Friday, May 29, 2026

3.x Hardcopy archive

I've been gradually over the last year, or maybe two, been going back and getting hardcopies of D&D 3.5 (mostly, but there's probably a 3e or two product in the list there too) products that I think that I want to have in hardcopy, but which I didn't buy when they were new for whatever reason, and I have to deal with pdfs. Some of them I don't care about, because I simply don't care about that book as much as others (Dungeonscape being the iconic example here, most of the Races of... titles. Of those, I bought Races of Eberron because I liked Eberron when it was new, and Races of Destiny because I found it dirt cheap somewhere. Never got the others in hardcopy, but I doubt that I have any interest in doing so either.) On the other hand, some are ones that I wanted for a long time and I was waiting forever for prices to come down at at least what they were when they were new. Heroes of Horror was one of these; I probably still paid too much for a somewhat beat-up copy.

What are the ones that are on my shortlist of titles to get?

1. More than anything else is Monster Manual IV. This is the only 3.x monster book that I don't have in hard copy, and it's bugged me for years. 

2. I jumped very quickly on the non-magical Complete books, and I have hardcopies of, say, Complete Warrior and Complete Adventurer that I bought when they were new. I even have Complete Psionic which is weird, and I bought it relatively new. (I've still never read it, though, lol. It's on my list.) I never got Complete Arcane, Mage or Divine because I was not very interested in D&D-style magic. I guess maybe that's why I liked psionics. It was magic, but different. 

3. I've had the DMG2 since forever, but somehow I never bought the PHB2. It's not super cheap, but you can get PODs from DriveThru.

There's a few other books that were more out there late books, like Book of Nine Swords or Magic of Incarnum, etc. that I probably wouldn't buy in hardcopy, because I don't care about that kind of stuff as much, but eh. Maybe. 

4. I'm also missing a few Eberron books that, if I could find them in hardcopy in decent shape at a reasonable price, I'd totally pick up, because I dropped out of collecting Eberron after a while, and had to get these later in pdf. City of Stormreach is the one I most want here, and probably the only one that I really regret not picking up in physical copy. It sells for... a lot of money, when you can even find a hardcopy available at all. Slightly less so, but I'd probably get them if I could find them cheap, Dragons of Eberron and Secrets of Xen'drik, so I've got more details on the continents that I'm missing. (I bought Secrets of Sarlona new, so I've always had that one.)

Thursday, May 28, 2026

Paizo Iconics - (Nakayama) Hayato

The last iconic for today is the Samurai, another of the "new" classes. He's the fourth such, and the third to feature a last name; although because he's "Japanese" his last name is actually his first name, as indicated in the post title. Of course, he has to have a tragic yet epic backstory too; why can't 1st level character just be fresh-faced youths? Described as both "late thirties" and "est. 49-51 years old" simultaneously, he's also one of the few older characters. Of course, he's a ronin. Because he was a great warrior before he was a 1st level character, even, he had to have this honorable duel with the murderer of his prior lord, but because Minkai is steeped in dumb traditions, that meant he had to become a ronin. Actually, he became a ronin because his lords' widow forbade him from committing seppuku, so he had no choice but to come to the Golarion version of "Europe" where he appeared in .... well, in relatively few product art, because a samurai doesn't actually make much sense in this setting, and trying to fit him in was always a case of special pleading. 

Like many of these Wayne Reynolds iconics portraits, he's way too busy-looking. He's like a Warhammer 40k model turned to an acrylic or watercolor painting.

Even the Pathfinder wiki points out that the samurai is like a culturally slightly different variant on the Cavalier, which is already like an alignment variation on the paladin. Samurai seems like a very oddly specific and superfluous class. I can't imagine ever being interested in playing one myself.

The next four, which will be my next update whenever I get around to doing this tag again, include four more of the Pathfinder unique classes: Lirianne the Gunslinger, Reiko the Ninja, Feiya the Witch, and Imrijka the Inquisitor. A nice batch of girlbosses to look forward to. Sigh. Anyway, several of the classes would be potentially be interesting to me, nonetheless.

The Pathfinder wiki divides the classes up into various different categories. Maybe I should have done that instead of just going through them chronologically. The first batch are the so-called "core" classes, which are basically the same as the original 3e D&D classes. The second batch are the so-called "base" classes, which are different 1-20 level classes, not unlike the classes that appeared in 3.5 books like, say, the Complete series. Then there are the "hybrid" classes that kind of combine the territory of two core or base classes and blend them in a way. Then there are the "occult" classes which were kind of the Pathfinder take on psionics, although they weren't done very much like the 3x psionics were, unfortunately. (For that, however, there's a third party book called Ultimate Psionics that is well-regarded.) And finally, there are "alternate" classes, which it is presumed you would only use on rare occasions because they're kind of weird. The samurai above is one of those. Anyway, just to add a bit more text to this post and to keep it handy for when I want to refer to it, let me list each class by which category it calls in.

Core

  • Barbarian
  • Bard
  • Cleric
  • Druid
  • Fighter
  • Monk
  • Paladin
  • Ranger
  • Rogue
  • Sorcerer
  • Wizard

Base

  • Alchemist
  • Cavalier
  • Gunslinger
  • Inquisitor
  • Magus
  • Oracle
  • Shifter
  • Summoner
  • Vigilante
  • Witch

Hybrid

  • Arcanist
  • Bloodrager
  • Brawler
  • Hunter
  • Investigator
  • Shaman
  • Skald
  • Slayer
  • Swashbuckler
  • Warpriest

Occult

  • Kineticist
  • Medium
  • Mesmerist
  • Occultist
  • Psychic
  • Spiritualist

Alternate

  • Antipaladin
  • Ninja
  • Samurai
Of course, there's also NPC classes, but they don't have iconics, and you're not meant to use them. And there's also mythic paths, which are kind of like the equivalent to the old Epic Level Handbook, but there's no iconics of them either.

Paizo Iconics - Damiel (Morgethai)

The second character to feature a last name, and the third of the "new" Pathfinder classes, Alchemists like Damiel are kind of like an combination wizard who uses potions and stuff instead of spells and a drug dealer or mad scientist. Damiel certainly lives up to that promise; his backstory is that he got so involved in his alchemical mad scientists experiments—on himself—that he was kicked out of his home and had to become a wandering PC. (There seems to be a certain theme with the iconic character bios. Can't anyone just have had a regular, mostly happy upbringing?) Yeah, he's another James Sutter creation. Sigh. 

Damiel, like all of the new Pathfinder classes wasn't revised for 2e, or at least his artwork wasn't. In fact, he was replaced; the new 2e iconic alchemist is now a goblin named Fumbus or something. Which I'm a little bit surprised by, because he appeared in a lot of art, it seems. 

I'm not really a fan of the concept. I don't like magic-users of any kind, honestly, although a mad scientists who's "magic" actually comes from potions and the like is maybe something that I'd like better than a super traditionalist wizard or even a sorcerer. 





Paizo Iconics - Alain (Germande)

Yes, as far as I've noticed, Alain is the first iconic to be given a last name. Weird. His backstory is a study in the envy of gamma writers, who tried really hard to not make him too unlikeable, but just barely. Born into privilege and arrogance, and still possessed of it even after running away from home eventually to become a mercenary captain, or "rogue knight", he's described as little more than a charming sociopath. Which is what I believe most gammas believe alphas truly are.

Whatever. He's fine, although reading between the lines makes him seem.. eye-roll-worthy. Cavaliers are kind of like knights, and they belong to specific orders. Naturally, wokesters and other people of low social status and questionable moral outlook struggle with the very idea of the paladin, so they need a secular and less good alternative, and that's kind of what Alain and the Cavalier class represent. Maybe it's good that they made him lawful neutral, even as they described his behavior as mostly evil, just to separate him from the paladin. Of course, given that the iconic paladin is an African girlboss, it's also unfortunate that the Cavalier is a caricature of an alpha written by a gamma. 

I could play one. I wouldn't be clamoring to be the cavalier, but if someone gave me a cavalier to play, I wouldn't complain too much, I don't think. 

Paizo Iconics - Alahazra

I dislike this character more than most. The concept of the Oracle, which is what Alahazra is, is fine. I totally different and kind of mythic take, if you will, on the concept of the cleric. Where the cleric is heavily rooted in the Christian martial templar tradition, the oracle feels like ancient pagan priestess of Apollo at Delphi or something like that. Saddled with a curse that gives their class abilities a bit more flavor than most, the Oracle sounds interesting to play. I'm (slowly) going through an actual-play podcast of Carrion Crown, and one of the characters there is an oracle. It's a nice idea. In that case, the character plays not too unlike a cleric, but then again, I've only witnessed four levels of play so far, so who knows.

The Oracle is also the first uniquely Pathfinder class that wasn't just a slightly updated version of a D&D 3.5 class, and as such, it's an interesting concept there too. I actually like many of the new classes, and think that they did a good job creating them. But this backstory is a feminist grrlboss fantasy, and it's nasty. It doesn't help that Alahazra is from the militantly atheist nation of Rahadoum; possibly the worst country in the entire Golarion setting. As a teenager, she was bulled and cast out by her family, ironically for allegedly being religious (because apparently the iconic Oracle was the first oracle ever, and they thought she was a cleric) but now she wanders around northern Africa... her, Garund, highly respected, beautiful, and friends to all kinds of nobles and kings and all that crap. What a crock. That backstory is absurd.

Not on that, is she supposed to be an adventurer? Her outfit is more ridiculous than Padme's most ornate state dress. 

As normal, Wayne Reynolds did the artwork. As far as I know, there's only one, because this wave of iconics weren't revised, but he did feature her (and Seltyiel) on the cover for Ultimate Magic. And, of course, other artists have painted her. There's even one really dumb one where she's mopping the deck of a pirate ship in her ridiculous exotic princess dress and hat. 

Oh, well. Paizo is made up of idiot progressive mutants who live in Seattle. One shouldn't expect too much from them, even if they used to be able to produce pretty good products that were apolitical. Too much of it isn't, though. I think this bio was written by James Sutter who is one of the "newer" wave of younger, woker Paizonians.



Preview of Coming Attractions...

Sol Invictus
I made a brief list of gods that I would use if I wanted to create a typical D&D style fantasy heathen pantheon, like the old heathen pantheons of the ancient Greeks, Romans, Norse, etc. that are familiar to us from Bulfinch's Mythology and elsewhere. Nominally, my settings are not pagan, but y'know, sometimes you want to option. Lots of people (including past versions of me) considered pagan mythological pantheons as going hand in hand with D&D-like fantasy. Even Tolkien kinda sorta did it with the Valar. Other books I read in the 80s and 90s (Riftwar Cycle, Belgariad, Dragonlance Trilogy, Halfling Gem Trilogy, etc.) had the same assumptions as pretty core element and sometimes even a hugely important story hook associated with them. 

My pagan pantheon isn't going to be "original" per se, as it will include many names cribbed from actual pantheons of past mythological origin. Heck, what started me on the journey in the first place was the idea of using Sol Invictus as a D&D god instead of something like Pelor or Sarenrae or even Apollo, who appears in both versions of Deities & Demigods and therefore qualifies in a basic sense as a D&D sun-god. 

Here's the list, deliberately brief, that I'll be using to build this out. I'll probably have a 3.5 and a 5e version, with domains, etc. Just for the heckuvit. And I'll talk a little bit briefly about all of the characters, and generate ChatGPT images of all of them. Which is my bottleneck; I can only generate so many a day, because I have a free account and if I don't get a perfect image the first time, I have to use a few iterations to get even one of them. It limits my generation to 2-3 characters per day, mostly. 

Anyway, here's the list, and three images. I'll do each one as a separate post at some point shortly. Some of these might be slightly modified as I go through this exercise. 

Sol Invictus - sun god (as you'd expect) with a martial aspect. More like Pelor than like Apollo. Originally a Roman god.

Cernunnos, the Horned King - nature god from Gaulish/Celtic origin, with antlers. Not super friendly.

Cernunnos
Thunraz the Thunderer - the proto-Germanic asterisked form of Thor. I'm less likely to go with the "god of xxx" kind of thing; in real mythology, gods were just characters, and they didn't necessarily belong to domains and spheres of influence as much as we like to make them be. Thor, for instance, was never once called the God of Thunder, or even the Thunderer in any Norse text. He did have a hammer that thundered when he smote with it, but he was just an adventurer Norse god with a quick temper who was very strong, heroic, and featured in more stories than most. But I agree that for D&D there probably needs to be some element of that. 

Mithras - another late-appearing Roman god like Sol Invictus, famous for his mystery cult that was popular among the legions and the foederati, so he's often considered a martial god.

Chernavog, the Dark One - a Slavic god, although I've spelled it slightly differently than normal, who also happens to be the character from the "Night on Bald Mountain" sequence of Fantasia. I consider him a pretty typical dark lord style figure. 

Veles, the Sly Mage - both a trickster figure, and a god of magic of sorts; Veles is also a Slavic god originally.

Tellus, the Earth-Mother - an old Greek or Roman spelling of Terra. Pretty typical Mother Earth type of goddess.

The Gray Sisters: Wyrd, Verthand, and Skuld - The Gray Sisters is usually a literal translation of the Graeae, which were Greek (famous for their interaction with Perseus, if you've watched Clash of the Titans lately) but I've used names that are more similar to Anglo-Saxon versions of the Norse Norns. Obviously they are both old Indo-European reflections of the same idea anyway, since the Graeae and the Norns are almost identical. Goddesses of fate, divination, etc. but with a darker, edgier tone than some might have had otherwise. 

Nodens, the Silver-Handed; Lord of the Hunt - A Celtic British god, also known by his Irish name Nuada or Nuadha, although the name Nodens itself is familiar to many gamers from Lovecraft. A huntsman and fisherman, he's kind of like the iconic ranger, maybe.

Brigantia, the Mistress of Victory - a poorly attested Celtic goddess. Well, actually she's fairly well-attested in terms of figurines, but we know little about her. Not unlike Nike, the Greek Goddess of Victory, and also often conflated with the Romans with Minerva (Athena). I'd probably see her as the unlikeable girlboss of the gods that the other gods either are annoyed by, or are constantly putting in her place, although she's lacking in self-awareness enough to realize it.

Summanus
Epona - Gaulish goddess of horses. Maybe some elements of Artemis too; a weird, wandering loner of a girl who prefers the company of animals, especially horses, to anyone else.

Sirona, the Healer - another poorly known Celtic goddess (I'm using lots of them, if you didn't notice) but I'll call her the pretty stereotypical Florence Nightingale goddess that D&D pantheons seem to always have.

Tzovinar, Daughter of the Seas - an Armenian goddess. I just like the name and the title that came with her. I was thinking of using Thetis, a Greek chthonic goddess of the seas, and the bad guy from Clash of the Titans, but I like this name better. I need to mix up a few more goddesses, because I'm wont otherwise to ignore them and make the whole pantheon a big ole sausage party.

Mokosh, the Swamp Mother - I can't even remember where I got this name. But a hag goddess in a swamp sounded kind of cool.

Volturnus, the Father of the River - I thought about using Father Ren, or Father Rhine from the Germanic tribes, but I relented and went with this more "generic" Roman name. An aquatic god, obviously, and maybe someone who's frequently irritated by Mokosh and Tzovinar.

Ceres - a Roman goddess of the hearth, agriculture, marriage and domesticity in general, often equated with Demeter, and who picked up the same story of Demeter and Persephone and Hades, except the names were Ceres and Proserpina and Dis Pater in those roles to the Romans.

Dagon - a dark god of the ocean, who borrows more from the Lovecraft and D&D demon lord stuff than from mythology per se.

Orcus - another name for Pluto to the Romans, but of course, he's got a long history in D&D which I'll also be borrowing; a dark demon-god, associated with undeath. He may be more like Orcus as Tenebrous, though—an undead thing. Maybe like Nagash from Warhammer in fact.

Thanatos - another alternate name for either Hades or his realm to the Greeks, although in D&D of course, this is Orcus' layer of the Abyss. I'll call him a dark god of night and murder, maybe not too unlike Zon-Kuthon of Golarion; corrupted by the Dark Tapestry, or Far Realm, or Outer Darkness, or Void Beyond, or whatever I want to call it. Conceptually, they're all the same thing. This Lovecraftian corruption possibly places him in a similar role to Tharizdun from D&D.

Zaltys, the Serpent - a snake god. The name comes from Lithuanian, and refers to the home snakes that they used to keep for whatever reason. The Teutonic crusaders who brought Christianity with the sword to the Baltic peoples killed a lot of their snakes. Elements of Yig, Ydersius, Sertrous and more

Nwt, the Sky-mother - an Egyptian goddess of the night sky.

Ashtar of the Sacred Groves - A Semitic goddess, usually known as either Ishtar or Astarte depending on the language, but I've split the difference. Infamous for her sacred groves and temple heirodules, or "sacred prostitutes" in real life. 

The Old Men of the Sea; Manann, Thaumant, and Halios Geron - odd spellings of Greek gods and one Irish god of the Sea. I thought it'd be cool to have them be a trio rather than just one. 

Pathfinder Freeport

I'm a little over half way through the Freeport: City of Adventure book which came out for Pathfinder 1e a number of years ago. Although it has the same name as the older 3e book, it's two iterations beyond that; the old 3e book was updated to the system-less Pirates Guide to Freeport back in 2007 or so, and this Pathfinder update is the next iteration, advancement a bit in the timeline and some details, expansion, and merging with the Pathfinder Freeport Companion. I had the system-less guide on my reading list, but I decided to remove it both because I read it kind of recently—since I was tracking my reading, at least—and because I had essentially three versions of the same material on the list. It seemed overkill to read all three. This "new" one, which is at least seven years old now, I've had on PDF for a number of years but never got around to reading. I found out, after spot checking, that it was on sale from the Green Ronin store in hardcopy for about a third of it's normal ~$80 price; under $30, anyway. Even with nearly ~$11 in S&H fees, I could get it for less than half its normal cost, so I did. However, by the time it arrives, I will almost certainly have finished reading the PDF copy, so it'll just go on my shelf until... well, until next time I want to read it or refer to it, I suppose. 

As I've said, I'm quite excited to finish the Freeport Trawl. I'm almost done. Once I finish this book, which I was a little intimidated to start because it's so long but which I shouldn't have been, because I've been making good time through it, I've got the Freeport Bestiary, a Pathfinder update to the older Creatures of Freeport, which I expect to have lots of repeat text from that book, so I can probably skim it quickly, the Shadow of the Demon Lord companion, which I can also skim, because it's just the adaption of the Companion material to yet another system, and I've already gone through half a dozen variants of that already, and, of course, the Return to Freeport mega-adventure. Technically originally released as six chapters; separate adventure books, but I bought it as a compilation into a single ~225 page omnibus, so it'll be like reading one of the 5e campaigns, at least in terms of scope, scale and size. After that...

It'll be easier to go through my trawls with one less, right? I'll do a big ole summary of All of Ye Freeport Products when I'm done, but especially focused on the "adventure path" Return to Freeport. My Curse of the Corsair Coast campaign proposal, in fact, would be very loosely adapting Freeport material, although with all of the Freeport products and adventures that I've read, many of them side quests and unrelated one-shots, exactly how I loosely adapt it is TBD. I'm not actually a huge fan of the high fantasy tropes that Freeport uses, which are very D&Dish, but not very Freeportish, if that makes sense. I mean it is, but it seems to me that Freeport undercuts its own brand considerably by presenting itself as a low fantasy, picaresque pirate game mixed with Lovecraftian horror, and then actually just being yet another D&D setting with Talk Like a Pirate Day corny aesthetics tacked on kind of half-heartedly. As much as I've liked a lot of Freeport material, it really needs a pretty heavy-handed restructuring to even work as advertised. Freeport isn't really what it advertises to be, in my opinion. It's really just a D&D setting. In fact, as time has gone on, it's become more of a woke, modern D&D setting. The real gritty pirates and Lovecraft themes are more cosmetic rather than structural in most products. 

So Curse of the Corsair Coast, like I said, will no doubt take some ideas from the Freeport material, but it'll only have 20-25% of the Freeport material, and all of it will be "roughed up" to be considerably more edgy than it actually is in print.

I also got started on the next Forgotten Realms book in my Forgotten Realms trawl, just because I hadn't touched that trawl in a long time. Faiths & Pantheons was the book I started, which was one of the ones I was least interested in, in fact, but it was next, so I needed to read it. Luckily, it's got Deities & Demigods-style long-form god stat-blocks, which I can skip through, so I'm skimming nearly 50% of the content because it's stat-block content, which I don't need and wouldn't use. Next up is Silver Marches, which I believe was a relatively well-regarded product, although I'm not 100% sure that it's the kind of product that I need or not. City of the Spider Queen is next after that, a large adventure, and Races of Faerun, a probably workmanlike product that I just have to get through to move on. Then we finally start to hit products that I'm actually kind of excited to read, like Unapproachable East, Underdark, and Serpent Kingdoms, and after a few more products, finally City of Splendors: Waterdeep. I'm still a little on the fence about Forgotten Realms of any edition, but I've got pdfs of all of the 3e stuff, and it seemed a shame that I've been sitting on them for years, so I'm glad I'm trawling through it. I think that my impression of the setting will be the same when I'm done, though—there's some interesting stuff in it, sure, but overall the themes, tone and most of the details of the setting are simply not up my alley and I'm not that interested in them. 

But the exact same could easily be said for D&D as a whole, so, eh.

Wednesday, May 27, 2026

"Fake D&Ds"

This kind of made me laugh. Someone posted this meme in a discussion. Now, don't get me wrong. I don't mind fake D&Ds. If I were to play "B/X" I'd probably actually want to play Labyrinth Lord or Basic Fantasy. If I wanted an OSR experience, I'd probably actually look at ShadowDark, and I'm more excited about Deathbringer coming this year than any other rules systems. Pathfinder 1e carried the D&D torch for many years after WotC created 4e. But, sometimes, when you want a Dr. Pepper, you don't want to be asked if Mr. Pibb is OK.


These are not Dr. Pepper. And Tales of the Valient or OSE is not D&D. That doesn't mean that they're bad. As a Dr. Pepper fan, I'm the first to admit that I drink fake Dr. Pepper all the time, because I can buy a freakin' 2-liter for $1. But sometimes, you just want Dr. Pepper.

Tuesday, May 26, 2026

D&D base classes, tier list

Using the 3e/3.5/Pathfinder 1e list, because that's a good one to start with. Actually, I believe the 5e list is the same except for the addition of the Warlock. But I'm not super familiar with the Warlock, and it's changed a bit from edition to edition. I'm also not sure that the warlock that I'm more familiar with (later 3e era—came out in Complete Arcane I believe?) is really all that similar to the 4e and 5e warlock. So I'll tier-rank the 3.5 base classes, of which there are eleven. Let me list them first in alphabetical order:

  • Barbarian
  • Bard
  • Cleric
  • Druid
  • Fighter
  • Monk
  • Paladin
  • Ranger
  • Rogue
  • Sorcerer
  • Wizard
Sorcerer was a new class to 3e. Bard used to be something like a prestige class. Barbarian was a 1e Unearthed Arcana class, which is unusual given that Conan the Barbarian is often cited as one of the most foundational works of literature to the D&D milieu. Assassin is the only one missing from earlier D&D (Blackmoor supplement for OD&D, and 1e AD&D PHB), but it was a prestige class in the DMG. Freeport had a 1-20 level Assassin class, and Complete Scoundrel and Rokugan had complete 1-20 Ninja classes, so they kind of got in on the game. Pathfinder 1e also has a Ninja class. So, there's options for it, but not in the basic PHB.


My tier list is not based on how powerful they are, by the way, because CoDzilla is definitely a thing in d20 games. Rather, it's based on how likely I am to want to use the class, based on my own tastes. 

S-Tier:
I tend to start most characters, if I start with a core base class, as either Barbarian, Ranger or Rogue. I don't necessarily think that they're the most interesting classes on their own, but that's how I start them, giving them a normal, swashbuckling action-hero vibe.

A-Tier:
Although admittedly a little boring, Fighter is another one that I often give characters at least a few levels in. 

B-Tier:
While I'm not really a fan of spellcasters, if I were to play one, the sorcerer would fit here, as a relatively easy to use spellcaster. I'd probably also put Druid and Paladin here; although I don't necessarily play them, this is about where I would play them. 

C-Tier: These are the classes that I wouldn't necessarily avoid at all cost, but I also wouldn't be very interested in playing them. Here's where I think that I'd fit monk and wizard. I could create more tiers and get a finer gradation, but I think I'll add Cleric here too. In reality, Cleric is kind of at the bottom of this tier, maybe on the line between this one and the next.

D-Tier: My lowest tier: Bard. I've never liked bards. I think its a ridiculous class, and most people who like playing bards tend to be cringey. Can I imagine a scenario in which I'd be happy to have a bard supporting character in a party? I'm honestly not sure. I can at least imagine a scenario in which it wouldn't overly bother me, but I'd be plenty happy if the bard simply didn't exist as a class at all.

Maybe I should do a tier list of the base core 3.5 races too. Honestly, though... one of the things about 3.5, especially late in the era, was that we had so many options that the basic ones felt a little... tired, maybe. It was fun to do something else other than the basic stuff after a while. ChatGPT also always seems to want to add a half-orc and a tiefling when I just ask for a D&D party. I have to specify the races if I want a more "old school" classic feel. There are seven core races in the 3e/3.5 PHBs: human, dwarf, elf, half-elf, half-orc, halfling, gnome. 

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.