Andre Caceres's page

Been doing some world building and I wanted race from 3.0 days, the StoneGrunts from Mythic Races FFG. I was re-building the race race for Pathfinder (except for keeping racial levels); but thats not the issue.

Stonegrunts get Damage Reduction 10/+2, but I double checked Pathfinder rules and was a bit unclear on if the +2 matters any more, only substance or magic qualities. So how would a 10/+2 damage reduction natural ablity be converted for Pathfinder.

This becomes a bigger problem as I have more then just +1 'normal' qulities, I use modified rules from GR's Black Company. So a masterwork itme in Pathfinder is closer to +3 non-magical item in my game. But if stats no longer reflect that it means some work for me stat-wise.

Thanks in advance for any imput.

TTFN DRE

Andre, your idea confuses me.

Are you talking about real life years that DC would only make certain comics? So if you were in charge of DC right now, in two months, youd have them stop making any and all comics that werent Superman? A year later in Sept 2012 they could start with Batman, and then work from there with everyone else?

If Im reading this right, DC will have nosedived into the concrete before December. Not all DC fans read Superman, and even fewer would be satisfied with JUST Superman comics for a solid year. That would alienate a HUGE portion of their fanbase.

Basically yes, but as I said in my post this will not happen for the same reason you mentioned. Money and fan-base. I'm talking in a perfect world. Heck I'm not even a Superman fan, but he is number one, and historically I think he was the first superhero, at lest what we think of as superhero, I'm not sure of what Pulp heores that predate superman have made their way to current timelines.

But also as I said since you really cannot do that for bussines reason, start at Year Five.

TTFN DRE

Golden age characters should be placed where they belong..in the golden age..so in my reboot time moves slower on Earth 2's timeline and they are still in WW2.

I just posted my idea, and you read it you'd note I disagree with you, no golden age for me.

Having said that I know perfectly well that'll never happen and that your idea of the golden age charactes being placed in the golden age would be far more acceptable. No argument on that; but I do have a question, not just to you but anyone who'd have some idea.

Question is basicaly this; Who would you have in the Silver, Broze and as M&M likes to call it iron ages.

What I mean is DC as fairly established what characters existed in the golden age, but with the reboot I'm going to assmue that most 'moden' heors have come out since 2000. So what list of heros works for.....

The Silver age 1954 to 1973

The Bronze age 1974 to 1985+ or -

The Iron Age 1985 to 2000

You can say the golden age heros were around in WWII but thats now 60+ years ago are we to assume that no other superheors came out in that time?

If Not who would be the hero list for those ages? Knowing that by putting such a hero in such a category forever locks him in that time period. Sure you can still tell stories with that caracter but it would be in that era.

For example: I'd put Hal Jorden and Berry Alen/ Green Latern and Flash as silver age heors. Whoever has those titles in 2011 will not be those two charactes, and both are most likely dead or retired completly. Stories can still be told with them, but they are no longer part of current DC universe.

Are we even ready to lock some of the iconics to differnt eras?

TTFN DRE

I was thinking of asking this very same question. I'm almost glad I didn't because most of you know more about DC then I'll ever know. That being said I just have put in my hat, for what its worth.

1. First start from scratch in terms or your primary earth. Everything that's gone before can be said to have happaned somewere else. This isn't going to make fans happy but it will give a starting point.

2. In a perfect world without market demands, fan demands, and simple finicial suicide DC starts with 1 comic, 1 superhero, Superman. Yeah it sucks but if the man in blue is going to be the guy all others are measured by then there has to be a reason. Think of it this way if JSA worked during WWII then supermans first apparance wouldn't be that impressive to the world at large. A year later first isssue of Detective comics (no roben until year four with Dick).

3. DC cannot do #2 so something has to devised. My solution, come out with a series of Year One books, or declare other year one titles to be offical. Batman Year One works fine because it steps on no ones toes, Man of Steel I'm less sure about. In any case then have ongoing series, but the ongoing will be more or less Year 5 or 10. Thus Bats and Superman and wonderwomen will have been around. ACtually I'd go year five, most of the major DC heros will have come out by then, but most if not all will not have meet each other yet.

4. Decide who is know by year 5. By know I mean which heors are actively being heros. My basic list, I'll keep to 10
Superman (first superhero came out in the new Year one)
Batman (maybe doing stuff in year one, but as batman year two)
Wondewomen (year two)
Auqoman (Year two)
Green Arrow (Year Three)
Flash (Year Three)
Green Latern (Year Four)
Hawkman (Year Four)
Robin (Year Five)
Captain Marvel (Year Five)

5. This makes it easy to start new stroylines for everyother hero they want to introduce as it is now year five and new heros can come out. And it leaves open hidden unknown players such as DR. Fate or the Spector, oh they've been around for a long time, but now one knew it.

6. DC will have to decide how long it wants to wait for new versions of old charactes can come in. New Green Lanter year 12. New Robin year 11. so on and so forth. They don't have to plan everthing out but have some sort of time table.

7. No Teams. Yeah this one no one will like, but I simply wouldn't have these hoers know each other much less be working together already. Just think about it for a moment, the first major crisis (pun not intended) that the world will face, and that will cause a crossover will be the orgion of the JLA. Then you start the JLA title, it'll have an offical self contained history.

Not that it matters, because I have no say but thats how I'd outline the rules (open for debate and suggestions of course).

TTFN DRE

Okay I have not read the whole thread so sorry if this has been asked and answered.

Big question for this book for those who've used it. How easy would it be to restore Psicraft and Use Psionic Device and related feats?

I've read a a lot a reveiews (even saw a few on utube) and most agree the Soul Knife by itself is worth the price. However I'm rather happy with keeping psionics and magic apart. Yes I know the logic behind the change was to make things simpler, but for me it hurts game play.

My reasoning is simple (I use tech. rules from WoW RPG, just to clearify) in the mind of the average joe in any fantasy game a tech. device (flint gun) magic device (wand of magic missile) and a crysital em (jezz can't think of psionic item right now) may all look and act the same, but such items to a Tinker, Wizard, and Psion would not only be differnt but function differnt.

Yeah I know it simplfy things for game play, but I've seen this experimited upon before it opens things to abuse or just plain wired S***. Not trying to start a fight over it the book is out now and if you like it that way great. I was just wondering how hard it'd be to convert back?

Thanks,

TTFN Dre

Been thinking along these lines for a while, personally other then giving Goblins a +2 Int. I wouldn't change much from the WoW rpg, assuming of couse you have that book/race.

The Tinker class works very well as is. However I did add a few minior adjustments. I have to look it up but their is a fan supplemnt called "Even More Magic and Mayhem" on PDF (google it'll pop up) that improves the Tinker class by letting the Tinker do what it does best only slightly faster.

Of course all this is assuming a WoW conversion, not a lets make a Goblin Tinker only using a Pathfinder context/rules set.

On a deeper level I would like to here some thoughts as to using the tech rules from WoW. I don't see any major problems adding the tech skill, but then I lean more towards 3.5 skill list then pathfinder. Moreorver it seems if you have the WOW rpg it be easer to use their tech rules rather then trying to come up with house rules fitting into the PF contect.

PS a multiclassed Goblin Tinker/Alchemist now theres a concept.

TTFN DRE

Conan OGL has very good rules for dodge and parry. In effect they work like saveing throws or BAB but have unique progression. We use those rules with a few changes. Such as....

as a house rule in terms of dodge armor ac actually works as a negative. So you have +4 armor, you get -4 to dodge.

Again as a house rule Parry gains nothing good or bad from armor AC but a helm with horns adds to Parry (they cacth the swords and stuff) and shield AC adds to Parry.

I would highly recomend looking into that games base rules to at lest set up a good starting point.

TTFN DRE

Long story short, Re: Blackest Night

Basically anyone who was dead was 'fair game' for the rings to animate. They went after people for whom others had strong emotional connections. Since Kal-L and Earth-1 Lois died in the 'Core' universe, they were fair game.

As to being offended, I don't think it was meant as a slap to the Segals, as a lot of characters got the 'zombie' treatment. Was BL Wonderwoman a slap to Marston? Or BL Grant and Addie a slap to Marv Wolfman? What is was meant as a slap to was the reader. To show no one was safe.

Now that beng said, I thought the carnage was overdone, and some of the characters they brought back annoy me (I liked Gen, Damage, Tempest, and Holly Granger, and would rather have seen Zoom and Digger stay dead. I am glad Martian Manhunter and Jade are back.)

You might be right, I could simply be overthinking it. But honestly the timing just seems suspect. Last I saw of Earth 2 superman, who is the superman that the Segals created, he, Lane, and Superboy (oh yeah as to the superboy debate look up superboy of earth prime, WTF? You will not be happy) we sent off to a paradise world. Now 20+ years later they couldn't leave the first true superhero be, and at the same time the Segals are sueing and, i think, won the rights to superman.

As to everyone fair game and all the other characters and creators, I see your point but from what I've read the only other big names are Aquaman and Martian Manhunter. In the end I suppose it gets down to the fact that Earth 2 superman was spared at the end of Crisis and honored with a happy ending that he should have gotten, but because of that DC left a loop hole to the whole Infinite Earths deal created in the 50's that they wanted to fix.

TTFN DRE

PS here is a funny irony, I once heard that DC did Crisis for two reasons, one and the main reason, it was getting too complex with too many worlds to keep track of and heros and stories to keep stright; and two newer readers were becoming very hip and better educated, and science (real world science that is) discredited the idea of multiple diminisions.

The Irony being that now Science and embraced the concept of multiple diminisions and the DC universe, for being one universe keeps messing up and re-starting things over and over again.

I don't remember the Dracolich. Now I am even more depressed.

This is a new one on me? But if you want such, look up the Dragon series from MacFarlin, they had a Dracolich toy, although be warned I'm still trying to fix it so the damn wings stay on. Still its well worth tracking down.

Mage Knight also had a good Tiamat that I was lucky to get my hands on.

TTFN DRE

Of the 5 archer archetypes presented, one is restricted to classes that can cast spells. The alchemical archer is more a gadget-arrow user than a spellcaster.

Thanks, I think I can work with that, and the spellcaster option might be houseruled or tweeked somehow. Yes I think this might be a very good toolkit for me.

TTFN DRE

Hmmmmm, okay thanks guys for the feedback. I'm with Shem as to if they are actually going to come out with this, but assuming it does come out I think well see it in secondary markets. Who knows maybe somebody will trade it in to Paizo and will see it for sale as single.

Shem also makes a really good argument for somebody to take up the plastic mini market. Lets face it that's what really put Mage Knight and Wizkids on the map. Mage Knight was fun, and the click thing was at lest differnt, but mostly it showed that there are a lot of gamers willing to pay for platic pre-painted. DD killed that with their runs, but without any competition they got lazy and quality went to hell in a handbasket. That's changed somwhat recently but still.

I did have some hopes for Reaper to do so, their plastics pre-painted are very well done, but Robert mentioned a slow boat, I think they have somebody swim across the pacific to delever there stuff.

Anyways hers hoping you guys get Orcus, and keep your fingers crossed that I can get my hands on one.

TTFN DRE

Okay, so I’m at my FLGS the other day and I what was in effect a Zombie Superman toy. It was just wrong. I found out it was for Blackest Night a Green Lantern storyline. Okay now before I go on I have not collected since X-Men age of apocalypse and while I do try to keep up on what’s going on with comic books I’m by no means hardcore. That being said I read up on the Green Lantern story so I know the basics, but something just kept bothering me about the Superman thing. Now I’m team Batman make no mistake, but I’ll freely admit Superman’s the most famous and iconic superhero and it just struck me wrong.

At first I thought it was simply my pride as an American. Superman to me is a symbol of the USA and I just didn’t like him being a Zombie ‘like’ (yeah I know they are not Zombies in the Romero sense of the word). But really that wasn’t it, or at lest that wasn’t all of it. I work for a Law Library I was going through some old copies of the Daily Journal (a Law news paper) and found an article on the lawsuits over Superman ownership from the families of his creators Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster. (As an aside I’m actually on DC side of the question, yeah they might of created the character, but they sold it to DC, how many characters did they buy that never became iconic, no one at the time knew what Superman would become? Sorry guys but you sold it, and you knew what the comic book business was like). In any case, sorry lost track of my point, it seems to me the whole Zombie Superman as a sick slap in the face to the character and his creators.

My logic goes something like this, Siegel and Shuster’s creation was the Superman of the 1930s, hence Superman of Earth 2, who has been coming back a lot lately even though 86’s Crisis on Infinite Earths ended his story, more or less happily. And each time DC has basically been throwing mud in his face as a hero of a bygone era, until now with this final(?) insult of insults now you’re an undead zombified corpse. Now maybe I’m wrong but its almost like DC is saying, fine if we have to share ownership of Superman with the families of his creators, were going to really F*** with your creation, and we have an easy out because the ‘real’ Superman isn’t the one form Earth 2.

Like I said I’m actually on the side of DC on the ownership issue, but it seems like they really have a bad case of sour grapes and wanted to get back and Siegel and Shuster in a back handed way.

Sorry just had to rant.

TTFN DRE

I am not sure this book would work well for that or not. I say that cause the archer archtypes are themed and mixing more than one in many cases would be odd. Plus they powers are preset to a certain level of power. Now with that said, I think you might get some good idea's to help you build a archer class, out of this book.

I wasn’t looking to mix themed types necessarily. For example a Sorcerer with a Dragon bloodline wouldn’t gain any Fey bloodline effects. Or more specifically we took a “Long Bow Hunter” PC from book A, and added that style of Archery to my class. While we found another archer built around the Yeomen archetype, we took many of his unique abilities a built a Yeomen Style.

Thanks for the help, I leaning more and more on picking up this one.

TTFN DRE

Okay, so what Happaned? This is still coming out right? Its just effectily sold out before its been relased correct? Its a bummer because I was thinking of getting it, now I'll have to pay twice as much on ebay.

Or am I missing something and she (yeah Orcus has to be a girl, used to date don't you know) isn't being released at all?

TTFN DRE

Odd question here, is this book good toolkit to make an Archer Class?

I have multiple Archer 3.5 classes, that my group and I enjoy, but we always wanted just to have one Archer class (a concept that to us is vitally needed). Pathfinder gave the perfect solution when we first saw the Sorcerer. Make one class with optional ‘styles’ for want of a better word. As such we set about working on combining the various Archer classes together to make a Pathfinder Archer. What we found was that multiple Archer classes from all our books only ends up with a few ‘styles’ so we decided to make up are own. We soon discovered new respect for game designers, as such work is much harder then one would think.

This books looks like it might fit a vital need for us, forget about swapping with existing classes, I want use these tools to make a new Class. Has anyone tried this, or if not, do you see any major problems with using this product that way? My biggest concern centers on the magic and alchemy aspects of the book. Do they require spell slots? Something my existing Archer Class wouldn’t have nor-want. If so has anyone come up with a solution. Any input would be appreciated.

Thanks…

TTFN DRE

Changeing the subject a bit, I've never liked the idea of building a character simply for the assumed power level of the game, ie its assumed that a arcane caster will have access to spell X and a divine will or should have access to spell Y. Such logic, to me at lest, puts into question multi-classing of any type. Any stright up Class will be stronger in a fight then a class that is forced to blend ablities.

To me I don't assume that my players will have X, and if the game demands that they do it forces them to think outside of the box.

Moreover in terms of roleplaying the Sor/ora/theu, concept if a lot of fun in a lot of differnt ways. Tactical support to start off with, whoever is your main arcane or divine caster (assuming you have one in your group) cannot be all over the battle field all the time, such a combo character saves times and gives much needed support. Moreover don't forget scroll reading. As a whole Sorcers should be carrying a lot of scrolls anyways, not sure about the oracle yet as I've not played one long term yet.

I think James had some good ideas for the Sorcere/Oracle build. Like me he seems not to be afraid to tweek rules as needed.

Oh yes and as to the idea that no group of players would or even should tolarate such a character remember the game is supposed to be fun, and the best moments usualy comes from a groups short commings rather then their over power ablity to wipe everything off the map in three rounds.

TTFN DRE

This seems very well done. I'm converting an old 3.5 Defender to yours. From what I'm reading forsee very few issues as is.

I always wondered why this class never made it to the Pathfinder core book. I'd like to think that it was simply a space issue, but in all honesty, much as I enjoy Pathfinder I always gotten a sense that Paizo as a whole, and not just with their home setting, just has a disliking towards Dwarven culture.

As to making this into a 20 level class, to an extent most 10 level PC can be expanded as such (going all the way back to 3.0) In a lot a ways 5 level PC are far more logical mechanically speaking, but also more difficult to make intersting.

As for your warmage plans I was thinking about updating that class, I have been thinking along the lines of combining aspects of it and the Arcane Warrior class from Blackmore. If you have that resorce you might want to look at it for some insperation.

TTFN DRE

Andre Caceres wrote:

Well I ordered this, the sale was just too good. But another question poped into my mind. Why the sale? I have no intrest in playing confrontation, in truth I've only barely heard of it. But hate to lose out on perfectly good minis source. Especially in regards to Classic Knights. Anyway just wondering.

TTFN DRE

We got a really good price on these from Fantasy Flight and decided to pass along the savings to our customers. That is pretty much why there is a sale on them! :)

-Lisa

Very cool, Thanks for the heads up.

TTFN DRE

Well I ordered this, the sale was just too good. But another question poped into my mind. Why the sale? I have no intrest in playing confrontation, in truth I've only barely heard of it. But hate to lose out on perfectly good minis source. Especially in regards to Classic Knights. Anyway just wondering.

TTFN DRE

Andre Caceres wrote:

Whats the scale of this?

TTFN DRe

The wolfmen are about large size, though their base is an odd size between medium and large.

Hmmm, sounds like this might be a good deal then, specially for the price, have to consider this.

Thanks for the info.

TTFN DRE

Whats the scale of this?

TTFN DRe

Andre Caceres wrote:

I have an aside question to the topic Vic, if you happen to know. I have the first printing of the Pathfinder setting thats kinda beat up, but since the old version is going away I was thinking of getting a mint copy for my collection and was wondering if it says "1st, 2nd 3rd ect. Printing" inside the book? or is the setting book still on its first print run?

Thanks DRE

This book had only one print run, and since it's being supplanted by a new book, there will only ever be one printing for this one.

Thanks thats what I needed to know.

TTFN DRE

Aaron Bitman wrote:

I also don't see the comparison to the Alpha- and Beta- core rules. Those were MEANT to be temporary, right from the get-go. And they were FREE for goodness' sake.

Ok... how about the Core Rulebook itself? Currently, the PDF mirrors the second printing, incorporating corrections to the first printing. In the not-too-distant future, the PDF will be updated to the third printing, incorporating corrections to the second printing, and the second printing PDF will be unavailable.

I have an aside question to the topic Vic, if you happen to know. I have the first printing of the Pathfinder setting thats kinda beat up, but since the old version is going away I was thinking of getting a mint copy for my collection and was wondering if it says "1st, 2nd 3rd ect. Printing" inside the book? or is the setting book still on its first print run?

Thanks DRE

Hey thanks all, ended up getting a copy.

TTFN Dre

I deciced to pick up a copy of this core book since I'm been playing in a group using Rippers for almost a year, but cannot find it at my FLAGS nor on line other then pdf format, which is not my perfered option.

So I was wondering if anyone knew if Rippers is going to go back into print anytime soon, or will have to hunt it down?

Thanks,

TTFN DRE

Well this is agood a place as any to post this idea.

Technically the argument that spellbooks vs. Familiar are about even is ture, however the issue of how many books and where a wizard keeps them for somereason isn't explotied much, but in testing I've seen Blue Dragons go after a cat familiar without mercy. so the simple answer is protect the familiar, but that leaves the witch at a disadvantage.

What I mean is that while both classes have to protect their books/familiars, the former (wizard) gets to use his familiar in combat situations where as the witch wouldn't want to risk it (again this is what has happaned in play).

Now I've been thinking about this, and my players have put out some suggestions of buffing up the familiar which is nice an all but in effect goes into summoner teritory in terms of pain in the butt.

So I was thinking along the lines of a Book of Shadows concept. In this case the Book of Shadows would be the Witch's familiar. It may have been a simple spell book once, but at some point it became an enchanted object, that carries part of the essese of the witch that owns it. Perhaps it gets passed down from witch to witch, as it dose so it gains spells, but only reveals them to the curret owner when they are powerful enough. The witch would have to bond with the book so that its destroyed it has the same effect as losing a familiar, so they must be careful with it. The Book of Shadows would also act as a grimore of knowledge for the Witch, this would work exactly like Bardic Knoweldge but would require study time(maybe like HP and Chamber of secrets, have to write your question into the book for it to answer) and the knoweldge would actually come from the past owners of the book, hence a witch from three hundread years before who helped kill a Blue Dragon, would give info on the blue dragon to the curret owner of the book. This gives the class the option of a Wizards spell book but still keep the flavor of a Witch. Any book could be made into a book of shadows but a new book could only be created by a Witch's coven and it would gain a little bit of knowldge from each witch the performed the ritual.

I was also thinking of giving the book intelligent, but thought of better of going into those waters.

In any case I still have to work out all the mechanics of this but it does solve the "Crow" weakness of the familiar and still keeps the class distinct from the wizard. And whats nice about this option is that it still allows for the 'standard' familiars, the book of shadows is simply a another type of familiar.

I could use some feedback on this idea thanks.

TTFN DRE

P.S. oh yeah almost forgot, the book would work for other witchs but any other spell casting class would only detect it as a magical object with a lot of blank pages.

Looking at the two classes, without roling one up much less playing one myself, or my group I have to say....

The big issue will be the familiar for the Witch. Over all the flavor and class is okay, seen better but thats mainly because I think Paizo kinda went for heavy combat concept for the class overall, this might be fine due to the over all game's power creep but is less to my liking. That being said too much power is tied to such an easy target, one which will have to be protected every combat, far more so then a Wizard.

I would have perfred a Book of Shadows, holding her spells, more powerful then a mear spell book they could have allowed it to contain Witches knowledge (like a bardic roll) and perhaps something like a seconed sight type of spell that gives flashes of critical information to the wicth, be it passed event, alarm to danger (either personal or to a friend). Perhaps the book could even call foruth the familiar giving a portion of its essece thus making the familiar the back up spell book.

In either case as it stands the familiar, if it remains the same will be reworked altogether.

The Summoner is a more complicated issue. Balance and clase features wise its fine, again just looking at it, but this is the one class so far that really should have been a PC, its too specialized and too focused. I could maybe see it for a region kinda like a Ninja in OA but for all of Pathfinder RPG? On the other hand I would banish it from the table.

As to the new classes being magic as opposed to martial orinted, I tend to agree. An Archer class done very well is needed, No I don't think Fighter/Ranger does it well enough.

TTFN DRE

Why do I have an image of a cheep claymation brown riding dog named goliath saying.....

"Don't call us evil Daveyy"

So my pathfinder game has begun, and like usual one of my players wanted to change x y and z. Thankfully this time it wasn't focused on rules, well not specifically.

Long story short after talking it over we decided that we'd perfer our Halflings to be closer to fey then Tolkins' vision. In fact we pushed halflings closer to what Paizo makes Gnomes to be, except that we decided to go with a Dark Crystal/Elflings feel for them, in looks and powers. All this mechanically worked fine without rules changes save for females having wings and the ablity to fly.

As none of the core races have flight as a racial ablity I was wondering if their is a standard mod. for the fly skill as a racial ability, +2 or +4? Or should I just give female halflings fly as a automatic class skill (I perfer the latter as I regard flight to be more akin to glide for them, however my player likes the +2 idea). In either case however what if anything should I take away from Halfling racial ablities.

As I said I like simply giving fly as a automatic skill, but I'm open to others ideas, or if their is an established standard what that would be.

Thanks in advance for any and all imput....

TTFN DRE

These are very good versions of the Noble. My suggestion would first forget Dragonlances Noble, Hey I love their Mystic, but the noble was just too plain. Not sure about Star Wars noble, although I like the concept of talent trees. I've always used GR Noble for 3.5 and updating would not be too hard as I recal the class gets something every level, or very close too every level.

By my way of thinking, and this ist just a thought all the ablities mentioned so far could be folded into a system for nobel Houses. Something like Bloodlines, in fact bloodlines would be a good name for it had not the Sorcerers already taken it. In such a system such things as knacks would be folded into a certain ablities given to certain members of a nobel House. Think Dune (in fact I did such a homebrew dune game with just such a concept).

In such a model you might have

House Caceres:

House Traits: Inspire, nobles oblige, Landed, Great Courage.

or

House Clinton: Backstab, Snake Tounge, Elks Enderance, Rats Grace.

With each Trait having a number of possible ablities Within. Thus not everyone in a single house would get everything associated with their House, but the would gain something from their noble upbringing.

I don't have a full class put together, hell I'm still working a a witch, and archer, but this is how I'd start putting together a noble. Its not really a question of is he good at combat really, the very fact that a player would want to play a noble means combat may not be on his mind. However Each House should have at lest one combat or combat support trait on their list.

Just a cp

TTFN DRE

Jeremy Epp wrote:

There was a fellow that converted Burnt Offerings and the iconic Piazo characters to Savage Worlds a while back with reportedly good results you can find his notes at http://savagegolarion.wikidot.com/

That would be me :) I had a TPK in the adventure, but it was player error that caused it.

The only thing I didn't like about the SW system was the use of power points for spells. The mage in the group didn't enjoy having to wait for his power points to return after each encounter. If I could go back and replay this adventure, I would use the Hellfrost magic system that doesn't use power points at all, and is 100% compatible with any SW game.

I'm playing in a group right now, its a fun solid system but my group also hates the magic system. It just feels wrong. Well for them not playing a caster so I can't say one way or the other. Our groups solution was something called Witch Girl rpg, technically its not SW and it is made for 13 year old girls, but the basic system is the same as SW and the magic system/concept works far better. Not sure about Hellfrost as we are playing Rippers (with a lot of magic in it) but my fellow players live by that game even though no one seems to ever have the book on the table, its very well hidden by eveyone.

TTFN Dre

+1 for Gothic as well, provided there are some lighter moments in the AP.

After all, Gothic horror is only so appealing when contrasting to standard fantasy.

In this vein, I would recommend the "Witcher" books and video game, which capture a lot of this, IMHO.

LOL I thought you were going to say Fearless Vampire Killers!

TTFN DRE

James Jacobs wrote:

Stay tuned; in a month or so, we're releasing "Carrion Hill," a VERY Lovecraftian adventure set in Ustalav, written by Richard Pett for us many years ago but unpublished, and then updated to be in the PRPG game and to be set in Golarion by yours truly. No vampires in this one, but it's very good at evoking the creepy sense of backwoods/ancient urban horror that Lovecraft excelled at. Fans of "The Dunwich Horror" should take special note of this adventure...

Take it easy with the "Lovecraft stuff". I like as much as most but it really seems like Lovecraftian themes are really getting over used.

In the past we have had a 3E glut a D20 glut and I would dare to say we are right now at the peak of a "Cthulhu glut". I hope we don't someday look back at these years and think: "What was with all the Lovecraft stuff back then?". I know the HPLove stuff is popular and in the public domain but lets not overdue it. Some new original concepts would be better, like whatever happened to Mr Monas Red/Green Planet module idea?

Well you sorta answered your own question,its in the public domain, although from what little I know of Lovecraft he wouldn't of minded too much.

TTFN

For this to really work it requires two very important things: Setting and Character.

Paizo has been great with settings so far. I think this can be a bit more challenging to maintain through six full adventures. A fine line has to be maintained to keep the players engaged and in suspense and not cross over into yet another "creepy" crypt adventure. The setting for each adventure would need to be unique and engaging in its own right.

The characters developed by Paizo have been great as well. Here I think they would have an easier time. A truly monstrous villain in the guise of a aristocratic gentleman (makes me think of Queen Ileosa Arabasti in Curse of the Crimson Throne). The cast should be flawed but salvageable, though some will never be saved.

The plot itself can be rather simple, or knowing Paizo, could be layers of plots that lead to understanding the events that have happened.

Quite honestly, if well done, I could very well see this kind of AP becoming the most popular AP released yet.

The problem is, that unlike most other APs so far, there is a high level of expectation for something like this. For Second Darkness you just needed to throw in Drow doing something naughty. That essentially all that is necessary for a drow adventure... drow! But for a gothic horror there is more than just a vampire.

I sort of disagree with the Drow thing. I think the high expectations was going to be on what was Paizo's take on the Drow was going to be. They'd been done for so long that many people (myself included I have to admit) thought they were not open to the SRD like the Beholder, in other words the Drow were DnD and only DnD whatever edition. Upon starting to read 2nd Darkness my first words regarding Paizo's take on the Drow was "Oh S***!" I mean random Elves becoming Drow, and not just because they are evil alingment a lot of evil elves never become drow. I just got better. That fear was something new for players (I haven't played the path yet but I can't wait to spring that one on players). In any case it worked and was fresh.

TTFN DRE

Strahd is a thinly-veiled ripoff of Dracula. Read the original book and then "I, Strahd."

That is all.

Agreed, but most of the great iconic vamps are Dracula in name, Legosi's Dracula and the very best Lee's Dracula. Strahd to my mind is a new take on Dracula, but Dracula nevertheless. But in gaming circles Strahd is vital, while most people will mention (and with good reason, the OWoD vampires, they'll mention Clans or bloodlines, not individual vamps).

Also Fraust mad some very good points in his post above. I loved Hook Mt. as well but like Romero's zombies, slasher stories is not Gothic Horror.

As to the issue of Demons I'm of two minds. I agree that Wizards wantered down demons too much, but again not Gothic, or at lest not exactly gothic. I think a 20th + Vampire Lord would be less intrested in consorting with Demons as he would in becoming a Demon Lord himself (which isn't a half bad idea).

TTFN DRE

Hey you forgot Fright Night and Lost Boys....+1 paizo it would be awesome to have a gothic adventure path.

Actually we did talk about that, but for the life of us we couldn't remember his name, or his sister in FNII. By the time I wrote up my request I forgotten. As for Lost Boys I forgot all about that one.

As for the Zombie mention a few post up, I wouldn't be against them persay but I want Gothic not Romero, or god help us post-Romero fast zombies.

TTFN DRE

Okay I have a request for the folks at Paizo, and since its now October and Halloween time I just had to send this out.

A few months ago my gaming group was discussing the Pathfinder rule set, one thing led to another and we ended up talking about Halloween and costumes, which for some reason ended up becoming a discussion of Vampires, and how bad the current crop of vamps are these days. I mean True Blood, Twilight, good help ups the Vamp. Diaries, its all the same, and all a women centered romantic notion of vampires standing in for god knows what. Actually I do know what, good looking guys, emotionally damaged (because no bad looking guy can be damaged or be worth her time) who treat women with all the bygone manners of a few centuries before without all the ownership values of said centuries, and with out the ‘male domination’ of such times. In other words with all the romance of said times, without any of the cost. (I know, I’m venting)

None of which is my point, which was that we as a group began to name iconic vampires that did not fit the above modern version (although every name had some aspect of such) Dracula (Legosi’s) and LeStant, Nosferatu (Schereck’s), Count Yogi, Marieous (spelling?), Lee's Dracula of course, heck even Spike from Buffy (say whatever you want about the show being the forerunner of the current croup at lest the creators of the show knew they playing with the stereotypes even before they really existed as they do today). But then I mentioned Strahd almost off handedly. I got nothing, not even from the old timers.

“You know from Ravenloft.” Oh yeahhh! Form the old timers. It was odd that only the old timers knew what I was talking about, and even then had to be reminded. I never played 2E (I was busy in the WoD) but I heard of Ravenloft, and of Strahd. Heck I even got a hard cover of "I Strahd". I couldn’t believe he was barely acknowledged or even remembered. But then I thought about my collection of 3E Ravenloft stuff. I got it all, and while the texts were good and informative, they were sadly and ironically being from WW, dry.

So my 1st request is for Paizo give us a good old-fashioned Gothic Horror Adv. Path. I read in one of the Dragon Mags that Ravenloft owed its inspiration to the old Universal Monster movies; as such I love to have something based more on Hammer’s Horror, and Lee. The archvillian should be a vampire of course, but like Lee make this a true monster, something that’ll kill you as soon as look at you, and regards the peasants as property or food. In other words Paizo, to be perfectly clear, give Vampires their freaking ba-ehh fangs back again. A true Gothic Vampire Horror Adventure Path. Please!

My 2nd request is probably less likely but I think would simply be cool. An adventure Path (six issues) of “What If’s?” from the older paths. In other words, one issue being What if a Rune Lord had won. The next issue being What if the Second Darkness had begun. This would also fill the growing demand for epic or at lest higher level adventures.

Just had to put this out there for your consideration.

TTFN DRE

During 3.5 I always went sorcerer because I just loved the concept, but I would always tell players go Wizard, it was the better class realistically. I improved the sorcerer as time went on, in many cases the way Pathfinder did except maybe a little too powerful.

With Pathfinder however I have to play a little more. I love what they did with the Sorcerer, and I'd go Arcane or Fey, most other bloodlines are good but don't appeal to me, and I think the Elemetal bloodline is far too meh to get the true feal of either the Sorcerer or Elementalist. On the other hand I do like a lot of the Wizard improvements.

Looking at the classes side by side I'd say to decide between concept over flexablity. In power the classes are equel, but the wizard edges out in raw flexablity. The sorcere now has both concept and power in equel mesure, but you are restricted to that theme.

TTFN DRE

I'm very open with letting stuff in. I've always been bit surprised by a lot of 3x GM's and Players who support open gaming and want 3rd to be accepted and prised but then turn around and not allow any 3pp stuff into the game because of balance.

In any case I have to really give it to the guys at Paizo as I thought I'd be updating a lot of classes from 3pp pub. (forget Wizards non-core classes which for the most part I found kinda eh)but have found that most need only a small tweek or non at all. List of classes that came out fine:

Tinker, Hunter, Runemaster, (Warcraft RPG)
Cavaler (GR)
Seductress (Conan)

Classes that need work, and by this I mean just added stuff each level.

Kingdom of Kalamar (all)
Witch (GR although I'm thinking of combining various attempts at this class into one, oddly enough this is good way of updating the class with a little less work)
OA (all)
Knight (R&R Excaliber) this is my fav. version of the Knight, although it was a bit underpowered and too close to the Fighter even in 3.x so I gave it the weapon power from Rokugon Samurai which made unique and equal. Now I have to bumb him up to Pathfinder level. I'm thinking of getting that 3pp book with the new Knight class and combine the two. but I'm still working on that.

Then their are rules. I've highly modified conan's dodge and parry to work with Pathfinder and like the results, but find making a custom character sheet a reall pain.

Feats, I've yet to see a really really broken feat, however because of Wizards, and even Paizo to a lesser extent, I can tell you of a few feats that simply are worthless and obsolete now. Had a pdf archer book which I loved that let fire more then one arrow at the cost of a feat per arrow. Well Wizards took care of that with one feat when 3.5 came out. Its not that Wizards way isn't better or worse, but after that became an option no one used the old feat.

So count me in as someone who lets just about anything in. I don't have powergamers in my group so maybe I have it easy, but I have found that most 3pp came out with fairly balanced stuff. If anything the creep came more from wizards then anything else.

TTFN DRE

These are fantastic! My compliments.

In fact, unless you have powerful characters, that girl is going to annihilate the characters so badly that their ancestors will die retroactively.

LOL thats a good one KaeYoss I'll have to remeber that. But the group I was in didn't have a problem with her. Of course tthinking about it we were play testing beta at the time, so the classes were stronger then 3.5. Do you think the overpower isssue still holds with classes now?

TTFN DRe

Just curious how many people out there would like all of the melee characters converted to a similar system that Tome of Battle follows? Would you want a more magical, aname style fighting system or do you prefer the larger mechanic gap between Fighters and Wizards?

I'd prefer something more like Iron Heros then Tome of Battle. At lest in theory, I'll admit I haven't gone though Iron Heros enough to say its fantastic, but I got very little out of Tome of Battle. In fact it'd be collecting dust if it wasn't for one of my players who uses it alot.

I think the aname style has been done to death. But that's just me.

Also on the main subject one thing I really loved about WoW RPG was tech, and fantasy tech like that, (which by the way works fine in pathfinder both class and system I needed almost no conversion whatsoever)an option that's just never been core or in the system at all save for clockwork monsters. Go figure Frogboy I have to admit I was wrong, the more I think about it the more fun this topic is. I think initial reaction to it was the fact that almost everyone was tired of testing. And just the thought of a revised edition made everyone collectivly grown.

TTFN DRe

Upon thinking about it one thing I would like to see incorparated in the game, don't know how radical it'd be but some sort of system for being hurt.

Right now I've house ruled a system where you get a -1,2,4,8 ect. to skill checks when your hit points go down by 1/2,1/4/ ect.

Also when you hit 0 hit points, assuming you recover and life, one Ability goes down by one for good. Yeah some spells can fix such things and I use the conan system when at certain levels all ablities go up by one to compensate but I find that this gives a level of gritty realism to the game. The reason for all this is because I found that when the group starts clicking and works as a team the idea of 0 hit points no longer causes fears or worry. Their is no price for going down except having to wait until your back up again.

Now don't get me wrong my house rule works fine and I like it, but by no means is it a full system for getting hurt and having lasting scars for doing it. But I think such a sub-system would be a welcomed addition.

TTFN DRe

I wouldn't mind seeing a combat system that took into account not just attacking a monster but where exactly you attacked it. Damaging a creatures legs would have different effects (reduced movement) than attacking its body (full damage) or arms (lowered attack) or head (daze/confusion). I know that these effects can be achieved with various feats (hamstring) and such but I'd like to see it built into the core mechanic. I'd like monsters listed with descriptions of what actually happens if you damage or disable different parts of it. I think that it would bring an interesting dynamic to combat.

This would be great, however you would need a much less complicated system, Pathfinder is quicker then 3.5, mostly, but chcking for what kind of damage would add a level of complextiy that would slow the game up. On the other hand one could argue a somewhat more vague system based on called shots.

I call a head shot -5 to hit, crit kills, otherwise blind, dazed or lost nose (GM's choice).

TTFN DRE

What do you want? What are you pushing for?

What do I want? I want it to be a loooong way off, thats what I want. Seriously 3rd edition has to have been the most refinded and amended system in the history of gaming. You have 3X offical, Conan, Arcana Evolved, True 20, a host of smaller sub-systems and setting overhauls with new classes (so much so that Pathfinder had to imporove the core to keep up). Lets give it a rest with updating and imporoving. At lest offically yeah I'll admit I'm house ruling alot of stuff.

Its not that their isn't room for improvement, Pathfinder isn't perfect, no game is, but don't see the need for any massive changes. If anything I think Pathfinder 2.0 or 1.5 or whatever, will look more like Beta. But if you want a radical shift how about this.

More skills! For the love of mercy I'm really getting sick of the push for fewer and fewer skills in gaming in general. I have disable device now I can pick locks and take apart a clock work as well as make a wagon fall apart. I know I'm in the miniorty and I can house rule more skills in (which I do) but it just annoys me to no end.

In any case like I said I thing the next editon, in 2020 I hope, will look more like beta, perhaps a little more radical on the non-magical power side, a few more combat and skilled classes that are not just Fighter and Rogue. Maybe something like a Based Magical Save insted of the fort/will/reflex but in general more akin to beta.

TTFN DRE,

PS oh yeah excpet for one thing, by the time 2.o comes out (in 2020) they'll only be three skills in the game, They'll be called This, That, and That Other Thing, and most will argue that That Other Thing can be folded into That as a skill.

Not sure what you mean by pitfalls in the Advanture. I've played RoTRL during the Beta testing with a large mix of classes, both tested and classes form other sources. I'm also working out a few house rules, and updating classes for Pathfinder RPG to begain RoTRL again with a new group of players. The Advanture is sound and playes out well. Paizo is very good at making paths that flow well from one advanture to another.

Depending on what your GMing style is, and from what I can read its very much story based, then you might what to play up minior subplots within the story, and remember that while it can be pluged into any 'standard' fantasy setting it was built with Paizo home setting. Names places history. This can be an issue for some, although in my new game I'm using my home setting, its all easily pluged in, so it worries me not.

In general I would advise you to take things slow, have players play on the slow xp progression, until they get used to the system. I perfer the slow track so I can do side adv. as well. In point of fact in my upcoming game I'm seriosly thinking of playing both RoTRL and 2nd Darkness at the same time (distance and timing not being a factor as its my home setting) and the slow track allows for this.

I would also recomend the slow progression due to the fact that RoTRL is 3.5 I was impressed how easily Pathfinder works with 3.5 stuff but I'm sure issues will crop up in the fine detals. Here are some basic on the fly rule of thumbs.

Monster CR's, lower them by one.

If your going by Pathfinder rules standard each baddie figure out CMB and CMD, everything else will come fairly easily with just a little bit of logic. Skill conversion can be done with a judgement call. Hit Points go with a best guess a the table. but the CMB that'll crop up when you lest expect it and it does require some calculations.

PC's and NPC's with hero levels will have a lot of blank spots on their write ups. If you think he's that important rework the charcter. This mainly entails addding class features.

Hope this helps

TTFN DRE

Well speaking for myself I do love new Classes and Races, however I will admit that most 3.5 classes work well with Pathifinder, and the ones that I see that need updating will be updated, either by myself or by 3pp, so I can see why you wouldn't want to simply go that root, lest not in total. I'm thinking of stating an on line publishing company myself, lest until company cut backs, so while I have time I no longer have the cash to do so. So I suppose no harm in giving you one of my ideas.

Side Advantures Series. Small quick advantures based on small story seeds. A treasure tid bit that an Orc King wants and sends part of his Hoard after the PC's that have nothing to do with a GM's overall big advanture path but that can be put in when he needs a quick nights advanture or between published 'adv. paths'.

On a related note we often get Monster books how about Treasure Books. Not just random tables mind you, but a Treasure book with a sort of Monster book feel. If I'm understanding the new awards system in Pathfinder, it would lend itself to such a book. Moreover you don't have to pack it with magic items, mundane trasures are often the hardest to come up with, but one could give normal objects not justGP value but lore and history that might create new adv. for the players. Or problems. The example above might be because the players found a Crown of Leadership that Orcish lore claims will give them the power to control all the lands. Funny thing is while the crown is the legenday crown, and while it has a lot of GP value (so much so the PCs may not want to part with it) it just a crown, no magic nothing special. The Orc who first wore the crown gave it credit for his victores and legend has since always followed it.

Legend Lore Treasure Books like that make both good reading and a useful tool for GM's.

Hope this helps.

TTFN DRE

Andre Caceres wrote:

I do have some suggestions if you really do find it more and more of a problem.

1. Limit the number of PC who can play a non-human or/and limit the number of a certain race to one (elf for example) to show how rare they are.

2. All human PC but the other fantasy races exist, in fact you have to go the Elf city in the game. This give you a race that your aren't supposed to just kill, and allows you to show just how differnt and magical they are. Then in your next game (with the same players of course) start allowing that race.

3. Kinda like #2 start your game as all human party, but when people start getting killed, and if they are in the correct kingdom, then let them play other races. So if player X dies on Avalon, let him play an elf next.

4. All humans with differnt stat ajustments like the Conan game, which is very easily compatable race wise, and gives humans options. I do this alreay because I got tired of 50 subraces of Elves, but all humans are alike gentically and culturally.

5. Go the other direction, take any of the above but an all racial party, in which humans are rare, or at lest rare in this kingdom, or even better humans are the bad guys. In Elf lands they could look down on savage half-humans as thugs.

Hope this helps.

Unfortunately, I don't think it will.

Let me address your points:
1Let me address your points:
1.) How does the poor gamemaster fairly choose amounst his friends who gets to play the token non-human character?
2.) That would be cool, and would allow Elves to be like there root form - the Celtic Sidhe and Dwarves to be more like the Norse "Dvergar" that is their original source - namely distant, otherworldly and powerful.
3.) Character death is kind of rare in our campaigns. So this option does not work quite a well.
4.) This path can lead to Real World arguements about racism too. :(
5.) My problem is that having any be "Always Chaotic Evil" leads to some dark ideas that I would rather not deal with. (Now, having a nation or culture be evil is another matter

Hmmmm, okay try this.....

1. First give your players the option, sit them at the table say, okay this is a human focused game, only one non-human PC. If it gets down to a fight, random roll.
2. Sounds like this might be your best option.
3. Okay, maybe not death, but people get sick of their characters, or better have the group split up (I often do this) for a mission. When this happens allow new characters into the story (played by other members of your group, in effect making NPCs into PCs) When the group gets back together have you can write off charcters as down time or other missions. This also helps when someone dies, as the 'replacment now has history.
4. Agreed, you do need mature thinking players for this, however if you base your races on mythic cultures this can still work.
5. Not always, its a sterotype on the part of the PC race.

TTFN DRE

At their best non-human races give us role playing oppotunities.

Example, One of the best games I ever had was one of my early 3.o games. I had one human player who was basically playing John Wyane's character in the Searchers (if you haven't seen it do yourself a favor and do so, if you have seen it then you understand how cool and complex a character he was doing). To complicate matters we had an half-orc in the game who never Role Played before. He got into it, but then began to realize not only did the Wyane character hate his guts, but who, he read up on the Half-Orc a bit. Orcs raid and rape humans, thu half-orcs. The player said told me 'no, I was raised by orcs, and humans raided our villiage, and raped my mom' He did not reveal that to the Wyane character. The game led to an examination of Orcish cuture, one which the Wyane character understood well and could even fit into it if needed.

The fact that Orcs don't really exist allowed us to role play without stepping on anyones toes or break down to just racial jokes/sterotypes. I don't think thats a major concern as games like Conan have multiple human races with stat adjustments, but I have heard some people on these boards accuse that game to almost be racist due to the sorce matterial by Howard not the company mind you. In either case that is an eample of non-human race at their best.

The down side is number chruching. Its a game and I play for numbers everybit as the next guy, but racial characters fall apart when players take them for power X or boost Y then paly the character against type because he didn't want to really play that race, he just wanted power X and boost Y. In this case I'll admit it gets harder to defend other races. If being an Elf means nothing except numbers, you might as well have a +1 long sword shaped like a four foot long +1, with a sharp edge.

For all that I'm still on the side of races, and even allow LizardFolk, Centaurs, Orcs, goblins and hob-goblins (not the standard type) into the game because even when players don't give the best performance as such race, most players still at lest attempt to make the race important.

I do have some suggestions if you really do find it more and more of a problem.

1. Limit the number of PC who can play a non-human or/and limit the number of a certain race to one (elf for example) to show how rare they are.

2. All human PC but the other fantasy races exist, in fact you have to go the Elf city in the game. This give you a race that your aren't supposed to just kill, and allows you to show just how differnt and magical they are. Then in your next game (with the same players of course) start allowing that race.

3. Kinda like #2 start your game as all human party, but when people start getting killed, and if they are in the correct kingdom, then let them play other races. So if player X dies on Avalon, let him play an elf next.

4. All humans with differnt stat ajustments like the Conan game, which is very easily compatable race wise, and gives humans options. I do this alreay because I got tired of 50 subraces of Elves, but all humans are alike gentically and culturally.

5. Go the other direction, take any of the above but an all racial party, in which humans are rare, or at lest rare in this kingdom, or even better humans are the bad guys. In Elf lands they could look down on savage half-humans as thugs.

Hope this helps.

TTFN DRE

I don't think the Archer has an ability every level. Lots of Iron heroes classes have some sort of token pool (so put simply, the archer has an aim token pool which is increased by taking more time to aim) which allows them to enhance their abilities (I beleive the Archer can get to ignore armour, etc) so they may not translate very well into Pathfinder class abilities.

Hmmmmmm? I'll have to dig out my copy. Token pool sounds like I'll have to port a whole new mechanic to the game. Might be too much work. However I could keep the ablity simple, give a +1 to aim per round he takes with a max equle to his Dex. mod. As for ignoring armor I've actually toyed with that for my conversion, in my case it would be Ignore Armor AC 1 about every five levels, so around 20th level they get Ignore AC 4 or 5 depending on which level I start this at. That along with the two Archer classes I already have, and which I liked in 3.5 already, I might just have a fairly good Pathfinder Archer.

Thanks Wintergreen this helps.

TTFN DRE