Monday, May 25, 2026

Paizo Iconics - Seltyiel

The last iconic for the Second Darkness adventure path, and the only one who arguably shouldn't have been made, because he didn't even represent a regular character class until later, Seltyiel was always an odd fit. It's also the first one that had a really quite long and detailed backstory written; more so than the other characters before him, and of course, they made him a misunderstood edge-lord who'd been bullied as a kid but later came into magical power so he could... I dunno, get his revenge against the jocks who made fun of him and got the girls that he had a crush on all through high school, or whatever. 

At the time, Seltyiel was built as a fighter/wizard who took the Eldritch Knight prestige class, but he later was given the "martial wizard" (sometimes stupidly called a "gish" by D&D players) class of magus when that came out in Ultimate Magic, so his mechanics were revised and retconned. He really doesn't fit. I understand why they probably wanted an even number of twelve iconic characters to start with; four unique ones for each adventure path, but y'know, when you only have eleven core classes, that twelfth one simply isn't going to come across as very iconic. 

The next adventure path, Legacy of Fire, re-used iconics, which it should have done because having a limited number makes some sense. They use Kyra, Valeros, Ezren and Merisiel, probably the first time that they really actually had an iconic party, honestly. Seltyiel reappears in the next adventure path after that, Council of Thieves (along with Lem, Seelah and Seoni) which is the first Pathfinder 1e (instead of D&D 3.5) adventure path. By the time we got to the Carrion Crown adventure path, they weren't even included pregens anymore. But by that time, products like Advanced Players Guide and others had started to introduce additional 1-20 level "core" classes, so new iconics to represent them started to appear, which is where we'll be when I come back to this series. 

Seltyiel has two iconic Wayne Reynolds artworks, but curiously, it's not an update from 1e to 2e like the rest; he just has two artworks for whatever reason. One of them comes from the Ultimate Magic book, I believe, where he was retconned into being a "magus" class rather than an Eldritch Knight prestige class. In honor of the retcon, he got new art, I guess.

Original art 2008

Updated art 2010

Love the little Red Cross icon on the updated art. Lolwut?

Anyway, when I come back to this series, we'll be doing stuff like the "iconic" ninjas, samurai, oracles, alchemists, etc. Interesting characters, and I'm not sad that they made representative versions of them to, y'know, represent, but they no longer fit the definition of "iconic" in any reasonable sense.

Anyway, for the heckuvit; here's a list of the next few iconics, in groups of four:

  1. Alahazra (Oracle)
  2. Alain (Cavalier)
  3. Damiel (Alchemist)
  4. Hayato (Samurai)
<  †   >
  1. Lirianne (Gunslinger)
  2. Reiko (Ninja)
  3. Feiya (Witch)
  4. Imrijka (Inquisitor)
<  †  >
  1. Balazar (Summoner)
  2. Jirelle (Swashbuckler)
  3. Quinn (Investigator)
  4. Oloch (Warpriest)
There's more, but that'll keep me busy for a little while.

Paizo Iconics - Lini

Lini is the last of the "original" Paizo iconics, by which I mean, the last one that actually represents one of the original core, base classes. Of course, Paizo kind of did a number on the gnomes, and she's also the first gnome iconic character, so she's kinda weird. To be fair, gnomes were never really that iconic of a race in D&D. I know that they obviously existed, of course, but they just didn't seem to have a place the way the other races did, and TSR and later WotC couldn't quite decide what to do with them. Were they like nature-loving skinny dwarves? Sorta like halflings but different? Tinkerers and inventors? Tricksters and illusionists?

I have to at least give Paizo props for trying to make a fundamentally uninteresting race have some kind of unique spin on it so that it could be interesting. But I still have no use for gnomes. She looks, and acts, like a little kid. That's kinda the gnomes' thing in Golarion. Sigh.

There's a bio for her, but it reads less like a bio and more like a weird tiny little micro-short story of a single moment in time, when she met her snow leopard animal companion. Who, unfortunately, looks almost exactly like the bad guy in Kung Fu Panda instead of, y'know, like a real snow leopard. 

One thing that I'll say about Lini is at least she doesn't reek of DEI, wokeness and grrlbossiness. She's just not that great of a character, but she's not an offensively bad one, just a mediocre one that I have little interest in.

Somehow her 2e update in the art makes her look even more like a little kid and less like a weird little fairy girl. 

Sigh.




Paizo Iconics - Amiri

Amiri is the next iconic, and is included also in the Second Darkness adventure path. She's another one that I wish they hadn't made, but they seem to love her and have her all over the place. She's a grrlboss Conan, a barbarian from the Realm of the Mammoth Lords, who had to heroically overcome sexism because she was as good a warrior as any man! This pissed off the men in her tribe (and the women, for that matter) so they betrayed her and sold her out to some giants or something, but she escaped, found out that she'd been set up, "raged" (as per the barbarian class ability) and killed the people who'd sold her out. Whoops! Now she was forced into exile because it would be a death sentence to return home. Same as Sajan, as it turns out. Not the most creative, and actually really quite stupid in a mid 00s or 10s grrlboss narrative. 

To make things even worse, she's supposed to be prettier than most, arrogant of course, especially when interacting with Valeros, the punching bag of the gammas at Paizo, and she uses an oversized giant sword, which isn't actually appropriate according to the rules; they just fudge it in an attempt to make her even more appealing to low status gammas and to give he ran anime-style oversized sword kind of thing.

Although they also drew her with inappropriately skimpy armor, although not exactly sexy like 80s chain mail bikinis, just oddly feminine. And, of course, she has tattoos. And because she's a barbarian, she's gotta be like stronger than Arnold Schwarzenegger in his prime, even though she's half his mass and not really all that muscular. 

In other words, she's a walking epitome of crappy DEI thinking translated into an anime character. Her whole concept just screams woke 00s nonsense. I have little use for her. Luckily, she wasn't in the radio plays, but she does seem to be a favorite in cover art, and you see quite a bit of her on modules and other products. Although she didn't appear in Curse of the Crimson Throne, she was on the cover of one of the original modules.



Paizo Iconics - Sajan

Many people, even of my generation, always thought that the addition of the Monk class seemed really weird in D&D. But I came into D&D in the early to mid-80s. The Monk was added in Dave Arneson's 1975 Blackmoor supplement. Arneson was always more of a genre bender than Gygax, who was a bit more of a Medieval military history buff, along with pretty traditional fantasy. In 1975, Enter the Dragon had been out for about two years, and Bruce Lee was kind of a faddish icon at the time. The wildly popular David Carradine Kung Fu TV show had just had or was still in its third and final season. I still saw reruns of that ten or so years later, so in a way I kind of get why there's a monk in D&D, but at the same time, it really feels like an artifact of the early to mid 70s that has aged poorly since. 

That said, Gygax included the monk, as well the assassin from Blackmoor when he released the AD&D Player's Handbook in 1977, and monks became, for better or for worse, an integral part of D&D because of that. Although I've never had much interest in playing one, I've seen them in play in campaigns that I've also been in, by other players. 

Paizo, for whatever reason, decided that Orientalist martial artist monks wouldn't necessarily be Chinese or Japanese, like you'd have expected in the 70s and 80s respectively given the faddish popularity of Hong Kong movies, Bruce Lee and Kung Fu in the 70s and the whole fascination with ninjas, samurai and Japanese pop culture through an 80s American pop culture lens that was a hallmark of the 80s. Rather, they seem to have mostly made them Vudran, which is kinda sorta their fake India... yet Vudra is off-screen from the main campaign setting, and I'm not sure that there's any product that actually details it; the closest we get is Jalmeray, the "Vudran island colony" that is geographically kinda sorta where Madagascar is, to the extent that you can align Golarion and real world geographies. 

Sajan, the iconic Bollywood martial artist (lol, people mostly make fun of Bollywood in America. It isn't like it has the same cultural cachet that Hong Kong movies did in America in the 70s) is kinda sorta like Kwai Chang Caine; an exile looking for his missing sibling who can't return home, so he's destined to wander the land interminably. Probably with a melancholic corny 70s TV show music playing in the background while he's a silhouette against he sunset crossing the desert. And maybe the flashbacks to his training in whatever an Indian equivalent to a Shaolin temple is.

I dunno. While I can at least imagine the cultural touchstones in the 70s that made an iconic monk character seem desirable in D&D, because I'm old enough to have memories of the aftershocks of the cultural touchstone; I saw Kung Fu reruns in the 80s, and Hong Kong movies were usually on TV on Saturday afternoons when I was a kid too, I still think it's kind of silly. And Indians aren't even as cool as Chinese monks. I've known way too many Indians to be impressed with them anymore. Whatever. Sajan is included as one of the pregens for the Second Darkness adventure path, and is next in the roll-out of the Paizo iconics. 



Sunday, May 24, 2026

D&D's Tier List

I finally made a tier list of the various versions of D&D. Sure, maybe that's kind of a trendy thing to do; a faddish short-hand when I've already talked at length about this stuff sometimes. But what the heck; I'm not immune to a trendy shorthand when it comes along. 

A few caveats; I don't actually love any version of D&D that much. If this were to include some other games, they would be S-tier and no version of D&D would be S-tier. But, I had to rank the versions of D&D against each other, not against something else, so they rank from S to D in comparison to each other. My one S-tier choice is actually a game that I have a lot of problems with... although it's also one that has problems that I know how to fix, because I played it for 16-17 years, and I'd be happy playing it again if I could.

Anyway, I'm not doing this as a video where I rank them as I go, which is the real trendy way to do it, but here's my tier list and my discussion on it.

S-Tier: 3.5. I know that this "devolved" if you will into a charop powergamers game, at least in the perception of those who played it, but if you look at those as roleplaying options rather than powergaming options, the D&D 3.5, especially as played at lower levels and keeping it indefinitely in the "sweet spot" of levels. 

A-Tier: Here I put B/X, "the only old system that I'd probably be willing to play", and the Rules Cyclopedia, which is arguably the last iteration of the B/X expression. Albeit with a bunch of higher levels and domain based play, which I'm not terribly interested in. I also put the original 3e; although I was salty for a long time that 3e migrated to 3.5, I did eventually own up to the idea that it is a better iteration of the system (arguably, Pathfinder 1e is yet another improvement, although I'm not 100% sure that I agree with that even now nearly twenty years after the fact.) I could play these, but while doing so, I'd constantly be wondering why I'm not playing a better version of the game instead.

B-Tier: Here we have a bunch of stuff that I think is interesting, but would be less likely to be interested in. Holmes was the first clean-up of the rules and while it is certainly an improvement over OD&D, B/X is a better improvement. I have 2e, which is arguably better than 1e mechanically, but which otherwise has problems in tone that I'd be less interested in. BECMI is fine, I suppose, but I'd be wondering why not just use RC if you wanted to play the BECMI rules. The only thing BECMI has over RC is the sequential rolling out of the rules and the easy to grok writing style. I've also included 5e in this one. It's fine, and I actually do play it. I don't really prefer it or like it, though—it feels, as it would with all of the other games in this tier, that while I'd probably "survive" playing them, I'd always be asking why we aren't playing one of the better tiered versions instead. 

C-Tier: If B-Tier are the versions of the game that I would reluctantly accept is someone really wanted to run them, but I'd constantly be irritated with us not playing an A-Tier or S-Tier version instead, C-Tier are the games that I'd probably not even be interested in playing at all. 5.5 doesn't seem like an upgrade to 5e, and the tone is certainly worse. 4e never interested me, except as a source for some setting and fluff material that I'd much rather take out of context and use with some other mechanics enitrely. And 1e is not a game that I've ever really liked. It's too proscriptive, too detailed, too disorganized, and too self-important. Unlike many other people of my generation, I never appreciated the "High Gygaxian" language, and I find even that label pretentious. 1e feels like stream of consciousness writing. 2e is better organized, and if it lost something in terms of charm and edginess, it desperately needed some help otherwise in presentation, writing, organization, and even in terms of the rules themselves.

D-Tier: OD&D has to be at the bottom. It deserves credit for being first, but it is such a mess of organization, poor rules, and poor concepts that it really isn't playable as is without a lot of interpretation covering the blatant gaps in how it's written. I think that carried forward into 1e, because Gygax may well have created the concept of D&D (based on ideas of Arneson, but I think Gygax was better at crystalizing it as a concept) but he isn't a good game designer by any standards that we'd recognize today. Anything he wrote is a hot mess, honestly.


Now, all of these versions probably would require "help." I'd maybe prefer to play Pathfinder 1e + E6 to D&D 3.5, although it's "mostly" the same rules, I guess. I'd prefer Advanced Labyrinth Lord or Basic Fantasy to B/X. So, curiously, my tiers of D&D have to come with the caveat that I think someone else perfected every version of D&D beyond what D&D itself did in its own cycle. Which is maybe a little bit sad, but unlike many of my generation (again; I may be a bit iconoclast) I'm not necessarily nostalgic or sentimental about D&D per se. For much of my participation in the hobby, I've preferred something other than D&D and been unhappy with at least something that D&D did. 

But maybe that's also just the consumate homebrewer in me. Nothing that somebody else has created is ever exactly what I wish it would be, so I have to tinker. 

Saturday, May 23, 2026

Paizo Iconics - Lem

Well, I had four iconics done earlier; might as well do the next four before I call it a day. Lem is the last of the Crimson Throne iconics, a halfling bard. Supposedly given a tragic backstory, because although raised in the lap of luxury, he was a slave in Cheliax, he comes across as a little weird. His original 1e illustration makes him look like some kind of pixy or little boy, while his 2e illustration gives him a chiseled fantasy Elvis look. Plus, y'know, he's a bard. Literally the worst of the core classes, and a halfling to boot. Not only that, he's not a bard with a lute or pan pipes or something, he's a bard with an actual flute. 

Sigh. 

Still, you've got to do them, right? You've got to have iconic versions of all of your core races and all of your core classes, even the ones that you probably shouldn't have included in the first place. I guess he's not terrible, I've just never had much interest in halflings that weren't part of Middle-earth and even less interest in the bard class. And as I said, a wizard, paladin, bard and ranger isn't exactly the most iconic adventuring class. Although it's probably still better than the one we were about to get for the third adventure path and the next wave of four iconics: Sajan the Bollywood monk. Lini the gnome druid with a snow leopard (Harsk has a badger animal companion, for what it's worth. I forgot to mention it. Because they mostly forget about it too.) Seltyiel, the half-elf fighter/wizard/eldritch knight (hardly an iconic combination. In 2e, that was called a magus and was a regular core class.) And Amiri, the grrlboss barbarian.

Anyway, here's his original and updated designs.




Paizo Iconics - Seelah


Seelah is another DEI iconic; an African sheboon dressed and behaving like a European knight in shining armor. I get it; Paizo can't help it, and to some degree, hey, it's their audience or whatever, but I've never in the least found her an appealing character. She has a pretty trite backstory (again, before detailed bios were written for any of these guys) where as a girl she saw some heroic paladin sacrifice herself to save people or something, so she was inspired to do the same.

The problem with these DEI characters is that they simply don't fit. Why is an African woman wandering around fantasy Europe as the iconic Paladin, acting like one of King Arthur's knights of the Round Table? It just doesn't make any sense that she'd be wandering around in pseudo Mediterranean European Korvasa and the rest of the Curse of the Crimson Throne adventure path, where she appears. She's from a completely different part of the world, her dress and accoutrement is out of character for her race and origin, and she may look like some black women I know, I suppose, but she doesn't act like any kind of woman at all. She's not charismatic, she's not attractive, she's not likeable, she's not interesting. Even worse, she'd make no sense whatsoever in the adventure path that she's cast in as a default pregen character. Honestly, I'm not quite sure how any paladin can be in that role, especially in the first adventure. I'm sure I could figure something out, but I'd never select her as a character that I'd play. If I had to choose from those four, Harsk is the one I'd go for. 

By the way, a wizard, a paladin, a ranger and a bard? Not exactly the most iconic adventuring party either, is it? Although I suppose you had the four characters from the previous adventure path to choose from if you really wanted to; a sorceress, a cleric, a rogue and a fighter. Three out of four of those seem to fit the geography that they're set in too. Between the two adventure paths, you could get one functional adventuring group. Sigh.

In general, I'm not much a fan of the 2e artwork updates, but I think Seelah's picture might actually be one of the few that's a definite improvement.



Paizo Iconics - Harsk

Harsk is the final iconic to be pictured on the cover of a Rise of the Runelords book, #5, "The Spires of Xin-Shalast." While he's not actually a pregen for that campaign, he is in the Pathfinder Legends radio play adaptation of it, so I feel that he's one of the more iconic of the iconics, if that makes sense. He is, however, one of the pregens in the second adventure path, along with Seela, Lem and Ezren. He's also in the radio play adaptation of that adventure path, because it uses the same characters as the other ones, of course.

Harsk is meant to be both the iconic ranger and the iconic dwarf. Giant is his favored enemy, which works for a dwarf, and he's got a tragic backstory of his brother being killed by one. Of course, a dwarf as a ranger isn't the most iconic combination, but he otherwise is pretty stereotypical as a dwarf; surly, grumpy and kind of short-tempered. 

Of course they changed his hair color from 1e to 2e, which is weird. I'm also not entirely sure how that big ax is a ranger weapon, but his crossbow at least seems iconic; rangers being stereotypically ranged weapon specialists of sorts. Probably mostly based on the Robin Hood archetype.

As characters go, in the radio play he was mostly kind of interesting. He's the last one of these that I can refer to from those, however. I do find it curious that the Pathfinder Legends crew had no cleric, but rather a fighter, rogue, wizard and... ranger? And he didn't even do any healing at any point that I recall. Makes you really wonder if the iconic class round-up is really as iconic as all that. I tend to think not. Then again, Kyra was a lousy iconic character, so the clerics were poorly served there anyway. Too DEI.

So yeah, Harsk is one of the better iconics. I could actually use him as a pregen and run a campaign or at least a module with him and not be unhappy about it. It doesn't hurt that I love the ranger archetype anyway. 

As a small bit of a joke, although I've never thought of dwarves as being particularly Scottish (Tolkien wrote them as Scandinavian, for instance) that has kind of become a bit of a joke in D&D, probably because of Bob Salvatore and Bruenor. Harsk does not speak with a Scottish accent in the radio plays, but his Wayne Reynolds images do have a bit of a tartan blanket or sash.



Paizo Iconics - Ezren

I kinda forgot I was doing this after only four entries. Let's add a few more. Ezren comes up next, the iconic wizard. He's from Absalom, which seems appropriate as it's kind of the center of the world of the setting. He's a bit older, which seems iconic given that he's a wizard. Although he's kind of bitter about it, and self-taught, because of backstory reasons. He's also got a Richard Dawkins bitterness about religion. Sigh. Freakin' Paizo. I can almost imagine Ezren quoting the "In this moment, I am euphoric. Not because of any phony god's blessing. But because, I am enlightened by my intelligence." meme. Luckily, in the radio plays, he doesn't rant about it much, although it does come up once or twice. There he's a bit of a stick-in-the-mud know-it-all, but not in an obnoxious way, just in a "this is what I imagine a fantasy intellectual would be like" way. He's not the worst character we've seen so far. In fact, he mostly kinda works. He's not terribly unlike what I would imagine a D&D wizard to be like. Especially one written by a woke Seattle hipster, although in an era where it was still important not to be too obviously woke if you wanted to be taken seriously. 

As I've said many times, I'm not a huge fan of wizardy archetypes, but given that Ezren does manage to be at least quite iconic in nature; much more so than the thief or cleric "icons", he's a much better character than either of them. As Paizo continued to make more and more iconic characters, they had to become, over time, less iconic, of course. More unique. Their backstory and biographies grew from just a couple of generic paragraphs to several printed pages worth of detailed story. 

While I'm not usually one of the guys to decry the influence of "theater kids" on the hobby, being perhaps a little bit "theater kid adjacent" myself, I can understand where that meme comes from and appreciate what it means. Ezren predates the rise of theater kid iconics, at least. 

He has two versions of his art. As one of the original iconics, he's been around a lot and has original 1e and revised 2e artwork versions. As always, I don't know for sure that the 2e upgrade is actually an improvement or not; you'll have to decide for yourself. He does look a little bit more "actiony" in the 2e artwork, as many of the character do, but given that he's supposed to be a staid intellectual with a great deal of dignity, his more posed picture from 1e seems more in character.

Like I said, I appreciated his inclusion in the Pathfinder Legends radio plays, even though he wasn't actually included in the Rise of the Runelords as one of the pregens. He is on the cover, however, of the fifth volume, "Sins of the Saviors."



Golarion Remixed

I'm going through some of my trawls, and I'm reading the early Gazetteer product by the Paizo crew, almost of all which was incorporated whole cloth into the Pathfinder Chronicles Campaign Setting... I believe. Anyway, the largest section of this is the "Nations" section, and I thought I'd add my comments as I read it, since it's a slowish Saturday afternoon for me.

Absalom: I'm currently reading the Old Testament on audiobook while commuting in the morning, and it wasn't that long ago that I finished the two books of Kings and started well into Chronicles. The name feels fake to me, knowing of course, that this is King David's son who led an ultimately unsuccessful coup against the King. I know that America has largely lost many of the details of its originally Christian cultural traditions, and people don't recognize Old Testament stories the way that they used to a few generations ago, but it's still weird that they use such a clearly prominent Bible name. Other than that, though, I don't really have any problems with this element of the setting. I think the siege castles of weird dungeons just outside of town is a stupid D&D affectation, but that's easier to just ignore than to overtly change it.

Andoran: The self-righteous proselytizing of "muh democracy" was tiresome before I even finished reading the basic description. Sadly, his over-the-top stupid detail tends to hide the fact that otherwise Andoran, as a nation with cultural and ethnic ties to both Taldor and Cheliax, but unwilling to accept the rule of the House of Thrune, is a fine idea. I don't have any interest in that non-stop ideological bent of Andoran; that needs to be replaced with them just acting like normal people, not woke mutants. But I do like the idea that in spite of their ties to both Cheliax and Taldor, they're unwilling to unite with either until they get their act together. But maybe they're more like the Commonwealth than like the fully independent US, i.e., all of the former Taldoran and Chelaxian nations still recognize the authority of the thrones in Oppara and maybe even Egorian; they simply can't work them them. For that matter, other former dependencies like Galt, etc. will have this same thing going on. I don't know if it's because Paizo is made up of professional woke mutants or not, but they don't understand how normal people think and act, and have made some of the "personalities" of some nations unbelievably one-dimensionsal and tedious and frankly unbelievable. 

Belkzen: In one ironic place where I actually agree with the woke mutants in gaming, I think orcs as they've been portrayed in D&D and RPGs in general is pretty boring. This doesn't have to have anything to do with the "orcs as black people" nonsense; all the way back to early Warhammer, Warcraft and Heroes of Might and Magic games in the 90s, the idea of orcs as at least somewhat sympathetic if savage and barbaric peoples who act more or less like people rather than caricatures has been growing. Before getting coopted by the woke mutants and leading to the nonsense of 5.5's "Mexican orcs" joke. Anyway, I've already talked at length about how to make orcs more interesting, and I've done this already in Old Night; I'll no doubt do the exact same to Belkzen. Having Belkzen simply be "Mordor, but without a real Dark Lord holding it together" was never very interesting to me. 

Brevoy: This is a weird frontier region that because it is largely disconnected from most of the rest of what's going on in Avistan, doesn't really need anything changed. 

Cheliax: Other than downplaying the open-ness of House Thrune's diabolical connections, I probably don't need to change much here either. I think it's ridiculous that a whole society of open devil-worshippers would put on a civilized face, so we'll have it be more a case of Gothic aesthetic and secret, or at least discrete with plausible deniability connections to devils. I also dislike the myriad of distinctions between fiends in D&D and D&D-like games. Sure, sure; factions that don't get along with each other, that makes sense. The full on use of alignment to separate them along the chaos/law axis doesn't. That probably doesn't matter too much to Cheliax's nature, however.

I also want to make Cheliax to still be (at least on paper) suzerain over places like Andoran, Galt, etc., although the strength of that suzerainty is waning fast.

Druma: The idea of a nation of capitalist-cultists with a religion of consumerism is exactly the kind of nonsense you'd expect from Seattle weirdos. That doesn't mean that the idea of a mercantile kingdom with a weird, clannish aristocracy isn't salvageable, though, just that you need to downplay the over-the-top weirdness that Paizo allowed Druma to accumulate. 

Galt: The idea of a French Revolution that's been going on for generations now is also stupid. Like with Andoran, Galt needs to tone down it's over-reliance on one, kind of overplayed and shrill idea. Sure, sure, it's unhappy with House Thrune, and the degree to which its leaders actually still support being considered a part of Cheliax, when they're quite a ways away from it anyway, is OK. The idea that there is a competing faction of nouveux aristocrats, and skullduggery and intrigue, murder and political machination is commonplace in Galt; I can get behind all of that. But people still need to actually live normal lives, or this kind of thing can't last. The real French Revolution didn't last 40+ years; it lasted ten and for decently long stretches there, it was quiet, only flaring up into widespread violence on relatively few occasions.

Geb: I don't know for sure what to think of the high-magic countries like Geb or Nex. I understand why they exist, I suppose, but I've never had much use for them. I think Geb also feels like a less-developed also-ran of Ustalav. To be fair, I haven't read the Blood Lords adventure path. I'll probably uneasily leave it more or less as it is, but of course, since I greatly prefer a much more low level and low magic game, I'm not quite sure what an African or semi-Egyptian undead nation will actually offer me. I'll probably mostly just refer to it, if at all, very obliquely and otherwise pretend that it doesn't exist. honestly.

Irrisen: I'm not quite sure what to make of this one either. A nation where it's literally always winter is a wasteland, not capable of supporting a population. One ruled by fey-touched witches and whatnot, where winter is long and cold and the witches have a cold-weather Frozen kind of aesthetic works, but again, it's too exaggerated to take seriously. And the adventure path set here literally has an adventure where you're supposed to travel to WWI era Russia and deal with Rasputin. Lolwut? I need to do a bit more research into the details to understand exactly how to change this, but right away, I know for sure that having it literally always be winter doesn't work.

Isger: The notion of Isger as a thoroughly dominated frontier region of Cheliax, recovering from a devastating series of invasions by goblinoids (or orcs) and now a kind of Mad Max-like shell of its former self probably doesn't really need any particular change at a high level. Details may, of course, vary, but the Gazetteer doesn't provide many, and I don't think I've read any modules or anything else that takes place in Isger that I'd feel inclined to change.

Jalmeray: This is another high magic bastion of wokified Orientalism. I've met way too many Indians to be impressed with Indian-inspired cultural elements in gaming. But as a foreign place with an elemental/genie kind of vibe that you don't actually do much of anything with, I suppose it works. Maybe the Princes of the Apocalypse can actually be from a place like this, or at least are worshipped here. A cult of "elemental evil" reigning on Jalmeray is more interesting to me than a culture of Bollywood martial artists. 

Katapesh: I've always quite liked Katapesh more or less as it is. Or at least as it was in 1e. I hear that they've taken the tooth out of it, like so many other elements, in the wake of the move to 2e, so I'll almost certainly be ignoring that. The chance that I actually get to doing anything meaningful with 2e or its products is pretty low, though, so eh. Who cares?

Kyonin: While I admit to not being a huge fan of fantasy elves and weird, flaky elf-kingdoms, I also recognize that it's probably important that they exist in a D&D-adjacent fantasy. I wonder sometimes if I should swap the elves for some kind of fey-touched humanoid that's a little less... elfin, or whatever, (even if they use the same name) but I'll otherwise probably pretty much ignore them. 

Lastwall: While the concept of Lastwall is fine, actually finding something interesting to do with it seems kind of a lost cause. In 2e, Lastwall has fallen and been converted to the Gravelands. I might go ahead and do the same, honestly, in one anachronistic referral to 2e. At least the Gravelands as a place for adventure is an interesting place to go. Lastwall was just like hanging out on a self-righteous military base, and then going somewhere else to actually do anything.

The other alternative is to give them the melancholy aspect of the fading Crusader States; aristocrats, formerly warriors, surrounded by foreigners and holding on to a way of life that is doomed to end within a generation or two. But that makes Lastwall more like a normal place, with Ustalavian commoners running an Ustalavian way of life outside of the ethnic and cultural Taldoran nobles castles. It probably doesn't matter. Paizo couldn't ever figure out anything interesting to do with Lastwall other than destroy it, so maybe I just ignore it too. That's the benefit of a large, diverse setting like Golarion. Anything that I can't think of to make actually better than what they came up with, I can simply ignore and pretend like it doesn't exist at all. I kind of like the idea of it being like a portion of Ustalav, except under the influence of foreigner-kings who owe no loyalty to Ustalav.

Or, if not Ustalav, maybe Molthune and Nimrathis, etc. from the south.

Linnorm Kings Lands: I changed the name slightly to make it fit alphabetically; in the Gazetteer, it was referred to as Linnorm Kings, Lands of, which I thought was kind of dumb. This nation is more or less OK as is. I'd, again, tone down it's "wintriness"; Scandinavia is certainly a habitable place today, for instance. And White Astrid the female Linnorm King is pandering to people who apparently don't know any real women. But those are minor details; mostly a kingdom of para-Vikings tends to work fairly well in most Eurocentric fantasy.

Mammoth Lords Realm: Another one with the strange alphabeticization; but still. A place where Conan-like barbarians live alongside Rancholabrean fauna and even dinosaurs coming up from a Pellucidar-like Underdark vault deep under the earth is fine.

Mendev: This is another nation that has one, too-shrill note for its existence. I think treating it like it was before the Crusades, i.e., kind of like Brevoy, but with lots of companies of mercenaries due to conflicts with both Brevoy, Numenaria and Sarkoris/the Worldwound is more interesting than literally a nation of cold Crusaders and various pointedly corrupt hangers-on.

Molthune: Like many of the former Chelaxian or Taldoran colonies, I prefer to see Molthune as simply a more autonomous frontier region of Cheliax still; one that is not subservient, and might even be openly rebellious against House Thrune, but not against the notion of a united Cheliax of which it is a part. Othewise, surprisingly little else needs to change. The same can be said for Nimrathas, except their conflict and rebellion is more local. 

Mwangi Expanse: I actually like the idea of savage pulp-tale inspired jungles, and Paizo have only somewhat poisoned this idea with their leftist disapproval of "colonialism" and "racism." Still, other than ignoring those themes, and maybe race or alignment swapping a few details here and there, this works pretty well as is. 

Nex: I'll be honest with you; I know even less what to do with this kingdom than I do with Geb. I think maybe the two of them work better if, instead of being high fantasy magical superhero countries in two flavors, they are instead shown as a post-apocalyptic wasteland (in two flavors) based on based battles of two Heresiarchs or other powerful mages that are more like The Ten Who Were Taken rather than D&D archmages. But I just fundamentally don't really like or trust the high magic stuff, so where Golarion focuses on that, which it should as a setting meant to have something for everyone, no doubt, I will tend to either change the theme or just ignore that area altogether. 

Nidal: This is another place that I'm not quite sure what to do with, and neither is Paizo, I feel. The idea of a place under the thrall of the Plane of Shadow as it's theme is fine, but in doing that, they've created a land where agents of Nidal operating outside its borders is much more interesting than anything you could actually do in Nidal itself. I'd probably have to have it be an area that's "coterminous" for lack of a better word with the Plane of Shadow and replace its capital that you're never supposed to visit anyway, with something like Gloomwrought from the 4e Shadowfell book would work better.

Nirmathas: I prefer to see this as a rebellious area of Molthune, and therefore, like Molthune, a frontier province of Cheliax. Closely allied with whatever Lastwall is, and actually the subject of plenty of sympathy from day-to-day Molthunian people, it's more a case of the terrible leadership and mismanagement of Molthune by its elites that has led to the crisis that it finds itself in. Nirmathas also doesn't see itself as anti-Chelaxian, and has in fact made some tentative overtures to Cheliax for aid against the mismanagement of those of Molthune, but Cheliax has its own problems, is in decline, and the House of Thrune doesn't care much about the plight of a bunch of frontier yokels and their claims of being oppressed by bad nobles. 

Numeria: I've never really cared for the idea of a "Barrier Peaks" kingdom, which is honestly exactly what Numeria was meant to be. I'd rather see it as a semi-barbaric land, but instead of aliens and robots and lasers, I'd be more likely to have Lovecraftian entities that also share some similarities with the gray alien mythos adapted to fantasy be the source of the weirdness. If I ever were to get around to adapting the Iron Gods adventure path, it'll be a real challenge given the significant changes to the base setting.

Osirion: Your fantasy needs an Egypt. There's nothing significant I'd change about this one.

Qadira: I don't know why Qadira has to be merely the westernmost province of an unseen and undescribed vast Keleshite empire. I mean, I guess they were going for the Imperial Persian feel here, but Qadira vs Taldor already gives us an effective Sassanids vs Byzantines vibe without needing to postulate a completely unseen eastern majority to Qadira. Let Qadira just stand alone. And with that minor change, I don't think I need to do much else. I don't particularly like Sarenrae as the patron goddess of Qadira, but I'll change all of the religion of my Golarion Remixed anyway, so I'll deal with that in another post some other time.

Rahadoum: This is another one of the stupidest idea of the Golarion design team; a kind of western north African kingdom that is defined by being aggressively anti-religious? Yeah, no, that's dumb. I'd rather combine Rahadoum and maybe even Thuvia as merely regions in a Barbary Coast like situation. And the Rahadoumi (?) are no more or less religious than anyone else. What an inane idea.

Razmiran: Whenever Paizo attempts to do something weird with religion, it's a mis-step. I don't mind a tyrannical wizard-king as a ruler, but him having this secret cult where he pretends to be a god and isn't is just silly. Again, I don't know how much changing that matters; I don't think there are a lot of adventures or other material that really focuses on the Razmiran cult that I'd have to even change anyway.

River Kingdoms: This feels a little too patchwork for my taste, but I'll probably leave it more or less as is. I haven't ever read the Kingmaker adventure path, so until I do, I'm reluctant to postulate any significant changes until I do, I suppose. I'm more likely to see the River Kingdoms as the River Communities, however, and see them as a decentralized yet culturally contiguous area less marked by constant warfare against each other and more marked by threats from their neighbors encroaching on the border communities. Paizo already does this part OK, so it's just a question of focusing more on that instead of violence just being something that's always happening between different sections of this area.

Sargava: Sargava is a metaphor or allegory for how bad European colonialism is. Since I tend to think European colonialism is mostly good for the natives, if not necessarily for the Europeans, this is actually backwards; the failing of the Sargavan colony due to being cut off isn't something to be celebrated and accelerated, it's to be mourned. It's a tragedy of the greatest order. I'll tend to focus less on the failing of Sargava, though, and make it probably more thriving.

Shackles: The Shackles was such a disappointment. Paizo couldn't think of what to do with a pirate-themed area other than make it a collage of all kinds of other crap that doesn't fit. It really just needs to be northern, mostly Chelaxian, pirate-lords on a kind of Corsair Coast. Hey, have I had that idea somewhere already before? If I want to have a darker version or element within it, than something like Iron Kingdom's Cryx works well. Otherwise, yeah; just borrow loads of Freeport-ish stuff and make it just piratey. The Shackles was hugely, hugely disappointing to me. I looked up my original review when I first got it, and at the time I was bravely trying to like it, it seems, but now I just find it pretty silly and unlikely to work for me. 

Sodden Lands: There isn't much material, I don't think, set in the Sodden Lands, but a place lashed by a supernatural storm that won't abate after decades, inhabited by 1) savage cannibals who attack and eat anyone who lands on sight, and 2) an abandoned soothsayer culture who's soothsayers saw something that caused them all to commit suicide; I mean, what's not to love there?

Taldor: As one of the biggest, most consequential, but still kind of tragic nations of the setting, Taldor works pretty much as is. It's basically the fantasy version of the late Byzantine Empire, but you have the opportunity to reverse the decline rather than watch it disappear and get swallowed up by the Ottomans and the Islamic conquest, if you like. Not that Paizo's woke mutants would ever really understand that theme exactly, but I do. I'd have to adapt War for the Crown, if I ever do, to make sure that I focus on that theme rather than sexism or whatever stupid theme the authors gave it.

Thuvia: Another nation that is based on a trumped idea that isn't deep or interesting enough to support a whole nation. I'll just merge it with my revised Rahadoum. Maybe the sun orchid elixir can still exist, but it's just a significant trade good, not the whole raison d'etre for the whole nation. 

Ustalav: This was already always one of the best elements of the Golarion setting. Although I've heavily modified it into my Timischburg nation for my setting, if running a Golarion Remixed, I'd change very little if anything of this, other than perhaps to expand its borders a bit into the dubious neighboring kingdoms that I don't particularly care for.

Varisia: Varisia is another one that I quite like as is, at least if I'm specifically playing a Golarion Remixed game (although once again, my Humberland/Hill Country region largely can be seen as a reflection of the same themes.) The only thing I'd change is replace Kaer Maga with some other city that isn't so stupid. I'm considering the old 3e Bluffside, but I still have to read that book to verify it.

World-wound: I actually like the idea of Old Sarkoris better than the World-wound. I land of creepy witches and barbarians? Fallen to demonic or Lovecraftian cults, but still there, just a place that's almost as bad as "an Abyssal layer, but on the regular world." Sure, sure, they summon all kinds of obyrith and aberrration like insanity, but it isn't literally the Abyss spreading across the landscape. It's still a normal place, more like the benighted and creepy backwoods of Lovecraft's stories like Innsmouth or Dunwich.

<  †  >

Anyway, that's my review of the nations of the Gazetteer, at least. The next chapter is on religion in the Inner Sea region, but I already have my alternate D&D pantheon. Curiously, I detailed it in a post in which I was also talking about Golarion Remixed. 

Friday, May 22, 2026

Dungeons in Dungeons & Dragons

There's an interesting poll; still doesn't have tons of respondents yet, but the early numbers are interesting. Basically, the question is; how much do you use dungeons in Dungeons & Dragons? The answers include:

  • Never
  • Almost Never
  • Rarely
  • Sometimes but not regularly.
Those are the answers that I consider variations of "I don't focus the game on dungeoncrawling."
  • Regularly, but not exclusively.
I consider this one to be the probable default mode, where people don't really think about it too much, but by default they use a lot of dungeon-crawls. Probably because most of them run packaged modules, which tend to have a lot of dungeon-crawls in them.
  • Most of the time
  • Always
There's also an "I'm a special snowflake" response for people who can't decide. Back in ye olde days, these were more overtly jokey, like "I'm Brannich Blacksmoke" or "Lemoncurry." I don't remember why those two became the default, but whatever. There is a vote or two on that one, but I'm going to ignore it.

In the first batch, we have almost a third, so a bigger plurality than I expected. My own answer was actually "Almost Never" rather than "Never" because I do occasionally do a little bit of one here and there. Maybe that's not entirely fair, as there's a pretty big difference between "Never" and "Sometimes, but not regularly". But conceptually, they're all gradients of the same idea; not really being a big enough fan of dungeon-crawling to make it the focus of the game. Maybe the most extreme, "Never" is different than teh rest, but the percentage of responses that selected never is very low, about 3%. The cumulative percentage of all of those groups together is almost 30%.

The middle one, the "default" as I called it, is just a hair under half of the respondents.

The fans of dungeon-crawling, i.e., most of the time and always, are about 22-23%, so less than a quarter. This is interesting to me. I had thought that my avoidance of dungeon-crawling made me kind of an iconoclast in the D&D-o-sphere, and I do mostly play D&D or D&D-adjacent fantasy games. Apparently that's not necessarily true. If nearly a third of people use dungeons, at most, "sometimes but not regularly" then that's a pretty significant secondary plurality. 

I suspect that the bottom and top part will start to converge. I've been watching the last few hours as more responses came in, and the "not that interested in dungeons" group gradually has gone down from just over 30 to a bit under it. I wouldn't be surprised if it settles somewhere near a quarter, i.e. 25%. Meanwhile, the "I use dungeons a lot" group has done the opposite; gone from under 20% to a little over. I think both will "settle" close to a quarter the responses.

Anyway, interesting data, I think. 

Thursday, May 21, 2026

"Funhouse" dungeons

This continues to be my worst year ever, coming up on nearly halfway through it now. Well, let's not get ahead of ourselves. We're more than a third of the way through it, but only by three weeks. Still, regardless of the timing, the theme of the year has been "a long ride on the struggle bus." Work started off already more stressful and challenging than normal due to some "exceptional" one-off circumstances, or at least I thought they were exception and one-off at the time. They've all only gotten extremely worse. Orders of magnitude. Then my father died early in the year, at only 79. Not young, but not that old. My mother will probably live for a good ten years more and she's older than he was. Because of my wife's work situation, our finances have been strained this year, and while we had a good plan to quickly recover from that and get back on track, ongoing and severe drama with my oldest son and his family in Michigan has indirectly threatened our recovery plan, threatened my wife's ability to work, and needless to say, put a lot of emotional strain on us for its own sake, to say nothing of the financial implications of it. It's days like these where I start to wonder about the Hail Mary of buying lottery tickets. Not that that solves all of our problems, but if I can quit my toxic, extremely stressful job (which six months ago was pretty chill and not bad at all; a real failure of leadership that it got to this point so quickly) and not have to worry about finances, then the other problems become manageable. 

Anyway, I'm babbling. My point is that if I'm lucky, I spend a couple of hours in the evening reading some D&D books or a novel (but mostly D&D books) or vegging in front of the TV with a YouTube hiking video or an old sitcom like Seinfeld or Just Shoot Me going on. That's about all that I can manage for free time. Not great. I'm up to about thirty books read so far this year, although some of them are just shorter modules, so maybe that's cheating just a bit. But that's how I count them, so eh. I finished recently the Paizo stand-alone module "Seven Swords of Sin", the first volume of the second Sandy Petersen Cthulhu Mythos Saga; y'know, the one with the unfortunately stupid name "Yig Snake Granddaddy." After reading the first SPCM Saga, I kind of knew what to expect with that one, so it's fine. I've also started reading "Death in Luxor" a Call of Cthulhu scenario (linked as Age of Cthulhu scenarios, all by Goodman Games). I'm also about a third of the way through my monster book re-read of Fiend Folio (3e version) which is the third of six official monster books. I'll be halfway done with those after I finish this one! And I still haven't even switched over to 3.5. I mean, I read the 3.5 MM rather than the old 3e one, because why not, but II and FF were 3e books that were never updated. I also put Races of Eberron in my backpack to read after that. I know that that seems a little out of order, because I'm not really into the Races Of, but it also is in order in the Eberron trawl. It'll probably just be out of order. I'll likely get to Races of Faerun on the Forgotten Realms trawl before I otherwise start reading the Races Of books too. After I read Eberron and Faerun, maybe I'll make a point of reading Wild, Stone, Dragon and Destiny just to get them done. I don't remember being super thrilled with those books, but I find that my memory of 3e books vs my thoughts on them now are not always completely aligned, so who knows what I'll think when I get to them. I've kind of put off advancing the Eberron and Forgotten Realms trawls because I wasn't super excited about the next book in the series, but I don't want to lose focus on those. 

I'm also a little bit intimidated by the big Pathfinder (on pdf) version of the setting. I suspect that much fo the text is repeated from The Pirates Guide to Freeport and The Pathfinder Freeport Companion, but not all of it. If nothing else, there's at least a new adventure attached. But 500+ pages?! Insane! Once I finish it, though, I'm surprisingly close to completely finishing the Freeport Trawl. Although I have all of the titles of the Return to Freeport adventure path listed separately, I actually have them all in the single volume compilation (again, pdf, from DriveThruRPG). That's about it. I'll skim the Pathfinder Freeport Bestiary and the Shadow of the Demon Lord Freeport Companion, but I expect that both are just rules updates to books that I've already read, notably Creatures of Freeport and the other system companions. But I'll skim them to make sure. It seems like it's taken me forever to get to this Return to Freeport point, but that's what I really wanted to read when I started the trawl. Kind of insane that I made myself read, what 30 some odd books before I could get there? Even if some of them were just ~36 page modules, that's a heck of a prereq homework assignment I gave myself. 

Anyway, what I really wanted to talk about was "Seven Swords of Sin." This is an entry in the Gamemastery Series, which was later renamed Pathfinder Modules, and is a stand-alone module for 7th level D&D 3.5 edition characters published in 2007. So, before 4e had even come out. This had to have been one of the very early products by Paizo, although at the time, I admit I wasn't paying a ton of attention to the Gamemastery series or the idea of stand-alone modules at all. I was watching the adventure paths, although I didn't start actually acquiring them until later, and I was picking up a fair bit of the setting stuff, thinking it fun to be "on the ground floor" of a new setting. Of course, the reality is that Golarion always did get a fair bit of development in its modules. This one has a lot of connections to the ongoing Runelords of Thassilon stuff, which is the subject of at least three or four full adventure paths, and touched on in numerous others. I have opinions. To wit:

  • I don't actually love Thassilon. I've mentioned before; there's only so many ways to make an organization or kingdom or whatever of evil wizards, divided into factions by school of magic, and while the Red Wizards of Thay didn't necessarily set the gold standard, they did manage to be better than the Runelords of Thassilon. That said, the Runelords and their junk is just window dressing. There's swords, and their tied to the seven deadly Catholic sins, which have been mapped to seven of the eight schools of magic, and it takes place in Kaer Maga, which has an old Thassilonian (or even older) backstory, but that doesn't matter too much. It's just a little bit of local color.
  • It takes place in Kaer Maga, which is the setting element of Varisia specifically and probably Golarion at large that I like the least. Then again, that doesn't matter much either; the Kaer Maga setting book didn't come out until 2010, so it's just a tiny bit of flavor text here and there. 
  • The entire adventure is not only a massive dungeon-crawl, which I'm long on record as not enjoying, but even worse, it's a "funhouse dungeon" which means that it's a bunch of super random death traps and silliness that is incredibly gamist. The whole point of a funhouse dungeon is that each room is a "fun" challenge in its own right, but that the dungeon itself probably isn't very coherent. It's the kind of thing that people who love traps and puzzles will enjoy, but almost everyone else will think is silly at best and incredibly stupid at worst. 
  • James Sutter has a lot of "designer notes" asides in little text boxes. While this isn't necessarily a bad idea, it comes across here as self-indulgent and mostly cringe. He didn't really say anything that justified being said, in my opinion, and felt a little bit like self-flattery. 
There's still 18 more of these before we even update to the Pathfinder 1e modules, so I should focus on getting through them a little faster maybe. Then again, maybe I don't need to be in too much of a hurry. I still have twelve episodes of the Adventure Paths in 3.5 still; two full paths. 

After I finish the SPCM campaign that I'm reading, I want to put Second Darkness on my queue. I read pdfs with Sumatra, and I've got it set so that it shows ten of the recently opened files (I wish I could show 15, but it doesn't look like I can, sadly.) Unfortunately, I've got fourteen trawls that I'm doing, so I can't have the next one up on each trawl queued up. I'm trying to keep moving more or less consistently through all of them, but I also feel like once I can start checking off trawls, starting with Freeport, I'll be happy to have one less trawl to track. Freeport is the only one that I'm really close to finishing, but if I focused on them, I could knock Eberron back pretty quickly, and the 3e Web Adventures wouldn't be hard to finish. There's not that many o them and they're all really short anyway. The regular 3e adventures isn't too big a deal either, although later in the series, they turned into significantly longer products. Honestly, trawling through the 5e campaigns isn't that bad. They're longer books, but there aren't really that many of them.

Of course, as soon as I start checking off trawls, I can hide those pages, but I might well want to add more trawls; 1e or 2e trawls, for instance. I can keep at this for years. Probably, at my age, for the rest of my life. And I still have novels and other books that I'm trying to read. I really wish I could go into soft retirement and have my free time. Spending most of the day doing things I don't want to do and hanging around people I don't really care to see is getting old after better part of thirty years of doing it. 

I should note that the Return to Freeport book is quite a bit smaller than the single-volume Paizo adventure paths, but the Paizo adventure paths have about 50-60% module, at most, and 40-50% bonus bestiaries, fiction, and other setting material. It looks at a quick glance like the actual adventure content is comparable in size, assuming that the Freeport stuff is mostly just adventure content and doesn't include anything else other than maps and statblocks, which are actually, of course, part of the adventure. 

Monday, May 18, 2026

Low magic Pathfinder 1e E6 project

One more post on the races options for my E6 project. While my setting doesn't necessarily have the same races as Pathfinder, which is very D&D, part of the reason I'd possibly use Pathfinder is to have more races available. Here's the complete list (minus psionics) of races in the rulebooks, I believe. I'll bold the ones that represent races explicitly in my setting, leave races that I wouldn't mind if someone played alone, and use strikethrough on races that I explicitly won't allow. Any kind of animal people or Oriental fantasy races are explicitly not really in the cards. I don't want them.

Core:

  • Dwarf
  • Elf
  • Gnome
  • Half-elf
  • Half-orc (called just Orc in Old Night system)
  • Halfling
  • Human

Featured: (about 50/50 in terms of what I'd allow)

  • Aasimar (called seraphim, but moved to appendix. On the fence, but it someone really wanted to play one, I wouldn't probably balk. 
  • Catfolk
  • Dhampir (another appendix race)
  • Drow
  • Fetchling (shadow genasi?) (Would use for Grislings/Hyperboreans)
  • Goblin
  • Hobgoblin
  • Ifrit (fire genasi) (called surturs)
  • Kobold
  • Orc (could use as an alternate for orc. There's no half-orcs in my setting, but I don't care which stats you use.
  • Oread (earth genasi) (called dvergs_
  • Ratfolk  (they exist but are specifically a monster race only)
  • Sylph (air genasi) (hey, I use the same name!)
  • Tengu
  • Tiefling (called kemlings)
  • Undine (water genasi) (called tritons)

Uncommon: (otherwise known as, with one potential exception, not appearing in any of my games for any reason)

  • Changeling
  • Duergar
  • Gillmen
  • Grippli
  • Kitsune
  • Merman
  • Nagaji (snakeman)
  • Samsaran
  • Strix
  • Suli
  • Svirfneblin
  • Vanara (monkey)
  • Vishkanya
  • Wayang
UPDATE: In a completely unrelated tangent to add on, I've often been fascinated by the tiny home movement, but I think it's gotten out of hand. Let's say, for example, that my wife dies or something, I'm a widower in my mid-50s, and I decide that even though I probably can't afford it, I want to retire. Because I probably can't afford it, although maybe I can with life insurance, I want to buy some land out in the country for $100k or less, in Wyoming or maybe Colorado or Montana or even parts of Utah or Idaho. But Tiny Homes are usually surprisingly expensive. Why wouldn't I buy a regular mobile home instead? For about the same price, I can easily get 2-3x the square footage. I don't need lots of space, but if I'm sleeping in a loft, have no real space for an office and small library because I'm somewhere between 300-500 sq feet, why wouldn't I just get a mobile home for the same price that's 1200+ square feet, comes with three bedrooms (one of which could become an office/library) two bathroom, a spare bedroom for visitors, and a decent kitchen and living room space?

Living in a mobile home naturally comes with a bit of a stigma if you're in a trailer park, but if you have one isolated out in the country, who cares? It's cheap, it's functional, and it gives me everything that I need. Why overspend on a tonier tiny home, or a big full-sized "normal" house when I can do this instead and have all I need? A double wide is easily under $100k, maybe even under $80k. Heck, I've seen 100-+ sq ft single wide's in the $50ks. Although in that case, I probably lose the spare bedroom.

This assumes I'm a widower. My wife is unlikely to go for this plan. For multiple reasons. She really doesn't want to live in Wyoming or any other "cold state" either.

I don't know what brought that on. Watching a bunch of widower and/or bachelor retirees in tiny homes on YouTube over the weekend, I guess. Kind of made me wonder what I would do if I were in their shoes.

Sunday, May 17, 2026

Further Low Fantasy musings

In my "D&D as low fantasy" post, I discussed how I would house-rule 3.5, the version that I'm most familiar with, to be something that I could play. The more I think about it, though, the more I think that Pathfinder 1e would be a better baseline to play with than 3.5. It's basically the same game already, but a bit streamlined in some respects, and with more options. A little bit more powerful, but I'm adding steps below that mitigate that. And frankly, I like a flatter curve rather than zero to hero anyway. I absolutely want to limit the soaring heights of hero, but let's also not start literally at zero. 0-level character funnels and stuff like that is fun as a gimmick, but not what I want for a long-term, serious campaign. Let me reiterate and expand just a bit on how to do this. I'd still like to do this, honestly, and will probably make this an official page at some point; how exactly to use these rules to get the low fantasy that I want.

  • The number one rule is: don't play with powergamers! Late in 3.5's life cycle and throughout Pathfinder 1e, it certainly had a reputation as a powergamers' paradise, with all kinds of optimization combos and stuff that you could use. If you instead look at all of these options from a roleplayers' perspective, as offering you all kinds of ways to customize your character experience rather than ways to optimize your mechanical character experience, most of the problems with the game go away on their own. That said, maybe something like "The Elephant in the Room" help to mitigate it. 
  • Use E6. If it works for 3.5, it works just as well for Pathfinder 1e, since the games differ only in details, not at all in base structure. 
  • All races beyond core need to be explicitly approved. I'll try to make a lot of stuff work, but a lot of stuff simply won't, no matter what. Especially the animal people.
  • All PCs are by default, banned from taking a full spellcasting (or psionic powers using) class at 1st level. You can multiclass into it at 2nd level without penalty, however. "Half-casters" like ranger or paladin, etc. can still be used as is. And non-casters can, of course, also be used as is right away.
  • Incantations were never officially introduced, I don't think, into Pathfinder 1e, but they were certainly present in d20 D&D and Rituals work almost exactly the same way in 5e. Higher level spells that you want to be present in the game can be converted by GMs into Incantations or Rituals, but that, of course, makes them unlikely to be useful in combat, because the casting time is in minutes or even longer rather than in rounds.
  • One of the main reasons I was reluctant to use Pathfinder 1e vs 3.5 is because I wanted psionics from 3.5 to be available. For this reason, I include Dreamscarred Press's Ultimate Psionics as a "core" book useable in the Pathfinder version. I know, I know—it's not exactly just a direct port of the 3.5 psionics into Pathfinder. It couldn't be even if it wanted to; the Expanded Psionics Handbook material was added into the SRD, but the Complete Psionic material was not. While I miss the Lurk or the Ardent sometimes, they did a pretty good job of attempting to get the same material, more or less, out of their book. It'll do. Psionic classes, like spell-casting classes, however, are subject to the same "half-caster" rule at first level, i.e., full-casters can't be taken at 1st level. You'll have to use your best interpretation of what is considered a "fullcaster" psionic class, but certainly the Psion and the Wilder qualify, at least. I don't remember the Pathfinder specific rules well enough to comment otherwise; I know for sure that the soulknife and aegis, for instance, probably don't. Anyway, maybe this is a moot point. I don't know a lot of psionic players, and if there are psionic players, they often tend to gravitate to the soulknife for obvious reasons; because it's like a combination of Psylocke from the X-men and a Jedi or Sith. It may actually be the only psionic class that I've seen played, come to think of it, and I know that I've been in campaigns with at least two of them before.
  • If needed, and if you play into the E6 feat progression part of the game, higher level class abilities can be converted into feat chains that characters can continue to take after they hit the max level cap of E6. Yeah, this will require a little bit of review and work, but it's not a big deal. And you have to run quite a long campaign for it to even be relevant anyway. Speaking of which, I'll almost certainly ditch XP and do something like 5e's milestone experience. Which will be a fair bit slower as well. There's no rush to get new abilities. Get used to the ones you have for a while before you start immediately adding new ones.
  • Because of the class list and archetypes formula of Pathfinder 1e, which built on the same idea in the Complete books (and others) of 3.5 as well as the PHB2 but greatly expanded and in the game almost from the get-go, I don't think prestige classes are nearly as important in Pathfinder 1e as they were in 3.5. I'm almost tempted to just say ignore them completely. However, if as GM you want to allow them, you'll have to look at them carefully; if you think that they're OK, they should be playable at 2nd level. Let the PC take as many of the prerequisites as he can at 1st level, and then just waive the rest of the prerequisites and let him take 5 levels of the prestige class, as if it were a fullcaster class. Feel free to veto any prestige class, or even the entire concept of them. Pathfinder with all classes and archetypes enabled is already even more open of a game in terms of optional character concepts than 3.5 was. Because it was built on the 3.5 chassis after seeing what 3.5 did, and it deliberately enabled some of the better late appearing ideas early on.
  • Sanity rules aren't necessarily necessary for low fantasy, but I like them. There's lots of options out there, but if I'm doing Pathfinder 1e anyway, why not use the Fear and Sanity and possibly even Corruption systems from Horror Adventures? I'm not as much a fan of Corruption as a mechanic, but it could be useful in the right game. Fear and Sanity I always like, however.
Now, don't get me wrong. I'd still prefer to use my own rules-lite, kinda sorta old school adjacent system. I like rules-lite kinda sorta old school adjacent systems as long as I'm not playing in the OSR playstyle; I'm very much in the trad camp, and I've always been interested in D&D because I liked fantasy fiction and roleplaying, not because I was interested in any of the gamist elements of D&D, or the dungeon-crawling environment, or anything like that. But, I have a lot of nostalgia for d20 games, and this is something that I could run with and enjoy. And I do enjoy using the 3.5 and Pathfinder 1e mechanics of character building, not for the optimization nonsense, but for the built-in customization for roleplaying that it offers.

Reading trawls

My first "trawl" started before I even relocated, and I started getting my old 3e books out and reading them again. However, I haven't been tracking that as a trawl; although since 2023, I've been tracking books that I read just for the heckuvit. I still have my original document, and I just add a new tab for a new year. So, yeah. I'm on my fourth year. But my performance hasn't been super stable. In 2023, I read 39 books. In 2024, I only read 27, although that's also the year that I relocated. In 2025, I busted out and read 107 books. This year, so far, I've read 26. If I continue to track at more or less that rate, I'll be somewhere between 50-60 for the year. I had a very slow start this year, though—I tend to think that I'll improve my pace and get closer to 75 or so. We'll see. 2026 has so far been the Year From Hell, and it doesn't look on pace to improve in the short term. Sigh. That'll probably put a dent in more than just my reading, but also my blogging, my vlogging (which has already taken a huge hit), my traveling, my sleeping, and who knows what else. It'll probably take years off my life.

Once again, if any eccentric wealthy person wants to pay me a bunch of money to go into soft retirement and make these posts and videos about gaming, the outdoors and the two together, you know how to reach me. I'll do you a solid and make videos and blog posts like it was my job. Because it would be. 

Anyway, what are the trawls that I'm doing? Let me list them and give an update:

  • The Untracked Trawl - 3.5 books. I started just kind of reading them somewhat randomly, based on what I was in the mood to read. I'm still doing that. This is the only one that I'm not tracking. But it makes steady, if slow, progress.
  • Freeport Trawl - The first one that I started tracking. I'm actually not that far away from finishing it, curiously. Although the books that I have left are pretty hefty.
  • Eberron (3e) Trawl - This one has stalled because two independent crawls have kind of merged in a sense. The next book on it is Races of Eberron, which is one of my old 3.5 hardbacks, and I'm doing other things with my old 3.5 hardbacks (see the Untracked Trawl, above.) Maybe I just need to bite the bullet and read this one specifically so I can move on. This was the second one that I started tracking.
  • Forgotten Realms (3e) Trawl - Another one that I started on a whim; if I'm reading Eberron, why not FR? I don't actually like the FR nearly as much, although I admit that there's good ideas in it. The one I'm on next, Faiths and Pantheons is one that I am specifically not that interested in, so I always end up picking up something else instead of this one, I guess.
  • Pathfinder Adventure Path Trawl - I should call it Paizo rather than Pathfinder, because I started with the three adventure paths that were in Dungeon Magazine, Shackled City, Age of Worms and Savage Tide. I've already read Rise of the Runelords (again) and Curse of the Crimson Throne. I need to start the next one soon. 
  • Pathfinder Modules Trawl - I figured why not; if I'm reading the adventure paths, why not the stand-alone modules too? The older 1e stuff in particular is pretty easy to find on pdf now that it's been out of print for years. Shame, though. Lots of people still remember these older ones more fondly than the pop fantasy stuff that they're doing now, which is kitschy and feels more like Pokemon meets globohomo corporate art style in comparison.
  • Pathfinder Chronicles/Setting Trawl - I had a lot of the old Pathfinder Chronicles books, and the ones that I don't have are, again, readily available in either the used or pdf market (or both.) The line changed names partway through from Pathfinder Chronicles to Pathfinder Campaign Setting, if that matters. Many of these I've owned since they were new and have read before, although not in many years now.
  • Pathfinder Companion Trawl - I had fewer of these, but still a lot. Why not read them too. Very early days on this trawl. I've only read a couple out of many dozen that I need to read.
  • Pathfinder Rules Trawl - It would seem weird to read everything Pathfinder, especially 1e, without reading the rules books. Then again, I skipped the PHB and DMG in my 3.5 re-read, so I dunno. I haven't even started this, but I made the list and I'll track it. Probably for years. 
  • 3e Adventure Trawl - I also started reading the official 3e modules, including the "pseudo-adventure path" of modules that aren't linked, but by levels, seem to at least be sequential. Of course, once I finish the last of those, I've got a bunch more official 3e modules to read that are floating out there. I'm still pretty early on this one, but it's a more manageable list.
  • 3e Web Adventure Trawl - I'm on the fence about this one. There are a ton of web adventures that were released. They're all short, but there's a ton of them. I've been reading them, but not with a lot of rigor.
  • Goodman Games Module Trawl - I bought a humble bundle several years ago that had dozens of Goodman Games modules in it, so I figured, what the heck—I'll list them out and read them. I have a handful of other modules here and there that I've picked up to supplement the list. This is one of the ones that I care about doing the least, but y'know. Lists are lists, and why not make one?
  • 5e Campaign Trawl - I have access to most if not all of these, since I know people who play lots more 5e than I do. I thought what the heck. I'm not very far along yet. Many of these aren't super highly thought of, but some of them are. They're written more to be read than played, in my experience; they have at least somewhat engaging prose instead of toolkits and statblocks and stuff like that. Many of them are adaptations of sorts of older material too, so they're pretty familiar. Curse of Strahd is largely seen as the favorite, but it's at least the third adaptation of the same material, and I've got Expedition to Castle Ravenloft on my untracked 3e trawl already. And I've read it and the original "Ravenloft" module before anyway. So, I don't expect any of these books to blow me away, but y'know. I don't expect them to be terrible either. Most will probably be vaguely but pleasantly forgettable. 
  • 3PP Trawl - Doesn't include everything, but many of the 5e campaigns that were made by 3pp belong here. Slow progress with this one too, although I retroactively added the Enemy Within Director's Cut to start the list off, so it looks like I've made more progress than I have. I also finished the first SPCM campaign, "Ghoul Island". The second one should be next, if I ever get started.
  • 4e Trawl - I gradually got most of the 4e books over time here and there, and I've been meaning to read them. I actually have read many of them, but I'm now doing it a little more systematically, so some will get re-read as part of this trawl. 

Friday, May 15, 2026

Bad Blogger

Sigh. I wish I had enough money to "soft retire" and then I'd do three things. Concurrently.

 - Overlanding and hiking trips, especially in the Rocky Mountains of (mostly) Colorado, Wyoming, and Montana in the summer, and to the deserts of Colorado, Utah, Arizona, and even Wyoming in the shoulder seasons, and New Mexico, southern Arizona and West Texas in the winter. I'd make YouTube videos and blog posts about my adventures outdoors.

 - Create videos about gaming. Some general gaming news, but mostly talking about my setting. I'd also blog a lot more and a lot better. I'm whipping this out while multitasking on a meeting, but that's about all that I have the time or mental energy to do. Actually, a lot of these would overlap. I'm sure I'd do some videos from a studio/office room in my house, but what I'd like to do is talk about gaming from outside. If you're familiar with Jackson Crawford's Old Norse videos, it'd be kind of like that for most videos, if I could. Heck, I'd focus on utilizing the wilderness in my gaming, because that's kind of a thing for me. Maybe not focus, but I'd talk about it quite a bit, and how the place that I'm standing in for that video can be utilized/adapted to make your game session more interesting. Crawford dresses kind of like a cowboy. Maybe I'd dress kind of like a pirate to mix it up. At least sometimes, just for fun. The image below isn't really me, by the way, although it's (originally) based on a picture of me, run through AI several times until it doesn't look that much like me anymore in most respects.

 - Also, in an ideal world, I'd have another room in my house that would be my model railroad room, and I'd have that hobby that I always kind of wanted but never did anything with for the last four decades other than tinker a bit here and there. This one is, sadly, a little disconnected from my other two hobbies, which would be more tightly integrated, but the reality is that being outside inspires me to create models of the outside on the inside in miniature. 

Anyway, as if. If anyone wants to fund my desired lifestyle by giving me a few million dollars that I can invest and quit my terrible day job, you know where to reach me.