|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
Typically no group names... but a few did pop up occasionally, usually chosen by one charismatic team member such that everyone just started using it...
- Mobile Justice! (clearly a fan of whatever this phrase came from)
High School of the Dead is a good example of an anime that I have to actively ignore the mountain of objectification just to enjoy the fun story underneath. I love that the girls are bad ass and can hold their own... mostly. But that same fan service intended to sell tons of this to adolescent minded boys is sending the message to adolescent girls that in order to be attractive to boys you need big breasts and have to wear very little clothing. You have to appear vulnerable and needy to the boy is another thing they use... even in High School of the dead where the girls are kicking ass, you get moments were they break down emotionally and need big brave hero main character to save them. This plays into a bad mindset for both genders. look at the ten stupid things men and women do to mess up their lives; for men Stupid Chivalry and for women Stupid Helplessness. These don't lead to healthy relationships they lead to unhappy marriages.
Are you comfortable telling young girls that they should be nothing more than eye candy for guys? And that that in any way is healthy for them as individuals?
~idly wonders what a cross universe movie would look like~
OK Whedon hasn't directed either but I think those two would make a great movie team up of directors.
Sadly much to the utter dismay of the Fivers, Scapers, Browncoats, and Gaters those universes have ended. They only live on in reruns. While Star Trek and Star Wars are continuing settings with fresh new opportunities to be awed or enraged depending on the situation. Lets face it when a Federation Dreadnought faces off with an Imperial Star Destroyer in orbit they will be doing so over the lifeless ruins of Babylon 5, an old star gate, a crashed hulk of a Peacekeeper carrier, and some Reaver and Alliance wrecks.
Long Live Warsies! Long Live Trekers!
I loved Voyager in spite of some really bad episodes.
If you stripped out the "time war" and restructured the shows seasons it would have been awesome... even despite the canon violations.
Guys Lucas IS from a much older generation that doesn't hang out online or follow twitter trends. He didn't grow up with computers or cell phone... his preferred entertainment may not include camping out online. In which case it is entirely believable that he may have missed the viral buzz about the new Star Wars trailer. Now it would surprise me if after being asked about it by a reporter he didn't go online to watch it later.
Tequila Sunrise wrote:
This is why I slightly changed the book definitions, it makes things clear instead of murky. In the case of doing evil to evil doers this has been a thing in the game already a crusader hunts down and murders the bad guys; he doesn't bring them in for a trial unless the GM has them surrender... Torture to stop further crime is good in your own words, yet it makes no sense if we leave that type of torture as evil acts. Better to make that a Chaotic act and call it a Dirty Tactic that way Paladins would still avoid it but it leaves the CG guys free to pick up the knives while the paladin guards the perimeter as long as you are fine with the paladin being cross with you later. No ones alignments need to change this way and everyone has a clear vision about the alignment of their actions.
No not quite correct; Better to say "This is JJ Abrams. The rest is unimportant." Remember JJ LOVES flashy effects and edge of your seat action scenes. He tosses canon out the window. Fortunately in Star Wars case I think Lucas did a horrible job recently. Maybe it will actually help Star Wars to have less canon and more flash and action. There are a LOT of Star Wars canon bits we could all sleep better forgetting; midi-chlorians for one. If he can change all that and make a great movie than I am more than willing to look the other way when he makes a less than optimal lightsaber design.
~raises a glass~
Peter Green wrote:
This is why torture (for information not pleasure) and lying are Chaotic Aligned actions in my new definitions. They can be good... they can be evil... but they most definitely are dirty tactics. A single chaotic act from a paladin wouldn't cause his fall... but if he makes a pattern of torturing his enemies for information, then his alignment would start to move toward CG and away from LG causing a fall unless he alters his behavior.
It is frequently true that the things we hate the most in others are the things we would do ourselves if given the chance. I mean there are notable exceptions but nine times out of ten if someone is hating on whatever, "power gamers" to pull a random example, then that is probably what they are when they are sitting in the other seat.
Actually a min/maxer is someone who takes the maximum amount of weaknesses he can have with the minimum impact on his character's power or survivability. The term was coined for point buy systems, but it has exploded in popularity and now is sometimes used synonymously with power gamer or optimizer.
Edit: A good example is dumping a stat you will not need to 7.
I have been too quick to reject player created material before I have even fully considered whether it would hurt the game or not.
I am also easily distracted by outside media... so don't leave a TV, radio, or video game on even in the next room or soon I will be helplessly drawn to listen to/watch it.
I have tried numerous alignment systems and the ONE system that persists decade after decade is D&D's nine point system. Is it really hard to comprehensively understand? Yes this IS why your GM is the final arbiter and NOT the game rules; because everyone seems to have their own take on what they mean. Is super simple to use? Absolutely, this is it's persistent charm.
I had a perfect alignment system with a 16 word set of descriptors that could describe ANY character... But EVERY player hated it with a passion. So it sits in a binder somewhere in a dusty box never to be used again. And I find that simply cleaning up the meaning of each axis transforms the D&D alignment system into one that is easy to understand as well. Good vs Evil is the willingness to do harm to innocents. (new)Law vs Chaos is the willingness to use dirty tactics to get to your goal... things like poison, traps, torture, curses, or even mind control fall under dirty tactics.
I say (new) because I used to have Law vs Chaos mean how strict a code you followed. BUT this tended to complicate alignment discussions with intent and patterns of behavior. I wanted something simpler that ANYONE could instantly grasp. Still the change does affect a few things in-game. For example the creation and use of unaligned undead becomes inherently Chaotic in my new system. The creation of Evil aligned undead is still an evil act in fact it becomes a chaotic evil act.
Thejeff has the right of it. You came across seeming to support over-optimized concepts, If that isn't the case then I mistook your comments. But keep in mind if the others at the table are resenting you as you say, then you are probably doing something wrong, something that is making the game unfun for them.
False; It's not your job to smash encounters in one round.It is your job to have fun and not ruin the fun of others.
Clearly you were failing at that second part of your job.
It isn't the "quickness" of the fights that creates ill feelings at the table though it can contribute... No; it is the time share that matters. If you have a mixed group and one guy single-rounds most of the encounters then all the other people at the table who are expecting some table time in combat are left with nothing. "Oh you go third? Sorry you get to do nothing this combat". BUT if the GM makes the baddies powerful enough to last to round two then suddenly it becomes apparent that a hack and slasher with a weaker build is simply going to die, NOT get more combat time. And this creates HUGE resentment toward the optimizer who spent months combing up every trick in the books or on the internet to master his build. Because now all those combat aficionados who didn't "eat, sleep, optimize" all that time have to suddenly catch up inside of a week. So most groups answer isn't to keep punishing all the lesser optimizers, NO most groups either kick out the "munchkin" or put house rules in place to keep the over-optimizer at the same power level as his friends. And so that over-optimizer comes crying on the internet that he plays with a tyrant GM who won't let him play anything cool.
The rule of thumb is that the child is always the same size catagory as its mother. Unless you are planning to have the baby kill her. And since there are no rules for 1/4 giants the baby is human for stat purposes, although having a giant blooded feat or trait is certainly a possibility.
As for actual stat generation just use the standard method your table uses for NPCs. Mine uses Elite array but there are many varied methods. The GM and player decide what class the child will grow into and assign stats based on that... Or you could place highest to lowest based on the child's parents and let fate/role play determin his/her later class.
I agree with Kthulhu, nearly every table handles magic differently... The best definitions you could probably have are; Low = any magic lower than what you expect; and High = any magic higher than you expect. In my low magic setting where you can have those cool murder mysteries and survival scenarios most non-combat magic is removed or restricted. BUT to the group that simply bans all full casters my low magic seems like high magic.
This is par for the course with PbP. Do what I used to do. Build good relations with as many GMs as you can. Give them helpful characters without using any crazy rule tricks, just standard characters. BUT feel free to make them memorable in role play... memorable in a good way. Be nice when you are not selected and helpful to others when you are. After a while those GMs will begin to request you in their games, thats right free pass to the front of the line. And they will be far kinder to unusual concepts you present, even far out ones. After all once they know you are a good player you will stand way out from the crowd of potential bad players.
I would want my ten to reflect different places I would want to remember;
1- Star Wars: A New Hope
This would be easier if you could cheat and bring whole series or movie sequels.
My point is that the hacktivist Doom can be arrogant and genius (those are normal from such hackers), and NOTHING is preventing him or her from having a twisted sense of nobility and honor, likewise Doom could still be from Latveria and it would lose nothing. So IF that is the core of Doom I fail to see why you would be upset by the new ideas?
I guess I should really ask you all. WHAT is it you think is being lost and WHY is that so important to you?
But of all the times he is involved in other titles Kthulhu, did they go into depth about Doom's background? Not that I am aware of. They kind of assume people already knew about him even if for nothing more than name recognition. In other words he became just another villain. How many times have titles of ANY sort explored Dr Dooms origins?
I may be late to the thread but... I can answer why. Why go with low magic? Simple; to tell the stories that are impossible with a high magic setting. Survival against the elements or mother nature, murder mysteries, crime dramas, or any other sort of tale that can be solved by casting one spell. Some people miss that part of fantasy and want it back. So they take their favorite fantasy system and tweek it till it can allow such stories.
Grey Lensman wrote:
IIRC, the old movie version isn't the comic version either. Doom did not get powers from the same accident that created the Fantastic Four (nor does he really have any - it's the suit, the brains, and the sorcery he learned). He's pretty much a self-made monster.
Keep in mind that the movie version WAS FOX's attempt to stay true to Dr Doom's comic roots. I for one do not want more of THAT.
PS: I am betting that most of the team at FOX haven't read any old Dr Doom at all.
I have already explained this. But I will try again.The Old Dr Doom isn't the comic book version for most people, myself included. The Old Dr Doom is the original Fantastic Four movie version. And I have yet to hear ANY praise for THAT Dr Doom. He was lame and NEEDS a rewrite. I wasn't intending to specifically say that hacktivist Doom was the "way to go" or anything like that. But as far as fresh takes on a character go I could see it working out. The idea here isn't to appeal to the hundreds of thousands of rabid readers of comics featuring Dr Doom, but rather to appeal to the millions of movie fans many of whom never really got into comics themselves. In effect they are trying to recreate a franchise which is only "based on" the comics and subject it to a far bigger and often more critical audience.
I will admit their track record so far doesn't fill me with hope for the new version... but it is certainly worth a go see. If they get it right this time around it will become the new standard for what the Fantastic Four really IS. If it fails it will just become another forgotten movie used as space filler on cable TV.
John Lynch 106 wrote:
Sounds good to me.
The reason higher point buys are seemingly much more powerful despite the numerical differences being so close is because of the "you must be this tall to ride" effect. Many feats have stat minimums. The more stat minimums you meet the wider your array of character options are. The more character options you have open the more you can optimize. The more you optimize the more powerful your character gets.
The way to limit the power of point buy is to remove or severely restrict buy downs. I have used 20 point buy with NO buy downs to very good effect. It seems to be a sweet spot at least the way my group plays. Although I have used 15 point buy with no buy downs before as it makes 20 stats impossible at first level.
I reviewed the issue and have come to the following conclusion:
No you can't set CL to 20th by adding +5 to the crafting DC. The FAQ sidebar is clear on this. In this case CL 20 is NOT a requirement to craft a staff with a level 1 spell on it.
Yes you can craft a staff for very little money by making the spell it holds cost more charges to use; 10 charges to activate a level 1 spell DOES reduce the cost of that spell by a factor of ten.
Oh and even with the feat you will have to wait till you are either 11th level or at least 9th level caster with a couple levels in something else using the feat.
Magic Item Creation wrote:
In addition, you cannot create potions, spell-trigger, or spell-completion magic items without meeting its prerequisites.
So... you can't use the +5 crafting DC at all with staves which are spell trigger items. I am leaving this separate because I am sure this is an error in print and that it was probably was supposed to mean that you just need to be able to cast the spell in question.
So you could make the cheapest staff you can manage at 11th level which is a staff of cantrip (10 charges per single casting of that one cantrip) made at level 8 CL; the minimum. For (400x0.5x8)/10=160gp that would function as a +2 staff using these abilities.
I am already on casual and finding that combat is either super easy or massively impossible. Swapping companions doesn't help... probably because I didn't properly equip the ones I didn't use. I seem to recall an option where you could have the game level the people for me... maybe that will solve my ineptitude over builds? When I try yet again to play I will have to try that.
PS: Have patience they will patch the menu thing soon. This is why I no longer grab a game on day one. Let everyone else find the bugs so that when I do buy it the game will play smoothly.
* Although it is possible for software to affect hardware: STARCRAFT 2 infamously caused certain graphics cards to overheat on release until Blizzard rushed out an emergency fix.
If this were the case with Dragon Age a quick check of the community would have confirmed it. No, Dragon Age was a stable game without any hardware issues. Hard disks don't last forever. Freehold DM's disk just picked Dragon Age to fail during. Avoiding the new Dragon Age won't prevent future hard disk failures. But sooner or later Freehold DM will lose another hard disk and either become enlightened about these things or avoid yet another program.
As for me I have yet to finish Dragon Age Origins OR Dragon Age 2... Is it just me or did the difficulty of combats in DA2 wildly vary? I had to restart that game too many times when I realized my builds sucked horribly and I became stuck on an impossible combat. Makes me wish easy mode really was easy... if just as a way to continue without starting from square one over and over again.