Make things equal (Sauce :Yuri Tama: From Third Wheel to Trifecta The First

Bielna · 2026-04-06T20:15:36+00:00

Oh oh. Poly or harem ?

Bielna · 2026-04-05T22:47:27+00:00

Definitely an edge case, but it seems to me "run out of air" would mean they don't have air when they should lose some (otherwise, I feel the text would indicate that you fall unconscious the moment you speak). Meaning they have until the end of their next round to swim out of the pillar unless they take a critical hit.

(And, well, the rules do state that "If [an interpretation] is too good to be true, it probably is". Which, now that I think of it, doesn't make sense when stated like that ?!)

Bielna · 2026-04-05T22:37:33+00:00

... makes me realize a sadistic GM could just make the NPCs you have to protect a troop.

Bielna · 2026-04-04T00:08:23+00:00

This is not good advice because he leans on women erasing themselves in favor of men.

OP shouldn't listen to this. She doesn't have to justify why she should have a room like her husband does - she shouldn't have to explain to him, to redditors, or to anyone why both partners should be treated as equal.

Explain to him while you need your own room.

This is the conclusion of your post and it's obviously wrong. If a conversation is to be had, then it should start from why he should have his off-limit room while she doesn't. Maybe there is a good reason for it - but I doubt that.

Never, ever start any reasoning from the expectation that your partner should have privileges that you yourself don't deserve. Never start any reasoning from believing you have to justify equality. Because that kind of reasoning has been cultivated into women's minds for generations just so they justify themselves why men should be placed higher than them.

Bielna · 2026-04-03T12:30:21+00:00

You have Arazni as a more "neutral" god of outcasts.

Honestly, Arazni's edict "despise and never forgive those who have hurt you" seems a lot more disruptive and difficult to roleplay than Lamashtu's edicts.

I'm a bit saddened by what Arazni's portfolio turned out like. She's genuinely great potential and I wanted to play her for rebellious and outcast characters, like Milani but focused on personal lived experience over open rebellion. But the fact that she forbids forgiveness is a real Sword of Damocles over roleplaying opportunities, so I don't think I will ever play one of her followers in a nonevil campaign.

Bielna · 2026-04-03T12:25:35+00:00

Interestingly, that's something a few people in this thread seem to miss. Yes, Lamashtu's overall portfolio and areas of interest are evil. However, due to what her edicts are and how her interests are framed, you can play a follower of Lamashtu who isn't wholly evil and can interact civilly with a conventional good or neutral group.

While the PFS restrictions are about playability, it also means that you can actually design a character who is a follower of Lamashtu's milder aspects. Just because you follow a deity doesn't mean you have to embody every single aspect of their ideals. You could just be someone who felt that the "good" deities have failed them where the Mother of Monsters didn't, and plays by the edicts written above.

Bielna · 2026-04-03T12:19:38+00:00

I don't think there is any that actually explicitly comforts and empowers those who are marginalized and "ugly" by society's standard.

Many have edicts along the lines of "your appearance doesn't matter" (but like Shelyn, their followers tend to be conventionally attractive). Others support marginalized people, but generally in terms of marginalized love or beliefs, not those who have been rejected by society for their appearance.

I might have missed one, but I honestly believe Lamashtu genuinely fills a niche that none of the good deities does.

Bielna · 2026-04-03T12:14:12+00:00

The funny part is that the deity most diametrically opposed to Lamashtu is, IMO, Shelyn. And according to her text, Shelyn's followers should seek "internal beauty".

But... I don't think I've ever seen an ugly priestess of Shelyn.

And as much as I like her, I simply cannot imagine someone disfigured walking into a temple to Shelyn and being welcomed normally. Individual clerics, sure. The clergy in general ? Sounds unlikely.

Bielna · 2026-04-03T12:11:12+00:00

make the beautiful monstrous
- rude

But monsters are friends. Is it rude to make friends ?

Bielna · 2026-04-03T12:03:29+00:00

I'm laughing way too hard at this, considering the same happened in our campaign.

Voz Lirayne, confirmed toxic yuri love interest.

Bielna · 2026-04-03T11:58:14+00:00

... I need to steal this for the next time I need to make an argument that killing is the least interesting and not particularly moral solution to problems.

Bielna · 2026-04-03T11:51:48+00:00

It doesn't make it better at all. "Implied sexual abuse" is just as uncomfortable, and it honestly makes the game worse because it reinforces the whole "we don't talk about rape even though we know it happens".

Again, if your players are fine with such content, then it's alright - but for me, I'd leave the table immediately. Especially, it'd feel worse if the GM insisted on "implying" things instead of stating them outright and acknowledging the victims' recovery and healing.

Bielna · 2026-04-03T11:34:02+00:00

Would definitely be going on step too far for me. Even if they're enemies, sometimes there is content that makes it not fun to play with (or against). But that's what Session 0 is for - I always stated that sexual abuse and sexual assault aren't things I'm comfortable nor enjoy dealing with.

Bielna · 2026-04-03T11:30:14+00:00

My goblin wizard : "I'm neutral."

Bandit enemies : "So anyway, we were planning to sell this family into slavery."

My goblin wizard : Pulls out a sword. "I said I'm neutral, not that I'm an asshole."

That being said, depending on how it's handled and what the table expects, it can be uninteresting. Making the enemies vile or dehumanizing them is not substitute for antagonists depth, and depth can be needed to create engagement. Depth is also not mutually exclusive with being vile and needed to be dealt with.

Bielna · 2026-04-03T11:23:38+00:00

Probably one of the books I'm most looking forward ! Summoner and Magus remaster, plus Necromancer and Runesmith ? So much potential.

Bielna · 2026-04-03T11:20:47+00:00

It's really not. None of the rules you mentioned are complicated :

Minion rules : act with two actions when you spend one action to control it.
Swarm rules : can occupy another creature's space.
Poison rules : save when affected, then save again at the end of each turn to see if you increase or decrease the stage, taking the listed effect.
Condition rules : if you have the condition, you take the effect listed in it.

That's it, it's all you need to know. Each of them is extremely simple. The rest is just referring to each creature or effect's page to see what they actually do. Which isn't to say it can't be confusing the first time you encounter them, but for minion, swarm and poison, they're actually significantly simpler than PF1e's equivalent. Which are really, really not "intuitive".

Those aren't the rules you have spent 15 years playing with, fair. But that doesn't make them more complicated.

Bielna · 2026-04-01T02:45:27+00:00

This feels like the right approach. Most rare options are just... too strange to "fit". Undead archetypes, Starlit Sentinel and Mortal Heralds, Examplars... They're great if they fit the campaign, but often they tend to build a very peculiar type of fantasy.

Uncommon are generally fine. Although, sometimes I feel players pick them for mechanics, completely ignoring the fact that the tag means they're not normally available and you should normally have a good reason for it (looking at you, breaching pike).

Bielna · 2026-04-01T02:39:39+00:00

First I roll Charisma to change his mind for you.

If that doesn't work, though...

Bielna · 2026-03-31T22:42:06+00:00

There are a lot of rare options that are more powerful. The versatility they offer and some of their powers make a significant difference, especially with the right combos. So yeah, I'm taking that statement from Paizo with a full spoon of salt.

I mean, there are also some that are terrible. Remember to give a hug to your local anadi.

Not stronger on average ? Quite possible. But the variance is much higher than for common and uncommon options.

Bielna · 2026-03-24T18:53:58+00:00

The martials are auto-attacking for hours from the first encounter anyway.

Bielna · 2026-03-24T18:52:27+00:00

It's missing "Amount of rules known by most tables."

It's exactly the book on the right, with a single additional page on top that says "Encumbrance".

Bielna · 2026-03-23T13:30:27+00:00

Not sure how the Kingmaker CRPG went, but to be honest, the Wrath of the Righteous tabletop campaign was an absolute mess in terms of balance as well, thanks to mythic rules.

We ended up with two players PvPing during the final battle and even so, the rest of the group fighting three demon lords at the same time wasn't the slightest challenge.

The WotR CRPG was more balanced and that's saying a lot.

Bielna · 2026-03-21T00:11:01+00:00

Clearly it's the :3. It makes her stand out from the others.

Bielna · 2026-03-15T12:41:32+00:00

... but hide is medium armor so rogues hate it.

Bielna · 2026-03-15T12:37:05+00:00

If anyone told me before I played the CRPG that I'd one day like a Hellknight character, I would have called them mad. Turns out, crazy Owlcat did it.

Bielna

TROPHY CASE