Paizo Top Nav Branding
  • Hello, Guest! |
  • Sign In |
  • My Account |
  • Shopping Cart |
  • Help/FAQ
About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ

Alzrius's page

Goblin Squad Member. Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber. Pathfinder Society Member. 2,260 posts. 70 reviews. No lists. 1 wishlist.


1 to 50 of 448 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | next > last >>

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber
Mr.Goblin wrote:
I have never understood why commoners and other npc classes like warrior are almost always 1st level.

They're not always 1st level. Heck, just look at Paizo's generic commoners. A beggar is 1st level, but your typical pig farmer is 2nd, and a miner is 3rd. Among experts, an apprentice jeweler might be 1st level, but an old sailor will be 2nd, and a seasoned trapper will be 3rd.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber

1) I buy weird dice - things like d3's, d11's, d16's, etc. - and have them in my dice bag along with my regular dice. I have so many of each type that it's now gotten to the point where hunting for the "normal" dice each week has become cumbersome, much to the amusement of my group.

2) I really want to play a pony character (from Ponyfinder).

3) I once played a dwarf paladin with a German accent, to counteract the standard "Scottish dwarf" stereotype. When my group made some Nazi jokes, I ran with it. He talked about how "ze gnomes" were taking everyone's jobs and hurting the local economy. As a consequence, the standard of living was low (*arm out, palm down, fingers together*), and so needed to be raised up heil for everyone (*raises arm upward*).


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber
Orfamay Quest wrote:
Alzrius wrote:
Rysky wrote:

For example:

1d20+14 failure
1d4
1d6
1d20+14 success
1d4
4d6

Hey look at that, after 2 tries and 5 hours the Nereid succeeded, but she only has 2 CON now.

Which kills her.

Seriously, the drop from Con 24 to Con 2 (that it's staggered over time makes no difference) means that she's losing 11 hit points per Hit Die. Being a 12 Hit Die creature, that's a loss of 132 hit points...against her 126 hit point total.

You always get at least one hit point per die, irrespective of your Constitution score (essentially, the penalty to hit points is bounded), so it won't kill her. Now, granted, reducing her hit points to 12 is going to make her very unhappy,..... but it won't kill her.

Looks like the derp is mine, then.

Sorry Rysky!


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber
Rysky wrote:

For example:

1d20+14 failure
1d4
1d6
1d20+14 success
1d4
4d6

Hey look at that, after 2 tries and 5 hours the Nereid succeeded, but she only has 2 CON now.

Which kills her.

Seriously, the drop from Con 24 to Con 2 (that it's staggered over time makes no difference) means that she's losing 11 hit points per Hit Die. Being a 12 Hit Die creature, that's a loss of 132 hit points...against her 126 hit point total.

Even being able to successfully make a new shawl isn't a guarantee that she'll survive the loss of her old one.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber
Sir RicHunt Attenwampi wrote:
PossibleCabbage wrote:
Werewolves are and have always been vulnerable to sharpened breadsticks, it's simply that it's extremely difficult to make a breadstick sharp and silver isn't that hard to get your hands on.
It's true. You never hear of werewolves attacking an Olive Garden restaurant. With their copious use of garlic, it's also safe from vampiric predation.

Nobody attacks anybody when there's breadsticks close at hand. Just look at the mayhem that ensued when one guy used a baguette.

Don't even get me started on all of the mimic-related sandwich deaths that happen every year. And heavens help you if several of them can get together and summon their god...


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber

If that were to happen, I'd be super ticked that I invested so much in my low-level human cleric with the terrible Strength and Constitution scores, rather than being a point-whoring munchkin who played a noble drow wizard 20 with 10 mythic tiers and the half-celestial template.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber
Lord Fyre wrote:
  • What other female protagonists have similar attributes to what works for the character?
  • There are some similarities to Telerie Windyarm, from Larry Elmore's SnarfQuest comics.


    2 people marked this as a favorite.
    Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber
    Haladir wrote:
    No game is better than a bad game.

    Okay, I know what you meant here, but it sounds like you just said that there's nothing better than a bad game.


    7 people marked this as a favorite.
    Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber
    BigNorseWolf wrote:
    Its english. You can verb anything.

    "Verbing weirds language." -Calvin


    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber
    Irontruth wrote:
    The reward system of D&D isn't new or novel, it's been there since before it was called D&D.

    This is a skillful way of confusing the issue, since you've slyly conflated "class abilities" with "advancement." In fact, the idea of "rewards" and "advancement" is entirely separate from the issue of making sure that you get new class abilities each and every time you level up; that's kind of the point that I was making.

    Your whole bit about "the reward system of D&D isn't new" purposefully ignores the fact that back then, virtually every level for every class was a dead level, and yet gaining XP and leveling up was still incentivized. That was because levels were simply adding to existing abilities (primarily defensive in nature, such as the ability to receive more damage via increased hp, or avoid damage with better saves).

    It was when gaining some new ability in addition to that became expected that the meta-mechanics became a goal unto themselves, instead of being something that would help accomplish a character's goals.

    Quote:
    You're essentially railing against the evolution and improvements in understanding of a subsystem that has been present for the entirety of gaming.

    Not so much, no. The idea that leveling needs to have cookies added to them or they're "dead" isn't an improvement to the game itself. It's just a heightened expectation on some people's part.

    Quote:
    BTW: there are games that don't use levels and don't include advancement. I can recommend some if this is a huge issue.

    I strongly urge you to go and play those games. If you do so, you'll develop a greater understand of why "dead levels" are a canard, and broaden your horizons.


    2 people marked this as a favorite.
    Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber
    Sundakan wrote:
    Talonhawke wrote:
    Alzrius wrote:

    I hate the term "dead levels."

    I first heard about this in an old WotC article which set out to "fix" this problem.

    For those who don't want to read through that page, "dead levels" are levels in a class progression where you don't gain a new class ability (or an improvement of an existing ability). Note that spellcasting classes gaining new spells (or even spell levels) are still considered to be "dead levels" if there isn't a separate class ability given as well.

    I absolutely can't stand this, since even aside from the sense of entitlement (e.g. the idea that there "should" be some new class ability at every single level), I hate how it reinforces the meta-game involved in D&D/Pathfinder. I much prefer to have the focus be kept on what the characters accomplish, not what abilities they have.

    The problem for a lot of classes what they can accomplish is tied to what abilities they have.

    This.

    It's kind of why the classes exist in this game.

    Maybe that's a problem for a lot of classes, but characters are more than their class abilities.

    Call me old-fashioned, but I'm of the opinion that what you can accomplish is primarily determined by role-playing, including a combination of ingenuity, preparation, and good die rolls. Obviously that won't be enough to let you do whatever you want, all of the time (particularly if the dice roll badly), but if you can reliably pull that off then I'm fairly confident that there's a way for you to contribute and have fun just as much as if you hadn't received a new cookie when you leveled.


    2 people marked this as a favorite.
    Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber

    I hate the term "dead levels."

    I first heard about this in an old WotC article which set out to "fix" this problem.

    For those who don't want to read through that page, "dead levels" are levels in a class progression where you don't gain a new class ability (or an improvement of an existing ability). Note that spellcasting classes gaining new spells (or even spell levels) are still considered to be "dead levels" if there isn't a separate class ability given as well.

    I absolutely can't stand this, since even aside from the sense of entitlement (e.g. the idea that there "should" be some new class ability at every single level), I hate how it reinforces the meta-game involved in D&D/Pathfinder. I much prefer to have the focus be kept on what the characters accomplish, not what abilities they have.


    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber

    It's coming...

    KonoSuba season 2.

    January 11th, 2017.


    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber
    Klorox wrote:
    Well, create a flesh to plush spell ;)

    No need to create it; it can be found in the letters column (as a staff response) in Dragon issue #190.


    2 people marked this as a favorite.
    Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber
    UnArcaneElection wrote:
    I have yet to hear of a nerd deity manifestation . . . .

    That's because those are the gods who show up to whine about how the new world that everyone's making is inconsistent because it has lizard-people but not muskrat-people, or complains about how the floating islands aren't aerodynamic. Eventually the rest of the pantheon just stops inviting that guy, and the mortal world forgets that he exists.


    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber
    Charon's Little Helper wrote:
    Snowlilly wrote:
    We should all just say to heck with it and play FATAL.
    I must say - I have wondered how many copies of that game sell just because people are curious about just how bad it is due to it being referenced as an example of a horrid game.

    Rumor has it that a few print copies were produced, before the author was torn to shreds by invisible attackers in broad daylight on a crowded street in Damascus, and survive in private collections and archives to this very day.


    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber
    johnlocke90 wrote:
    The flip side is that a lot of the neutral and evil gods don't make sense with significant amounts of worshipers.

    I don't quite understand why neutral or evil gods wouldn't have significant number of worshipers the way good deities would. It's not like the afterlives for one are different than the other; they're all basically you taking an eternal job in that god's service. Few evil deities actively punish their followers for living a life of evil.

    Quote:
    For instance, Rovagug is never going to have many worshippers.

    As I understand it, it's still questionable whether or not Rovagug is a god or some sort of super-powerful qlippoth.

    Quote:
    By requiring worship, you constrain what kind of gods you can create.

    I don't believe that to be the case, if for no other reason than you can have plenty of cults that worship eschatolic or nihilistic deities, despite how insane that is.

    Quote:
    Edit: Also, the gods have obvious incentives for worshippers. Those worshippers go to the gods plane when they die. The god isn't directly empowered by the worshippers, but he does get helpers who can do his bidding.

    Except, again, those petitioners aren't worth very much. It's more worth a god's time to recruit a stronger creature - which will be almost anything - rather than to rely on a horde of CR 1 petitioners.


    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber

    So apparently there's going to be a compilation movie for Overlord.

    Between this and the recent Ple Ple Pleiades OVA shipping with the eleventh volume of the light novels, I'm starting to have some real hope for a second anime cour. That's because these are indicative of continuing interest in the series to the point where it's presumed to be profitable to continue animating.

    Certainly, I hope that's the case!


    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber
    GM Rednal wrote:
    For what it's worth, Dicefreaks gave stats to the Avatar of Asmodeus in the last volume of their Gates of Hell series. He's got a Divine Rank of 21 in Hell, 1,610 HP, a basic AC of 97 (even a touch AC of 63), and a bunch of Salient Divine Abilities that basically add up to "lol, you lose". Plus a horrific artifact. That's probably a good place to start if you really want to use stats... and it's worth keeping in mind that this is STILL less powerful than his true form. XD

    That was based on the depiction of Asmodeus from the 2E Guide to Hell, which suggested that he's one of the primordial beings that predate the formation of the planes, and helped give them their current arrangement and structure. Pathfinder's Asmodeus is still an ancient deity, but doesn't have quite the same pedigree.


    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber
    Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
    I'm just challenging the notion that you need stats for narrative purposes. that they are a pre-requisite for internal consistency.

    I don't believe that sentiment is an accurate representation of the notion in question. Unless I missed something, nobody is saying that you need stats for narrative purposes, full stop (or at least, aren't saying that everyone, rather than themselves, needs such things). Rather, some people are saying that, for them, such materials are very helpful in terms of clearly outlining the narrative possibilities, as well as stimulating creativity regarding what those possibilities can mean for the wider game world.

    You're arguing against an absolute principle that nobody is putting forth.


    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber
    Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
    Again it's how you write things. In Fritz Leiber's setting of Nehwon, the relative power of Gods is an intensely volatile affair, with major upsets happening fairly often. the faith that's at the glorious temple at the top of the street, may be reduced to being the hovel at the lower end in the course of a single story. (Now of course I'm talking about the Gods IN Lankhmar.. the ones that you'd actually have clerics for, as opposed to the Gods OF Lankhmar... those mummified figures whose only worship is an occasional basket of fruit tossed in the door and are only seen when the city itself is under mortal threat... they have no worshippers to speak of.)

    Fair enough; I'm presuming some basic adherence to the presumptions in D&D in general, and Pathfinder in particular (notwithstanding campaign assumptions that deviate from these, such as, say, D&D Lankhmar). If you alter those, then everything else will change accordingly; I doubt most gods would have stats in, say, Eberron, for example.


    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber
    Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:

    It's one way of top-down, but not the only way. Top/down can start with just the continents and countries, and the gods as opposed to being the bealls and end alls of the works, can actually be at the bottom of the evolutionary process. After all if you design your gods to depend on the beliefs of their worshipers, pantheons may actually diminish or disappear if their believers are conquered or eliminated in war.

    Lankhmar's Street of the Gods is an excellent example. The temples of the Gods advance, and decrease in position and prominence to the exact proportion of how their faiths are doing.

    I didn't say that it was the only way, just that I think that starting with what the gods (or other most powerful beings in the setting) can do is the epitome of top-down design.

    That said, I disagree that gods being affected by issues of requiring beliefs puts them at the "bottom" of the process; being affected by something doesn't mean that you're subordinate to that thing. That's particularly the case when the issue involved is one that's a gradual process, one that requires a large number of people to actuate, and isn't something that can be easily coordinated among them.

    The issue of a god's power being influenced by current issues of how widespread their faith is is likely to be an issue that spans years, if not decades or centuries (outside of massive disasters affecting the near-total base of their worship, at which point the deity is likely to become personally involved, since their own life is effectively on the line). When compared to the fact that a deity is an exceptionally powerful entity that can take quick, decisive action that will have an immediate impact on others, then it's hard to rate such issues of gradual erosion as being of greater importance when ranking the entities of power that ultimately give shape to a campaign world.

    Now, those can be aspects of a world's historical context, but in terms of designing who/what is a major player on the campaign world-stage right now (e.g. at the moment the campaign starts), that's not likely to factor very highly in determining why the world is in the state that it's in. At most, it'll be one issue that the gods take into account when performing their undertakings, but it's not likely to be some sort of serious check on their influence.


    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber
    Vidmaster7 wrote:
    So I think the reason that iv heard before of their stats being kind of gamer porn where you can just go wow look at those numbers and abilities is as far as it would go for me.

    I've heard this before, and this idea - that there's no reason to stats out gods except for indulging in gratuitousness (as though there's anything wrong with that where a personal project about game design is concerned) - strikes me as overlooking some more salient points.

    World-building is typically done one of two ways. It can be bottom-up, which takes the idea that you should start with things that are most directly relevant to what happens during game-play, and extrapolate out from there, or be top-down, which is that you start by creating the most salient features of the world that would affect its development and current organization, and then extrapolate out from there.

    Both philosophies are entirely legitimate, and both have their strengths and weaknesses. Bottom-up design, for example, is likely to quickly produce things that are immediately-useful, but can lead to problems of internal logic and self-consistency if there's no effort to keep a greater design ethos than ad hoc creation of what's likely to be of immediate relevance during a campaign. By contrast, top-down design lends itself to creating a world with a large degree of verisimilitude, but runs the risk of the designer losing sight of the practical elements of game-play in creating a cohesive world.

    Making stats for deities is, to my mind, the epitome of top-down design. Being the major power-players of a campaign world, what gods can do directly influences how the world looks, in terms of their actions and reactions being the defining - or at least major - factors influencing the behavior of less powerful individuals, but also quite possibly on the physical world itself!

    It's been mentioned here that politics is another consideration besides gross martial ability (which is what stats are taken to represent, though I don't think they're quite that simple), but really the two aren't orthogonal at all. As Carl von Clausewitz noted, war is the continuation of politics by other means, and this works in reverse as well. Political actions are undergirded and supported by martial power, either in terms of what can be offered as assistance (other resources can be offered as assistance, of course, but these are still safeguarded by martial prowess, otherwise an antagonistic force would come in and take them by force) or what can be used as a threat.

    Personally, I think that this is a great way of engaging in world design, even if bottom-up methods have been in vogue for some time now, and doesn't deserve the level of derision (in the form of people suggesting that this isn't a worthwhile endeavor, or wondering why someone would think it was) that it tends to receive on these forums.


    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber

    Personally, I've always felt that a project like this would best be done using the old 3.0/3.5 (those rules did get a mention in the official 3.0->3.5 update booklet, after all) rules for creating gods.

    Don't forget that there's a notation in the Core Rulebook's contact other plane spell that says that the Inner Sea deities are all intermediate gods. So with that, Pharasma is probably a rank 15 deity, Rovagug would be rank 14, and the others would be rank 11 or 12, depending on how they're described.


    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber

    It certainly seems like a worthwhile endeavor - Tar-Baphon has stats for how he is now, and when he was alive he mixed it up with Aroden directly, after all. (Sure, he lost, but we now know that he threw the fight.) So yeah, if he could fight a god, then surely PCs could, and stats would be rather germane to that.


    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber

    I'm cheating by slipping two in, but they're thematically related so hopefully it'll slide:

    You must worship a deity in order to make use of a divine spellcasting class's spells, spell-like abilities, and supernatural abilities. Divine spellcasting characters cannot have an alignment more than one step away from their deity's alignment.


    2 people marked this as a favorite.
    Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber
    Greylurker wrote:

    Keijo!!!............Should I be ashamed for watching this...Yes. Am I going to watch it anyway....yes.....Is it actually any good....it just might be.

    Seriously once she broke out the Butt Cannon I was hooked.

    Get the title right, philistine. It's Keijo!!!!!!!!, with eight - count 'em, eight - exclamation points. And those girls earn every one of 'em.


    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber
    thejeff wrote:
    I can't think of a single example of a RPG company releasing a new version of a game while still continuing support for the old version.

    TSR, with Basic D&D and AD&D 1E/2E, come to mind.


    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber
    Charon's Little Helper wrote:
    Orfamay Quest wrote:

    One of the key factors behind Pathfinder's success is WotC's failure.

    D&D 3.0 and 3.5 were wildly successful by the standards of TTRPGs and (via the OGL) basically redefined the entire market. And then for some reason, WotC dropped all of that on the floor, said "we've got a 100% market share, so we're going to completely drop that product and push something new and terrible."

    That would be like McDonalds dropping hamburgers from their menu in favor of.... I don't know, zucchini smoothies? Jelly beans? Women's clothing?

    I will say - that's a bit of hindsight 20/20. The theory behind 4e was to retain their current market share and make D&D more appealing to newbies and expand the market.

    The reason behind the theory behind 4E was that D&D needed - and still needs - to increase its annual revenue in order to justify its existence to Hasbro. We know this because Ryan Dancey has told us before:

    Ryan Dancey wrote:

    Sometime around 2005ish, Hasbro made an internal decision to divide its businesses into two categories. Core brands, which had more than $50 million in annual sales, and had a growth path towards $100 million annual sales, and Non-Core brands, which didn't.

    [...]

    Core Brands would get the financing they requested for development of their businesses (within reason). Non-Core brands would not. They would be allowed to rise & fall with the overall toy market on their own merits without a lot of marketing or development support. In fact, many Non-Core brands would simply be mothballed - allowed to go dormant for some number of years until the company was ready to take them down off the shelf and try to revive them for a new generation of kids.

    At the point of the original Hasbro/Wizards merger a fateful decision was made that laid the groundwork for what happened once Greg took over. Instead of focusing Hasbro on the idea that Wizards of the Coast was a single brand, each of the lines of business in Wizards got broken out and reported to Hasbro as a separate entity. This was driven in large part by the fact that the acquisition agreement specified a substantial post-acquisition purchase price adjustment for Wizards' shareholders on the basis of the sales of non-Magic CCGs (i.e. Pokemon).

    This came back to haunt Wizards when Hasbro's new Core/Non-Core strategy came into focus. Instead of being able to say "We're a $100+ million brand, keep funding us as we desire", each of the business units inside Wizards had to make that case separately. So the first thing that happened was the contraction you saw when Wizards dropped new game development and became the "D&D and Magic" company. Magic has no problem hitting the "Core" brand bar, but D&D does. It's really a $25-30 million business, especially since Wizards isn't given credit for the licensing revenue of the D&D computer games.

    [...]

    Sometime around 2006, the D&D team made a big presentation to the Hasbro senior management on how they could take D&D up to the $50 million level and potentially keep growing it. The core of that plan was a synergistic relationship between the tabletop game and what came to be known as DDI. At the time Hasbro didn't have the rights to do an MMO for D&D, so DDI was the next best thing. The Wizards team produced figures showing that there were millions of people playing D&D and that if they could move a moderate fraction of those people to DDI, they would achieve their revenue goals. Then DDI could be expanded over time and if/when Hasbro recovered the video gaming rights, it could be used as a platform to launch a true D&D MMO, which could take them over $100 million/year.

    The DDI pitch was that the 4th Edition would be designed so that it would work best when played with DDI.

    This central idea - maximizing return on investment in order to hit those target goals - has been the driving force of the Hasbro-led WotC for some time now. It's not just affecting D&D game books either, but rather everything that's part of the "D&D brand."

    I was at the Candlekeep meet-up at Gen Con 2016. One of the guests to appear was James Lowder. During the meet-up, he explained why it is that you never see D&D novels anymore (notwithstanding ones by Greenwood and Salvatore, both of whom have contractual agreements with WotC to have their books published or they can sue to recover the IP rights).

    Lowder, who used to work in the fiction department at WotC/TSR, explained that the novels were always a profitable division. Even though they only had six people in that department at its height, it was pulling in half of D&D's total revenue during that time. And yet Hasbro told them "you [WotC] aren't a novel-publishing company; stop acting like it," and shut that branch down.

    Why shut down a profitable part of their subsidiary? Because it wasn't profitable enough. The amount of money that the novel division was making wasn't enough to justify its existence in Hasbro's eyes, and so that's why you don't see D&D novels on store shelves anymore.

    That's the same reason why you no longer see brand logos for individual campaigns (e.g. the Forgotten Realms). Lowder made it clear that it's all about making D&D a brand unto itself, without any other brands cluttering things up. Because branding helps with sales, and that's what D&D needs to keep maximizing if it doesn't want the entire game to go the same way as the novels did.

    5E is trying a different strategy from 4E, as part of the new take on branding. It's not a coincidence that we recently heard about the court fight to recover the movie rights to D&D, for example, or that they've been making sure that their big news has been reported by Forbes and other high-profile outlets. The game itself is now just part of the multimedia content strategy to make D&D a "core" brand for Hasbro.

    Let's hope that it works. Because if not, it's not unimaginable that the game could be mothballed for a generation or two.


    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber

    Here I sit
    Finding paths
    Gamed a bit
    But it's all maths


    2 people marked this as a favorite.
    Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber
    Sissyl wrote:
    But where is the ixitxachitl?

    It's gonna mix 'n' match it all.


    2 people marked this as a favorite.
    Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber
    Lathiira wrote:
    SmiloDan wrote:

    Elf on a shelf?

    Dwarf on a wharf?

    I got 99 problems, but the lich ain't one.

    Lich in a ditch?

    Bugbear wants a hug where?


    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber
    Caineach wrote:
    Interesting, because I felt the opposite. I felt that we saw way more of what and who these characters are than pretty much any other fantasy series I can think of. They had minor hobbies that were shown on screen. They had things they did for fun. They didn't dwell on them and make them the sole focus of the character, which I found very refreshing.

    I agree that those were there; I just don't think that that made the actual story very interesting or engaging to watch. Knowing that Moguzo liked to whittle, for instance, did little to make me want to know what was going to happen next; characterization works best (to my mind) when it's mingled with the plot - this felt like it was trying to use it to replace the plot.

    But I'm not surprised that you and I don't see eye-to-eye on this; this is far from the first time that you and I have had very different takes on things.


    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber

    I didn't think that the characters were uninteresting. I just think that their presentation was far too limited, and so made the narrative uninteresting. There was clearly more to those characters, and we were continually denied anything more than the occasional glimpse, which I found frustrating.


    2 people marked this as a favorite.
    Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber
    Tyinyk wrote:
    Neadenil Edam wrote:
    timelord ?
    Be a reincarnated druid.

    My group called that particular idea "Dr. Hoot."


    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber
    Caineach wrote:
    Greylurker wrote:
    Well the new deal betweeen Crunchyroll and Funimation has given CRunchy access to Grimgar of Fantasy and Ash. If you have not seen this wonderful series you should. It is a great portrayal of starting adventurers in a fantasy world.
    I've started it and thoroughly enjoy it

    Having just finished this a few hours ago, I'm not that impressed. It's a good series, but I wouldn't go so far as to call it a great one.

    Spoiler:
    The show's central themes - appreciating your friends, putting in the work necessary to cultivate those relationships, and being able to rely on them when things get bad - were all executed very well. The problem I had with the show is that it had nothing else to say besides this.

    The problem with any message, no matter what it is or how well it's presented, is that if you hear it over and over and over and over again, it eventually wears thin. I can understand the group being devastated by Manato's death; but having them struggle with that and try to get past it for virtually the entirety of the series - switching things up only to then focus on Mary's inability to deal with the deaths of her teammates, and in doing so propagate the same ideas in essentially the same way - made me feel bored with the same moral being broadcast at me again and again.

    Notwithstanding its initial setup - and, to be fair, the climactic fight at the end of the series - the show is entirely inward-focused, presenting character exposition rather than moving any particular plot along. That's not inherently bad by itself, but the characters were further restricted to how we saw them dealing with Manato's death (or, in Mary's case, her friends'), which made their characterization fairly shallow.

    Beyond that, the show had a fairly gritty appeal in that these guys were the rookiest of rookies, initially struggling to take out lone goblins. But while we did see them grow over the course of the show, and their improved prowess was well-earned, it didn't feel like a significant point, since it was always portrayed as a backdrop to how they felt about themselves and each other.

    I also rolled my eyes at the initial presentation of the group - when the six of them are struggling to take out two goblins (but to be fair, those guys were like little green ninjas), why on Earth does Manato feel the need to remind them of how high-stakes a fight to the death is, and that that's true for the goblins they're fighting as well? Is that supposed to do anything but make them more nervous, as well as create empathy for their enemies?

    In fact, that kept on throughout the series. The show kept flirting with the idea of the equivalence between humans and the goblins (and later kobolds) that they were fighting, and then never going anywhere with it. Instead, it usually just seemed to end with a shrug, in that they were on different sides, but this came off as unpalatable because the humans were the only ones to act as aggressors; at no point do we see goblins or kobolds attacking human settlements the way the humans do theirs.

    Ultimately, Grimgar wasn't a series I enjoyed because it refused to move past itself. It's insistence on waxing eloquent about the character's feelings excluded everything else, and that was to its detriment. Issues like who the No Life King was and why he cursed that area, or the true nature of that light-trail that Haruhiro sometimes saw, or how the group ended up there in the first place and what happened to their memories...these were all plot-threads that the show should have resolved, or at least touched upon more. But instead, all were dealt with as minimally as the show could afford to do, sacrificed on the altar of pathos.

    It's not a bad show, but that's the most charitable I can be towards it.


    2 people marked this as a favorite.
    Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber

    This thread points out why most Pathfinder PCs don't go clubbing.

    *rimshot*


    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber
    Erik Mona wrote:
    But an archetype requires a class, and what class is Red Sonja? Check back here next week, and I'll tell you!

    You kinda let it slip before, with that EN World article that showed that she's a level 7 ranger.

    That said, I'm quite hyped for this comic series; I just side-cart'd a preorder, and can't wait for it to arrive! I'm also very interested in these design diaries, as I always find these peaks behind the proverbial curtain fascinating.

    In this case, I'm intrigued by the process that went into the coinmail (née chainmail) bikini armor, since insofar as I'm aware this is probably the most serious treatment that that particular trope has ever received in the tabletop RPG industry. It's a shame it's not going to be an actual armor that anyone can wear, though I agree that as written the above armor is little more than an excuse to get enhancement bonuses (even if haramaki armor does that already, as others have noted).

    ...but what I really want to know is, why does Sonja have a +1 shield bonus to her AC? Doesn't she typically fight with a two-handed style, rather than sword-and-shield?


    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber
    thejeff wrote:

    As a software engineer, I'm quite familiar with this kind of set up. The correct solution is almost always to redesign and rebuild from scratch.

    As a developer, I'm well aware there's never time or budget to do that.

    In my experience - and from what I've heard from others - that's an unfortunate truth that comes up much more often than a lot of people think.

    While I like a lot of the suggestions that were put forward, that can often be like someone saying "I really like this house, but the roof needs to be a foot higher. It's only a foot, that's not that hard, right?" When in fact, doing that wouldn't be that much different from building a brand new house, with commensurate costs.


    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber
    Greylurker wrote:
    Well the new deal betweeen Crunchyroll and Funimation has given CRunchy access to Grimgar of Fantasy and Ash. If you have not seen this wonderful series you should. It is a great portrayal of starting adventurers in a fantasy world.

    Ah, it's finally up! I was checking for a while, and kept finding a message saying to please be patient, so this is a nice development.


    4 people marked this as a favorite.
    Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber
    KSF wrote:

    @Alzrius, thank you for replying, and thank you for reading and considering what I said.

    We'll have to continue to disagree on what we disagree on, but I do agree that we are coming from a similar place. Apologies if I was a little hot under the collar at times in my replies.

    I'd like to apologize also for coming off a little too strongly there at the beginning, and also express my gratitude for such a constructive dialogue. :)


    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber
    Crystal Frasier wrote:
    Buri Reborn wrote:
    Crystal Frasier wrote:
    Quick side note: LGBT people are not "controversial topics." LGBT people are human being we ask be treated with respect and humanity in our company spaces, especially considering that we have many employees who fall within that community and are required to participate in the forums as part of our jobs
    Then, please, enlarge that company space to include the forums and afford the folks here the same protections you, yourselves, enjoy, including from and especially to other members of the Paizo staff.
    You'll note we also don't tolerate people using our forums to proclaim that heterosexuality is a mental illness, or dictate how straight people should act if they don't want to be fired for being heterosexual.

    You're correct, but oftentimes the situation is far more subtle. I've seen posters here justify making insulting comments about a particular demographic by calling it "expressing frustration" rather than "expressing hate."

    Moreover, they then compounded this by saying that there was no need to indicate that this sentiment wasn't universal with regards to all members of that demographic, making excuses like "people slip between literal and figurative language all the time" and "the 'not all' is understood," not realizing that if you have to say that then that's quite clearly not understood.

    When another member pointed out how that would sound if applied towards black people like them, they were told how it doesn't work that way due to "power dynamics."

    Not only was this not moderated, a Paizo member favorited the initial post in question.


    2 people marked this as a favorite.
    Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber

    I'll mention that posts by Paizo's staff seems to be exempt from the moderation policies. While I can understand that this might be a tricky needle to thread, I've seen a member of the Paizo staff be very condescending, rude, and sometimes outright insulting on multiple occasions, and flagging has never resulted in any deletions or other actions that I've seen. Needless to say, this is rather disheartening.


    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber

    High-fantasy post-apocalyptic.

    The reason why Golarion is gone in Starfinder? Because the Worldwound opened wider, the demons won the war, and Rovagug is comin' back, baby! It's a setting that has yer "points of light" on the verge of being snuffed out...unless you can step up.


    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber
    Aranna wrote:
    Just look at Rambo. And yes don't take my geek cred but I wasn't a fan of that either.

    If that's a prerequisite for geek cred, then if they took yours they'd need to take mine; I've never watched any of those movies.


    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber
    Aranna wrote:

    There was a novel?

    Actually I got kind of bored with Overlord. I can totally see how others would love it being a power trip fantasy. But I found it to be ... dry? Is that the right word? It lacked the conflict that would keep me on the edge of my seat. You knew going into every situation he was going to stomp it flat somehow.

    The novels (as with so many series) came first; in fact, the series was a web-novel before it became a light novel series, after which a manga and an anime were created.

    Insofar as the power-fantasy nature of Overlord goes, it definitely is that, but what made it so incredible (to my mind) was that it handled it so differently than most. I also tend to get bored of "invincible protagonist" series - where's the drama when there's no tension due to (the illusion of) the possibility of loss? How can victories mean anything if they're so effortlessly acquired? - and so was surprised and fascinated when Overlord didn't bore me.

    It's hard to explain why, but I think that it has to do with how the main character approaches the situations he finds himself in. That is, he acts with extreme caution in every situation, even when he has good reason to believe otherwise. Because he takes nothing for granted, he puts himself in the position of a potential underdog due to taking measures befitting of someone in the inferior, rather than vastly superior, position. Hence, his victories still feel as though they were earned, rather than being inevitabilities.

    Moreover, his motivation for doing so is plausible. Not only is this the strategies that he learned through long hours of playing his MMORPG, but he is very worried about acting in a manner that could potentially disillusion him in the eyes of his subordinates, possibly to the point of causing a rebellion, which would be a serious problem, since they have power comparable to his own. Hence, he treats failure as being a very real, very threatening possibility. He can't just win; he has to look good doing it (and everything else).

    Speaking of which, only sixteen more days until the next volume releases! I can't wait!


    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber

    WOOOOOT!!!

    Freakin' booyah!!!

    As a subs fan with a Crunchyroll subscription, and who has long wished to access the stuff on Funimation but didn't want to manage another subscription (particularly since, unlike Crunchyroll, Funimation doesn't have a channel that I can load onto my TV via my WiiU), this makes me so deliriously happy!


    1 person marked this as a favorite.
    Pathfinder Adventure Path Charter Subscriber

    Isn't this the kind of problem that glamered armor was made to solve?

    1 to 50 of 448 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | next > last >>

    ©2002–2016 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.