Homebrew Worlds


Homebrew

1 to 50 of 53 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

I've taken the time to read up on the playtest materials. For the most part I like what I saw, and from what I've seen from the spoilers and reveals on the forums things will only get better. But then I read over the materials for the Clerics and I realized that Pathfinder is rather married to the Galorian setting.

This isn't a bad thing. I wasn't expecting the second edition to be setting agnostic. But it seems that a lot of the mechanics are informed by the main setting (I'm mainly referring to Clerics getting certain spells from certain gods, but possibly also the lore on how/why certain spells or items or class archetypes work). It's not a big deal because everything can be changed and ignored to suit whatever new setting I can think of.

My question is, do you think there is anything that will be challenging to graft into another setting (like Forgotten Realms or LotR)? Is there anything inexorably tied to the mechanics that shouldn't be altered less it breaks the whole system? Is the creation of new gods with their own unique spells easy to implement? I personally think that homebrewing my own setting is as easy and simple as I hope it is, because the first edition had support for worldbuilding mechanics. But maybe I missed something.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

I think you will be fine, Just assign appropriate spells for your worlds Deities to grant, done. How and why those items and spells work you can decide to not explain or explain in a context that makes sense for your world.

From what I have seen and read I think it will be just as easy if not easier to use the 2E rules in other settings.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

As someone who intends to run a campaign in her own setting as opposed to Lost Omens, and also wants to convert Eberron to PF2 at some ponit, I had a similar concern (in my case itwas with goblins - for how much I adore them, I don't want them to be Like That in every campaign, but a number of their ancestry feats and heritage options are rather idiosyncratic to LO goblins).

Luckily it seems that PF2's modular design will allow for this fairly easily.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 4, RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I've been using the playtest rules to run my house setting for the past year with no problems. This includes a roster of new gods (just a matter of choosing what domains and bonus spells they grant) and some custom ancestries. I don't think it's harder to use 2nd edition for a homebrew setting than it was for 1st edition.


I've been running my own world for 18 years. There are constant adaptations and adjustments, but I'm able to make it work with no difficulty. Pathfinder 2 seems to be a little Lost Omens-centric rather than a strictly generic gaming system, so more modifications may be necessary. It would be interesting if Paizo ever comes out with other campaign settings, that would probably change their perspective a little.


I think that would be pretty easy to adapt, using as an example Faerun you could use one of the Golarion gods as base, like using Nethys to represent Azuth.

Or make your own, this would be for Moradin, the dwarf god of creation in Faerun in this case:

Moradin
Alignment: LG Channel: Positive
Weapon: Warhammer Domains: Knowledge, Creation, Earth, Family
Spells: 1st: Ant Haul, 3rd: Earthbind, 4th: Creation

Even races would be something not hard to do, an Dragonborn per example you could give it a boost to STR, CHA, FREE and one flaw that you think that is fitting (dex maybe?) plus a breath weapon (2 actions 1d6 and heightened like a cantrip?), then have one heritage that give a natural claw weapon, Dragon hide (resistance to the dragon element equal to half your level) and then ancestry feats like the Dwarf Ancestral Hatred/Giant Bane but against dragons, a version of the Goblin Burn it but for the dragonborn element and so on.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

I’m going to need to do this for my setting too, but I’m not too concerned. PF2 looks like it will be pretty modular. Even having to recreate all of my setting’s races as new ancestries (since no core races are part of the setting) doesn’t seem like it will be too bad. In some ways, it should be easier than other systems because customization is done primarily through feats rather than an ad hoc system of traits.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I listened to a PF actual play podcast where they quested the people who ran Weal or Woe which is a homebrew playtest podcast. The condense of the hosts who run a 1E AP podcast and the guests was that they thought 2E would be much easier to adapt to homebrew than 1E (and that they would probably stick to 1E for historic APs as that was the intent of the writers) but probably move over any other games ...

So take that for what it is worth


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Last year I adapted my homebrew world of Enelis (running about 20 yrs now) to PF2 (using the playtest rules for now). It's a world/setting that has transitioned from 2ed -> 3ed -> PF1 -> PF2_PT.

So far, I have found PF2 to be the easiest ruleset for setting customization, mostly due to PF2's modularity.

For our case, Enelis is a low-magic (think LotR) fantasy setting. This was a particularly hard setting to pull off in the 3ed->PF1 era due to magic items being an integral part of the character system. Thankfully the automatic bonus progression system became available to alleviate some of the mismatch between game-rules and world setting.

PF2 has made my setting really come to life in a way that I had always imagined, without having to gloss over rules-mechanics and other game mechanisms to try to make it 'fit'. It's easy to turn options on/off to maintain world consistency without taking away from the players' options.


Thes33 wrote:

Last year I adapted my homebrew world of Enelis (running about 20 yrs now) to PF2 (using the playtest rules for now). It's a world/setting that has transitioned from 2ed -> 3ed -> PF1 -> PF2_PT.

So far, I have found PF2 to be the easiest ruleset for setting customization, mostly due to PF2's modularity.

For our case, Enelis is a low-magic (think LotR) fantasy setting. This was a particularly hard setting to pull off in the 3ed->PF1 era due to magic items being an integral part of the character system. Thankfully the automatic bonus progression system became available to alleviate some of the mismatch between game-rules and world setting.

PF2 has made my setting really come to life in a way that I had always imagined, without having to gloss over rules-mechanics and other game mechanisms to try to make it 'fit'. It's easy to turn options on/off to maintain world consistency without taking away from the players' options.

Could you please provide some more examples of how the modularity really helps here? I am trying to advocate for 2E for a couple of friends that have homebrew so some examples might be useful

Your example is magic items which do seem like they are not as necessary any more


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Lanathar wrote:
Could you please provide some more examples of how the modularity really helps here?

For instance, it's quite easy to list which Heritage or Ancestry feats are not allowed due to not lining up with how a particular race is portrayed in the setting. In PF1 (or prior), you'd have to come up with alternative abilities or adjustments, since most powers weren't selected from a list, but were simply given. PF2 allows access and restriction without creating more work for myself or weakening my player's characters.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

That all sounds very promising. Thank you! A large amount of what I use these core books for is world-building, so knowing that I won't break the game with my inventions is a great help. That's what I'll be doing in the days leading up to release.


Pathfinder Companion, Maps Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

Adapting Pathfinder setting material to your own world could be as easy as creating a table of nation correspondences. For example, do you have a nation that is something like Egypt? Tell your players that it maps to Osirion. Do you have a Viking-like culture? Tell them it maps to the Land of the Linnnorm Kings. And so on.


I'd rather not do that for homebrew settings, as my players won't necessarily be familiar with Golarion. Also I'm very particular about my world-stuffs and would rather not reference other material unless there's a direct correlation (or some kind of cross-over).

For example, I won't compare a fictional historical event to the Crusades. I will, however, borrow a lot from those historical accounts and would only tell players about that if they ask.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
Thes33 wrote:
Lanathar wrote:
Could you please provide some more examples of how the modularity really helps here?
For instance, it's quite easy to list which Heritage or Ancestry feats are not allowed due to not lining up with how a particular race is portrayed in the setting. In PF1 (or prior), you'd have to come up with alternative abilities or adjustments, since most powers weren't selected from a list, but were simply given. PF2 allows access and restriction without creating more work for myself or weakening my player's characters.

For low magic did you consider banning the casting classes BUT allowing their multi class archetypes? This severely cuts down the amount of magic going on, but still allows a player to invest in curtailed casting if they want.


Malk_Content wrote:
For low magic did you consider banning the casting classes BUT allowing their multi class archetypes?

That's an interesting idea, but no. I don't typically mind the PCs being magical (they're supposed to be special and unique).

They just have a hard time finding magical items. There are no magic shops. But alchemy is more normalized, so elixirs are not so hard to obtain. Additionally, NPC priests are simply preachers, they cannot cast divine spells. There is no real communication with the gods. Clerics are rare and wonderful, and even they do not know where their powers truly come from.


@Thes33
I rather like your idea of a low magic setting. Particularly because I like to subvert the whole "magic is ubiquitous" notion that a lot of players have. I can see the scenario playing out:

Player: We're overburdened with treasure! But don't worry, we could always go into town and grab a bag of holding. Gotta pick up some magic bling and maybe a curative wand while we're at it.

GM: Magic items are a rare commodity and it'll take you days of searching to find any one particular item in a settlement, if they have it at all. Here, I'll generate the few items that are available based on the settlement size. They're mostly potions and scrolls and useless antiques.

Player: Or I can just have someone in town craft the items that I need. We'll cover the cost of materials.

GM: Sure thing! Find an artificer.

Player: But you said that there were none.

GM: I said that there were none in the realms of man. You'll need to travel to the Elven ancestral homelands, deep within the tangle of endless jungle. Or brave the molten caverns of the Dw--

Player: No artificing, got it. Well my guy is still wearing cursed armor. Gotta remember to stop by a temple to get that fixed.

GM: Not all priests are faith healers. In fact, the vast majority are regular priests. Not that you can tell them apart.

Player: I'm a wizard. I'll find a scroll that'll let me scry for--

GM: Good luck with that.

Player: Oh, right. Well then I'll... find another wizard?

GM: Wizardry is a highly esoteric skill and this is a modest town. It's likely you and your mentor are the only wizards in the region. Also, your mentor is still banished to another plane of existence.

Player: Circle of druids? Order of paladins? Wandering circus that just so happens to have a magic musician on staff?

GM: Without a lore check I can tell you that finding any one of those involves a dangerous quest line that's probably not worth the effort.

Player: ... Sigh, local snake-oil peddler?

GM: Just inside the gate, actually. Her shop doubles as a tavern.

Player: ... I'm going to have to find all my spell books and artifacts in some dusty old, trap-laden cavern, aren't I?

GM: Yyyyyy-yep.


5 people marked this as a favorite.

@Aiden:
that sounds more frustrating then fun to me...


@Aiden:

I think the core PF1 rules are not supposed to stray far from that. That's how things were done in the old school. It's players and GMs who have left that behind.


I know. My sensibilities are old-school, though. It's not that I *prefer* that adventurers have to work extra hard for their magic cellular phones, but I feel the urge to change things up a bit every once in a while.

Also, it's sorta my revenge on players thwarting my attempts at incorporating survival mechanics, with their rings of warding against hunger/cold/heat and their nifty emergency shelters. I'm not saying that items make the game too convenient; I'm saying that my players are too smart and that they tend to catch on to the various hazards and trials I have in store before I even have the chance to spring 'em.

Endless dark cavern? Only one day of lamp oil left? Go-go gadget flashlight thingy (those things Pathfinders get, I forget what they're called).


Is anyone's homebrew world influenced heavily by Greek Mythology? Just curious.


scary harpy wrote:
Is anyone's homebrew world influenced heavily by Greek Mythology? Just curious.

I am actually considering doing something bigger, might even release it on drivethru (still have to do a lot of work and some research) but basically I want to make a whole greek pantheon (which is less a bunch of jerks then the real ones) and a few custom ancestries, heritages and possibly class feats, but waiting for crb to know what i have to work with

not neccissarily a setting I am gonna play so far but I have some points of motivation for that


scary harpy wrote:
Is anyone's homebrew world influenced heavily by Greek Mythology? Just curious.

That's how I got my start in homebrewing. I was a super nerd in middle and high school when it came to Greek and Roman mythology, so I naturally incorporated it into my setting lore. Pretty sure I still have notes for it around somewhere; I've been so content with Golarion as a setting that I've mostly abandoned my old homebrew work. Hasn't seen more than tertiary use in about 8 years, honestly.


Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
scary harpy wrote:

Is anyone's homebrew world influenced heavily by Greek Mythology? Just curious.

I had a 3.5 game which had the players start as mortals caught in the increasing conflict between pantheons. The Greeks happened to feature the second most prominently due to were the party decided to go in their search for godhood.

Silver Crusade

scary harpy wrote:
Is anyone's homebrew world influenced heavily by Greek Mythology? Just curious.

A section of mine is, influenced by Greco-Roman myth/history with a totalitarian twist for "funsies".


1 person marked this as a favorite.
RiverMesa wrote:

As someone who intends to run a campaign in her own setting as opposed to Lost Omens, and also wants to convert Eberron to PF2 at some ponit, I had a similar concern (in my case itwas with goblins - for how much I adore them, I don't want them to be Like That in every campaign, but a number of their ancestry feats and heritage options are rather idiosyncratic to LO goblins).

Luckily it seems that PF2's modular design will allow for this fairly easily.

The Game Mastery Guide looks to let us do some really cool stuff with mechanics for homebrews. Specific to Eberron, it looks like Archetypes would be a great place to set up things like Dragon Marks and recreating prestige classes, especially ones that enhanced racial abilities. Ancestries will let us redesign and get more into expanded options for Warforged and Shifters, especially. I also want to rebuild Dragonborn.


Thanks for the responses.

I thought Greek Myth was unpopular because I saw so little of it.


Does your version of Dragonborn have tails? Yeah, I know it's a weird thing to get hung up on but I don't see how or why they were designed to not have tails.


scary harpy wrote:


Thanks for the responses.

I thought Greek Myth was unpopular because I saw so little of it.

It is actually one of my favorite mythologies, even though the gods are a bunch of dicks tbh

One thing I'm going to change in what I'm going to write up, if they are gods (and the good ones) they should actually be worth worshipping


Seisho wrote:
scary harpy wrote:


Thanks for the responses.

I thought Greek Myth was unpopular because I saw so little of it.

It is actually one of my favorite mythologies, even though the gods are a bunch of dicks tbh

Isn’t that a reason why it is so interesting ? Because of the way the gods behave ?


I haven't dabbled in Greek/Roman mythology. TBH, all of what I know about the subject comes from video games and that one animated film. I am interested in Norse mythology and would like to incorporate it in a setting someday, but I don't know of any parallels to the other myths.

Except for the part about most gods being a bunch of dicks, like Seisho said. Seems to be a common theme.


Lanathar wrote:
Seisho wrote:
scary harpy wrote:


Thanks for the responses.

I thought Greek Myth was unpopular because I saw so little of it.

It is actually one of my favorite mythologies, even though the gods are a bunch of dicks tbh
Isn’t that a reason why it is so interesting ? Because of the way the gods behave ?

For me its kind of the design and aesthetics, I liked them before I found out that they are mostly a bunch of jerks :P

I'm going to make a sidebar about that, though

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
Malckuss76 wrote:
Specific to Eberron, it looks like Archetypes would be a great place to set up things like Dragon Marks and recreating prestige classes, especially ones that enhanced racial abilities. Ancestries will let us redesign and get more into expanded options for Warforged and Shifters, especially.

The Dragonmark feats are perfect fits for Ancestry feats. The heritages would be awesome places to bring in the unique cultural bits of each race (the Talenta halfling heritage would be awesome). And of course, the various warforged build types and shifter heritages would be very easy, as you said.


Seisho wrote:
scary harpy wrote:
Is anyone's homebrew world influenced heavily by Greek Mythology? Just curious.

I am actually considering doing something bigger, might even release it on drivethru (still have to do a lot of work and some research) but basically I want to make a whole greek pantheon (which is less a bunch of jerks then the real ones) and a few custom ancestries, heritages and possibly class feats, but waiting for crb to know what i have to work with

not neccissarily a setting I am gonna play so far but I have some points of motivation for that

I hope this works out for you.


Shisumo wrote:
Malckuss76 wrote:
Specific to Eberron, it looks like Archetypes would be a great place to set up things like Dragon Marks and recreating prestige classes, especially ones that enhanced racial abilities. Ancestries will let us redesign and get more into expanded options for Warforged and Shifters, especially.
The Dragonmark feats are perfect fits for Ancestry feats. The heritages would be awesome places to bring in the unique cultural bits of each race (the Talenta halfling heritage would be awesome). And of course, the various warforged build types and shifter heritages would be very easy, as you said.

Ancestry feats would certainly be a good place for the various 'racial' marks. My head was racing forward to the prestige classes I recalled that enhanced them, and as a space for aberrant and Siberys marks that might need more design space.


Malckuss76 wrote:
Specific to Eberron, it looks like Archetypes would be a great place to set up things like Dragon Marks

I'd actually strongly recommend going with a heritage and having racial feats for Dragonmarks. You can either have them be "universal" heritages (if you want to go the 4e route) or race-specific heritages if you want to go the 3.5 route.


Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Card Game, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber
John Lynch 106 wrote:
Malckuss76 wrote:
Specific to Eberron, it looks like Archetypes would be a great place to set up things like Dragon Marks
I'd actually strongly recommend going with a heritage and having racial feats for Dragonmarks. You can either have them be "universal" heritages (if you want to go the 4e route) or race-specific heritages if you want to go the 3.5 route.

5E brought them back to race-specific. For the races that have them, they became your subrace, which I thought was clever design. (So instead of being a hill dwarf or a mountain dwarf, you were a House Kundarak dwarf). So yeah, I agree that Heritage / Ancestry feats are the right way to go on this one.


To be fair the 5e implementation was where I stole it from. Should have mentioned that.

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.

In my own little Eberron PF2 conversion I'll be making Dragonmarks ancestry feats. I toyed with the idea of going with 5e's implementation and making Dragonmarks a heritage option, but even baseline they seemed a bit too strong when compared to the other heritage options as presented thus far, so I went with ancestry feats instead so that they could have a little more "oomph" but also allow the player to choose their level of involvement. With Siberys I'll be presenting it as a rare archetype (more representative of 3.5's prestige for the Heir of Siberys).


Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Card Game, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber
Arrendis Lionheart wrote:
In my own little Eberron PF2 conversion I'll be making Dragonmarks ancestry feats. I toyed with the idea of going with 5e's implementation and making Dragonmarks a heritage option, but even baseline they seemed a bit too strong when compared to the other heritage options as presented thus far, so I went with ancestry feats instead so that they could have a little more "oomph" but also allow the player to choose their level of involvement. With Siberys I'll be presenting it as a rare archetype (more representative of 3.5's prestige for the Heir of Siberys).

I mean, if you want it to be on the strong side, just make it the Heritage + required first level Ancestry feat.

Silver Crusade

First World Bard wrote:
Arrendis Lionheart wrote:
In my own little Eberron PF2 conversion I'll be making Dragonmarks ancestry feats. I toyed with the idea of going with 5e's implementation and making Dragonmarks a heritage option, but even baseline they seemed a bit too strong when compared to the other heritage options as presented thus far, so I went with ancestry feats instead so that they could have a little more "oomph" but also allow the player to choose their level of involvement. With Siberys I'll be presenting it as a rare archetype (more representative of 3.5's prestige for the Heir of Siberys).
I mean, if you want it to be on the strong side, just make it the Heritage + required first level Ancestry feat.

Totally viable option, and valid choice, I just didn't want to have to require both a heritage and an ancestry feat right out of the gate, it felt too limiting to the player's choice.

That being said, I haven't really worked out what all I would do for heritage options for the ancestries... hmm... food for thought!

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Companion, Lost Omens, Pathfinder Accessories, Rulebook Subscriber
Aiden2018 wrote:

I haven't dabbled in Greek/Roman mythology. TBH, all of what I know about the subject comes from video games and that one animated film. I am interested in Norse mythology and would like to incorporate it in a setting someday, but I don't know of any parallels to the other myths.

Except for the part about most gods being a bunch of dicks, like Seisho said. Seems to be a common theme.

The gods being jerks helps explain why the world is such a painful mess.

When I heard a bit more about Aztec mythology, I saw similarities with both Egyptian and Norse mythologies. Might be due to being agricultural cultures.


Well, at least the norse gods protected us from the frost giants ;)


From the brief info graphic I saw on YouTube on the subject of Norse pantheon, apparently the giants weren't all that bad. In fact, a lot of the aggression against them by the aesir was either motivated by xenophobia or Odin's jealous obsession with being the smartest guy in the universe. The giants most just wanted to keep to themselves and live peacefully, then Thor went and genocided a bunch of em. Several times.

Edit: Minor correction. I put Zeus instead of Odin.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Eh. The Aesir were certainly aggressors sometimes, but so were the giants (several times, they tried to force Freya to marry one of them, for example...she was unamused, they stole Thor's hammer one time, etc.).

And most of the time the Aesir and giants actually got along fine. Several were married to giants, and there's lots of stories of them just kinda hanging out. Heck, Loki technically was a Frost Giant, he was just Odin's blood brother.

Really, it's all just reflective of the Norse's interactions with other cultures (or, depending on your faith, vice versa), with nobody always in the right or the wrong.


We've been running a 5e homebrew world through Discord for just over five years now with around 80 active members. We are keeping that as our main focus but starting a side project for PF2. The only thing slowing us down in making that world is making our own gods. Even then, once we get into the flow of things, it runs smoother and fast.
Sure, there are some spells that will need to be tweaked once the core book comes out and that is one reason we aren't pushing hard to finish the world right this minute.
The one difference between the two worlds is, in the PF2 world, most of the world is unknown. The characters will need to explore to learn anything of the area. It is fun coming up with the areas the characters will visit and writing up the lore on the wiki just after. This will leave a lot of leeway and the players will help build the world in ways they never dreamed of.


Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I do not think it would be too hard to use PF2 with other settings.


Aiden2018 wrote:
I've taken the time to read up on the playtest materials. For the most part I like what I saw, and from what I've seen from the spoilers and reveals on the forums things will only get better. But then I read over the materials for the Clerics and I realized that Pathfinder is rather married to the Galorian setting.

Homebrewing PF1 provides some insight that applies to PF2. Dieties was a challenge if your players are using automation for their characters. It can be a lot of work to provide Hero Lab files for your own deities and domains. I kind of punted and made all of the Golarian deities be names for different aspects of my 3 true deities.

Homebrewing classes provides a similar dilemma. If your players are using automation, like Hero Lab, its a lot of work to make your own class.

Homebrewing a race is pretty simple on paper. Automation, again.

PF2 doesn't make any of this easier, nor more difficult. In the playtest I observed folks still wanted to use automation because character generation was still complex enough to be fraught with error when manually attempted. Hero Lab Online even appears to lack features that made some house rules easy to support.


I see. As a rule I don't ever use automation. Partially because I don't trust them and I've had errors cripple the pacing of games that I've played in. But also because I want people to learn the mechanics of how their characters work, and I've found that having he sheet do all the math for you is a potential barrier to that. Your statement about it making it harder to homebrew deities gives me yet another reason, as I hadn't considered that before.


Aiden2018 wrote:
I see. As a rule I don't ever use automation. Partially because I don't trust them and I've had errors cripple the pacing of games that I've played in. But also because I want people to learn the mechanics of how their characters work, and I've found that having he sheet do all the math for you is a potential barrier to that. Your statement about it making it harder to homebrew deities gives me yet another reason, as I hadn't considered that before.

I certainly understand. My friends prefer the time savings that automation affords. My preference is actually for simpler systems where automation isn't needed, mostly because I want to house rule and homebrew and automation has been a significant barrier to that.

I'm not saying you're wrong about errors, but my observations have been different. Very few people were able to manually create a PF1 character and get it right. My observation comes from a game club of college students who couldn't afford automation, but did like having a nice character sheet. I'd take their manual work and enter it in for them... and inevitably find a missed opportunity or something taken in error.

1 to 50 of 53 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder Second Edition / Homebrew / Homebrew Worlds All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.