|
I can't offer any advice about the mechanics of how to build a Razmiran priest in 2E, or the availability of the relevant options in PFS. However, I do know that there is a Pathfinder lodge active in Razmir now, operated by an influential NPC priest who is trying to foster cooperation between his church and the Society. See the Exalted Lodge entry in the Pathfinder Society Guide, and scenario #1-18: Lodge of the Living God, for more details.
Based on my limited experiences encountering Razmiran priest PCs in PFS, playing one in 2E is probably going to draw just as many confused, suspicious, and/or exasperated reactions from other players as they did in 1E. But there seems to be better justification now for the two groups to cooperate--for as least as long as Narsen's little experiment is still active, anyway.
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Come cousin, let us show our fellow Pathfinders that we are not the charlatans that our enemies accuse us of being.
Cousin Karela taught me many things before I let the glory of Razmir into my heart and the Pathfinder Society has taught me many things since.
Let us open our arms in friendship and let Razmir's power flow though us as we bless our allies with Razmir's Might, Alacrity and Wisdom.
Do not let their moral understandings dampen your spirit for Razmir grants all spells and the convictions to keep a friendly smile upon our mask even when all has gone sour.
Do not push yourself upon them, for many will have their own beliefs and resent your proselytisation. Instead show them how your love and understanding of Razmir has granted you strength. An indomitable strength that overflows and can be freely shared. Show them your wonder and let those who would seek Razmir's blessing come to you.
Venture-Captain, Germany—Bavaria
|
Personally, I dislike Razmir and player characters that follow them, and I guess the same is true for my characters.. those who are religious likely will assume that the god and character are a fraud.
If I know that a particularly motivated character is played at a table, I will likely find fascinating opportunities to do something else... like cleaning my bathroom.
Apparently, there has been some plot development in a scenario, which I have not touched, personally, I am assuming the country is currently consumed from the inside by insidious undead, and I hope it is only a matter of time until an adventure ends with us sending an undead Razmir to whatever fate Pharasma has in store for them.
But that's just me, I am not really flaunting my own divine character's religion so the whole Razmir thing is rubbing me the wrong way in more ways than one.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
As long as you keep the number one rule for society play in mind you should be ok.
Oh the rule, don't be a jerk.
For reference, that is not a rule in PFS.
1. It is too easily weaponized. The moment you invoke that rule, you are in effect calling someone a derogatory name. Which means you are violating PFS rules.
2. It is to low a bar. No one wants a campaign where people stop just short of being jerks.
The rules you want are:
"Create a welcoming environment."
"Remember, your character is a member of the Pathfinder Society first and foremost, and as such, your character should be able to work with any other Pathfinder, and abide by the Society’s Motto – “Explore, Report, Cooperate”."
"Participants are expected to respect their fellow players and work together to create positive and memorable experiences."
Venture-Captain, California—Sacramento
|
I understand avoiding players who are acting in bad faith but avoiding people who play characters based on concepts you don't like doesn't seem kosher to me. You're free to play in any game you want or not, but If I don't like Lawful Good paladins it doesn't mean I'm going to ostracize their players because their character isn't what I like. At the end of the day it comes down to the behavior of the player and the character. The religion is most likely background or only brought up in specific RP situations in 90% of Organized play. I guess I just don't understand this way of thinking.Personally, I dislike Razmir and player characters that follow them, and I guess the same is true for my characters.. those who are religious likely will assume that the god and character are a fraud.
If I know that a particularly motivated character is played at a table, I will likely find fascinating opportunities to do something else... like cleaning my bathroom.
Apparently, there has been some plot development in a scenario, which I have not touched, personally, I am assuming the country is currently consumed from the inside by insidious undead, and I hope it is only a matter of time until an adventure ends with us sending an undead Razmir to whatever fate Pharasma has in store for them.
But that's just me, I am not really flaunting my own divine character's religion so the whole Razmir thing is rubbing me the wrong way in more ways than one.
GMs are not free to turn away legal character concepts. But no one is going to ask you to run or play a game you are not having fun at.
Saying "This concept is uncomfortable for me to be around," and setting a healthy boundary is entirely reasonable.
I am not quite to the point Sebastian is, but I have purposely avoided running or playing the Razmir Lodge scenario. I offered it in my region when it came out, and will offer it again if asked, but I personally have no desire to play or GM it. (I feel much the same about bone keep, for different reasons, actually.)
|
Venture-Captain, Germany—Bavaria
|
I understand avoiding players who are acting in bad faith but avoiding people who play characters based on concepts you don't like doesn't seem kosher to me. You're free to play in any game you want or not, but If I don't like Lawful Good paladins it doesn't mean I'm going to ostracize their players because their character isn't what I like. At the end of the day it comes down to the behavior of the player and the character. The religion is most likely background or only brought up in specific RP situations in 90% of Organized play. I guess I just don't understand this way of thinking.Personally, I dislike Razmir and player characters that follow them, and I guess the same is true for my characters.. those who are religious likely will assume that the god and character are a fraud.
If I know that a particularly motivated character is played at a table, I will likely find fascinating opportunities to do something else... like cleaning my bathroom.
Apparently, there has been some plot development in a scenario, which I have not touched, personally, I am assuming the country is currently consumed from the inside by insidious undead, and I hope it is only a matter of time until an adventure ends with us sending an undead Razmir to whatever fate Pharasma has in store for them.
But that's just me, I am not really flaunting my own divine character's religion so the whole Razmir thing is rubbing me the wrong way in more ways than one.
I guess you and I are viewing play opportunities a little bit differently, and how seeing who and what is signed up for something.
Personally, If someone is already playing a particular class like a bard, I will try really hard to not bring my own to steal their thunder.
If the party is lacking a particular proficiency, I will try to find a way to bring that (as I tend to have more choice in characters since I gm a lot and occasionally try go get to play).
It's worth stating that I am not actually avoiding the players, it's just that this particular plot element on the Pathfinder setting is something I personally dislike and try to avoid. Does not matter what class the player brings and how well they perform, or if the element is brought into the game by the GM (though as I mentioned before I have not touched that particular scenario).
Me avoiding that character is not ostracizing anything, rather I think I am creating some room for them to fully engage in any roleplaying.
In the last 10 years, the rare followers of Razmir I have encountered made that a major part of their character and their RP. And rather than, not really engaging with that character, I just take myself out of that equation. There are plenty of tables to play and run.
As you can see above, my experience is not universal, as Pirate Rob has posted above under an alias.
No matter what you are playing, some people might really enjoy interacting with that character, and others might avoid it.
There are a couple of other types of characters I personally do not really enjoy RPing with, so while I have the options, I might just decide to play at another table.
Just as an example, I might not enjoy bringing most of my characters to a table where characters are really big fans of the Chelaxian government, and would worship devils if that was a legal option, and they might not really enjoy RPing with my character.
People can of course play well together, even if their characters would normally not be found dead in he same party (like the Pharasma priest and the necromancer) but personally, I enjoy avoiding those situations.
As a GM I care a whole lot less.
Of course, my reaction is also informed by my own experiences playing RPs for a couple of years.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Saying "This concept is uncomfortable for me to be around," and setting a healthy boundary is entirely reasonable.I am not quite to the point Sebastian is, but I have purposely avoided running or playing the Razmir Lodge scenario. I offered it in my region when it came out, and will offer it again if asked, but I personally have no desire to play or GM it...
And I 100% agree you shouldn't be expected to play with characters who make you uncomfortable, but also you can do so without being snarky about a character someone else is interested in.
As I said I can really see where Razmiran COULD be problematic in the hands of some people, but at the end of the day other than a few comments about Razmir or battle cries of that ilk I highly doubt throughout the course of normal Society play there would be time for rampant attempts to convert people or to deep dive into the philosophy thus its really no different than having any other character devoted to one of the many deities of Golarion.
You're free to play with or without whoever you like, but there's no need to make new players feel like outcasts because of a concept you aren't personally interested in.
At the end of the day, I like the aesthetic and concept behind the character, it's legal for play, and I think it will be fun. When on assignment for the Pathfinder Society we are first and foremost Pathfinders, so everything else takes a back seat during the timeframe of the game.
Simple conversations make things so much easier. If someone had a problem with the dogma of Razmir at the table and made that clear, I would be sure that it didn't come up during the session. It's really that simple. We can all get along and put aside differences for the betterment of the Realm.
I think what you are experiencing is a result of the fact that many people who played Razmiran characters in PF1 were vocally and prolifically disruptive. It also does not help that they were linked to one of the most poorly priced and abusable magical items in print at the time. (The item's low price was balanced by a "drawback" that many players who used the item tried to argue should not be allowed to disadvantage them.)
It resulted in a poor play experience. As a result, people who had to deal with that experience (sometimes repeatedly) will not want to play at a table that brings back memories of that experience. It's not a criticism of you, or an assertion that you will play that way. But it does not change the fact that even being around that will be uncomfortable for some people.
There are other issues with Razmiran that go deeper, and those involve personal, real world triggers, and I would rather not go into those.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
One of my PF1 characters is not a priest, but grew up in a Razmiri orphanage, and so takes on a number of Razmirian characteristics. She has a mask and robe but never wears them.
Admittedly, her full story was that she was born as promised to Sivanah, and she was quickly pulled out of the standard grind when she was discovered by a Sivanah faithful who was masquerading as a Razmiran priest, so she ended up being trained as a sleeper agent for Razmir or maybe Sivanah or maybe both, but that pretty much never pops up.
So there's definitely ways to use Razmir without pushing deep into the conversion and more difficult aspects of Razmiran, but it's important to think about how you'd want to approach it.
|
Venture-Agent, France—Paris
|
When I want to play a character that may not fit all parties, I play it with a group I know. As such, issues have less chances to arise and can be solved easily.
If you can't play with a regular group, then I'd avoid some concepts. They may generate issues even when you play them in good faith.
|
|
I think that as long as you do not have an evil character you should be fine to play that character in PFS. There are different ways to get access to the various spell school traditions that you might not even need to play the cleric class. I know that sorcerer might be a way.
If I remember correctly, there was a sorcerer archetype in PF1e that was a Razmirian cleric so to say. I would have to look it up again but I found it interesting and thought what a great way to play when I read it long ago.
|
|
Boy sure sounds like a lot of problem players people have experienced, not so much problem Razmirans.
Here's the thing: play your legal PC. Tone it down if you are making people uncomfortable; sometimes a component of a PC can fade into the background. This is a social game too.
I would also point out that Gary is right: "don't be a jerk" is essentially codified in the code of conduct which is indeed an extremely important component of org play.