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

Aranna's page

2,862 posts. Alias of Min2007.


RSS

1 to 50 of 2,862 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

thegreenteagamer wrote:
Aranna wrote:
thegreenteagamer wrote:
Any game where you get better by putting more money into it rather than (or more so than) putting time, effort, or strategy is a game I'm not interested in. It's why I hate all collectable card games, and an aspect of wargaming I'm not into.

Not completely true. Yes you have to spend a certain amount to get a strong deck (if you are playing officially like a tournament then yes this can get a little pricey) but the bang for your buck is strongest with less cards the person who has a few decks only is going to get a big power boost from one booster where the person with a crate packed with cards probably won't see any boost from just a single pack.

Also however are equal parts strategy / tactics. Knowing how cards work together and the timing on how best to use them both for your strategy and your opponents is key to higher levels of play where you all probably have many of the same cards available.

And luck will of course factor into any game using cards or dice.

But paying more money flat out makes you better if you put enough cash into it. That's an inherent problem I'm utterly disinterested in participating in. You have to dump a certain amount of cash into the game to even be in the same league as the average player, and let's face it, you can improve your game through a cash investment alone...maybe not as much as cash AND strategy, but there is a direct monetary investment and success correlation.

That's rewarding wealth and punishing poverty. That happens enough in the world; I don't need to support a game that reflects such a position.

You could always use my pennies to play option. Where you simply draw the cards you want in the deck on blank cards. All the fun and almost no cost. It just isn't tournament legal for obvious reasons.


The 8th Dwarf I never said they weren't fun. And I have played a few psionic characters over the years, the latest being my way broken epic psion from lovable munchkins last attempt to run with psionics. BUT the fact that she was broken is largely the result of epic play under 3.5e and not a true test of the psi system (well other than the knowledge that you CAN break psionics with such rules in place). That IS why I am open to running psionics, to learn them better. But I just don't feel I should mix them until I do learn them better. Remember Aranna's rule #1 for good game mastery is 'Know the Rules'. Heck I am not even guaranteeing that I will mix them after learning them better but at least at that point I will have a better grasp of the dangers in doing so.


thegreenteagamer wrote:
Any game where you get better by putting more money into it rather than (or more so than) putting time, effort, or strategy is a game I'm not interested in. It's why I hate all collectable card games, and an aspect of wargaming I'm not into.

Not completely true. Yes you have to spend a certain amount to get a strong deck (if you are playing officially like a tournament then yes this can get a little pricey) but the bang for your buck is strongest with less cards the person who has a few decks only is going to get a big power boost from one booster where the person with a crate packed with cards probably won't see any boost from just a single pack.

Also however are equal parts strategy / tactics. Knowing how cards work together and the timing on how best to use them both for your strategy and your opponents is key to higher levels of play where you all probably have many of the same cards available.

And luck will of course factor into any game using cards or dice.


Tacticslion wrote:
** spoiler omitted **...

Spoiler:
Huh? I wasn't talking about ALL psionic players just the ones that LOVE to argue. Just the ones who like to say MY reasons for not mixing the two are wrongbadfun, yes this wasn't aimed at you at all. Actually someone posted a list of stuff psions can do and that list contained at least one thing way more broken than simulacrums ... why again are simulacrums broken? I used them when I played a Theurge but they were just servants I don't recall any of them being useful in combat. MY reason were just that MINE, all arguing was doing was pushing me further away from the side they wanted me on. I used to be strongly anti psi, but changed my position to neutral as long as they don't mix... but clearly that isn't good enough for some people. You don't see me trying to tell THEM how to play.

My reasons for not mixing:
- These are two systems trying to do the same things.
- They are balanced differently.
Where did they disprove either of these? I suppose I could ban a psion from having any power that mimics a spell... but damn that will make psion power selection rather small. No all they have proven is they can find corner cases where either psionics is helpless vs magic or a list of tricks (at least one of which is massively broken) that only psionics can do. Neither of which changes my reasons for not mixing. Right now I allow psionics only in a game featuring them, and by featuring them I MEAN they are the STAR of the show. If you don't like that then tough, it is the best you are going to get till I understand psionics better.

I only have a basic understanding of psionics but I have a good understanding of people so when I see every power gamer I have ever met either speak highly of psionics or try to play them, I can only conclude that there is something mechanically advantageous about them beyond my basic understanding. Add to this the fact that I see people leaping to the chance to play a psionic character while claiming loudly how underpowered they are and I can smell a lie miles away. Clearly these people are trying to convince GMs to let psionic in under this whitewash where they point out the flaws but NOT the strengths. If I was more versed I could argue back on mechanics clearly this isn't underpowered as people claim or it would be just a forgotten system nobody wants to use like 3.0 psionics was.


captain yesterday wrote:

So what are the larger sized card for?

I work in a toy store, so I see them but I don't want to ask co-workers, they already think I'm weird because I don't know video games :-)

They are probably the player reward cards.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I love Magic the Gathering...
If you want to play on a budget with friends (strangers will probably not let you do this) just take a bunch of blank cards and use colored pens to draw the cards yourself. Costs pennies and you can theory craft the best decks money could buy. So all the fun and none of the cost.


I started a course on speed reading (that I never finished but it IS on my bucket list to finish someday). So I can answer some of your questions about speed reading since I understand why it works.

When you read you probably sound the words out in your head. This puts a limiter on how much information you can take in... think of your brain as a super fast computer. By sounding the words out in your head as you read you are forcing a middle man into your speed of comprehension that doesn't have a high bandwidth and instead has a like a crappy dial up connection speed. If you can train yourself to simply comprehend a word without any extra thought processes like direct image processing without any of the silly translations your mind wants to do then suddenly you will be not only able to read much much faster but you will retain that information much much better since it isn't cluttered with thought notes and translations. Because lets face it when you are reading slower than your rate of comprehension then your brain gets bored and starts thinking other stuff while you read. Kind of like reading a book while you watch TV... not very productive.

Now emotional events in the book? Not sure about this, but I imagine it would force a speed reader to pause no different than any other reader does in order to fully process the emotional impact of the scene. But since the speed reader will continue onward just as fast as before it probably wouldn't slow them down much.

How can you read quickly? Take the class.


thegreenteagamer wrote:
Has anyone ever seen a content or trigger warning and actually used it to stop reading and avoid the article or post?

Definitely. I am a born again Christian with an LBGT friend, content warnings are great, there is a lot of stuff out there I just don't need to know about and would haunt me if I did.


Liz Courts wrote:

Removed a couple of unhelpful posts and responses. Different play styles and campaigns for different folks, everybody!

More on-topic, when I mixed psionics and magic, I made one half as effective against the other, in regards to spell/power resistance.

Thank you.

I find it annoying that psionics players think any game which does things differently is wrongbadfun. as if arguing and calling me wrong is going to do anything other than drive me away from psionics just to avoid the drama.

Different games for different people.


I am perplexed by all this lack of understanding... unless maybe it's my GMing style? If I am running a game for 5 players then there is one main plot line that guides the overall campaign BUT I always build a series of subplots into the campaign as well one for each character's back story and one for each major group that is involved... in the case of psionic characters there will be one subplot centered on each character many of which involve psionics in some way typically and a subplot for the psionic elements that are involved through the various characters back stories as well. Also I would adjust my treasure drops to have psionic treasures rather than magical ones.

Taking this into consideration if I used Ashiel's 5 minutes to drop a psionic PC into a non psionic game suggestion this character would have NO subplots to shine in, they would have NO psionic treasures to enhance their character, and there would be NO psionic encounters to really showcase the system. If I were that player I would feel I was having less fun than my friends who are involved in various magical subplots which may totally showcase their character as the main lead such as a witch dealing with a magical coven or a wizard handling the mage's guild. It would frustrate me to see only magic treasures dropping forcing me to deal with a magic shop at their usual markup if I want psionic gear.

Also as I have stated before it is total BS that psionics are less powerful than magic. Each can do stuff the other can't mechanically making each one shine strongly in different ways. THAT means they are equally powerful or very nearly so depending on the situation.

Let's look at a couple psionic classes to debunk this myth that ONLY psionics can support certain concepts.

Psychic Warrior: This is a self buffing melee fighter concept. There ARE numerous Gish builds that do the same thing with magic. Flavor can be refluffed to whatever the player wants. I see no need to have the extra hassle as a GM at trying to balance the two systems constantly all game when the player can just use spell mechanics and get the same concept.

Psion: A full caster concept. As I pointed out earlier a sorcerer or wizard can easily be refluffed as a psion. In many ways the sorcerer class is already set up for refluffing in such a way.

Soulknife: The only thing here that stands out is making a short sword out of thin air... any build which self enhances their own weapon can be refluffed as a soulknife. Just let the character swap out some other thing for the magical ability to summon a short sword as the focus of their self enhancing weapon abilities. And puff you have your magic based soulknife.


Rynjin wrote:
And still, even without specifically Psionic NPCs, treasure, and monsters...your claims that the character isn't challenged, engaged, or rewarded is ludicrous. They get all three in the same measure as the other members of the party.

How are you STILL misunderstanding this? This refers to psionic encounters/rewards NOT normal encounters/rewards.

In your game feel free to mix and match as you desire, I made no claims that my way was the only way to play. I don't mix them, it's what I prefer. You don't hear me calling your way wrongbadfun, but somehow I have to endlessly justify my way...


Have you been following the thread Rynjin?
The comments are based on the 5 minutes to run for a psionic character in a non psionic game scenario Ashiel championed. It basically means your psionic character isn't going to encounter any psionic challenges, NPCs, treasures, or anything else a player would like to find when playing a psionic character. Which I feel is less fun.

The edge is only in the minds of those who must have the mechanics behind the point system. Those who feel magic can't interest them at all. Despite the fact that concepts can be copied back and forth from magic to psi or vice versa.

Edit: There are a number of Gish or spellblade builds which can stand in for those psionic classes with a little refluffing. Even Sorcerer which can be fluffed as a psion.


Cha affects how you interact with others. It doesn't affect how you act. You could still act without direction from others... you would just find it largely impossible to influence others. For whatever reason people would dismiss your words. For example a wildly unlikely Character with an 18 Int would have a large vocabulary but combined with a Cha of 1 would find his words ignored by others.


Truth is I am one of the few people that liked 4e... but it was a nightmare to GM it so I didn't. And since I was one of the few local GMs it meant no 4e games.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Ashiel wrote:
Forcing them to play with mechanics they are disinterested in

Ahhh here is the REAL argument. Player A wants to use a certain set of mechanics... NOT fluff, NOT concept... mechanics. But when NOTHING engages your character, nothing challenges his field, or nothing rewards his field... then I say absolutely in my case this make the game LESS fun than simply using the system everyone else is using. You can probably do almost exactly the same concept with either system, so this boils down to certain players feeling they can get an edge by using different mechanics than the rest.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

The magic system is quite FUN or it wouldn't be the system they stuck with all these years.


What is the point in including Psionic characters if you are not going to be using psionic encounters/treasure/challenges? Sure it can be done but everyone will have a much better time in this case if you have that psionic player instead take a spell based class and refluff it as psionics.


Ashiel wrote:
Hence why I see a profound hypocrisy every time someone tries to denote some grand difference in mechanics that make the two systems incompatible or somehow unfeasible. Especially since you can learn everything you need to know to GM a game with psionic PCs in 5 minutes or less, usually by just reading a short bullet-point list.

They aren't incompatible nor is it unfeasible, stop falsely quoting me please. I just like using one system especially when the two systems are doing the SAME THING. Pick one and roll with it.

Also the second part is blatantly false. You can not pick up everything you need to build a psionic encounter off a 5 minute chat. Trust me that would be my first failed attempt to use psionics; Trying to pick it up on the fly.


I am not going to argue which system is better balanced. Suffice it to say they are internally balanced very differently... this makes for yet another good reason not to use both systems at the same time.


Ashiel wrote:
Aranna wrote:

SLA's being the exception none of that is enough to call it a whole new system. And SLA's really aren't a comprehensive class based system... they are a sort of bolt on mechanic to explain some monster powers.

And yet they are also used as class features by a fairly large number of classes.

Nothing in this statement is false. But that doesn't rescue them from bolt on status. No decisions need be made with them, no slots are filled no points are spent, they do just one thing x times per day at their predetermined level.


SLA's being the exception none of that is enough to call it a whole new system. And SLA's really aren't a comprehensive class based system... they are a sort of bolt on mechanic to explain some monster powers.

Edit: Not hypocritical at all, SLA's being a much simpler bolt on mechanic can be used effortlessly side by side with either the psionic points or magic slots systems.


Soilent wrote:
Riuk wrote:
ok time for the big one......I...I hate the elf race every thing about them...a bunch of pretentious stuck up jerks just because they have a long life they think their better than everyone else I HATE them...I should not have said that...there is one right behind me isn't there...well I stand by it ^_^
It's because they're prettier than you, isn't it?

Probably true both ways. I mean look at how many Blood Elves are in WoW despite it being a mechanically inferior race. They look awesome and who doesn't want to look awesome... Riuk being one of the exceptions. Poor Riuk.


And yes Blakemane they are TWO systems. When you break down the spell slot system it matters very little which fluff you use arcane or divine. Much the same as there is little mechanical difference in a Telepath vs a Kineticist. And while spontaneous slots ARE a little different they in effect only break one little rule of slots and follow the system too closely to be considered something like a whole different system they are merely a variant of spell slots.


And that is it in a nutshell Psionics aren't overpowered they are better.

I always marvel at the fact that the people who most want to use psionics are the people quickest to exclaim how underpowered they are. It's hypocrisy. They certainly aren't eager to use them because they are underpowered as they claim... no that is just a smokescreen for their real motivation. What is that? The psionic mechanics allow them to do things the spell slot mechanics don't. BUT but doesn't that make them more powerful?! Nope. Let's face it in terms of raw breakability magic and psionics stand hand in hand. I have been in too many OP arguments to think otherwise, anything that lets you rewrite the laws of physics is open to powerful shenanigans regardless of the mechanical system behind it. So why call it better? For the very reason that it lets you break those tidy prepackaged rules spell slot mechanics force on us. Oh they have balancers built in which get a little better with each new system, the latest rules made for Pathfinder being the most balanced introduced so far. So overpowered? Not at all.

Still I stand by my desire to use only ONE system in any given game though. It just feels wrong to have two separate systems at the same time.


kyrt-ryder wrote:
pH unbalanced wrote:
While I've never had any interest in playing a character with psionics before, it's beginning to sound a lot more appealing...

It's really nice at mid to higher levels, because you can dial up or down the amount of power you want to spend, controlling how quickly you burn it away.

Psionic casters get less overall magical stamina [and fewer powers compared to spells] than Standard Spellcasters, but they're definitely fun.

Well this is debatable. If you don't count all the low level spells of the caster which don't really have much combat usefulness at higher levels then the two have about the same stamina give or take specific situations.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I have a similar distaste of mixing the two but for a completely different reason; It bothers me to mix two completely different mechanical systems that supposedly affect the same metaphysical energies. If players want Psi I am fine with that as long as they are happy with all magic being banned or vice versa. No there will NOT be two separate but supposedly equals in the same game.


Valandil Ancalime wrote:
ngc7293 wrote:
I don't buy into the words thing, but Bribery usually does the trick. We had an issue where players cheated with dice (said ones were something else). Now, every time someone roles a one (at appropriate times), they get an extra 100xp.

As a player who tends to roll lots of 1's, I like this houserule.

One of my old GMs had a house rule that you learn best from new ideas or failures. One of the best ways to get XP in his games was from critical hits or critical failures, to be fair to non-combat areas he devised a critical success and failure system for ALL skills and abilities.


I feel Hentai is disgusting.
But as long as it's clearly labeled and kept away from children, then what some men decide to pollute their minds with is their own concern.


I despise those rotten brats that fidget and kick your seat.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Riuk wrote:
captain yesterday wrote:
I've never been a fan of Psoinics or stuff like it, however I am genuinely interested in Occult Adventures and will most likely get it as soon as it's out :-)
see I don't know why people don't like psionics its awesome!!! mind powers!!! I know the some of it feels overpowered but its easy to make any class feel overpowered

Psionics isn't overpowered it's just better.

Oh and I will also be buying Occult Adventures


1 person marked this as a favorite.

4 was good, just as long as you were happy with a comedy.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I finished watching Log Horizon 2. Absolutely fascinating how seamlessly the real world and game world are blended together and just what that means awesome.


Goth Guru wrote:
Krensky wrote:
If memory serves, that was the studio's fault. The original explanation for the matrix was processing power, not electrical power.

That makes more sense!

I liked the first movie more.
I liked the cartoon shorts more than the second and third movie.

Yes that does make more sense... until those idiotic 2nd and 3rd movies where they wipe out all the humans in the matrix.


DrDeth wrote:
Aranna wrote:
Cornnuts the Cha 14 barbarian and Silverlisp the Cha 6 Bard are both trying to get a date with the single barmaid... Since this involves improving her disposition toward them from indifferent to friendly it needs a Diplomacy check. Cornnuts the barbarian feels she should automatically swoon for him because of the fluff text on their respective charisma scores and has no ranks in diplomacy. Silverlisp on the other hand recognizes the real number that is needed here IS the diplomacy check result and since he pumped a bunch of his otherwise unspent points into diplomacy he has a +9 modifier even after the penalty. They both make checks against diplomacy after much arguing from Cornnuts and guess what assuming the target number they need is a 20, Cornnuts has a 15% chance of success while Silverlisp has a 50% chance to win her heart. Even if they both succeed Silverlisp has a much better chance of landing that date. The game mechanics CLEARLY show Silverlisp as being FAR MORE eloquent a speaker than Cornnuts. Clearly the 3.5e monster comparison chart is totally useless in comparing PCs.

If indeed, Silverlisp gets a chance to sweet-talk her for a whole minute. Have you ever tried to chat up a pretty girl? If you're a drooling ugly dude, you wont get past "Hey babe....." ;-)

Whereas Cornnuts will get her initial attention, but may fail his attempt as he bungles his conversation.

I talk to girls all the time... but then I am one so most of my friends are also girls. It really isn't hard to get a minute of chat with nearly anyone outside of combat. But remember also she starts indifferent to both of them, Cornnuts can't change that without gaining a minute to use diplomacy. Cha fluff DOES NOT AFFECT NPCs reactions, you NEED a skill for that.


Cornnuts the Cha 14 barbarian and Silverlisp the Cha 6 Bard are both trying to get a date with the single barmaid... Since this involves improving her disposition toward them from indifferent to friendly it needs a Diplomacy check. Cornnuts the barbarian feels she should automatically swoon for him because of the fluff text on their respective charisma scores and has no ranks in diplomacy. Silverlisp on the other hand recognizes the real number that is needed here IS the diplomacy check result and since he pumped a bunch of his otherwise unspent points into diplomacy he has a +9 modifier even after the penalty. They both make checks against diplomacy after much arguing from Cornnuts and guess what assuming the target number they need is a 20, Cornnuts has a 15% chance of success while Silverlisp has a 50% chance to win her heart. Even if they both succeed Silverlisp has a much better chance of landing that date. The game mechanics CLEARLY show Silverlisp as being FAR MORE eloquent a speaker than Cornnuts. Clearly the 3.5e monster comparison chart is totally useless in comparing PCs.


Riuk wrote:
Aranna wrote:

Riuk you already ignored the very tables you are misusing.

The 6-7 stat character was forcibly reduced to a vocabulary of "Raaarrrggh" by you. That is WAY WAY worse than slow to get it or misunderstanding some words.

This is a game where that Int 6 person could spend some skill points and be perfectly fluent in multiple languages.

hold on hold on I did not make the post about the "Raaaarrrrggh" stuff that was someone else why do you think I made that post look at it and see that was someone else...

edit that post was made by

Goddity wrote:

We once had a dwarf barb with 6 INT/ 9 CHA try that. We needed information about the location of a goblin village, so he walked into the middle of the park and said to a nice looking woman "Excuse me, but could you tell us anything about a nearby goblin village?"

And the GM said: "Alright, so he walks up to the woman, swings his axe over his head and says "RRRAAAARRGHHHGRRGAAGHRGARGHARGAHR"

so why you mad at me....

You are the one defending it. It isn't hard to see why I might think you feel the same way as that poster when:

Riuk wrote:
lol this is what im talking about

This is what you say about it. And then go on to defend it fiercely.


Riuk you already ignored the very tables you are misusing.
The 6-7 stat character was forcibly reduced to a vocabulary of "Raaarrrggh" by you. That is WAY WAY worse than slow to get it or misunderstanding some words.

This is a game where that Int 6 person could spend some skill points and be perfectly fluent in multiple languages.


Krensky wrote:
Aranna wrote:
Star Wars the Old Republic: This is a pay to win game... As a free player I can't even complete the game. And even paid members have a lot of stuff they need to pay more money for. Nice stories for the 8 story paths though... I wish I could see the endings...

Um. That's completely false.

F2P players can play to 50 and see all of the class stories and go do Corellia and Illum and then kill Malgus. Everything that was in the game at launch.

There is no need to buy anything, and the only thing you can only buy with real money that actually effects play are the +41 crystals that you can use at Level 10 rather than... Level 48 iirc.

I haven't paid more than my sub fee in... Um... Eighteen months. No, wait, I paid for the second expansion a few months back. When I need to buy something I use Credits, my Cartel Coin grants or do without.

Not false though I guess you are right that a paid player can use the market to get the cash extras without paying more. The money limit placed on free players makes this impossible for them though. But the story goes all the way to level 60 doesn't it? That means my free account can't play the full story. Actually free players can't use top end gear either so Corellia or Ilum are nightmarishly difficult to impossible zones for a free player.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

This punishment from bad GMs who will force you to act like a mentally disabled person if you dare drop below a 10 in any mental stat... I can't think of any better word to describe it than wrong. Stop and realize that the ONLY game effect of a low stat is a -1 or -2 on checks. If a 10% worse chance on a d20 equals mentally disabled to you then wow.


Do you enforce ALL stats I wonder? Or is this attack on low mental stats simply hypocrisy. In a game where a tiny waif thin halfling can have a 21 Str do you balk at the tall well built human man with a Str of 7? Or do you enforce that the halfling is a rolling ball of pure muscle?


Simon Legrande wrote:
It's nice to see someone step up and tell you that you're doing it wrong. Just to be safe, from now on you should check with Aranna before doing anything to make sure you're doing it right.

~grins~

Wise advice indeed.

Though if your players are fine with it who am I to say it's wrong in your group. In other groups however the warning stands.


Simon Legrande wrote:
Do you often see barbarians with 6 Int and 9 Cha put 15 ranks into Diplomacy? I can't say I've ever seen someone dump their mental stats then load up their penalized skills to make up for it. But I'll admit I haven't played in every game everywhere.

I have seen it both in practice and in theory crafting builds... though not with the Barbarian class I will admit.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Riuk wrote:
Well to me and my rl group when we read the Stat reference for when a player has a intelligence if 6-7 (dull-witted or slow, often misuses and mispronounced words)

Have you never gamed with a low Int real life person before? They sound just like everyone else does... with the exception that they either avoid big words or misuse them and they tend to settle into unskilled or low skilled positions in life. Their vocabulary isn't "Raaarrggh!" that is an animal. Low Int people sound like everyone else, to suggest otherwise is insulting in the extreme... to enforce otherwise IS wrong. Asking where a Goblin camp is isn't using any big words nor is it a complicated request such talk is well within the capabilities of someone who has chosen to play slow or dull witted.


I prefer playing... however... I do love GMing nearly as well, and can't go too long without getting my GMing fix.


Actually I don't think Art or Jewelry are covered by the "trade goods" clause. Gems are clearly a trade good used in the crafting of fine goods though and should qualify to be traded at full value.


Steve Geddes wrote:
Goddity wrote:
kyrt-ryder wrote:

I'm glad to hear everyone enjoyed the scene. That doesn't change the fact the GM changed what the player did of his own volition.

Now the GM was certainly entitled to have the player roll the relevant social skill to gauge the woman's reaction, but the characters action is the player's job and his alone.

We were at that point where the GM knows us well enough to pull things like that. We had that level of trust. I wouldn't have mentioned it as story without some complaining if it was bad. We still remember that and laugh. If you guys react so strongly to possible GM controlling when it isn't even your game and we're all happy, just wow.
Yeah, I think the table's expectation is the point. In that game the latter bolded statement may not be the case. (I've played in games where the player actions are sometimes determined by the DM - it's not my preferred style, but it's not wrong).

It is wrong. It may also have been harmless, even funny, everyone may have had a blast. But it was still wrong. It's good that no one had hurt feelings. All GMs make mistakes and this time the mistake didn't upset anyone... in fact they had fun with it. But it could have gone so much worse.


Riuk wrote:
...OK... I really really liked the buffy the vampire Slayer musical episode, the demon in that was pretty slick :-)

I loved it too. It is the only Buffy episode I saved and occasionally re watch.


Kthulhu wrote:
BigDTBone wrote:
But what many people dont realize is that DS9 was the originator of long-drawn story arcs over more than 2-3 episodes. Before DS9 TV was considered a media for episodic story-telling and that epic scale narrative was meant for the theater where you can give it up to 3 hours of film time. DS9 destroyed that paradigm and showed that you can really tell deep stories when you have ~20 hours a season to give it. The modern paradigm of arc-heavy plot-driven drama on TV began with DS9.
Not sure if serious....

I think he is correct in the US.

But in England DrWho was doing this long before DS9 did.


MMOs... I have played:

Star Trek Online: I still like it and it has tons of content including some fan created stuff. Though there seems to be some animosity of late between the DPSers, the casual players, and the developers as the game goes through changes.

Neverwinter: This is as generic a fantasy MMO as anyone could create.

Champions Online: I used to absolutely love this... but when Perfect World acquired Cryptic they really altered the game in ways I didn't like. Now everything seems to just be about dailies and nothing else matters.

Dungeons and Dragons Online: Be warned this isn't really D&D at all, it uses it's own system for characters, combat, and leveling that only resembles D&D in name only. Very boring for free players who have to grind the same content hundreds of times to level.

Swordsman: an asian MMO that I just wanted to try out. Nice outfits though.

9Dragons: It was a blast in it's glory days, but it died and now the one thing that made it cool (the other players) is gone.

Star Wars the Old Republic: This is a pay to win game... As a free player I can't even complete the game. And even paid members have a lot of stuff they need to pay more money for. Nice stories for the 8 story paths though... I wish I could see the endings...


GM DarkLightHitomi wrote:
Confession, I dislike having to build characters and spend hours typing up their sheet just for a maybe. I'd rather concepts be submitted and accepted and let the crunch work be done only if accepted. I have many characters that never got accepted and rarely would they qualify for another game because each GM has their own character gen.

I don't think anybody likes this...

1 to 50 of 2,862 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2015 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours: Monday–Friday, 10 AM–5 PM Pacific Time. View our privacy policy. Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc., and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Online, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.