
Neo2151 |

Something I've always wanted your take on, Mr. Bulmahn:
It's my personal opinion that the iterative attack system is one of (if not the) largest cause of bad feelings in all of 3.5/Pathfinder gaming.
I realize with the initial goal of remaining backwards compatible with D&D that there was no way iterative attacks wouldn't be a Pathfinder thing too, but I'm just curious about your opinion on that whole system of combat. In your opinion, do you consider iterative attacks a good thing? Would you do combat differently if you were not working with OGL and backwards compatibility?

![]() |

Disclaimer: This is “rules-y” type question and your answer only counts as one man’s opinion :-)
Q: How does Damnation Stride work? The spell description says “This spell functions like dimension door”. The Duration for Damnation Stride is 1 minute/level and for D-Door is instantaneous. The two popular theories are: 1) that you can activate it once during the duration (which happens instantaneously) or 2) you can activate (optionally) every round during the duration. Do you subscribe to either opinion, another opinion, or think it might be an error in the spell description? Or, don’t want to touch this with a 10’ pole?

![]() |

It looks like they expanded Damnation Stride in Mythic Adventures but did not change (or clarify) the duration.
Augmented (6th): If you expend two uses of mythic power, you bring one unwilling adjacent creature with you. You may bring additional creatures, but each must be adjacent to you and each requires you to expend one additional use of mythic power. These creatures must first attempt A saving throw against the burst of flame and stinking cloud, then can attempt a Will Saving Throw to resist being teleported with you.
Since Paizo didn't clarify or change anything, it must be RAW, right? Problem is, RAW is poorly written.
- School adds [fire] descriptor
- Level is increased by one; Domain and Bloodline removed
- No listed Components for Damnation Stride (Dimension Door is V); have to assume there is still a verbal component
- No listed Range for Damnation Stride (Dimension Door is long (400 ft. + 40 ft./level)); have to assume the range remains long
- Target changes from “you and touched objects or other touched willing creatures” to “self and creatures within a 10-foot-radius burst (see below)”
- Duration changes from instantaneous to 1 minute/level
- Saving Throw changes from “none and Will negates (object)” to “Reflex half, see text”
- Spell Resistance changes from “no and yes (object)” to “no”
- You lose the ability to transport others in exchange for a minor effect (10' radius burst of flame for 4d6 points of fire damage). So why the extra level, especially with the Tiefling restriction?
That's where the Duration comes in. Since it is 1 minute/level, but otherwise works the same as D-Door, it's logical that by spending a standard action (and requiring a verbal component) you can DS and be unable to perform any other actions for the rest of your turn. Effectively, you can do this once/round for 1 minute/level. At 9th level you could Dimension Stride 90 times in 9 minutes - but you'd have only a move equivalent action beforehand and no actions afterwards. Unless you could Quicken a spell, you wouldn't be able to cast anything else unless you forgo using DS that round. That's a really cool way to simulate Nightcrawler (X-Men) and fits in a lot with the Tiefling theme.
Is this the intent?

![]() |

Something I've always wanted your take on, Mr. Bulmahn:
It's my personal opinion that the iterative attack system is one of (if not the) largest cause of bad feelings in all of 3.5/Pathfinder gaming.
I realize with the initial goal of remaining backwards compatible with D&D that there was no way iterative attacks wouldn't be a Pathfinder thing too, but I'm just curious about your opinion on that whole system of combat. In your opinion, do you consider iterative attacks a good thing? Would you do combat differently if you were not working with OGL and backwards compatibility?
Hmm.. there are some good parts to the system and some bad parts. I like that your entire contribution to the round is not based off a single d20 roll, but I am not a huge fan of all the differing numbers and sliding bonuses you have to track. Alas, its the system we have so there is not much point in griping over it right now...
Jason

![]() |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |

Jason, did you get the feed back you needed from the ACG playtest? As a group that was a very well thought out and diverse character classes.
Yes, I think the playtest went quite well actually. We got a lot of very useful information and I can't wait for people to see the fruits of their labors in the final book this summer.
Jason

![]() |

Archpaladin Zousha wrote:What parts of Golarion would you say you consider yourself the most knowledgeable of?Razmiran.. it is my pet nation. Nobody touches it without at least chatting with me first.
Jason
All Hail the Living God
Reagrding that and also knowing that there are already modules that feature Razmarian cultists is there any chance of there being another module or even an adventure path set in Razmiran?

![]() |

Jason Bulmahn wrote:Reagrding that and also knowing that there are already modules that feature Razmarian cultists is there any chance of there being another module or even an adventure path set in Razmiran?Archpaladin Zousha wrote:What parts of Golarion would you say you consider yourself the most knowledgeable of?Razmiran.. it is my pet nation. Nobody touches it without at least chatting with me first.
Jason
All Hail the Living God
Who could know... I know I would certainly like there to be.
Jason

![]() |

To mimic a question I asked james, pretending that everything was ogl, what product that you worked on would you convert to pathfinder, given the chance. (can't be something you already did.)
Greyhawk... considering how much work I did on LG and Expedition to the Ruins of...
Jason

![]() |

More a design question than a rule question:
Belle Mythix wrote:A question that came up in a discussion: Why isn't Animate Object part of the Sorcerer/Wizard spell list?
I know it wasn't on their list in 3.5, but Wizards are kinda the one with the most uses/need for it... balance issues?
This is just one of those issues we inherited from 3.5 and saw no reason to change at the time.
Jason

Tels |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |

Tels wrote:All things anywhere and everywhere are competitions in Jason's mind already, and I prefer not to get caught up in that vortex.James Jacobs wrote:Can we make it a competition?Kairos Dawnfury wrote:Are you going to announce another ACG Iconic to compete with Jason?Nope. It's not a competition.
I'm thinking thems competition words, don't you?

![]() |
3 people marked this as a favorite. |

James Jacobs wrote:I'm thinking thems competition words, don't you?Tels wrote:All things anywhere and everywhere are competitions in Jason's mind already, and I prefer not to get caught up in that vortex.James Jacobs wrote:Can we make it a competition?Kairos Dawnfury wrote:Are you going to announce another ACG Iconic to compete with Jason?Nope. It's not a competition.
Since those words are things, then by definition they're competition words to Jason!

Kairos Dawnfury |

Tels wrote:Since those words are things, then by definition they're competition words to Jason!James Jacobs wrote:I'm thinking thems competition words, don't you?Tels wrote:All things anywhere and everywhere are competitions in Jason's mind already, and I prefer not to get caught up in that vortex.James Jacobs wrote:Can we make it a competition?Kairos Dawnfury wrote:Are you going to announce another ACG Iconic to compete with Jason?Nope. It's not a competition.
I'm sure there's a Fiendish T-Rex Vs. Red Dragon artwork somewhere...

Tels |

James Jacobs wrote:Tels wrote:Since those words are things, then by definition they're competition words to Jason!James Jacobs wrote:I'm thinking thems competition words, don't you?Tels wrote:All things anywhere and everywhere are competitions in Jason's mind already, and I prefer not to get caught up in that vortex.James Jacobs wrote:Can we make it a competition?Kairos Dawnfury wrote:Are you going to announce another ACG Iconic to compete with Jason?Nope. It's not a competition.I'm sure there's a Fiendish T-Rex Vs. Red Dragon artwork somewhere...
[Edit] Ninja.

Tels |
3 people marked this as a favorite. |

James Jacobs wrote:Tels wrote:Since those words are things, then by definition they're competition words to Jason!
I'm thinking thems competition words, don't you?Competition words? Competition of words? Perhaps some sort of structured, rhyming, word-using battle.
Who would win such a contest?
Would this be Golarion's first EPIC RAP BATTLE OF HISTORY!!!!

![]() |

Also, Jason, how big of a city do you envision Thronestep being? In terms of real-estate it spreads over, anyway. I'm bringing my home campaign there soon and I need to design a map of the city since there isn't an official one.
Since it is a "modern" city I was thinking something like 1800s Augsburg in size/design. Is that close to the mark or off?

zauriel56 |
I found the Investigator especially interesting. I know you couldn't convert over the factotum but it definitely feels like its in the same vein without being a carbon copy, which I love because I like smart fighter types, and while playing a lore warden or tactician can be cool, its not exactly what I want when I think of smart fighter.
I really want to say good job with the initial results of the ACG and cant wait to buy the ACG. Sorry there is no question here, just wanted to voice my appreciation for all your hard work at Paizo.

![]() |
Hey Jason, this is less a rules question and more trying to understand the rationale behind a change. Why make Dimensional Steps a standard action. In my opinion it really gimps the utility that this brings and makes it a less ideal choice due to its restricted amount per day vs. other options you have at this point in play. Thanks for your thoughts.

![]() |

Asked this of James, and I thought I'd get input from others on it too:
I noticed something that stands out for me regarding Iomedae's relationship to Sarkoris. I'd been wondering about the sequences regarding PCs who've a god in their family tree and wondering how Iomedae could count since she's a god more prominent with the foreign crusaders, but then it hit me. As one of the big 20, Iomedae would have been known in Sarkoris already. Since the Sarkorians owed Aroden big-time for driving out Deskari when he first showed up there, and this was long after the events of the Shining Crusade, the Sarkorians would have been aware of Iomedae as a goddess between then and the opening of the Worldwound, the only difference being that she was Aroden's servant and not the Inheritor of his church.
So...how would Sarkorians view and interpret Iomedae, especially in light of her pseudo-role as the goddess that leads the charge to save and protect what's left of their home? I have an idea for a Sarkorian paladin brewing in my head and I'm wondering how he'd reconcile venerating Iomedae with his culture's druidic roots as the founders of the Green Faith. More specifically (or more broadly, I'm uncertain), I'm trying to figure out how an individual PC might blend worshiping an ecclesiastical god/goddess while still respecting the shamanistic religion of their ancestors. Apart from Erastil and Gozreh, who are nature gods and thus fit right in with things like the Green Faith or Shoanti totemism, many gods seem to fit better in more populous, settled areas, and where their faiths go, cathedrals and heirarchies follow that are antithetical to the old ways.
How does someone straddling those two worlds reconcile the different beliefs, or is such a thing impossible? James mentioned before in his thread that, for example, a Sklar-Quah Shoanti wouldn't venerate Sarenrae AND the totems at the same time. I'm a big fan of playing "straddling the line between ancient traditions and modern beliefs" kinds of characters, like many modern depictions of King Arthur have been, but I'm uncertain how to approach such characters from the standpoint of worship, especially if they take a divine caster class like a paladin or inquisitor.

poiuyt |

1) Will there ever be a "Design a Class" contest?
2) Why are young Characters limited to NPC classes, it's kinda contrary to the examples given in Ultimate Campaign?
3) intermediary classes (between NPC and PC classes in effectiveness/power), is this a good/interesting idea?
4) Full BaB Divine class that work more like the Cleric than the Paladin?
5) Noble class(es) when?

Zark |

Have you ever tried Akvavit (also known as Aquavit)?
If yes, any favorites?
If no, you should try at least these:
From Norway: ”Løitens Export Aquavit and ”Lysholms Linie Aquavit”
From Denmark: “Röd Aalborg” and “Aalborg Jubilæums Akvavit”
From Sweden: “O. P. Anderson (also known as: OP Andersson)”; “Herrgårds Aquavit”; “Skåne Akvavit”; “Gammal Norrlands Akvavit” and “Östgöta Sädes Brännvin (more known as Östgöta Sädes)”
I don’t know if you can find it in the US, but in Sweden there is a set of 10 small bottles called “Svenska nubbar”. It contains the following brands: O.P. Anderson, Skåne Akvavit, Gammal Norrlands Akvavit, Hallands Fläder, Herrgårds Aquavit, Läckö Slottsaquavit, Örtagårds Brännvin, Östgöta Sädes Brännvin, Rånäs Brännvin och Bäska Droppar.
I’m not sure Bäska Droppar counts as an Akvavit, but it is worth trying, although it is very bitter (flavored with wormwood). There is a Danish bitter called ”Gammel Dansk” that you also should try.