Paizo Top Nav Branding
  • Hello, Guest! |
  • Sign In |
  • My Account |
  • Shopping Cart |
  • Help/FAQ
Recruitment Play-by-Post Play-by-Post Discussion
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game
Pathfinder Society

Pathfinder Beginner Box

Pathfinder Adventure Card Game

Pathfinder Comics

Pathfinder Legends

DM Alexander Kilcoyne's Sargavan Saga

Game Master Alexander Kilcoyne

"What is this place? Puzzles in Azlant, more magic than you see in a year in Absalom. Wheels literally within wheels. Bound demons and wax golems? The expense must have been enormous. But why? To what end?"

Jakob

Kingdom Rules | SRD Reference | Pyramid, Level 1 | Pyramid, Level 2 |


3,151 to 3,193 of 3,193 << first < prev | 54 | 55 | 56 | 57 | 58 | 59 | 60 | 61 | 62 | 63 | 64 | next > last >>

Yeah, I just don't get the point of introducing a third category and making it opaque to the mechanics already existing in the game. It's like having arcane magic, divine magic, and psionics: a mage can dispel a divine spell, a cleric can dispel an arcane spell, but for some reason neither of them can do a thing about psionics without significant investment. It's the world designers saying that the new option is not just different but qualitatively better.

If you're just building a PC for Iron Gods, it should be pretty obvious which options will be important: just like you'd put ranks in Swim and Profession (sailor) for Skull & Shackles but not, say, Rise of the Runelords. But for Society play, when you have PCs for whom Technologist has never been an option and it's suddenly near-mandatory, it's changing the rules of the game in midstream. Apparently, the Society people didn't know about the decision to make technology opaque, and the first scenarios of Season 6 have Knowledge and Linguistics and Disable Device checks that are impossible for PCs without the feat even to attempt.


I hate psionics.


And apparently Fires of Creation lets you attempt a Disable Device check at a -5 penalty without the Technologist feat, which sounds eminently reasonable to me. Once again, the AP line proves its superiority over the "let's hire a half-dozen freelancers to churn out twenty feats, spells, traits, and archetypes stat" line.


Your Humble Narrator

Guys, sorry once more for the slowdown. I'm currently hiring another staff member and my most promising applicant is coming in for an interview tomorrow. Assuming it goes well we'll hire him which will take some pressure off me and hopefully let me catch up.


Hey, AK, I know you don't allow stuff from Ultimate Magic or Ultimate Combat. Do you allow spells from the Advanced Race Guide or Advanced Class Guide? Who knows how long off 7th level is, but Triggered Suggestion (ACG) looks very interesting.


Female Human (Bonuwat) Cleric 4

Link to triggered suggestion

*makes note to bolster Will save*


Male Human (Mwangi - Bas'o tribe) Barbarian (Brutal Pugilist archetype) 4

At least your's starts high enough to give you a fighting chance... Qhude is in trouble if / when Ansha decides to get puckish.


Why is it that everyone always assumes that I'll use it on them? ;P


I don't think it is reasonable for a palace guard to attack his King without extenuating circumstances. :P


Well, RAW obviously disagrees. Are you seriously arguing with the flavor text of a spell solicited in bulk from freelancers with no design credits? Have you no respect for Paizo's painstaking quality control? ;P


Male Human (Mwangi - Bas'o tribe) Barbarian (Brutal Pugilist archetype) 4

With a high enough Bluff check and a lack of morals (on behalf of the convincer, not the convincee) anything is reasonable.


Which comes back to the old argument on the distinction between charms and complusions. I'm personally on the side that says you can't get someone to murder a loved one with a 1st-level spell, even with an opposed Cha check, but Paizo refuses to settle the dispute.

Forum: Can you use charm person to get someone to kill their children?

Jason Bulmahn: You can use charm person to get someone to plow your field.


Male Human (Mwangi - Bas'o tribe) Barbarian (Brutal Pugilist archetype) 4

Heh - mechanical means don't make sense when you start stripping back the socials anyway.

I mean the worst Bluff penalty is for an impossible lie... at -20. Glibness gives you a flat +20... for 10 minutes per level.

If the world worked mechanically, then every single society should be ruled by a 7th+ level Bard who chain casts glibness.


I don't let runaway skill modifiers overwhelm my games. Charms and compulsions are also closely monitored for balance. Just depends on the group and their preferred play style.


"What you would do for a friend" can be maddeningly varied (as can what seems "reasonable" to someone/something) and it's pretty much entirely up to GM fiat. It can make playing an enchanter frustrating.

Would a Chaotic Evil being like an ogre or drow think it was reasonable to kill an 'ally'? Probably. Do they have concepts of what a 'friend' is? Not so clear. Would a Lawful Good character think it was reasonable to kill a lawful authority? You'd probably have to convince them that the greater good was served, and even then...

One thing that really bugs me on a personal note is the interpretation of dominate person my tabletop GM uses, where even while you're dominated you'll continue to act normally until you are told 'do not do anything unless I tell you to'.


Male Human (Mwangi - Bas'o tribe) Barbarian (Brutal Pugilist archetype) 4

Does anyone have any interest in Through the Breach - the Malifaux RPG?

Reason for asking is that I backed their kickstarter and when the rewards came through they delivered to me twice... so I got double ups of the lot. Given that I'm not going to need the extras, and they haven't gotten back to me after my email asking what they want done with them... I'm assuming they're freebies.

I'd be happy to on send them through if anyone wants them?


I don't have room in my head for two sets of rules; I have to stick to one game. Transitioning from 3.5 to Pathfinder was complicated enough until I managed to consign the old rules to oblivion and quit getting them mixed up.


Male Human (Mwangi - Bas'o tribe) Barbarian (Brutal Pugilist archetype) 4

To be honest I think my head's full up with a working knowledge of Pathfinder and a smattering of understanding on the Fantasy Flight warhammer systems... but I still find it interesting reading up on other people's takes :)

I was the sort of kid who read the manuals for all my computer games in depth 'before' trying to play it ;)

TL DR:
The mechanics in this case are actually pretty interesting as well - the game master does not 'roll' anything themselves. All the critters and enemies have flat numbers for their stats and skills.

The 'rolling' mechanism is handled through a deck of cards (c/w jokers) that is turned over by the player whenever they attempt something. So you add stat + skill + value of card to get your result.

The twist comes that the players also hold a limited hand of cards that they can use to 'twist' to change the outcome. In essence giving them aces to pull them out of the fire on critical junctures.

The suits of the cards also come into it, and there are abilities to turn multiple cards and pick the best, etc.

The character generation is also randomized using the card deck to give prophecies and some randomization of statistics / skills / etc.


Man, I miss actual manuals. Readme files just aren't the same.

Using cards means the 'rolling' isn't actually randomized, no? You could keep track of which cards have already been turned and have a better idea of what you're going to draw the further you get into the deck? I used to destroy my college roommate in gin rummy because she never paid attention to which cards I'd picked up and which ones had already been discarded.


Male Human (Mwangi - Bas'o tribe) Barbarian (Brutal Pugilist archetype) 4

Yep - the 'Fate' deck is kept and you keep drawing until it runs out before reshuffling it. So yeah, the randomization reduces as you get nearer to the end of the deck.


Male Human Haunted Nature Oracle 4 (Ac 20 Cmd 20 Will+4 Ref+2 Fort+4)

It's card counting the RPG!

I am cautious about systems vulnerable to card counting. Savage Worlds I think hit the sweet spot with the reshuffle on joker mechanic. It is nicely random. Sounds like this system might have more issues, though with several players holding cards it will be a little harder to predict.

....Unless players can show each other their held cards...

Ummm if they can then the players can put a pretty heavy thumb on the random number scale and if they can't then there is a built in motivation to cheat.


You could argue it's a philosophical statement about the nature of conflict: When events first begin to unfold, anything could happen, but the more choices you make, the more limited your remaining options become, until at the end it seems like you're merely playing out the inevitable.


Male Human (Mwangi - Bas'o tribe) Barbarian (Brutal Pugilist archetype) 4

FWIW the rules define it as your characters are twisting fate in their direction. When you play a card from your hand it's actually called Cheating Fate.

It's a strange mix of deterministic and randomness I'll give you that... and without seeing it in action I'm not sure how easy / hard it would be to predict what will actually come out of the 'Fate Deck' (which is the shared one).


Seems like it would introduce some novel tactical thinking in the later stages of the game. If you were playing Pathfinder and knew that you couldn't roll a 20 -- or a 1 -- how would it change the choices you make?

EDIT: Hey, check it out: They've official resolved the second-diagonal conundrum!


Nice! Just like how I already play it. :)


You know, I have to say that I'm really pining for a non-mythic Kingmaker/kingdom-building game that doesn't consist almost entirely of random encounters....

Incidentally, it doesn't look like there is a single Kingmaker pbp recruitment thread newer than a couple of weeks old, and it's not actively recruiting any more, anyway.

I kinda wouldn't mind trying a Way of the Wicked game either.

...I think I'm going through PbP withdrawal.


Male Human (Mwangi - Bas'o tribe) Barbarian (Brutal Pugilist archetype) 4

There has been a bit of a slowdown it seems with arrival of recruitments worth applying to. You could always give the GM side of the screen a go Ansha :P


I'd be a terrible DM with Ansha as a DMPC who hogged the spotlight ;P


Joana wrote:
Well, RAW obviously disagrees. Are you seriously arguing with the flavor text of a spell solicited in bulk from freelancers with no design credits? Have you no respect for Paizo's painstaking quality control? ;P

It's worth pointing out that that sort of flavor text was in the TSR-era 2e AD&D books as well as the WotC 3.5 D&D books. It's not just Paizo--D&D itself has always been murky about enchantment spells. That's actually one area where I appreciate(d) 4e (and 5e)--they took some of the murk out of what it means to be under the effects of mind-influencing spell. (Even if I don't always like the results of the de-murking, like 5e spelling out plainly that people know that they've been charmed once a Charm Person spell wears off.)


Has anyone read the first book of Iron Gods? If so, what do you think of it?


Not yet... and likely not ever*. I prefer to pretend that Numeria does not exist. ;)

*I will likely give it a cursory glancing over but I'm not a big fan of mixing sci-fi and fantasy. :P


If I ran it, it wouldn't be in Golarion, it'd be in more of a Firefly-type setting, as I also am not a fan of mixing genres. Star Wars doesn't need dragons, and Middle Earth doesn't need lasers (imo).

But what I've read about the AP, the early books at least, makes it sound like a Doctor Who episode. It's hard for me not to picture Leela as a Kellid barbarian and Ace as a scavenger in Torch and a castle turret that's really a rocketship like in State of Decay and all the robot doubles in The Androids of Tara.

Sounds kind of fun, if you just base it on a planet that's all "Numeria." But I'm not sure how much standard-fantasy stuff I'd have to write out.


Male Human (Mwangi - Bas'o tribe) Barbarian (Brutal Pugilist archetype) 4

I'd think it would be doable - the main problem would likely be dealing with spells and especially deity driven abilities.

I've only scanned over the first AP volume - but based on that there wouldn't be too much that needed changing.


I'm with Okoya. I prefer to pretend Numeria (and gunslingers, for that matter) don't exist.


Ansha wrote:
I'd be a terrible DM with Ansha as a DMPC who hogged the spotlight ;P

On the other hand, if I did GM a Kingmaker game, I'd probably want to make an NPC the Ruler, just to forestall all the bickering....


Male Human Haunted Nature Oracle 4 (Ac 20 Cmd 20 Will+4 Ref+2 Fort+4)

Ooooo I want to play in this minion AP!

Seriously, it can work. There was an old FGU adventure series where the players weer the staff to a roving ambassador. Working to keep the big wig NPC alive while avoiding diplomatic incidents and keeping the ambassador happy enough to be able to negotiate was quite the task.

It was I think 5 linked adventures. Could be wrong. It would need expanding to become a full ap but it could work.


Ansha wrote:
On the other hand, if I did GM a Kingmaker game, I'd probably want to make an NPC the Ruler, just to forestall all the bickering....

You automatically assume there will be bickering? :P

Given that is a concern for your group, you don't have to have a single life long ruler. You can rotate the position. Give each PC a term, be it a month, months or even a year. Rule by council.


Male Human Haunted Nature Oracle 4 (Ac 20 Cmd 20 Will+4 Ref+2 Fort+4)

I find it amusing that there is no option for establishing a democracy in kingmaker.


Akirra wrote:
You automatically assume there will be bickering? :P

Given what I'm reading in the recruitment threads for Kingmaker...yeah. ;P

But I also recognize that there are ways around that. Like making the PCs minions of an NPC. ;P


Jakob Mulle wrote:
I find it amusing that there is no option for establishing a democracy in kingmaker.

Well, it is called Kingmaker. I imagine if there was democratic rule, they'd have to call it Election-rigger...not the same ring to it.


Male Human Haunted Nature Oracle 4 (Ac 20 Cmd 20 Will+4 Ref+2 Fort+4)

Sequel AP: Revolutionmaker! Overthrow your previous characters! Could also be the Galt AP.


Ansha wrote:
Akirra wrote:
You automatically assume there will be bickering? :P

Given what I'm reading in the recruitment threads for Kingmaker...yeah. ;P

But I also recognize that there are ways around that. Like making the PCs minions of an NPC. ;P

Just run Jade Regent. :P


*imagines Jade Regent with Ansha replacing Ameiko as the romantic interest of half-or-more of the party....*

3,151 to 3,193 of 3,193 << first < prev | 54 | 55 | 56 | 57 | 58 | 59 | 60 | 61 | 62 | 63 | 64 | next > last >>
Paizo / Messageboards / Paizo Community / Online Campaigns / Play-by-Post Discussion / DM AK's Sargavan Saga OOC Thread All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.

©2002–2014 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours: Monday–Friday, 10 AM–5 PM Pacific Time. View our privacy policy. Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc., and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Online, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.