If my Fighter worships Asmodeous, but thinks Asmodeous is Lawful Good, is Lawful Good herself, and thinks she's a Paladin, how would the Chelaxian government react to her? How would Asmodeous's clergy react to her?
Why, yes, she does have the Intelligence and Wisdom scores of a rock. Why do you ask?
If your fighter was low-key about it, the government and the church probably wouldn't notice.
If your fighter was all public and loud about it... I would first of all start to think your fighter was insane. If not insane... then a lot more chaotic than lawful.
In any event, once word spread, the government would react to you as an increasingly dangerous subversive, and the church would react to you as an increasingly dangerous heretic. Which one eventually sent agents out to kill or silence or imprison you first, though, I couldn't say.
But in any event, this character concept seems to me to be a specifically engineered troublemaker, and were a character like that to appear in a game I was running, I'd give a warning and then have the thought police show up to take you away. It wouldn't be an overwhelming attack force at first, but it would build over the course of several encounters, and would certainly derail whatever other adventure the party was trying to go on. And having such characters derail adventures is super frustrating for GMs and for players alike—since most players don't want to play in a game where someone else's character is always the attention getter and/or the star of the show.
My advice would be to abandon this character, honestly. It's a better idea for an NPC. Or at the very least, a character in a campaign that doesn't go to Cheliax.
Oh, you should see the rest of the party. We've all agreed not to take this game seriously, and every single character in the party has plenty of shenanigan potential. This character is designed to cause trouble, but that's the whole point. We don't feel like a serious RP right now, we just want to destroy Cheliax with our insane antics, and the GM thinks that a campaign specifically built around this type of behavior might actually be fun to run.
We also thought it would be fun to roll stats in order and build a character based on whatever we got, and I got a 4 Int, 3 Wis, 8 Cha, 16 Str, 16 Dex, and 14 Con. That's why I decided on a Fighter who's so stupid she thinks Asmodeous is a good guy, thinks she's a Paladin even though she isn't qualified to be one at all, and is incredibly gullible. She does act chaotic at times, but it's because she's easily fooled into thinking she's being lawful by the other party members.
Have you ever played in a campaign like this, James, or do you prefer to take every RP seriously? I like my RPs serious, but I think this will be a fun deviation from my normal games.
I just read Lovecraft's "The Case of Charles Dexter Ward" again for the umpteenth time, and it is always as good. In particular, the idea of necromancers or cultists seeking out the remains of long dead people to question them for secrets of lost civilizations, forgotten lore, or for blackmailing the living is very useful for stories, because it means that grave-robbing or relic trading gets other incentives than securing lost treasures or more corpses for low-HD undead or anatomy study. So my questions:
1. Does this type of necromancy fit into Pathfinder and Golarion?
2. Can you do something like this (interrogating the long-dead) under the rules? Speak with Dead is fairly limited in scope, and resurrection effects only work for a century or so before Pharasma gets her due, plus the dead can simply choose not to come. Are there any other spells that could emulate Curwen's rituals for force-raising the long dead, or if not, should there be?
3. Could you somehow conjure or planar bind the petitioners that the judged souls became? I have some vague memory of Faust doing that (and if not, the Witch of Endor).
4. Could you use some variant of Simulacrum for this purpose: create a limited copy of the original creature from the "essential salts" of its body, then question that on things that its now halved HD lets it know?
5. Might the upcoming book on lost civilizations come with some necromantic options for archaeologists?
Creative Director
|
Basically they're caused based since the setting doesn't use alignments, Champions of Life, Race, Death, Nation etc. and at the upper levels can focus so they can for instance be Champions of the Queen. Technically would you still consider these classes disruptive since they do have an "agenda" so to speak? For that matter wouldn't that apply to any divinely focused class?
Monte's a very imaginative and creative and good designer. But not every choice he makes in his design work is something that I automatically like—there were too many decisions in his Arcana Evolved books that didn't sync up well with my preferences (or too many that just plain didn't work with my campaign world), which is what kept me from really ever getting into Arcana Evolved.
And frankly... it's not the class that's disruptive—it's the player. When a class gives you specific rules on how to play that character in the form of a code—the more restrictive that code gets, the more easy it is for a disruptive player to capitalize on and use as a "shield" to justify his actions. Having not read those classes' codes, I can't say for sure how disruptive I think a disruptive player could make them.
Has anyone ever done the "Oh, James" (from James Bond) to you, as a joke or to sounds weird/creepy/funny or ... *gets shot*?
|
Creative Director
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Oh, you should see the rest of the party. We've all agreed not to take this game seriously, and every single character in the party has plenty of shenanigan potential. This character is designed to cause trouble, but that's the whole point. We don't feel like a serious RP right now, we just want to destroy Cheliax with our insane antics, and the GM thinks that a campaign specifically built around this type of behavior might actually be fun to run.
We also thought it would be fun to roll stats in order and build a character based on whatever we got, and I got a 4 Int, 3 Wis, 8 Cha, 16 Str, 16 Dex, and 14 Con. That's why I decided on a Fighter who's so stupid she thinks Asmodeous is a good guy, thinks she's a Paladin even though she isn't qualified to be one at all, and is incredibly gullible. She does act chaotic at times, but it's because she's easily fooled into thinking she's being lawful by the other party members.
Have you ever played in a campaign like this, James, or do you prefer to take every RP seriously? I like my RPs serious, but I think this will be a fun deviation from my normal games.
I have indeed played in games like that. And they tend to either self-destruct, or I tend to leave them. The worst is when a long-term game sort of transforms into one where a changing of the guard in players forces a change from serious to mayhem. In fact, that's what happened in a long-running FR game that I was playing Shensen in. I'd played her from like 2nd level or so (she replaced a dead character) up to about 18th or 19th, but then I ended up bailing on the campaign because the addition of new players who were too goofy and too disruptive made the gameplay experience no fun for me.
In other words... I take RP seriously, I guess. And that includes taking the SETTING seriously and taking the CAMPAIGN seriously, and thus building and roleplaying characters who WANT to be part of the setting and campaign in the first place.
Oh, you should see the rest of the party. We've all agreed not to take this game seriously, and every single character in the party has plenty of shenanigan potential. This character is designed to cause trouble, but that's the whole point. We don't feel like a serious RP right now, we just want to destroy Cheliax with our insane antics, and the GM thinks that a campaign specifically built around this type of behavior might actually be fun to run.
We also thought it would be fun to roll stats in order and build a character based on whatever we got, and I got a 4 Int, 3 Wis, 8 Cha, 16 Str, 16 Dex, and 14 Con. That's why I decided on a Fighter who's so stupid she thinks Asmodeous is a good guy, thinks she's a Paladin even though she isn't qualified to be one at all, and is incredibly gullible. She does act chaotic at times, but it's because she's easily fooled into thinking she's being lawful by the other party members.
Have you ever played in a campaign like this, James, or do you prefer to take every RP seriously? I like my RPs serious, but I think this will be a fun deviation from my normal games.
I have indeed played in games like that. And they tend to either self-destruct, or I tend to leave them. The worst is when a long-term game sort of transforms into one where a changing of the guard in players forces a change from serious to mayhem. In fact, that's what happened in a long-running FR game that I was playing Shensen in. I'd played her from like 2nd level or so (she replaced a dead character) up to about 18th or 19th, but then I ended up bailing on the campaign because the addition of new players who were too goofy and too disruptive made the gameplay experience no fun for me.
In other words... I take RP seriously, I guess. And that includes taking the SETTING seriously and taking the CAMPAIGN seriously, and thus building and roleplaying characters who WANT to be part of the setting and campaign in the first place.
I've had this problem a lot, too, and I agree that it is very frustrating. Like you, I prefer my RPs to be serious. I just think that this game might be a fun break from the norm, especially since all of us, including the GM, have agreed beforehand that this will be a goofy campaign. I think that, with a campaign that was specifically intended to be filled with insane PC shenanigans from the beginning, this behavior could be fun for everyone instead of massively frustrating.
|
Creative Director
|
I just read Lovecraft's "The Case of Charles Dexter Ward" again for the umpteenth time, and it is always as good. In particular, the idea of necromancers or cultists seeking out the remains of long dead people to question them for secrets of lost civilizations, forgotten lore, or for blackmailing the living is very useful for stories, because it means that grave-robbing or relic trading gets other incentives than securing lost treasures or more corpses for low-HD undead or anatomy study. So my questions:
1. Does this type of necromancy fit into Pathfinder and Golarion?
2. Can you do something like this (interrogating the long-dead) under the rules? Speak with Dead is fairly limited in scope, and resurrection effects only work for a century or so before Pharasma gets her due, plus the dead can simply choose not to come. Are there any other spells that could emulate Curwen's rituals for force-raising the long dead, or if not, should there be?
3. Could you somehow conjure or planar bind the petitioners that the judged souls became? I have some vague memory of Faust doing that (and if not, the Witch of Endor).
4. Could you use some variant of Simulacrum for this purpose: create a limited copy of the original creature from the "essential salts" of its body, then question that on things that its now halved HD lets it know?
5. Might the upcoming book on lost civilizations come with some necromantic options for archaeologists?
1) Yes.
2) Yes; Pathfinder #27 introduces a magic item called a corpse candle that does just what you're looking for. And a more powerful version of speak with dead or other effects that would allow this type of communication with the dead can certainly be designed when we decide to do a story about those elements.
3) You could, but in most cases, the petitioners or outsiders don't have any memories of their lives as mortals. There are exceptions, though, but it's very very rare (aka: only happens when we want it to for story purposes).
4) Simulacrum is very much a great way to model the effects of Curwen's magic; just change the flavor a bit (ash for snow) and presto; you're good to go. A simulacrum would indeed retain some elements of its source body's intelligence—it's a great way to interrogate the long dead. Of course, the GM has carte blanche to decide what the simulacrum does and doesn't remember.
5) I don't think that any "necromantic archeology" options are scheduled for the upcoming "Lost Kingdoms" book.
Oh, you should see the rest of the party. We've all agreed not to take this game seriously, and every single character in the party has plenty of shenanigan potential. This character is designed to cause trouble, but that's the whole point. We don't feel like a serious RP right now, we just want to destroy Cheliax with our insane antics, and the GM thinks that a campaign specifically built around this type of behavior might actually be fun to run.
We also thought it would be fun to roll stats in order and build a character based on whatever we got, and I got a 4 Int, 3 Wis, 8 Cha, 16 Str, 16 Dex, and 14 Con. That's why I decided on a Fighter who's so stupid she thinks Asmodeous is a good guy, thinks she's a Paladin even though she isn't qualified to be one at all, and is incredibly gullible. She does act chaotic at times, but it's because she's easily fooled into thinking she's being lawful by the other party members.
Have you ever played in a campaign like this, James, or do you prefer to take every RP seriously? I like my RPs serious, but I think this will be a fun deviation from my normal games.
IANJ but I sense an overarching pattern in the games you post about here. And from your comments, complaints, and posts I sense a pattern in the way they all end up.
I see no reason why this idea of yours would lead to a different conclusion.
Has anyone ever done the "Oh, James" (from James Bond) to you, as a joke or to sounds weird/creepy/funny or ... *gets shot*?Actually... no. No one has. Not sure if that's a relief or depressing, though.
Why can't it be both?
What is this aforementioned necromantic archaeology? It intrigues me.
Oh, you should see the rest of the party. We've all agreed not to take this game seriously, and every single character in the party has plenty of shenanigan potential. This character is designed to cause trouble, but that's the whole point. We don't feel like a serious RP right now, we just want to destroy Cheliax with our insane antics, and the GM thinks that a campaign specifically built around this type of behavior might actually be fun to run.
We also thought it would be fun to roll stats in order and build a character based on whatever we got, and I got a 4 Int, 3 Wis, 8 Cha, 16 Str, 16 Dex, and 14 Con. That's why I decided on a Fighter who's so stupid she thinks Asmodeous is a good guy, thinks she's a Paladin even though she isn't qualified to be one at all, and is incredibly gullible. She does act chaotic at times, but it's because she's easily fooled into thinking she's being lawful by the other party members.
Have you ever played in a campaign like this, James, or do you prefer to take every RP seriously? I like my RPs serious, but I think this will be a fun deviation from my normal games.
IANJ but I sense an overarching pattern in the games you post about here. And from your comments, complaints, and posts I sense a pattern in the way they all end up.
I see no reason why this idea of yours lead to a different conclusion.
I think this one will be different because we've agreed to act goofy and not take things seriously before hand instead of degenerating into it over time, so I'm going in with different expectations. I think that, if the GM is trying for this sort of thing, it can be fun for everyone instead of frustrating. I've also never played with this group before, so I'm hoping a fresh start will do me well.
|
Creative Director
|
Has anyone ever done the "Oh, James" (from James Bond) to you, as a joke or to sounds weird/creepy/funny or ... *gets shot*?Actually... no. No one has. Not sure if that's a relief or depressing, though.Why can't it be both?
What is this aforementioned necromantic archaeology? It intrigues me.
Check out "The Case of Charles Dexter Ward" for the best example.
(Basically, it's the act of resurrecting the dead to learn their secrets.)
Thank you as always for your answers. On the subject of simulacra, they explicitly cannot be healed except through an expensive laboratory procedure (in many cases more expensive than just making a new one). Can they, however, benefit from fast healing effects? This somewhat impacts whether or not it makes sense to use them for guards and the like.
|
Creative Director
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Thank you as always for your answers. On the subject of simulacra, they explicitly cannot be healed except through an expensive laboratory procedure (in many cases more expensive than just making a new one). Can they, however, benefit from fast healing effects? This somewhat impacts whether or not it makes sense to use them for guards and the like.
Nope. Fast healing (and regeneration) are both "healing effects" and thus don't work on a simulacrum.
It's probably easier to just make a new one when the old one gets too beat up.
:ry
d og upi vsm gohitr piy yjod vpfr sy s;;/ o did[rvy yjsy yjrtr
d s yu[p om oy dp,rejrtr. niy yjsy
d ejsy upi hry gpt sdlomh yjr ds,r p;f wirdyopmd s;; yjr yo,rz2
Really?
mp gsot/ o yjoml o
xr nrrm esoyomh wioyr [syormy;uz
Well, relatively, perhaps :)
So what's the highest level a campaign you've run in has gotten to? How about one you've played in?
(not counting one-shots :)
|
Oh, you should see the rest of the party. We've all agreed not to take this game seriously, and every single character in the party has plenty of shenanigan potential. This character is designed to cause trouble, but that's the whole point. We don't feel like a serious RP right...If my Fighter worships Asmodeous, but thinks Asmodeous is Lawful Good, is Lawful Good herself, and thinks she's a Paladin, how would the Chelaxian government react to her? How would Asmodeous's clergy react to her?
Why, yes, she does have the Intelligence and Wisdom scores of a rock. Why do you ask?
If your fighter was low-key about it, the government and the church probably wouldn't notice.
If your fighter was all public and loud about it... I would first of all start to think your fighter was insane. If not insane... then a lot more chaotic than lawful.
In any event, once word spread, the government would react to you as an increasingly dangerous subversive, and the church would react to you as an increasingly dangerous heretic. Which one eventually sent agents out to kill or silence or imprison you first, though, I couldn't say.
But in any event, this character concept seems to me to be a specifically engineered troublemaker, and were a character like that to appear in a game I was running, I'd give a warning and then have the thought police show up to take you away. It wouldn't be an overwhelming attack force at first, but it would build over the course of several encounters, and would certainly derail whatever other adventure the party was trying to go on. And having such characters derail adventures is super frustrating for GMs and for players alike—since most players don't want to play in a game where someone else's character is always the attention getter and/or the star of the show.
My advice would be to abandon this character, honestly. It's a better idea for an NPC. Or at the very least, a character in a campaign that doesn't go to Cheliax.
For a campaign like that, your concept sounds like a really interesting idea. I was just thinking on reading the earlier posts that it'd take such a game for that character not to derail it... but seems like you've got one.
What do you think of this.
Hey James,
Are there any posters that you just want to meet?
Hey James,
Are there any posters that you just want to meet?
IANJJ, but he already met me and he didn't call the authorities......
I might not have realized it. In real life, you might not look as much like a hound of Tindalos, I assume...IANJJ, but he already met me and he didn't call the authorities......Hey James,
Are there any posters that you just want to meet?
I mentioned the as yet unarrived live scorpions.......
What's your favorite situation that occurred favorably for you based on the die roll that could not have happened if you rolled poorly??
Mine, as an example, was when my weak necromancer out-wrestled a giant due to scoring more natural 20s than it did on grapple checks. I think the final total was Giant 3, Veldrin(me) 4 natural 20s in a row.
Clearly, had I rolled anything less, I would've gotten squished.
Query: So... How did the good people at Paizo manage to slip the name of a little-known goddess of "birdpeople"
I know that she HARDLY got any mention during 3rd Edition, but I was under the impression that she was
I'm not complaining.
Please and thank you!
-- C.
PS: Apologies for the awkwardness of the post (regarding all the spoilers & oocs)...
Hello again!
1- Are there any future or soon plans for Pathfinder-based PC games?
For example a Pathfinder-based game on Kings Bounty or maybe a game much like Neverwinter nights or a shooter for all I care, I would love to see a computer game in Pathfinders style.
And if there is a game please leave out the Hobgoblins, Orcs and other such common overused creatures and add the Daemons, Yellow Musk Creepers, Redcaps, Will o wisps and Alraunes for a change!! :D
2- I never cared for Daemons before... in D&D I thought they were extremly boring, in Tome of horrors they were even worse... but in Pathfinder they actually became my favorites, defeating even the Demons, Fey and Aberrations. Mostly because I really like the new Daemons SO much, Crucidaemon, the Marrash-like Leukodaemon and Meladaemon are fantastic!
Now for the question: Place these daemons from best to worse:
(this is my own order btw, I like crucidaemon most and Ceustodaemon least)
Crucidaemon - Leukodaemon - Derghodaemon - Meladaemon - Hydrodaemon - Purrodaemon - Thanadaemon - Vulnudaemon - Piscodaemon - Cacodaemon - Astradaemon - Olethrodaemon - Ceustodaemon
Its really cool how the boring Derghodaemon from D&D and Tome of Horrors became the Vermin Lord in pathfinder, such a good change!
Dear James Jacobs,
When you play MMOs (I vaguely remember you saying that you were/are a Warcraft player once) do you gravitate towards tanking, DPSing, or healing?
Will Pathfinder Online likely keep these "roles," or is it going to try to abandon them?
I like to paraphrase this classic quote from the original Ars Magica rules about magical activities as follows:
Keep in mind that the rules are only there to cover general actions by PCs and regular NPCs If you're looking to build story as a GM, you can always throw in one of a kind rituals and items that can't be duplicated by standard mechanics. That's the standard macguffin foundation of many modules since the original game began.
This is true, but even as a player, necromantic archaeology is very much something I might go in for. To each their own. : )
He'd have to get a pretty big raise though. I think his weekly pay check wouldn't cover the gas for one trip!IANJ, but he would no longer have an excuse to miss work due to snow...Dear James,
If you had a Sherman tank would you drive it to work?
Who would turn doing giving a raise to someone with a tank?
James, how come you can't bash with a buckler? IRL bucklers were specifically intended to be used as weapons.
|
Creative Director
|
Query: So... How did the good people at Paizo manage to slip the name of a little-known goddess of "birdpeople" ** spoiler omitted ** into Golarion ** spoiler omitted **?
I know that she HARDLY got any mention during 3rd Edition, but I was under the impression that she was ** spoiler omitted **
I'm not complaining.
Please and thank you!
-- C.
PS: Apologies for the awkwardness of the post (regarding all the spoilers & oocs)...
That's a case of parallel development. One of the things we had to do when preparing that book and the accompanying Inner Sea map folio was come up with a HUGE number of names for islands in a short time. This island was among those, I believe (as a glance at earlier maps of the Inner Sea confirms). Likely what happened was that I and whoever came up with the same name for the WotC character had either very similar though processes and sources of inspiration, and simply arrived at identical names coincidentally. It's freaky and weird, but I've seen it happen relatively often. (Another plausible explanation is that I read the name and it lodged in my lizard brain for years and years and then burbled to the top when I started poking my brain for new names, I suppose!)
If this were a case where a freelancer snuck the name in as an "easter egg," it would have been an excellent example of why I hate hate hate HATE it when freelances pull that kind of stunt—the name you mention is a VERY obscure character, and it's not one that anyone here (specifically, myself) recognized until you brought it up. It is, in fact, the type of easter egg, that when we learn about it, makes us strongly consider never ever using that freelancer again.
In any case, the "Syranita" who inspired the name for Syranita's Aerie was not a deity at all. Right now, it's just a name. When and if we DO ever develop it further, my gut feeling right now is that he/she was probably some sort of freaky bad guy who was marooned on that island and made it into a little private empire.
|
Creative Director
|
What's your favorite situation that occurred favorably for you based on the die roll that could not have happened if you rolled poorly??
Mine, as an example, was when my weak necromancer out-wrestled a giant due to scoring more natural 20s than it did on grapple checks. I think the final total was Giant 3, Veldrin(me) 4 natural 20s in a row.
Clearly, had I rolled anything less, I would've gotten squished.
Probably the time when I was running the Dragonlance adventures for my sister back in the 80s' and Caramon tried to pry up a heavy iron gate and failed, and then Raistlin steeped in to try it, rolled a 1 on the d%, and accomplished what his big beefy brother could not.
Actually, that wasn't really for me—I was running those characters as NPCs as the GM at that time.
For my own character? Hmmmm... I guess the time I decided to roll up a fighter/wizard and naturally rolled an 18/00 strength. That was pretty boss!
"Syranita" really reads as a simple derivation from Siren or such that could have been developed independently - to me.
Sirens obviously have something to do with bird women, but also are linked to the sea - the secondary meaning being mermaids.
|
Creative Director
|
1- Are there any future or soon plans for Pathfinder-based PC games?
For example a Pathfinder-based game on Kings Bounty or maybe a game much like Neverwinter nights or a shooter for all I care, I would love to see a computer game in Pathfinders style.And if there is a game please leave out the Hobgoblins, Orcs and other such common overused creatures and add the Daemons, Yellow Musk Creepers, Redcaps, Will o wisps and Alraunes for a change!! :D
2- I never cared for Daemons before... in D&D I thought they were extremly boring, in Tome of horrors they were even worse... but in Pathfinder they actually became my favorites, defeating even the Demons, Fey and Aberrations. Mostly because I really like the new Daemons SO much, Crucidaemon, the Marrash-like Leukodaemon and Meladaemon are fantastic!
Now for the question: Place these daemons from best to worse:
(this is my own order btw, I like crucidaemon most and Ceustodaemon least)
Crucidaemon - Leukodaemon - Derghodaemon - Meladaemon - Hydrodaemon - Purrodaemon - Thanadaemon - Vulnudaemon - Piscodaemon - Cacodaemon - Astradaemon - Olethrodaemon - CeustodaemonIts really cool how the boring Derghodaemon from D&D and Tome of Horrors became the Vermin Lord in pathfinder, such a good change!
1) We've only announced one—"Pathfinder Online," which is being developed by Goblinworks. This game isn't going to use the Pathfinder rules (the OGL gets weird when it comes to video games, and so we aren't using it and thus can't use the exact Pathfinder rules), but it will be set in Golarion.
2) Glad you like the daemons so much! I've been a fan of them myself since 1st edition, when they were introduced in the Monster Manual 2, because they not only had great art and weird new mechanics, but drew upon some neat real-world mythology to boot. I'm still a demon-fan myself, and as such I can't really rank the daemons in order from best to worst... although I am rather fond of the piscodaemon and always have been...
|
Creative Director
|
"Syranita" really reads as a simple derivation from Siren or such that could have been developed independently - to me.
Sirens obviously have something to do with bird women, but also are linked to the sea - the secondary meaning being mermaids.
That's actually a pretty good train of thought as to how someone might come up with that name. And it certainly makes the name of the island make sense if it's the lair of a powerful siren.
|
Creative Director
|
Dear James Jacobs,
When you play MMOs (I vaguely remember you saying that you were/are a Warcraft player once) do you gravitate towards tanking, DPSing, or healing?
Will Pathfinder Online likely keep these "roles," or is it going to try to abandon them?
I've tried many MMOs. The only one I've really ever stuck with was Warcraft, and the first character I made in Warcraft, back on launch day, was a night elf hunter because I wanted to play a character that:
1) Was a night elf, since I'd worked on night elves a lot in the abandoned D&D Warcraft book I was hired to help write for 3.0 by WotC), and;
2) Could tame a raptor as a pet.
I'm not a big fan at all of multiple characters, and I really AM a big fan of having a pet dinosaur... so that more or less means you'd classify me as one who gravitates toward DPS. And as a hunter fan who gets frustrated at the fact they don't have Tank or Healing powers and thus often have trouble finding places in raids... I'd very VERY much like to see Pathfinder Online completely lose these roles.
If Pathfinder Online doesn't... then there's no point to building more than three different character options.
|
Creative Director
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
James, how come you can't bash with a buckler? IRL bucklers were specifically intended to be used as weapons.
Because Monte Cook, Jonathan Tweet, and Skip Williams, the original designers of 3rd Edition D&D and thus the designers of the game rules upon which Pathfinder is based, didn't want to let you be able to do buckler bashes, and because Jason didn't change that rule because we had a philosophy of change as little as possible because we were worried about driving customers away from the game we already knew they loved.