Director
|
So I have two questions that pertain to the same general subject:
1) why was the racial restriction kept on the arcane archer?
It seemed out of place with the change the dwarven defender underwent to stalwart defender and I'm curious as to what influenced the decision to keep the elf/half-elf restirction2) why was the alignment restriction kept on the assassin?
I get why it might be there since they were that way in 3.5, but the capstone ability for rogues is pretty similar to the death attack ability, yet they don't get an alignment restriction (not to mention there is no restriction on the poisoner archetype).Personally I rule 0 these restrictions away, and it's not a huge issue I'm just curious what the dev team's logic was for these.
1) Because we weren't sure how far we could go with changes to the rules when we did the Core Rulebook. Expect the racial restriction to get relaxed soon, though.
2) Because killing people simply for money is evil. Because the assassin class has been presented as an evil class option not since 3.5, but since 1st edition. If you want to play a non-evil assassin... I'd look to the rogue or the ninja.
In Ultimate Magic the Spellslinger Wizard Archetype gets a proficiency with firearms, Gunsmithing feat, and a free gun but the Trophy Hunter Ranger Archetype gets no proficiency at all, and only Amateur Gunslinger at level 2 (and other feats/deeds later as per a style)...
Why is this? Shouldn't the Trophy Hunter get Exotic Weapon Proficiency Firearms and a free gun also?
I have two important questions :
Do you like when people mark your posts as a favorite ?
And do you like when people mark your post as FAQ candidate ?
What adventure path would you recommend to a beginning DM and do you have any advice how to convert it to a group of 6-7 people starting at level 4.
(I started with the Crown of the Kobold King module, but want something more coherent)
Big up! for answering all the questions.
Well... I would actually still start with the 1st installment of an AP, even though the players are 4th level, honestly. They'll have an easy time of the first adventure, but the first adventure is where and when a lot of the AP's groundwork is laid.
In any case, I think I'd probably recommend Carrion Crown to a beginning GM. It's got the right combination of good reviews and relatively simple mechanics (no kingdom building or extensive sandbox elements like you get in Kingmaker or Serpent's Skull, and no exotic stuff like you get in Jade Regent).
hmm never thought about it that way, i thought about "upping" Curse of the Crimson Throne, since most people like it.
I have to research the storyline for Carrion Crown before i buy the six of them. Thanks for the advice!
I have a question concerning the 3.5 book "The Draconomicon".
The feat dragonic wildshape allows the druid to use his wildshape to become a small and medium dragon( as written small and medium but it doesn't say only) , however by the time you take the feat you can already shapechange into a large animal.
In YOUR opinion would that mean that a druid could also shapechange into a large dragon provided he met all the other HD requirements.
before I bring this to my DM I am interested in a industry professionals opinion.
On a totally different topic, my group is having a blast with Shackled city AP. We just finished rescuing zenith( found his mutation) and are starting the next part this Saturday. Everyone is enjoying it immensely and it's a wonderful introduction to greyhawk for players that are only realms, eberron & homebrew familiar.
thank you in advance for your time.
6) I'm not sure this is really a question... there seems to be words missing from it.
Yes, a few words was missing.
It should be:
6) What is the quality control of Paizo about the new material created? I'm not talking about grammatical errors or what might be fixed in errata. I afraid we start to see classes and more classes that make no sense, overpowered feats and useless spells (or all this together). So, what is the quality control for new publications?
I hope now there are missing no words :D
So I have two questions that pertain to the same general subject:
1) why was the racial restriction kept on the arcane archer?
It seemed out of place with the change the dwarven defender underwent to stalwart defender and I'm curious as to what influenced the decision to keep the elf/half-elf restirction2) why was the alignment restriction kept on the assassin?
I get why it might be there since they were that way in 3.5, but the capstone ability for rogues is pretty similar to the death attack ability, yet they don't get an alignment restriction (not to mention there is no restriction on the poisoner archetype).Personally I rule 0 these restrictions away, and it's not a huge issue I'm just curious what the dev team's logic was for these.
1) Because we weren't sure how far we could go with changes to the rules when we did the Core Rulebook. Expect the racial restriction to get relaxed soon, though.
2) Because killing people simply for money is evil. Because the assassin class has been presented as an evil class option not since 3.5, but since 1st edition. If you want to play a non-evil assassin... I'd look to the rogue or the ninja.
Okay, I suppose the flavor text does say he does it for money, though I say that in my campaign setting it's just a set of skills and it can be used for a noble purpose if the character is going that way. Thanks for the reply!
Say, James, have you ever had a look at the Don't Rest Your Head system? What's your take?
James, I am not sure if you are the person to ask, but you have always been very helpful.
I want to change my Alias of DM Harpwizard to be my main Avatar Name and change my posts as Solaric to be a messageboard alias? Do you know how to change that? This all came up because my PBP campaign that I am running (Heroes of Elsir Vale) is listing Solaric as the Gamemaster and DM Harpwizard as an NPC. If you do not know, can you tell me who I can email for help? Thanks!
James, as a fellow Cthulhu fan I wanted to get your quick take on something. My players and I have all been playing together for about 10 or 12 years and with other groups at least a decade each before that. We are all very well versed in various game systems - especially CoC. Recently, I have taken to running shorter campaigns for my weekly Pathfinder game and something that has cropped up is each of my players has had, or will soon have, a campaign wherein their character is the "star". In talks with one of my players recently about his upcoming campaign he asked me to put together for him an actual Cthulhu game, but do it with Pathfinder rules and set it in our Fantasy World (which is a mash-up of Greyhawk 1000 years post the published setting with Golarion on the West coast).
My question for you is this: what "classic" CoC games/campaigns do you think would work best as a conversion?
My gut is telling me to try and do something with the Masks of N. But since you are such a fan, and I have noticed over the course of this thread my and your tastes in these types of things runs strangely parallel, I figured I might see if you were interested in sounding off.
I have about a year before the campaign is set to run, so I have plenty of time for the conversion work so level of effort isn't an issue. Here is the kicker, the player in question, while very familiar with CoC has had very limited access to some of the classic modules. He was in a At the Mountains of Madness game that fell apart and I know he played in a game that was a highly modified Kingsport run.
Any thoughts? As always, thanks for any response.
1)When did the Beastairy 3's release date get changed to December?
2)Have you seen Starman, the Last starfighter, Enemy mine, Innerspace, Saturn 3, Blackhole, Tron, Clockwork orange, Brazil, or Time Bandits? If so what did you think?
3)So are you against a Tiny/small magical beast that is as fast or faster than a quickling? What if it is from myth?
4)Have you seen the french films Amelie, City of lost children, or Priceless? If not you should. Aslo there is an animated french film called "A monster in paris" that coming over hear as well.
5)Did you ever find Waldo? catch Carmen Sandiego? Care who shot J. R.? Ask where's the beef? Do the safety dance? or cringe when you thought Disco was making a comeback?
6)What annoys you most Smurfs, talking colorful ponies, singing chipmunks, or house elves?
7)Do you like the old Max Fleicher cartons(Popeye, superman, Betty Boop)?
8)Do have a Favorite Charlie brown special? Favorite of those old stop motion specials like Rudolph?
9)Favorite Christmas special? Favorite Holloween special? Favorite other holiday special?
10)Will the Oni, Azura, or Rakshasa have Familiar options in the Beastairy 3? Are there familiar options in the Beastairy 3 that are Aberrations, plants, Undead, Monstrous humaniod, or Oozes?
Dear James Jacobs,
I'm incorporating your Kingdom Building article from Rivers of Blood in my latest game, and I had a question for you regarding the High Priest leadership role. Ultimately, I know this is my decision as GM, but I was hoping for you opinion on it.
Basically, my players are considering to elect a High Priest of a deity that is unpopular among the locals, then incentify the locals into converting to that deity's religion with tax breaks. As a GM, my first instinct would be to rule that the High Priest role is technically vacant because the person they're placing into power is not meeting the spiritual needs of the kingdom. What do you think?
Basically, my players are considering to elect a High Priest of a deity that is unpopular among the locals, then incentify the locals into converting to that deity's religion with tax breaks. As a GM, my first instinct would be to rule that the High Priest role is technically vacant because the person they're placing into power is not meeting the spiritual needs of the kingdom. What do you think?
I'm not James obviously, but it sounds like an interesting idea to me. There is some precedent in the real world for this kind of thing. There are many examples in Europe of the leader of the country changing and forcing the populace to convert from Catholicism to protestantism or vice versa. I would guess you would not have to dig very deep to find similar examples in other cultures, especially in places where there is a state religion.
Now for my question. Why do you think that the molds, slimes, oozes and jellies have proven so successful and appeared in most if not all versions of the game? I have never really seen the appeal and wonder what I am missing. The main reason I ask is that the one Pathfinder society adventure I bought was about 1/3 slimes and molds. Not the norm, I know, but it did somewhat put me off and I did not start buying Pathfinder modules until almost a year later when I discovered this thread and you convinced me to pick up the adventure paths. Thanks for an insightful and entertaining read. I wish I had picked up one of the adventure paths first.
|
James,
If you were to go back in time and make any changes to the books that were put out before you and Erik took tighter control over Golarion lore, what would that be? We know of some changes (dragons, Paladins of Asmodeus, Darklight Sisterhood), but I'm very curious if there are any more "retcons" to the early books (Dragons Revisited, Korvosa/Absalom/Darkmoon Vale) you would like to make?
I'm not James obviously, but it sounds like an interesting idea to me. There is some precedent in the real world for this kind of thing. There are many examples in Europe of the leader of the country changing and forcing the populace to convert from Catholicism to protestantism or vice versa. I would guess you would not have to dig very deep to find similar examples in other cultures, especially in places where there is a state religion.
One of my players made that argument too, the historical precedent one, but I don't think it's a valid precedent for one major reason: there is no question about whether or not all gods exist or not. One see the faithful to each god use their god-given powers, and deities send outsiders to mortals with some degree of frequency to carry out their will. I personally think that people are going to be a LOT more loyal to their given religion and less likely to convert if they can see Priests / Clerics of their faith actually perform miracles.
Okay, I suppose the flavor text does say he does it for money, though I say that in my campaign setting it's just a set of skills and it can be used for a noble purpose if the character is going that way. Thanks for the reply!
Also, note the Special requirement...
The character must kill someone for no other reason than to become an assassin.
Pretty much it's the old urban legend about gang initiations... Go to the mall (or Wal-Mart is popular in the legend these days) and kill a random person to join the gang. Now, the assassin SHOULD be more subtle than that, but it's the same thing. As for it just being a skill set, sure... but who taught you? Most assassins guilds would frown greatly upon their secrets (and an ability like "True Death" is not something you could figure out on your own how to do) being spread to non-assassins. So, I'd allow a non-evil assassin. You and your teacher are then marked for death by every assassin in the world. Have fun!
Now, for another question... Can a lycanthrope use his stats in Hybrid/Animal form to qualify for a feat? For example, if in Human form I have a Con of 10, but a wolf has a Con of 15, then can I take Improved Natural Armor with it's requirement of Con 13? Seems to me it would work, especially since the feat would be useless in human form anyway, since the Natural Armor is a Animal/Hybrid only feature.
As a Druid, I am always mindful of sustainability, and reducing waste.
From time to time during my adventures, I am forced to take the life of another being, often after transforming myself into the aspect of a Firepelt great-cat. Similarly, my ever faithfull feline companion is often engaged in such kills.
Given that we are not fond of just letting the kill rot, we usually avail ourselves of a bit of a snack, or turn the occasion into one of our full meals for the day. The party seem a little uncomfortable when the meal extends to human cultists, and highway robbers, but so far they have accepted my 'green and environmentally sensitive' waste free ways. Life is natures way of keeping food fresh after all!
Now being that the meat is so frequently uncooked, it has occured to me that there might be all sorts of bugs and parasites present, so I have as a general rule always blessed anything eaten with a quick pass of 'Purify food and drink'.
I would like you to solve a quick conundrum for me though;
At what point does the 'food' become 'food' for the purpose of the spell?
Is it possible to cast the spell on living humans? Often they are being consumed as they are still alive and kicking, so techincally they are food when hit with tooth and claw, it seems strange to have to wait for them to be dead just so we can clean them up.
As a Druid, I am always mindful of sustainability, and reducing waste.
From time to time during my adventures, I am forced to take the life of another being, often after transforming myself into the aspect of a Firepelt great-cat. Similarly, my ever faithfull feline companion is often engaged in such kills.Given that we are not fond of just letting the kill rot, we usually avail ourselves of a bit of a snack, or turn the occasion into one of our full meals for the day. The party seem a little uncomfortable when the meal extends to human cultists, and highway robbers, but so far they have accepted my 'green and environmentally sensitive' waste free ways. Life is natures way of keeping food fresh after all!
Now being that the meat is so frequently uncooked, it has occured to me that there might be all sorts of bugs and parasites present, so I have as a general rule always blessed anything eaten with a quick pass of 'Purify food and drink'.
I would like you to solve a quick conundrum for me though;
At what point does the 'food' become 'food' for the purpose of the spell?
Is it possible to cast the spell on living humans? Often they are being consumed as they are still alive and kicking, so techincally they are food when hit with tooth and claw, it seems strange to have to wait for them to be dead just so we can clean them up.
In most worlds cannibalism is considered an evil act, for whatever reason. Now, cannibalism in real life is eating one's own species, but in many fantasy games with multiple sentient races, it's usually considered eating another sentient being. So, is your druid evil?
Weeeeell.
The Great cat companion is not a human, and neither is the Druid.
Though he is by birth an Elf, but if he is eating a 'fresh kill' he's actually a great cat at that point - so not of the same species.
So thats kind of hard to classify as cannibalism :)
He's a savage that simply lives by the laws of the Jungle as do the beasts he calls his friends and family. Thats not Evil.
Weeeeell.
The Great cat companion is not a human, and neither is the Druid.
Though he is by birth an Elf, but if he is eating a 'fresh kill' he's actually a great cat at that point - so not of the same species.
So thats kind of hard to classify as cannibalism :)
He's a savage that simply lives by the laws of the Jungle as do the beasts he calls his friends and family. Thats not Evil.
Whether he's in cat form at the time or not, he's still an elf. Therefore eating a sentient being is an evil act. So, yes it's evil. The only reason an animal can get away with it is they are not sentient, therefore don't know any better. Afflicted werewolves (and most naturals) aren't forced to change to evil because they look pretty with red eyes. Looking at it any other way is splitting hairs (if not metagaming as a friend of mine said it would be).
So... is killing a sentient being an evil act?
So far the Druid has only killed in self defence, and is a bit of a primitive that simply lives as a natural creature, as do his animal bretheren in the jungle. Why would he eat Mr Cow, but not Mr Hunter, especially when his best friend Mr Tiger is tucking in with gleeful abandon?
As a Druid, I am always mindful of sustainability, and reducing waste.
From time to time during my adventures, I am forced to take the life of another being, often after transforming myself into the aspect of a Firepelt great-cat. Similarly, my ever faithfull feline companion is often engaged in such kills.Given that we are not fond of just letting the kill rot, we usually avail ourselves of a bit of a snack, or turn the occasion into one of our full meals for the day. The party seem a little uncomfortable when the meal extends to human cultists, and highway robbers, but so far they have accepted my 'green and environmentally sensitive' waste free ways. Life is natures way of keeping food fresh after all!
Now being that the meat is so frequently uncooked, it has occured to me that there might be all sorts of bugs and parasites present, so I have as a general rule always blessed anything eaten with a quick pass of 'Purify food and drink'.
I would like you to solve a quick conundrum for me though;
At what point does the 'food' become 'food' for the purpose of the spell?
Is it possible to cast the spell on living humans? Often they are being consumed as they are still alive and kicking, so techincally they are food when hit with tooth and claw, it seems strange to have to wait for them to be dead just so we can clean them up.
I like the way you think.
So... is killing a sentient being an evil act?
So far the Druid has only killed in self defence, and is a bit of a primitive that simply lives as a natural creature, as do his animal bretheren in the jungle. Why would he eat Mr Cow, but not Mr Hunter, especially when his best friend Mr Tiger is tucking in with gleeful abandon?
I'm done. Either you don't understand basic human AND D&D morality, or you don't want to. Either way, I'm done trying to get you to understand.
|
Creative Director
|
In Ultimate Magic the Spellslinger Wizard Archetype gets a proficiency with firearms, Gunsmithing feat, and a free gun but the Trophy Hunter Ranger Archetype gets no proficiency at all, and only Amateur Gunslinger at level 2 (and other feats/deeds later as per a style)...
Why is this? Shouldn't the Trophy Hunter get Exotic Weapon Proficiency Firearms and a free gun also?
(shrug)
Dunno; haven't really looked at that stuff much yet. AKA: A Jason Question.
|
Creative Director
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I have two important questions :
Do you like when people mark your posts as a favorite ?
And do you like when people mark your post as FAQ candidate ?
I don't notice either, but it's nice to know folks are reading what I'm writing enough to click on things! :-)
|
Creative Director
|
I have a question concerning the 3.5 book "The Draconomicon".
The feat dragonic wildshape allows the druid to use his wildshape to become a small and medium dragon( as written small and medium but it doesn't say only) , however by the time you take the feat you can already shapechange into a large animal.In YOUR opinion would that mean that a druid could also shapechange into a large dragon provided he met all the other HD requirements.
before I bring this to my DM I am interested in a industry professionals opinion.On a totally different topic, my group is having a blast with Shackled city AP. We just finished rescuing zenith( found his mutation) and are starting the next part this Saturday. Everyone is enjoying it immensely and it's a wonderful introduction to greyhawk for players that are only realms, eberron & homebrew familiar.
thank you in advance for your time.
Nope; if it meant the druid could become a Large dragon, it would have said. It's a game balance thing; a Large dragon is a lot more gnarly than a Large animal.
Yay! Glad to hear folks are enjoying Shackled City!
|
Creative Director
|
6) I'm not sure this is really a question... there seems to be words missing from it.Yes, a few words was missing.
It should be:
6) What is the quality control of Paizo about the new material created? I'm not talking about grammatical errors or what might be fixed in errata. I afraid we start to see classes and more classes that make no sense, overpowered feats and useless spells (or all this together). So, what is the quality control for new publications?
I hope now there are missing no words :D
The quality control of the books we put out is in large part all of our jobs at Paizo. If we start doing books folks hate, then folks will stop buying them, and then we stop being a company and go out of business.
As far as base classes... we're pretty much done with them for now. We wanted to get the character option books out first and fast, at the start of the game's life cycle. Going forward, the hardcover rulebooks will be increasingly going in different directions.
|
Creative Director
|
James, I am not sure if you are the person to ask, but you have always been very helpful.
I want to change my Alias of DM Harpwizard to be my main Avatar Name and change my posts as Solaric to be a messageboard alias? Do you know how to change that? This all came up because my PBP campaign that I am running (Heroes of Elsir Vale) is listing Solaric as the Gamemaster and DM Harpwizard as an NPC. If you do not know, can you tell me who I can email for help? Thanks!
I'm not sure that we allow Alias changes. I'd shoot a request to customer service and ask them for help.