| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I feel like the "Nocticula is the redeemer queen, but doesn't have redeemers" is the exact same sort of problem with "nature spirits are not made up of spiritual essence, they are made of material and vital essence".
It's just a weird quirk of the nomenclature.
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
Noct not having redeemers kinda makes sense to me. Her redemption and ascension was kind of a personal and private affair for her. As far as we know, it was something she sought out for herself, not something she was guided to.
It doesn't seem unreasonable that that'd extend to how she views redemption in general, positioning herself as a patron for those seeking redemption, rather than those trying to redeem others.
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
Thanks James, et al. Sorry for my initial reaction. It was born out of shock as much as anything else and wasn't appropriate of me.
Creative Director
|
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
Thanks James, et all. Sorry for my initial reaction. It was born out of shock as much as anything else and wasn't appropriate of me.
No worries, but thanks for the clarification. Hope you and your GM can figure things out to keep the character viable!
I noticed that the Prophecies of Kalistrade in the Core Rulebook and Gods and Magic differ.
Core: Follower Alignments LG, LN, LE
G&M: Alignment LN (LN, LE, NE)
Which is correct?
G&M one seems to be proper one since edicts and anthema go sort of against LG.
On another note Splinter faith feat can't be taken by clerics unless they take natural ambition ancestery feat as feat can only be taken at level 1.
While only humans can take it at level 1, any cleric can retrain into it.
Yeah it looks to me like some errata might be necessary. I would recommend the removal the 1st-level prerequisite. If a cleric can change faiths mid-career, I don't see why they couldn't become a member of a splinter faith.
|
No errata necessary, level x Feats can be taken at that level and beyond, not only at that level.
Splinter Faith even says
Unless you take this feat at 1st level, changing the way you relate to your deity requires retraining, as described in the Changing Faith section below. If you take this feat and previously benefited from any effect that requires a domain your splinter faith doesn't include, such as a domain spell from Domain Initiate, you lose that effect.
How since cleric dont have first level feat, only deadly simplicty or domain intiate based on their doctrine.
You can retrain a second level or higher feat into it.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think the problem with splinter faith is that some people want to start in a splinter faith and not be human at the samt time
partially because retraining takes a while the character does not have
I can get behind that idea
|
Are the feats "Battle Prayer" and "Sacred Defense" suppose to allow non-Divine Casters the ability to use Divine magic? The feat is tagged with "Divine" meaning it is magical but the requirements are "Master in Religion, you follow a deity".
Meaning a Rogue who follows Norgorber with Master in Religion can select these feats and use Divine magic?
|
Developer
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Minor nit-pick. Back in First Edition we were introduced to a sect of Achaekek worshipers who channeled positive energy to destroy undead. Achaekek is now only associated with negative energy.
...Maybe I just have to wait for a "Death Slayer" archetype before seeing how a loyal and devout Cleric of Achaekek would deal with their target becoming a ghost.
|
Creative Director
|
| 17 people marked this as a favorite. |
Minor nit-pick. Back in First Edition we were introduced to a sect of Achaekek worshipers who channeled positive energy to destroy undead. Achaekek is now only associated with negative energy.
...Maybe I just have to wait for a "Death Slayer" archetype before seeing how a loyal and devout Cleric of Achaekek would deal with their target becoming a ghost.
There's nothing to say that Death Slayers, if/when we publish them, don't have abilities to blast undead with positive energy. That sort of thing is a GREAT use of the archetype rules. And having that happen in light of the fact that all of Achaekek's other clerics not being able to do this trick really helps to make the Death Slayers feel special and more interesting.
Is there any chance we'll get that errata for bladed scarves?
Or at least an FAQ or Pathfinder Society clarification about it?
|
Bladed Scarf went from 1d8 down to 1d6 plus adding the Finesse trait.
With the errata, it is still a 2-Handed Martial weapon in the Flail category with the Disarm, Reach, Sweep, Trip, and Uncommon tags.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
On one of the other parts of the OP that kind of got overshadowed by the scarf thing (because I think it is actually interesting and worth discussing) - does redact really violate the anathema of those deities? Their anathema (the ones that seem closest to being relevant at least) as listed in the book;
Irez - Destroy Magic Scrolls (the spell just erases a name from a text, this is only relevant in fringe cases like maybe erasing a true make from a magic scroll)
Eritice - Sow or perpetuate lies? (Sure, if you heighten it and choose to replace the correct name with a false one, but that is only one of many use cases - you could for example, use it to replace a lie already in the text with the truth)
Imot - I can't figure out which anathema is being referred to here, it's just don't withhold your understanding of a portent and don't save things that can't be saved - I guess if you write down a prophecy and then cast redact afterwards to delete someone's name in it? Though these things are usually too vague in the first place to have actual proper names in them. It's usually stuff like "The grim lurker in shadows will oppose evil in the city of improbably high crime rates" rather than "Bruce Wayne will fight crime in Gotham"
For ones the OP didn't directly refer to (because I think it's fun and interesting to evaluate this and don't have anything else to do at the moment)
Thoth - fail to correct false information (this essentially means that if you see a text that is wrong, you are OBLIGATED to use redact if you can to fix it)
Mephistopheles - one of his other domains is literally secrecy which is where redacting as a concept came from
Magrim - the only anathema even remotely related is treat gravestones irreverently, and I had to do a massive leap of logic to find a connection there there (you have to somehow convince the GM that the name on the gravestone is redactable)
Magdh - Lie (again, only relevant if you use a heightened redact to change a name to the wrong name)
Winlas - nothing relevant here
Valmallos - nothing relevant here, except a positive use of maybe erasing the name of someone who violated the anathema to do with using magic irresponsibly
Ydajisk - the first solidly relevant anathema so far, in that she doesn't like the destruction of literary works, though you can probably still safely use the spell in non-literary works like records or to make helpful corrections
Lissala - destroy a book - depends on whether you count removing or changing a name is destruction of the book, and doesn't necessarily care about changes to non-literary works. Also, if a superior orders you to change a book you are in the clear because disobey a superior is higher up the list.
Hastur - has no Anathema, and his edicts require hiding your cult activity from the world, which might require removing your name from lists or incriminating documents
Lady Jingxi - as long as you aren't doing it to someone else's book (that would be rude) and the document isn't somehow a plum tree (though removing a name carved into a plum tree might be helping the plum tree) you are fine.
Nalinivati - I guess maybe if you erase your child's name from your will that might count as betraying your offspring?
Then the core deities for completionisms sake -
Asmodeus - as long as you aren't contractually obligated to not change names in documents, you are okay. Maybe if you try to change the name on a contract itself?
Nethys - his edict and anathema are "use magic, don't use not-magic if you can use magic instead" - the only way this interacts with redact is "don't you dare just cross out the names by hand, use the damn spell"
and that's all of the deities with the glyph domain I could find - none of them forbid all of the possible uses of the spell, and only one or two of them forbid more than a single one of the possible uses of the spell. Many of them would actually require you to use the spell in some situations.
I don't think it messes with the flavour at all to have a spell associated with a deity that could maybe in one of many potential uses violate an anathema - redeemers of sarenrae certainly can have many spells and abilities that could be used to kill an enemy without giving them a chance at surrender, but they don't have to use them pre-emptively so the spells are valid. Just because you could use heal on a living necromancer who you know will create a bunch of undead, it doesn't mean that Heal is an unacceptable spell for a cleric of Pharasma.
| 8 people marked this as a favorite. |
Errata also made it so Apsu will have followers for all good-aligned characters (LG, NG, CG), and Sun Wukong replaced his favored weapon to Bo Staff instead of Staff.
Pretty much everything from OP is more-or-less addressed. That's a good track record, not gonna lie!
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Bladed Scarf went from 1d8 down to 1d6 plus adding the Finesse trait.
With the errata, it is still a 2-Handed Martial weapon in the Flail category with the Disarm, Reach, Sweep, Trip, and Uncommon tags.
It's sooooo good for an Investigator with Athletic Strategist.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Shouldn't Dahak also allow CE/NE/LE dragons in the same way though? I mean even if you ignore chromatic dragon alignments, he DOES reside in Hell currently.
So him only allowing CE followers is just as questionable as Apsu allowing LG, except since nobody brought it up they didn't errata it :'D
|
|
This is not directly related to Gods and Magic, but I am curious why Red Mantis Dedication is restricted to lawful evil characters, when Achaekek has LN and NE followers; I could imagine a LN follower potentially engaging with Red Mantis work in assassinations that are... not as morally questionable (someone like say Agent 47 from Hitmman - that type of character).
The Red Mantis Assassin prestige class has been Lawful Evil only ever since it was introduced in APs for 3.5. This is just Paizo staying consistent across editions.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The Red Mantis as an organization are LE; they don’t have a monopoly on serving Achaekek, which is what those other alignments represent. They’re murderers for hire (Evil) who operate with a strict personal code (Lawful).
What exactly do the LN followers of Achaekek do? Is it just "I am extremely good at killing and treat it as a holy purpose, I just don't take commissions?"
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
What exactly do the LN followers of Achaekek do? Is it just "I am extremely good at killing and treat it as a holy purpose, I just don't take commissions?"
I might see a LN Achaekek character being an executioner for some group or state, rather than being a freelance slayer.