Harrow in ORC

[Bizzare Beasts Boozer]

Forgive me if thus has been asked- has anything been said about the future of Harrow Decks Post OGL?

With the concept of alignments gone, it seems like the Harrow cards has lost one of their major features. That said, the actual concepts the cards represent are usually quite separate from the alignments themselves (though the positioning of the symbols still alludes to that specific layout)

I'm mostly interested encase I've just started Stolen Fate, which of course heavily uses it.

[Sibelius Eos Owm]

It may relieve you to know that, technically, the concepts of good vs evil and order vs chaos still exist in the setting every bit as much as they do in ours, so while the mechanics and jn-world objective reality of alignment are gone, philosophy can still discuss whether the order of Axis of the freedom of the Maelstrom is better, or priests of orderly society use Heaven and Hell as symbols of good vs evil, or the Harrow have a range that crosses hese nine concepts, albeit possibly either different names, like tyranny/freedom/ambivalence etc.

I couldn't find you a quote right now but James Jacobs has said harrow should keep mostly working the same in the future even if some of the terms might change

[Dancing Wind]

James Jacobs said

James Jacobs wrote:

kyamsil wrote:

Isn't the Harrow deck deeply tied to Alignment? How is it going to be affected by the PF2e remastered removing alignment?

It is, but it's not so much tied to the rules concept of alignment as it is the English language definition of those words.

Side note about my initial design for how the Harrow would be set up:

His side note is an interesting peek into his design of the deck and goes more into how alignment fits in.

[Morhek]

Not trying to insult OP, but it's honestly a bit baffling to see a bunch of people assume that by removing Good and Evil as mechanical attributes you are also fundamentally erasing the very ideas of good and evil. Like, you can still be very evil and good - it'll just not be a bit more subjective, and less measurably objective.

[Bokavordur]

Morhek wrote:

Not trying to insult OP, but it's honestly a bit baffling to see a bunch of people assume that by removing Good and Evil as mechanical attributes you are also fundamentally erasing the very ideas of good and evil. Like, you can still be very evil and good - it'll just not be a bit more subjective, and less measurably objective.

I don't know, I think it is fair to ask the question. Many of us are not fully aware of the legal decisions and how close Paizo wants to sidle up to that line of good and evil vs Good and Evil, law and chaos vs Law and Chaos.

I think it is a fair question to ask, since those designations might have been affected by the move away from the OGL, as Paizo seemingly wants to avoid any connection to OGL terms and phrases when possible.

[Cori Marie]

The thing is, it's been asked repeatedly and answered repeatedly.

[PossibleCabbage]

You can just replace the alignments on the harrow cards with the planes that previously mapped to those alignments. The Cyclone is related with the Outer Rifts, the Forge with Axis, The Dance with Heaven, The Tyrant with Hell, etc.

We still have nine things on two axes, it's just that we've stopped labeling those axes (at least insofar as mortals are concerned.)

[James Jacobs]

Since those 5 words (lawful, chaotic, good, evil, and neutral) are all real words with real definitions, you can just keep using them as-is, and when you associate those concepts with PCs or events, you'll just need to use your best judgement.

If we reprint the booklet that goes with the book, we'll probably rename some or all of these 5 words, picking synonyms like order, entropy, holy, unoholy, and unaligned. We haven't considered this yet though.

In any event, the cards themselves are OGL immune. Nothing in the cards needs the OGL to keep doing what it's doing.