How his spells interact with his implements.
An Occultist could have multiple items that fucntion as implements from a particular school but they all give the exact same powers and spells.
For example, he could have the toe bone from a martyred saint, a scrap of robe from a destroyed vile lich and a drum that belonged to a shaman and they all give him the exact same spells regardless of which one he chooses to use as his necromancy implement for the day.
For someone who draws their power from/through the imbued emotional and psychic power of items, it seems odd that it doesn't actually matter what emotions and history might actually infuse those items.
Does anyone else find this a little odd?
No. It's simple in order to fit into any given campaign and concept. A longer more complex approach would be impractical. Covering each of the magical schools is already a daunting number of spells and abilities.
I'd hardly call the tiny list Ocultists have daunting. But maybe that's because I'm used to playing full casters.
Anyway, I know mechanically they tried to keep things simple. And I understand why they did it.
I mean flavourwise, it's odd.
Something else I find strange is how some schools of theirs have so few spells at a particular level while other schools have so many. I'd think it was because they couldn't think of ones to fit the occultist theme, but I can think of several that I would have included as appropriately thematic.
Yeah from a design standpoint it works, and works well.
It leaves much of the flavor up to the player and character rather than attempt to shoehorn you into any absolute specifics.
flavor wise I see no issue.. Its about perception of things.
and the item itself matters less. What matters is the amount of emotions behind and in it. They use that to manifest whatever spells the ywant.
The item isn't the spell. The item is the fuel that they use to create a spell.
Think of it this way.
The spell is.. Chicken parmasean.
The impiments could be chicken, and spagetti.
or it could be goose and linguine.
Different ingredients, and different tastes. but its the cooking that decides what it is.the same outcome. Poultry pounded into a semi flat, covered in coatings cooked served with noodles.
Parts may very but its how the cook puts it together that matters.
Zwordsman wrote: flavor wise I see no issue.. Its about perception of things.
and the item itself matters less. What matters is the amount of emotions behind and in it. They use that to manifest whatever spells the ywant.
The item isn't the spell. The item is the fuel that they use to create a spell.
Think of it this way.
The spell is.. Chicken parmasean.
The impiments could be chicken, and spagetti.
or it could be goose and linguine.
Different ingredients, and different tastes. but its the cooking that decides what it is.the same outcome. Poultry pounded into a semi flat, covered in coatings cooked served with noodles.
Parts may very but its how the cook puts it together that matters.
Mmmm... chicken parmesan.
While I think I know what you're getting at, that example doesn't really work.
Chicken isn't even close to goose in flavour or cooking methods...
If the spell is "chicken" and you use "goose", it's not the same spell.
The impression I was under was that, since each Implement only gives you one spell of each level, each Implement DOES carry different spells. Your Focus Powers may stay the same, but they evidently don't come from the Implements but rather from the Occultist's own ability to manipulate them - the Focus powers are the Occultist's, the spells are the Implement's, and you do still carry them all with you.
Natan Linggod 327 wrote: While I think I know what you're getting at, that example doesn't really work.
Chicken isn't even close to goose in flavour or cooking methods...
If the spell is "chicken" and you use "goose", it's not the same spell.
Nah probably not the best two poutlries but first that came to mind.
But still. Its a "different parts same outcome" sorta thing.
i guess go with chicken and chicken but two different types of noodles. basically same experience just slightly different versions.
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
Natan Linggod 327 wrote: I'd hardly call the tiny list Ocultists have daunting. But maybe that's because I'm used to playing full casters.
Anyway, I know mechanically they tried to keep things simple. And I understand why they did it.
I mean flavourwise, it's odd.
Something else I find strange is how some schools of theirs have so few spells at a particular level while other schools have so many. I'd think it was because they couldn't think of ones to fit the occultist theme, but I can think of several that I would have included as appropriately thematic.
D&D design often gets sort of caught between the rigidity of OD&D (Druids are humans, dammit; they all belong to the same weird secretive order and they all have to fight their way up the ladder like some kind of hippie Kung-Fu masters) and the freedom of more open-ended games like HERO, where the "special effects" of a given power are explicitly left up to the player to decide.
Being caught in the middle sometimes leads to silliness or rigidity where none needs to exist. When in doubt, I think it is best to just hand-wave flavor and let the player decide how he wants things to be presented - to include re-skinning things like traits, the species of familiars, etc. If it looks like a duck and it can sort of approximate a quacking sound, just let the player call it a duck.
Oh I have no problem with using the Occultist as is (although I would like more spells in certain schools - I'm looking at you necromancy).
It's just I found the idea odd.
Something else a bit odd, why are the Outsider Contacts specified to be 3HD?
They only thing they do is duplicate a divination spell, or pass on a message or small item.
What would you need to know their HD for? Makes me wonder if they were meant to be able to do more things like combat but Paizo changed their minds just before publishing.
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Natan Linggod 327 wrote: Something else a bit odd, why are the Outsider Contacts specified to be 3HD?
They only thing they do is duplicate a divination spell, or pass on a message or small item.
What would you need to know their HD for? Makes me wonder if they were meant to be able to do more things like combat but Paizo changed their minds just before publishing.
Because if Paizo didn't specify HD, we'd probably have a dozen threads now asking for those stats.
Plus.. for the weird interactions that can accidently occur. From a combo of various effects and or plot devices.
WIthout details peopel would want them. Much easier to just slide that in there.
Plus.. it means there isn't a RAW set accidental chance of summoning Shreeder or something who just busts out and kills you. As is the trope for summoning deamons or ghotss to do stuff for you (just look at any of the movies that has it)
I am rather surprised they didnt include combat as one of the options available for use of the Contacts.
Or using them for their spell-likes, I'd think calling up a minor angel or something for healing once per day works rather well for an occult character.
ah well.
aThat soundss liike a fun future archetype.
More things that stuck me as odd about the Occultist.
Specifically this line from the Outsider Contact description.
"The outsider always resents being used in this way, even if the occultist and the outsider share an alignment component."
That doesn't make any sense. Especially if what the Occultist asks is in line with the outsiders own goals.
Imagine this scenario
Othar the Good, LG Occultist 12 famed for using his abilities to combat evil and help the downtrodden, summon Thantrakus the Harbinger Archon.
Othar: Thantrakus, I need to know which of the two towers here (points to map) we need to get to, in order to stop the the lich Balphelemon from rising and bringing a thousand years of darkness to the land.
Thantrakus: What do you think I am? I have way more important things to do.
Othar: ... I have some high quality scriptures here as a gift that you can use to spread the message of Law and Good (20gp worth of materials).
Thantrakus: Oh alright, I'll go ask around. But this really cheeses me off! *poof* <disappears>
2 hours later *poof* <reappears>
Thantrakus: The answer I've been given is "Under the veil of bone, the unquiet dead stirs". Now sod off and stop bothering me. *poof* <disappears before Othar can thank him>
Imagine this:
You're at home, doing stuff.
Suddenly, an invisible force pulls you to a rather nasty (in comparison) place, sticks you into a cell, and some guy with shared interests bugs you with something.
How pissed would you be?
Would you be less pissed, if that guy showed some remorse, apologizes and offers you something as a gesture?
Harbingers spend much of their time trying to spread the Law and Good among mortals. In fact you can call one up as a familiar.
Being resentful for being given the opportunity to directly and concretely achieve your goals while being given gifts to do so is silly and un Archon like.
I could understand an evil or neutral outsider taking offense regardless of what the summoners alignment or goals are, but again that's dependent on the summoner and the outsider.
A blanket rule like this one just doesn't fit.
Also, consider Planar Binding, lesser. You can summon the same outsiders, bribe them and get them to do similar or even more dangerous/long term stuff and there isn't any requirement that they get pissy at you for it.
Edit:
To me it seems like another one of those "Made sense in a previous version but something got removed in editing" things.
No matter the alignment, task or gift, none like their agency being taken away at another's whim. There are quite a few different kinds of examples I could give you with real-world parallels, but I find this one seems to always work:
Kids. That's right! Kids! Once/if you have them you'll learn that however much you love them their constant need for attention strains the nerves of even the most strong-willed people. You don't want to feed the baby in the middle of the night, you want to sleep. But you're going to feed the baby, now aren't you?
Of course, it isn't truly the same thing. Actually, its a horrible comparison but at least it shows you that its easy to resent being forced into action or being called away even if the cause is good, or even greater than yourself.
sure. if you were a flawed mortal or an evil being. or neutral being. But a paragon of Good?
Here's some write ups from Binding Outsiders from Ultimate Magic.
Cassisian: The weakest sort of angels, cassisians serve as the messengers of more powerful angels, and frequently serve good spellcasters on the Material Plane as familiars. Formed from the souls of pious soldiers, they are often simply appeased with gifts that allow them to join the fray against evil creatures.
So they're willing to chuck it all and go traipsing around dungeons on the off chance they get to help stop evil but will automatically resent helping find some info or send a message (at 16th level) regardless of how much good it will do?
Lantern: The least of the archons, lantern archons are friendly, and their greatest ambition is to see the cause of good advanced. To gain their favor, one should engage in a week's worth of charity or make a sincere offering worth 100 gp to a good cause in the name of Heaven.
So helping with their greatest ambition makes them resent you? Hardly the attitude of a being composed of pure goodness.
Silvanshee (SR 13): Curious but cautious, silvanshees are often bound as familiars by neutral good spellcasters. Sometimes large groups of them are summoned and bound by powerful spellcasters to serve as spies and scouts, especially in cities where they can meld into cat populations.
Again, willing to be bound permanently but not use a couple of hours of their time to advance their cause?
And this doesn't even take into account that apparently every single outsider that can be contacted, out of the millions around, are going to resent it but apparently be ok with being called in physically with planar binding....
Btw, I was always the one to feed our kid at night. It was the only time his mum got to really rest.
And I never resented it. I loved it.
Edit: This may change if I have more kids but for this one, I loved every minute
The point I'm trying to make is that making "the contact always resents being called" a blanket rule does not take into account the individual contacts potential attitudes or that or the players. It assumes an automatic antagonistic dynamic. which I find to be silly consideringI can come up with any number of scenarios where even evil outsiders would be happy to be contacted.
And receive a little gift in return for a tiny amount of their time. What's an hour or three to a being that may have been in existence for thousands or years? Or more?
Recent threads in General Discussion
|
