This - and many similar issues - is solved by viewing square occupancy as incomplete. That is... a person occupies a portion of a 5ft square, not the whole thing. The person is dynamic, moving about within that space at will. My rule is to mentally view that position within a 5ft square always benefits the occupant.
So, at will the person within the final square of obscuring mist can elect to occupy a point within that square very close to the outside edge, and make their attacks unhindered. That benefits them. They can also elect to occupy a point deepest within their square, forcing their opponent to attack with interference. Again, that benefits the occupant.
I don't require actions to move about in the square, and I don't (as DM or player) talk about it. It's just mechanical detail in the background that explains and enables literal edge-conditions like this one.
Jim Groves wrote:
Reading in advance and replying to this having read ahead... you did splendidly. I'm not an argumentative fellow. I just like to register why my opinions are what they are... just as much as I like others to do the same.
Yes, still-more-vancian rules are a deal-breaker for me. As you've sussed out, because you and I are looking for different things in supplements. So be it. I'll never be offended by someone deliberately lunching at McDonald's when there's a Burger King right next door. I just recognize their irreparably deluded and make a mental note to never henceforth trust them with any responsibilities that require cogitation. <Grin>
Not much to say about my WotC reference, especially since you won't discuss them in any context. In case my point somehow contained some sort of slant or bias I didn't intend, all I was trying to express is the historical background of where Psionics Unleashed came from (the SRD). I'm neither a fanboy nor an edition-warrior. Shrug.
Anyway, hey, I'm totally okay with both of us getting our dream products, or just you - really - since I've got metric ass-tonnes of RPG material I'll never live long enough to touch. Variety is the spice of life.
Jim Groves wrote:
I'd love to see Paizo try their hand at a psychic magic system.
I'd far, far rather see Paizo try their hand at something different. For instance Incarnum. A lot of people didn't like the fluff, and mechanically the book was ultra-conservative to the point that incarnum classes were far inferior to non-incarnum classes, but that's just details. Paizo could do a NEW type of magic that works DIFFERENTLY and I'd be insanely excited.
Part of what I like about psionics is that it isn't vancian. It's different. Part of what I like about Tome of Battle martial initiators is that they aren't just like all the other martial classes. There's a fun new mechanic to play with.
I'd rather buy a book full of ideas like Witches having hexes and Inquisitors having Judgments than a book full of feats or spells. New territory cool. More stuff for existing territory less cool.
See... I'm of the opinion that really, it shouldn't be terribly hard to abstract things down to "were-whatever". You look like a whatever, you get one or two natural attacks from the whatever, and that's about it. Doesn't matter much what the whatever is. Getting too mired in uniquely creating templates for different animals is - in my opinion - a mistake.
That's word-count that should be spent focusing on "how do we make lycanthropy fun, exciting, balanced, and playable?"
I've been trying to put this into words the last few times this has been brought up re: "official".
In-context, the PFRPG Core Rulebook is "official" because we - the players - were comfortable with 3.5e and accepted Paizo's polishing that ruleset. Paizo didn't create their core rules, WotC did. While I haven't touched pure 3.5e since PFRPG beta, I strongly suspect that if Paizo had produced their own product not based on the SRD, we wouldn't be having this conversation.
What I'm saying is that a HUGE amount of what makes PFRPG Core "official" to many of us is that it had eight years of playtesting and theorycrafting behind its revision. It IS 3.5e+ and that's why we chose it.
Well, Dreamscarred Press' Psionics Unleashed IS the exact same lineage. It's the 3.5e SRD psionics product with eight to ten years of experience under its belt, updated for more modern gaming understanding. It's trustworthy because of its origin.
Is it a Paizo-endorsed product? No. Really, nobody gets to make the "official" Paizo anything except Paizo, unless it's a licensee like WizKids and the minis.
Is it the update of the "official" psioncs ruleset that matches what we're all playing at core, for the same reasons? Absolutely. The bona fides are identical.
I trust Paizo's original work, like the APG, UC, and UM. Per wordcount, the issues are very slim. Same thing goes for Dreamscarred's Psionics Expanded. Shrug.
Nobody who works at Paizo likes psioncs material. James has repeatedly stated that the rules don't have a "champion" at Paizo who might push for their adoption or use. Paizo has enough to do incorporating their own "new" rules into products without including anyone else's.
I don't expect Paizo to ever use anything from Dreamscarred's books, and I fully expect that whenever Paizo gets around to making new magic rules their will have no similarity style-or-mechanics to psionics as we know them. That's what no-champion means.
So this is as official as it gets, or is ever going to get. Some day then Paizo name may appear on something intended (by them) to be sort-of-kind-of what psionics is, but it won't BE psionics. It'll be P'zionics.
I dunno. I'm not a fan of minis beyond the Huge category. Down at Small and Medium there's just no substitute... it's hard to find anything the right size that fits a given monster. But once you start getting to 4" bases the minis hang over other squares anyway so size precision ceases being a concern. At that size you can go to a toy store and pick up various cheap things that fit a lot of roles. $30+ for a mini that's going to be used once just doesn't make a lot of sense to me.
I have hundreds of minis now but I still primarily want common things, not specific-freak monsters.
That's just my opinion.
Your player is very much gaming the system. There is an intention with the Ready action, and that intention is that you sacrifice some of your turn in order to precisely time your response.
There isn't (to my knowledge) a list of specific triggers but as long as the players understand the intention of the rule, it isn't needed.
What I'd do is explain to your player what the intention is. If that doesn't cut it, tell him/her that their trigger event must be a reaction; they have to pick an event that happens external to themselves. If "I ready for when I feel like it" was good enough, the requirement to specify a condition wouldn't be present. You ready for an enemy to come through the door. You ready for an enemy to cast a spell, make an attack, move into range. You ready for someone invisible to become visible. You ready for something someone ELSE does, not your own lips flapping.
Just because you don't have Int 28 shouldn't limit you as a player.
I have smart players, I have less-than-smart players. I have outgoing players, I have introverted players. Sometimes the smart players play stupid characters. Sometimes the introverted players play social characters. I refuse to force a player to only play character that are like him/her.
If I have an introverted player who can't actually imagine HOW the character "schmoozes the guards somehow", that's what Diplomacy is for. Roll.
Same goes for sub-average players and wizards (for instance). Can't solve the puzzle yourself? Fine, your character can make an Int check or something similar.
I don't make my scrawny players literally lift weights before their barbarian can climb a wall. No, the barb gets a Climb check. Why should social skills be any different?
I say it again. Why should social skills be any different?
I get it there's a panacea, a hypothetical perfect role-play game where everyone IS their character and is always in-character and never metagames or applies real-world sensibilities or experience their character wouldn't have. I get it. But that doesn't necessarily make for FUN.
I encourage and I reward players who role-play and try to flesh out encounters, but only to a degree. I don't generally reward the goal... I reward via XP or story rewards.
Note: I also don't encourage my bright players to play their tree-stump-dumb characters smart. Sorry. "Really, Bob, you think Ungorthungor The Mighty would come up with that complicated plan? Really? With Int 7? Really? Fine. Roll an Int check and we'll see." Fair is fair.
Restatement of opening statement:
TPK Games wrote:
3) As much as some people complain about Facebook, it really is a necessary evil. If you want read, get on Facebook. If you want to help publishers spread the word of their products, get on Facebook. In short, get on Facebook.
I want to take a moment to be clear on my position here. What I object to is any content or value that is exclusively available via Facebook. I don't care if Paizo (for instance) has a Facebook page, but the moment they stop using their own forums and start using Facebook is the day I cease having any contact with their discussion groups.
Link to? Sure, whatever floats your boat. Rely upon? No.
Why? In short I elect not to join a community that functions purely to aggregate and sell my personal information - even information I don't realize I'm making available. Any company that forces or even rewards that I sacrifice my personal privacy isn't a company I need to do business with.
1) I'm planning on tagging my backlog to make searching the site via tags/categories more efficient..BUT: Every moment I spend tagging, I can't write new reviews. What would you want me to prioritize? Tagging the backlog or writing new reviews? I can't judge what would be more useful to you.
More reviews. Not that you're slacking, of course. More on this in answer #5.
2) What type of review are you most interested in? Short, Bullet Point-length files? Big books? All? I'm asking since e.g. Razor Coast for example will eat A LOT of time and I usually print out my books. Since the print book will come in summer, that would require reading the monster on screen when I could wait and read it in print.
Whatever you like. The more a product is interesting to you, the more a review will matter. If you're not interested in a product to start with, it's a waste of your time, or nearly so.
3) Do you want me to join facebook/connect the page to fb? I don't like the platform one bit, but might bite the bullet if you folks tell me to.
No. Also, no. More no. All the "no" you can eat. The right tool for a job. When I'm looking for a grocery store, I don't look at my friends' profiles and find out what grocery stores they like. I research what foods I like already, then research what stores carry those foods. In RPG terms, if I want a review site, I'd go to a review site. Social engin^H^H^H^H^Hnetworking doesn't value-add.
4) Have you ever clicked on a link on my page to the respective product I reviewed? If not, what would make you? I'll be brutally honest: Reviewing as many files as I do, even with my at best erratic sleep-rhythm, takes a lot of time (it's almost a full-blown job by now) and at least being able to afford a pdf once in a while via affiliate sales would be nice.
No. Not likely to. Please see more in #5.
5) Where do you read my reviews? Endzeitgeist.com? GMS magazine? Nerdtrek? Here? OBS? d20pfsrd.com's shop? Pathways? Lou Agresta's RPGaggression? What would make you visit my site?
I'm going to be honest.
Here. Paizo.com is where I buy my RPG material (aside from what I buy retail at my FLGS). There is huge value in your reviews (thank you, by the way) being nicely attached to products here. I wander around, browse the SSG offerings, find myself attracted to a title or cover, read a little product description, then read your review (and/or whatever reviews are present). Then I buy the product or don't. Replace SSG with whatever 3PP and the story holds.
Paizo.com is where I find the material, and where I expect to gather my information about the material. Having reviews where the materials are just makes sense.
So, while I thank you immensely for your efforts, I have to confess that I find the idea of an off-site collection of reviews to be... backwards. It's sort of like d20pfsrd having to pull some materials because they opened a store selling product. But... the main draw of the site was that it was complete. Just like the main point of your reviews (to me) is that they are handily connected to the products.
I don't mean to rain on your parade or in any way diminish what you've done for the community. We all owe you. However, just like your reviews being impartial, I won't sugar-coat this and pretend the idea of your site is something I can wrap my head around.
Vaughan. Pett. Logue.
And yes, when those three write a Paizo AP together (just the three of them), they can go ahead and use the acronym free of charge. I'd love to see an AP where they round-robin the books, each one out-creepy-ing the previous book's author. By number six I'm sure we'd all be insane.
Very much looking forward to when Erik has more time!
Keep on looking.
It is my observation that at Paizo, workload is created to completely fill up any available time, and often marginally more that that which is available.
It is this principle that allows the FAQ system to be understaffed for most of any given calendar year and yet adventure path books are (usually) on time. If it isn't a new miniature line it'll be a new card game. If it's not a new card game it'll be a boxed starter set. If it's not a boxed starter set, it'll be... whatever. Paizo never stops.
Hope your teacher doesn't click the link. You got it wrong.
Also - and I'm just reacting as someone proofreading would - I'd recommend expanding a bunch of it to explain many of the concepts you refer to. The idea of an RPG should be reasonable to assume your teacher understands, but "supporting the Third Party d20 Market" won't mean anything. "What's a d20 market?" If you re-read your essay from the perspective of someone who doesn't already know all this, you'll discover a bunch of it will be confusing.
I'd recommend doubling your word-count to make things clearer and more engaging for the reader.
There's a sidebar in the Animal Archive which has wording that makes it clear Paizo does not intend to rule on this. It references that some DMs do and some DMs don't control companions and familiars. By putting that in print it makes it obvious that Paizo intends this to be up to the person running the table to decide.
How that works with PFS I have no idea.
"What I am calling for is, a single segment of the forums where 3rd party publishers make their announcements, to support a single product image by registered 3rd party publishers."
Not to beat the dead horse, but that single segment of the forums is called... the store. I'm not sure if you're aware, but each product on the store gets a product discussion thread. It's kind of... exactly what you want.
In fact, Paizo has gone to quite some effort to adapt the store to support 3rd-party companies' needs. For instance, Dreamscarred Press had a psionics book that they elected to release as a subscription. But the full PDF for $x and you get the individual parts of it as they're released, then the full PDF once all the parts are out. That functionality just... came to be, as far as I know because Dreamscarred asked. Oh, and people could still buy the individual parts without the full subscription. Paizo == awesome.
So if the store doesn't do something you need it to do, I'd suggest that would be a great topic for discussion. The forum on the other hand is for discussing, not advertising, though the line is sometimes blurry. Where I'm coming from is that I think the line should remain blurry, and not be permitted to become any more rigidly defined, especially in the direction of more direct advertisement. I can shop when I want to shop, and I can discuss when I want to discuss. Blending the two is done in the shopping area.
Who? Evidently I'm Amgish. And Silverhair2008 bought himself a vowel. <Grin>
But seriously, I respect the OP's right to his opinion. But Marc Radle has the answer, which I pointed out in my first post. The store lets you do what you ask. This isn't the store. This is the forum where we discuss. Not where we advertise.
Right tool for the job. Paizo has a place where you can do what you want to do. Do it there.
Then why, oh why does this forum dedicated to third-party publishers, have such terrible support for Images, Video or Rich formatting?
Why? Because the forum system doesn't support in-line images and video, or rich-formatted text. The forum isn't for advertising products, particularly. That's what the store is for.
One then gets to ask "why is that the case?" I've got to think it's deliberate. I'd think the simple answer is: to keep the forums clean, reliable, fast, and easily moderated.
We don't have to dink around with annoying (ie. large / animated / out-of-genre) signature graphics here. We don't have to dink around with annoying meme pictures in place of replies. We don't have to dink around with people embedding their latest crappy YouTube video in the middle of a useful thread. We don't have to deal with exploits due to malformed text breaking the rich-text parser.
We don't - in short - have to be stuck with the same annoying crap forums that everyone else gets. vBulletin was cool back when fewer obnoxious people had Internet access. Paizo built this system from the ground up to do exactly what we want and what we need.
In my not-even-remotely-humble opinion it should stay this way. Keep your pictures in your product announcement. Why I'd need a video to sell me an RPG product I don't comprehend. Just because the web is full of spastic short-attention-span-theater rich media doesn't mean this forum should be.
If your product is the typical RPG product, it consists of text and some supporting pictures. So show us you can DO text (and a couple supporting pictures) in your product announcement page. On the store.
If this is where Pazio’s fans are going to get there news and announcements from third-party publishers, why can’t we add a simple picture of the product we are announcing?
Mmmm. Maybe this is why you want rich media? <Grin> Just poking gentle fun.
Know what's depressing?
15 people marked this as a favorite.
Those people are depressing. Every single one of them.
DAMN RUDE? It's damn rude to invite a bunch of people over to your house and promise to feed them and when they arrive you've made lasagna. Only they're lactose intolerant.
It's damn rude to not let the diabetic guy bring his own sugar-free foods and drinks.
It's damn rude to assume that because it's your house you should feel free to dictate the actions and preferences of everyone in it.
Look, it's one thing to have rules. "No smoking" is reasonable. In game terms that might be "no evil characters allowed". It's entirely another thing to apply your personal preferences to your GUESTS. "I like cherry pie so we're having cherry pie." That's the game equivalent of "no gunslingers, no elves, no bards, and no greataxes".
It's your house. It's your game-world.
It's your JOB to adapt the game-world such that it's interesting and enticing to your players. If that means adapting the game-world so it's not fun for you to run, it's time to invite new players to your house/game. But if you only allow things in your game that you like, you're being a dictator. And by dictator I mean... really rude host.
Q: Do we need 45% to be female?
Aside from all of the gender-equality sensibility other folks have already brought up, there's the simple and obvious fact that miniatures aren't just for PCs. That's right... it doesn't matter if 99.9% of players are male and 99.9% the characters they play are male and if 99.9% of the female characters they play are cross-dresses posing as males.
Because NPCs. The end.
I don't care if your personal world doesn't include females. Mine does. Some of them are good, some of them are bad. Some are allies, some are enemies. Some are wizards, some are fighters. I need miniatures that represent a balanced world, and that mandates roughly half of humanoid minis should be female.
disliking homosexual behavior is evil
Let's get real here for a moment.
Disliking vegetables isn't evil. Scorning or discriminating against someone who likes vegetables and trying to make it financially or societally difficult for that someone to eat vegetables is. If you don't like vegetables, we're all okay with that... just don't interfere with other people and their salads.
Now. Paizo. Paizo doesn't encourage anyone to eat vegetables. They defend vegetable-eating as an option. That's it. They do not deny you or anyone else the right to not eat vegetables. Go nuts. Be a carnivore... I know I am. In no way does Paizo impede your right to dislike anything. Just don't expect the right to evangelize your personal fetishes (ie. intolerance of others).
Tolerance is an ideal. Acceptance is an ideal. Barring common-sense exceptions (ie. where a behaviour is harmful), a healthy person is tolerant and accepting of other people and their preferences. Murder is harmful. Child-molestation is harmful. Paizo clearly labels those as evil and rightly so. Sexual-orientation harms neither partner assuming - just as in hetero circumstances - consensual acts. And you know it.
So, how about we don't go around acting like Paizo should be supporting our personal prejudices? The idea of boycotting a gaming hobby company because you so desperately loathe the acts that don't involve you in any way is... kind of silly.
Malachi Silverclaw wrote:
On the previous page I posted...
ALL of the following is simulationist as opposed to gameist in nature.
This is a problem of definition. TL;DR, stop here.
"In 400 rounds, the result of a natural 1 (indicating a fumble threat) will occur 160 times, 20 times for each of the 8 attacks."
You are including frequency in your definition of probability, which is your right to do but is hugely misleading.
Assuming dice that are not biased, every roll has precisely a 5% chance of threatening a fumble. Let's ignore confirmation for the time being.
In 400 rounds with 8 attacks, the fighter makes 3,200 attacks. Of those, yes, 160 will threaten a fumble. In the same 400 rounds, your commoner makes 400 attacks, of which 20 threaten.
The fighter has a 5% chance of threatening a fumble.
The commoner has a 5% chance of threatening a fumble.
These - you may note - are identical.
Now, you (and others) have chosen to inject an element of time into all of this, by asking yourself "how many times does X threaten in a given fixed period of time?" I can understand that urge but it leads (IMHO) to a false conclusion.
Yes, in 40 minutes of constant uninterrupted swinging, the fighter will likely drop his sword more times than a commoner will. He will hit himself more times. He will burst into flames more times. Yes, granted.
But let's inject some realism into the situation, if we're going to measure probability over unit time. Let's talk slot machines. You've got a fixed probability of payout per pull of the arm. You and I walk into the casino and we each pull a lever once. We both have the exact same chance of winning. I leave. You stay. You pull the lever 19 more times.
Q: Do you have a better probability of walking out with more money than when you went in than I did?
A: No. You still have the same probability relative to me and my single pull.
Q2: Do you have a better probability of the machine having paid out to you than I did?
A2: Absolutely. You pulled 20 times... more frequently than I did, so odds are increased that you'll have a payout. Unfortunately (for you), odds are also increased that you'll have more losses.
You don't pull the arm more times to increase your odds of winning.
Similarly you don't view it that the chance of a fighter fumbling has increased because he makes more swings. It's the exact same scenario.
Again, yes, you can rightly point out that you will experience more fumbles at the gaming table in a night if you're playing a fighter than if you're playing a commoner. (Having introduced a unit of time.) You can also rightly say that you don't like that because it's a bummer and you don't want a once, let alone more than once.
The original complaint was regarding the realism of a fighter being more likely to fumble than a commoner. An airline pilot is also more likely to die in a plane crash than a submarine captain is.
Dice are used in this game to generate random events. Your bonuses are what expresses the bias of your abilities. Your confirmation roll is what allows things like The Flying Walendas. They're damned good at crossing tightropes. The might slip more often - over time - than Joe Average because they cross more tightropes - and longer ones in more difficulty circumstances - but they recover from it more often. Still, cross enough tightrope and everyone's going to go splat sooner or later.
I find the math here actually very elegant and representing the gaming model.
Let's break it down to imagine what this looks like at the extremes:
Scenario #2 - fighter versus a wall. The fighter hits the wall a lot more often and his grip slackens more often but he almost always recovers in the confirmation roll (due to his bonuses).
Scenario #3 - commoner versus a a dragon with a bunch of defensive spells and gears up. The commoner can't hit the dragon unless he's stupid-lucky and rolls a 20. He'll still lose his grip 5% of the time but every single* time that happens, he drops his sword.
Scenario #4- fighter versus the same dragon. The fighter also never hits because this dragon is talented. Swing, swing, swing, swing. The fighter also loses his grip 5% of the time, but against this foe he's outclassed so he also drops his sword every single* time that happens.
So. At the extremes... at extremely low AC the fighter loses his grip as often as the commoner but fumbles rarely. << Lower odds of fumbling. At extremely high AC, the two suffer the same problem. << Same odds of fumbling.
But that models reality nicely. Yeah, the fighter drops his sword FASTER against the dragon than the commoner does. But he also swung it a whole lot more. He was a machine, swing, swing, swing. He valiantly tried every trick he knows but the dragon was just so good that within seconds... MUNCH. The fighter dropped his sword accidentally and was eaten. Meanwhile the commoner is lining up his second attempt.
Shrug. Models reality just fine for me.
But again, it's okay to just not like fumbles. My groups are afraid of them (we use Paizo's deck) but they all still get really excited when there's a threat, and always make a production out of revealing what the card says on confirms. The suffering of others is always entertaining, right? << Maybe I'm training future DMs.
*Ignoring natural 20s on confirmations for brevity. Why brevity is suddenly a goal after the last billion words I don't know.
Nicolas Logue wrote:
I can't tell you how much I've missed the banter between you and That Pretender To The Throne guy.
See? I just tried but nothing happened. Weird, isn't it?
But seriously, I'm just waiting for the day a Logue, Pett, Vaughan module is announced - nay, released - so I can be truly complete.
Congrats on surviving to see your ship out of stormy waters, with AweomeLou at the helm.
Wind Chime wrote:
Bringing someone back from the dead is an evil act in my setting and requires another life as part of it's components.
I had a big reply for you but then caught this.
Your game style and setting is morbid, depressing, and doesn't sound rewarding. I totally get it that different people like different things, but personally all I'm getting is pessimist. You see the bad in every situation and you make the most of it. Personally as a player I wouldn't find that "gritty" or "realistic". I'd find it a great big downer.
I get consequences for action, but your world seems to be tailored to suit CN characters at best. You might want to poll your other players to see how they're enjoying the setting.
It's up to the player and the DM. If a player just decides that they're a crafter while the DM has a fast-paced adventure planned, the two are on different pages.
That said, it's up to the player. They're the ones who get to decide if they're satisfied by their feat choices. If the player wants 100% of the items they use to have been crafted by them, so be it.
Final comment, this may not be obvious, but I don't allow crafting to enable players to have more wealth than recommended. So yes, you can craft stuff at half the price you'd buy it for, but no, I won't let them end up with double recommended wealth. As players craft more, bad guys have less treasure to be looted and converted into components. The same logic goes for "sell & buy" versus "keep". If PCs keep everything they find, they'll end up with twice the wealth of a group that sells everything to buy different stuff. Sorry, no. I'm the DM and I can compensate to keep WBL sane.
Thanks to all for responding. I refuse to accept low standards for myself or the easy route, as I have set my standards high that's why I have a library of books in my house because I chose to pay for good deals and affordable prices.
Just for fun, I took a look at some of the items sitting on my shelf.
Paladium RPG, 4th printing, 1983, 274 pages of B&W, soft cover. $19.95
So. Are prices going up? Yes. Are you getting more for that money? Yes. Is Paizo's pricing cheaper per-page than buying either 3.5e Core & DMG or 4e Core & DMG? Yes. Does Paizo offer free alternatives that have never before existed anywhere near this scale? Yes.
I have learned not to ever trust a computer as I have had mine crash a few times losing everything I built up on it for years.
As an aside, I'd suggest that you - and pretty much all other computer users - learn enough to back up their data, so "a few crashes" doesn't turn into anything more than inconvenience. But this isn't about expense.
I also enjoy writing with pen and pencil rather typing stuff out, I am more creative that way. I'm speaking on behalf of all prices I see on this website, and like I've stated when will it stop?
It will never stop. Inflation doesn't work that way. Milk costs more than it did 30 years ago, water costs more than it did 30 years ago, and payphones aren't $.25 a call anymore. Fortunately average wages have gone up and overall standard of living has gone up for most people.
I feel some companies(Frog God) may be taking advantage of the Kickstarter also because alot of these kickstarter's these companies get more than they asked for in the first place. What are they doing with this extra money, and why have another one so soon after getting so much extra cash?
Interesting point-of-view. There's an interesting answer to that. In general there are two costs associated with an RPG product; development and production. There's a fixed cost of $X to actually write a product, edit it, commission artwork, pay for page layout, and other technical costs. Then there's a per-unit cost to physically make each of the books involved. The fixed cost won't ever be reduced by more people jumping into a Kickstarter but the fixed cost if spread over more customers becomes lower. The per-unit cost may be reduced if a print-run hits a large enough number that a print-shop offers a discount but I don't know that any of the Kickstarter projects have hit such numbers. We're still talking about a thousand or so books, tops.
So. There's an interesting thing I've seen happen whenever an RPG Kickstarter reaches its minimum-funding figure. All of the sudden the company involved starts offering FREE BONUS STUFF. It's really weird. "Stretch goals", they're called but you should call it FREE BONUS STUFF because that's what it is.
The company involved (say... Frog God Games) sees that while they originally required $100/book when they were expecting to be selling about 100 of them, realizes that the fixed cost portion becomes one tenth its original size (per customer) when there are 1,000 customers. So. That might "free up" a bunch of per-unit profit, right? 900 of those books don't have any fixed-cost overhead associated with them the margin is increased.
Well, that's when Frog God starts making DM screens and additional modules and a metric butt-tonne of goodies that are FREE BONUS STUFF. And everyone gets it. So... suddenly that freaky makes-SuperSlayer-suspcicious profit stuff goes out the door in the form of FREE BONUS STUFF that THANKS their customers for TRUSTING them.
The Reaper Bones minis Kickstarter I think says it all. Were you happy spending $100 to get 33 minis? Well, since so many people like you were happy, let's just make that something like 210 minis. For no additional expenditure. Also known as FREE BONUS STUFF.
All of this is an explanation of how nobody is ripping you off. If you pay attention, none of the RPG companies are getting rich. You don't hear about Lisa and Vic's yacht. You don't hear about Dreamscarred press buying a small island because they managed to sell two hundred copies of their hardcover rulebook. You don't hear that Reaper is buying Apple after taking in literally millions of dollars in pledges for Bones minis.
No. This is a small hobby and everyone involved is making modest profits - if they survive. Yes, every dollar out of your pocket feels important because it's your pocket, and that dollar could have bought you a fifth of a frapalatechinomocca foo-foo coffee. But nobody's screwing you.
I was trying to shop here the other night but I simply couldn't find a product that I thought was price fair so I canceled my order. In the end it just angers me, and I feel this is a hobby that is getting too expensive regardless of the cheap freebie shortcuts.
To be blunt, I'm sorry you have an incorrect perception of the reality of the situation. Frog God gives us the Tome of Horrors Complete, a 900 page book for $100. Paizo gives us the essential rules for less than any previous edition (accounting for color printing). Reaper give us the cheapest per-mini pricing ever. Adventure modules are no longer crappy black & white poorly-edited things that someone just smooshed out.
And you're angry.
Again, I'm sorry. Because evidently you are less fiscally lucky than the vast, vast majority of us. But more so because you're unwilling to take advantage of the unprecedented massive access to free RPG materials. It's like... back in the days when I was a kid and I had to make paper polyhedral dice because I couldn't afford plastic ones, only if I'd said "I don't like the way they're hollow, so now I'm angry."
Hopefully something in this wall of text will illuminate the reality... PFRPG has the absolute lowest entry requirements ever, and even if you insist on optional printed materials it's still massive value per dollar spent.
First of all, part of the charm of the psionics system is that it IS mechanically different. It's another way to manage limited resources that challenges the player to think of new tactics. That said, that's not for everyone.
Second, it needs be pointed out that while there is considerable overlap in what many psionic powers do relative to existing spells, that's absolutely, completely by design. dispel psionics, which works just fine on traditional magic, is absolutely essential. To deny the psionic system that mechanic would be ludicrous. Same with detect psionics. That said, the reason why they aren't literally the spells dispel magic and detect magic is because of the fluff you say you don't mind.
Once you get the essential staples covered, there are rather a lot of unique powers that the psionic system has that the divine/arcane magic system doesn't. While there are a lot of damage-dealing powers, they tend to work differently; the classic fireball isn't present, but instead you get neat things like energy missile.
It's worth mentioning that neither psionic grease nor psionic true strike exist as far as I know. Expansion is the equivalent of enlarge person but... well... it's personal, can enlarge you more than one size (if you can pay the power point cost), can be manifested as a swift action (if you can pay the power point cost), and can have a duration of 10 min/lvl (if you can pay the power point cost). So... iconic but clearly different utility. It's limited to the psychic warrior class power list, which is pretty much the gish / magus only created nearly a decade ago. So again, different.
You might consider picking up the system and actually trying it out. When and if you do, imagine the sorcerer class had never been written. That's what psionics is meant to be; a self-provided magic system that's a spontaneous caster. No gods, no books... just your own force of will.
Mark Hoover wrote:
Something like that, yes.
GM: the hallway you've been following ends with a 20x20 room made of ancient masonry. There is no sign of the mercenaries you have been following through the halls.
PC: I search for secret doors. Perception (rolls), 26.
GM: Well, your exhaustive search of the room reveals that the floor has some scuff marks, as though the heels of a body were dragged over the dirt. Following those scuffs, they suggest that the body was dragged through the wall. So, searching for more detail you eventually find that there's a passageway cleverly hidden in the a section of the brick-work. Had you not looked so hard, you would have easily missed the cracks around this secret door as they blend in with the rough bricks quite well. Having found your way out, it's child's play to find a counter-weighted area that needs to be pressed to open the door up.
Really, you're just using Perception similar to opposing a Stealth check. If you hit the number, the target is not hidden from you. "You catch a glimpse of movement from amongst the barrels and realize that your quarry is trying (unsuccessfully) to not be found."
That all said, part of what you've talked about isn't secret doors. It's problem-solving puzzle doors, which are something else entirely. Finding a console with a bunch of levers, or coloured gems, or coin slots, that's what you're talking about. There, the door may or may not be visible, but being hidden isn't important. What's important is pulling the slots in the right order, touching the gems in the right order, or sacrificing the right number of coins. A puzzle. Also known as: a lock. Puzzle doors should be beat by either a} the player(s) figuring out the puzzle or b} a Disable Device or Intelligence check. Not every player is good at puzzles (or likes them), and not every player is as smart as their character. Yes, I'm playing an Int 24 wizard. No, I don't have an IQ of 240. Gorgazag the Arcane Master of the Fifth Plane of Eternal Intellectual Brilliance should be able to figure out how to pull a few levers. Me? Honestly, I'd rather just go get a Mountain Dew from the fridge... anyone else want anything while I'm up? Oh... (rolls)... Gorgazag gets a 21 on an Int check... does he figure it out while I'm upstairs?
I'd like to see a stretch goal like Monte Cook did with his new setting, where x number of books go to either libraries or military bases, free of charge.
You know, I'd love that but really, look at the numbers involved. You're looking at about 200 books being printed, and that's B&W and colour combined. There just isn't a large enough run to give away a percentage that would be meaningful.
Now... how about printing a copy or two extra and "accidentally" shipping them to Paizo so their staff have them laying around as resources?
Well glad I did not buy psionics expanded.
Actually, I'm keeping my order for this, for a couple reasons. One, to support Dreamscarred. Two, because PU and PE in the same format will work out good for players at the table while I'll use my special-edition ultra-F-ing-awesome version that I paid for.
Likely options in no particular order.
1} Paladin resigns from the Pathfinder Society, nukes lich.
2} Paladin realizes lich doesn't have phylactery present, leaves to find it.
3} Paladin petitions Pathfinders to have lich's membership revoked.
4} Paladin asks his patron deity what path he is to take, obeys.
5} Paladin waits.
Look. This is just another "what does a paladin do when his Lawful requirement is at odds with his Good requirement" situation. It assumes an unrealistic situation, a player who is unimaginative, and a DM who is punitive and spiteful. It's no different from the absurd "if you don't kill this small child - right now - I'm going to kill these two small children... you need to decide if you want to save one life... mruhahahahah.
Bandavaar the Brave wrote:
I was toying with the idea of having Gil appear multiple times as a recurring villain, but working every encounter out with his varying levels put me off that idea, because simply put, I have no idea what abilities he should keep at say level 5, 10 and 15.
One way to handle this is... not to. What I mean is don't dumb down the recurring villain. If he wins at first, it'll just make your players that much more annoyed and invested. If he defeats them handily then lets them go, laughing at them... that's insult on top of injury. It also gives them a heads-up, so then can potentially plan strategies to cope with him when they try for revenge some day.
Basically "you are not worth my time. Go away in shame, worms."
Bandavaar the Brave wrote:
Real quick math for you... a 12th-level PC is going to have to roll a 14 for his caster-level check to get a spell to work. That's a 65% chance of failure. Your wizard may or may not have invested in Spell Penetration and Greater Spell Penetration by 12th level, in which case at best he's got a 45% chance of failure.
Basically 50/50 for every spell cast, with an optimized character. And 2/3rds failure for a vanilla caster.
When custom-building SR for my bad-guys, I generally anticipate a 50/50 at worst, and let the feats increase the odds in favor of the players. Simple reason is that you don't want to frustrate your casters.
Fighter types who contend with AC get a LOT of rolls. They have a lot of chances in a fight to matter. Even with a high-AC bad guy, some hits are going to register, leaving the sense of accomplishment.
A typical fight lasts four rounds. If your wizard player fails to penetrate SR three of those four rounds, and on the fourth round discovers his spell is partially resisted so barely did anything anyway, or worse... Gilgamesh is immune to whatever it is, that player wasted their time playing.
Hence my 50/50 recommendation. I'd aim the SR at 23 so a roll of 11 succeeds. Then if the wizard happened to invest in the caster-level boosting feats, he can get it down to success on rolling a 7; 30% chance of failure.
One in three is really reasonable for a bad guy to shrug off you caster's best-efforts.
Hope this helps.
Bandavaar the Brave wrote:
And that's where I'd leave the table. Well, honestly I'd take you aside and have a private GM-to-GM discussion. Here's the thing... one of the big deals with the PF system is that monsters play by the same rules that players do. Yes, there are monster abilities that are different from ours, but they work the same way. A standard action has the same "weight" to it for everyone.
There just isn't precedent in the system for "all my stuff just comes back".
Actually, what there is, is precedent that one thing can come back. There's a spell, contingency. The caster decides in advance what the condition is for the contingency, and what spell it will enact. This is a 6th-level spell. It isn't reasonable balance-wise to envision even an 9th-level spell that pops all a monsters buffs into being. And even if it was reasonable, it'd happen once.
When monsters start playing by rules that violate the standards of the system, it breaks my belief. I know I'm playing a different game than the GM is playing. My efforts work if - and only if - the GM wants them to.
Homebrew is fine. Absolutely fine. But it should be mechanically and systematically similar to existing material.
He's also immune to things like Paralysis, Charm, all Charm and Compulsion Spells, takes half damage from ALL elemental attacks (including both Holy and Unholy). Things like that.
Not being familiar with the character you're trying to build, here's my only input on this. Immunities... fine, as long as there's a good reason for it.
Half-damage is unusual... creatures have energy resistance in Pathfinder. Something like "resist fire 20, cold 20, acid 20, electricity 20, sonic 20" would be reasonable and mechanically consistent. Someone manages to slam a 100-point fireball on him, okay... well, he takes 80 damage, and gets a Reflex save to reduce it down to 40. Considering a normal fireball caps out at 60 damage, getting 100 means a lot of effort involved.
What I do find... jarring... is the resistance to holy and unholy. I suspect you mean positive energy and negative energy. Here's the thing. If I were playing a pious character and found this out, I'd probably be upset. Let me get this straight... this guy - and he's JUST a guy as a 15th-level ranger - ignores the channeled wrath of both Good gods and Evil gods? Seriously? Not cool. One or the other is fine... he's got a patron deity who protects him or something. Reasonable. But both is thematically weird and jars my sense of justice.
Please, please don't take this the wrong way but... are you really new to Pathfinder / 3.5e? I'm asking because... haste doesn't work that way. Not even a little bit. Haste grants a creature one extra attack at their full Base Attack Bonus. So a creature with 6 attacks gets a total of 7. It absolutely does not double the number of attacks a creature gets. Ever. Well, unless that creature only gets one attack. And... they only get that extra attack during a full attack, which frankly if I saw a six-armed doofus coming my way, you know darned well I wouldn't let happen.
Between that misunderstanding (about a 3rd-level, very, very common spell) and some of the terminology issues elsewhere, I'm lead to suspect you might be new to the game. That is NOT a bad thing, and I'm not being critical.
What it does lead me to offer as advice is... wait. You have the makings of a great DM. You're enthusiastic and creative. HUGE. That's hugely important. But what you need is some more system familiarity before what you create will... mesh.
I would advise laying the story elements as you go through RotRL but leave the mechanics unspecified. Wait until you've actually run through the AP (which could easily be a year or more) and have become more familiar with how things work. Then... then take the Lego box of PFRPG rules and craft yourself a nice evil bad guy.
So again, not critical. Supportive. But trying to gently guide towards great success.
Bandavaar the Brave wrote:
Also, all of his at will spells are free actions. I don't think I stated that, but that's what I intended.
Mmmm. Careful. The game is built on action-economy. As soon as you start throwing out creatures that ignore that economy experienced players are going to be... displeased. I know I'd be upset.
It's one thing for quickened spells (swift actions) for instance, but free? Not cool.
I'm not sure I want him to be immune to entanglement though, as I want this guy to be memorable and awesomely powerful (but not overwhelmingly so), but winnable to a party of 3-4 level 12's and above.
Remind me again...
Roughly 15th level PCs, yeah? So access to 8th level spell slots. Three ability points, +6 ability magic items. Say starting ability score of 18. You're at 27. One feat that I keep harping on: Heighten Spell.
Put it all together and what do you have?
A DC 26 Will save against slow. So... he's got a 55% chance of having his butt handed to him on a silver platter after one spell.
But wait... there's more. A self-respecting mage should have got their hands on a metamagic wand of persist for just this sort of moment.
Know that 55% chance of being hosed? Yeah, well, as I love to say when using persist, "do it again". How do you feel about a 20.25% chance of success?
Your wizard stands a great chance of making this "boss" encounter a one-round wonder. 'Cuz even if he doesn't get slowed, there are literally dozens of spells that can shut him down by 15th level.
For the record, for anyone else reading this... in re-reading the e-mail notification about the minis shipment, I find the orders were to be processed Monday. So that's why me changing my status Tuesday didn't help.
As usual, Paizo's awesome and most of the problems we experience we cause ourselves.
So is this correct? Anyone at Gencon can buy this first and all the people who supported the kickstarter get it later after them? Seems fair. They already have our money so why not. This has taught me a good life lesson. Never ever support another kickstarter. I feel like an idiot. I can't be the only person who feels like this.
Seriously? If you're pledged into the kickstarter then you're well-aware of how tight a timeline all of this has had. You're also well-aware that FGG is a tiny little company. You know that shipping hundreds of books, along with a variety of different extras that nobody else can get - some of which may not actually EXIST yet - takes a huge amount of manpower.
You still think that it's reasonable to ask this small company to forgo selling any of what they've got at the biggest Con of the year, so that nobody else can put fingerprint stains on a book before you can?
As long as nothing stupid happens - such as selling our copies at GenCon and making us wait for a reprint - all is very, very fair in my eyes.
forgive my ignorance but what is a "simple fallible carter sheet"?
It's the Internet; you have to assume everything you read was typed by a drunken octopus with boxing gloves on its tentacles while it was being herded into a chipper-shredder by enthusiastic application of industrial-strength cattle-prods.
Simple. Fill-able. Character. Sheet.
Magic is only imbalanced if you're a narcissist.
Let me explain. D&D is designed around the idea of a party of adventurers who work together as a team. Their skills and abilities compliment each other, resulting in a very powerful group.
When facing a caster who keeps shutting down the melee types, it's the job of the party's casters to get the melee types to the enemy. Sure... Mr. Fighter can't walk through the wall of force. Fine. His friend Mr. Sorcerer will use dimension door to deliver Mr. Fighter and friends.
My point in short is that if your melee players are complaining, it's because they're not accepting that there's a team involved. They want to swing and hit every round. Obstacles that they can't personally overcome are "overpowered". Well, it's a two-way street. If the melee types could reliable get to the casters and smoosh them, then melee types would clearly be overpowered, right? What good is being a caster if some dork with a stick can poke you in the face every time you leave home?
Time for your party's casters to step up. A simple magic circle against evil shuts down most summons. dispel magic works wonders against a lot of enemy spells. Heck, even your ranged weapons users could contribute a LOT if they'd just ready an action to shot the enemy caster in the mouth if he starts casting. But no.... they always want to take a full attack and fire fifteen arrows because it's sexy. Not smart.
And therein lies the issue. Casting smart, damage sexy. It sounds like your players have chosen one.
Mark, the point of the game is to play the game. As long as the players enjoyed the death-struggle, all is well. It doesn't matter if an hour is chewed up climbing over a wall or in combat with the BBEG. It's all game.
Now, for this particular scenario I'm not surprised. Players are a suspicious sort. I KNOW that I mentally process things differently when I'm a DM versus when I'm a player. As a player I see dangers everywhere I can think of. As a DM I put dangers... everywhere I can think of. Only thing is that when I'm playing, I think of a a lot more places. It's always a trap. Don't do the obvious. That's the player's mental mantra. So if Climbing is the obvious best choice, it's the obvious worst choice.
You can't win.
Only thing worse than children in a sweat-shop... unemployed children.
Haha only serious. This isn't one of those simple topics that's black and white. Sure, child-abuse is a Bad Thing, but it's just not that straightforward. Exploited laborers of any age may be better off being exploited than if they weren't. Also, as wealth pours into nations such as China, by definition the standard of living increases overall. It's a slow and difficult process but the whole world is experiencing higher prosperity and ethical enlightenment.
All I'm really trying to say is that while IF the Paizo books were being printed by foreign slave-laborers, it might still be better than if they weren't.
So... awkward topic that has no RIGHT answer. It's worthwhile to think about it, but really, there's not much to be gained by discussing.
/me is neither American nor European.
I'm a bookman so I don't bother with all this PDF crap. When the power goes out, I can still still play my RPG's to candlelight.
I know you don't mean to be condescending, but I've got to protest your usage of the word "crap". In and of itself I don't find that word offensive, but in context you're pretty strongly expressing that you think PDFs are... without merit.
My Tsar plan involves copying all the art to standalone files, viewable on a little tablet device. That way I can show my players things without the rest of the page being visible. No names, no statblocks, no CRs, nothing.
I can also make high-quality printouts of the player handouts, instead of adequate-but-poor photocopies. I can even doctor those if I want.
I can copy & paste statblocks and edit them, conveniently.
Basically while I'll run the adventure out of the physical book, PDFs are awesome (as in, un-crap) as companion products. While your personal game-table habits might not currently use these techniques, they're valid, useful tricks. I don't use electronic anything at the table, and I discourage players from doing so. (I'll be making an exception for the art in Tsar.) Still, electronics for prep are cool.
Thoughts to consider.
Vic Wertz wrote:
That's a big part of why we had to take the Player Companion monthly—too many good ideas were lining up!
I'm calling BS on that excuse. I'm certain the frequency is increased because you heard about the raise I got last month.
Huh. Okay, I'll play ball.
Seriously. If the project gets funded, make a hardcover. If the project gets funded for an extra $X, then replace Y interior pictures with full-colour artwork and print the book in colour. For every $Z above $X, an additional W pictures get replaced.
What I'm saying is that this is a good opportunity to upgrade the overall product. The more we spend, the more we get. Yes, the minimum pledge that gets a copy of the book will have to be carefully chosen because I recognize that a full-colour print job will be more expensive regardless of how much more interior art gets replaced. What I'm saying is that if a B&W-only book costs $30 to print, and a full-colour version costs $60 to print, you'll have to make $75 the minimum pledge that gets a copy of the book. And yes, your per-unit margin drops at that stage, but you're a} making it up in quantity, b} going to have control over the REAL numbers and c} inevitably going to have people that pledge more than $75 in hopes of seeing more upgrades.
Jeremy, I've touched on this in another thread, but this IMHO meshes really nicely. I have ZERO suggestions regarding content. I'm really happy with PU and PE. The words are awesome. But I'd really like to see this product end up looking not unlike a Paizo product. Kickstarter might make that possible.
As someone who preordered Tome of Horrors Complete, Slumbering Tsar, and is about to place his order for Rapan Athuk, I'm (evidently) willing to put my money where my mouth is. I'll pay for cool stuff.
That said, things like bonus GM screens or signed dice or special-edition psionic napkins don't really do it for me. Make the product itself better, not tack on fluffy tangentially-related things.
I'm in for $100 if the cover gets an upgrade.