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

2,135 posts. Alias of Min2007.


RSS

1 to 50 of 2,135 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

You need proof?

Proof of looting

Even if the ring was fake the rest isn't.


Orthos wrote:
137ben wrote:
Aranna wrote:
Also... I found it easier to metamagic psi vs spells, especially if you have the much touted magic/psi transparency since you can use any metamagic feat as a metapsi feat on the fly with a simple application of points. With magic you are often forced to plan ahead your use of the feats (wizard/cleric); which is trickier by far.
You are entitled to your opinion of other things, but this is factually wrong. Metamagic/metapsionics are not part of the magic-psionics transparency. You cannot use metamagic on psionic powers, just like you cannot use metamagic on spell-like abilities. There are separate metapsionic feats for psionic powers, and separate meta-spell-like-ability feats for SLAs. They are separate.
Oh wow I didn't even notice that paragraph. Yeah Aranna I don't know who told you you could use Metamagic feats on Psionics and vice versa but barring house rules that's quite wrong.

Are you sure? My GM was quite emphatic in his assertion that this was correct (of course this was back in 3.5e...) but he is one of my trusted go to sources for rulings. And and as it was explained to me makes total sense... it works so why would this be excluded from transparency?


Thewms wrote:
** spoiler omitted **

roflmao!


It wasn't just against gaming... this mentality predates RPGs and probably goes back to the dawn of time. My mom shared stories with me about her church and growing up. According to her church, TV and movies were satanic. You didn't dare listen to music either unless it was holy music sung in the local style which I kid you not sounded like singing dirges. On a trip up there with my mom I got to attend that church and it frightened me. I asked a relative why they sing that way and told them about the upbeat songs from churches in the southern part of the state, and they told me that people who sing joyously are going to hell... I wanted to correct them with a bible passage but my mom took me aside and said to just put up with it till we got home. Sometimes people listen to other people instead of reading the word of God and so they get all these crazy ideas from people they respect.


As for good vs evil.

Lets take a different scenario:
Say a man was driving down the road and accidentally ran over a small child and his mother.

Good: Takes full responsibility, and does anything he can for the victims and their family.

Neutral: Actively or Passively tries to dodge blame. But doesn't necessarily leave them like that.

Evil: Goes and riffles his victims pockets and purse for their valuables before leaving them there.

Now change this to an airliner shot by a missile and you can see the difference. The neutral response is self preservation, the evil one is callus disregard for human life.


Vlad Koroboff wrote:

Can anyone provide,IDK,EVIDENCE of laughing and looting by rebels?

Because,you see,you do not need to be a rebel to loot stuff from the plane.
Especially considering THE DEATH PENALTY FOR SUCH THINGS.
Seriously,one rebel fighter was executed by firing squad for stealing pants,for God's sake!
But then,rebels suck because they do not provide acceptable security of crash site.

They can track cell phone and credit card usage. And the terrorists are using them.


Comrade Anklebiter wrote:

Pro-Russian separatists brag about shooting down a Ukrainian military plane, discover it is a civilian airliner, cover their asses: evil incarnate.

The United States shoots down an Iranian airliner, refuses to apologize and awards the commander of the Vincennes the Legion of Merit: good guys?

Good guys? Obviously not. Assuming what you say is true the US was tactless and arrogant in the extreme. But unless they went in laughing and looted the valuables from the wreckage of the downed Iranian airliner I would not say evil.

Face it the US has been more neutral (maybe even evil) and less good for a long time now... but that doesn't change the evil done here or who did it.


We will have to agree to disagree then. Because if two battle magic using classes can have such swings in superiority when using battle magic separated only by circumstances such as the level of the caster, I claim imbalance.


Oh? was Auren talking about balance in terms of broken? I didn't get that impression. I am talking about balance in terms of parity between the two systems and when one or the other are clearly superior in different situations then they aren't balanced vs each other. As far as being broken? No psionics by DSP are not broken as far as I have seen, at least not any more than magic itself is.


Orthos wrote:
I would presume it's because spells scale on their own, without having to be augmented, at higher levels.

I can see this with blaster spells but isn't that balanced by the level cap? A third level Fireball magic spell can't do more than 10d6... While the psion version has no such cap on it's power. Sure it makes it cost more to use... but against the spell becoming useless due to game level getting too far ahead of the cap I am inclined to think psi wins that fight at certain levels while at other levels spells win. As you can see... Not balanced vs magic.


Oh on that I agree Orthos... Rynjin and Andrew are correct.


Auren "Rin" Cloudstrider wrote:
psionics are merely easier to track and more balanced.

I have yet to see this assertion hold any truth. While much of the rest of your post is true I find it troubling that you would drop such misinformation in there with it. Psionics are well balanced internally but not well balanced with magic. And as far as ease of tracking powers NOTHING beats the sorcerer. I watched one online game where a player constantly miss spent his psi points. And while his type is probably rare I haven't seen anything like it with slotted magic; maybe slots are easier to understand than points? or even possibly mechanically harder to make errors with? I can't say for sure but nearly every game I played had magic while only a few had psionics, so logically I should be seeing more errors with magic by far if psionics were easier to track.

Also... I found it easier to metamagic psi vs spells, especially if you have the much touted magic/psi transparency since you can use any metamagic feat as a metapsi feat on the fly with a simple application of points. With magic you are often forced to plan ahead your use of the feats (wizard/cleric); which is trickier by far.

And I am curious why you think the spell version of the same power is somehow superior to the psi version. Most people I talk to have the opposite opinion since using points makes using those powers more scalable and easier to select on the fly. It is one of the huge selling points for using the psi system.


I wasn't going to drop my opinion here... but... I changed my mind. I have always supported a people's right to choose their own leaders and if parts of that area wanted to become part of Russia them let them. Unless of course there are a large number of people who don't want that living there. And I guess that is why the separatists in Ukraine proper are more controversial than what happened in Crimea. But this mass murder of the people on that airliner and each sides response to it on the ground has highlighted in absolute certainty who are the good guys and who are the bad guys here. The separatists are pure evil. To commit mass murder of innocent travelers and brag about it needs no words to describe the horror, to threaten away any investigators and loot the plane itself for the victims cell phones and credit cards speaks volumes about the moral depravity of these people. But when I heard the account of one family who traveled to Ukraine to visit the site of their daughter's murder and the selfless support from the Ukrainian people who risked their own lives to help them get closure by holding a memorial at the site of the crash... I was moved to tears.

Ukraine isn't the bad guy... the separatists are the bad guys.


Has anyone had good luck with online play? It occurred to me that we could all have our cake if we could find an online solution. The trouble I have had is the glacially slow pace of PbP and the impossible herding of cats (or players if you prefer) to committing to a set time in chat games. But maybe someone has had better luck and would share their secrets?


I have always wanted to run a planescape style game especially around the city of doors. I love reading old settings and I had a great deal of fun with Ravenloft and Dark Sun but no one seems to like the idea of Planescape around here. I mean to me it seems like you can do so much with such a wide open mix, the stories almost write themselves.


Slaunyeh wrote:
Aranna wrote:

Awww... you seem pretty fired up for someone who is wrong, Jaelithe.

If Marvel says it's a title as well as a name and that they are giving it to a woman. Then it's true. They own it and can do what they want with the IP. No amount of petty ranting is going to change that.

Marvel can obviously do whatever the heck they want. That doesn't make it an inherently good idea. :p

I'm glad you like the change, but could we dial down the sniping of other posters? No sense descending to those levels just because you disagree with them.

Whether it is a good idea or not remains to be seen.

And really how else could someone respond to such a trollish rant?
Yeah, yeah I know don't feed the trolls... But they are SO cute!


Awww... you seem pretty fired up for someone who is wrong, Jaelithe.

If Marvel says it's a title as well as a name and that they are giving it to a woman. Then it's true. They own it and can do what they want with the IP. No amount of petty ranting is going to change that.


I guess I do both. Not sure that I fit the categories you give...

I usually start either with a background idea OR a combat role. Not a build or a fully developed character yet. Let's explore what I mean; Say we are starting in an Arabian setting and I am sitting here with our fellow players brainstorming what we will all play. Pete and Fred are planning twins who are palace guards. So I think hey why not make a palace maiden... the daughter of a noble of some sort who will obviously run off to adventure with the boys. Already I am thinking up story ideas for her but now I need to answer a big question: What will she contribute to combat? No one is going to invite Mary Sue worthless to go adventuring despite the entertainment value of watching her mess up over and over. I decide the boys will need a combat healer to keep them going about their slaughtering ways. Cleric will be my class... and I further specialize that out to a reach meleer. I will be just outside the main combat where I can either attack with reach, cast buffs, or heal them if they get clobbered.

Now I have some outlines Human with aristocratic roots and a Cleric class. And I know her fighting style. So let's delve deeper. Why is she a cleric? And who trained her to fight? She has a comfortable existence growing up under the strict supervision of her family and the palace officials. I decide her father is devoted to the local divinity and so my young aristocrat has automatic entry into the clergy via her father's influence; and her desire to further his faith would be met with approval. Combat training is provided by the church... but why would she want to go adventuring? Fred has decided that he wants to play a silver tongued devil breaking a long list of young maiden's hearts and that gives me my break, my young aristocrat begins adventuring to chase after the boy who broke her heart and prove him wrong! Fred is reluctant at first about too much drama but I convince him that my character is doomed to see the folly of her ways as soon as Fred's character begins chasing his next victim er... romantic interest, and that she will decide it best to remain friends from that point on. I am also counting on the GM to toss some exciting and beautiful locations into their early adventures to hook her on being away from the palace and keep her adventuring to find more excitement. After discussing this with the GM he says not to worry he intends to send out to someplace nice with plenty of exiting danger not into the local sewers. And after a laugh I already have a solid plan for who she is, where she came from, and what she is looking for.

Next step is the mechanics. I need to give her the skills an aristocratic temple maiden would possess. I need to select feats and combat options to allow her to function well as a reach melee combatant. And of course I need to go over her spell options and select spells that let her buff herself and others as well as good healing options. If none of the mechanics conflict with her background then I am all set to begin fleshing out her personality. Basically setting up how I want to play her role. I think hopeless romantic fits well so I start there, but I also go with unbridled curiosity about the world outside her sheltered early life in the palace, and fearless advocate of her god's teachings.

This is enough to start but who knows how she will evolve over the levels?


thejeff wrote:

Actually, AFAIK, we still don't know who the character is, if she's new or an existing character and how much of her own backstory and identity she already has.

You're making assumptions, due to the lack of data in a couple of press releases. If that's all still true when the change actually happens, you'll have more of a point.

Also by doing things this way we already have a tie in to her background in the form of the old Thor. So an existing character with an established back story the readers probably care about will feature prominently in her story. That is way more mileage than they would have gotten from a brand new character with her own version of Thor like powers.


Durngrun Stonebreaker wrote:
Marvel makes comics too!? How do they have the time with movies planned out till 2048?

Marvel is a bunch of sub companies. The one that handles the movies is completely separate from the one that prints comics.


thejeff wrote:
ShinHakkaider wrote:
Aranna wrote:
All the pre judging in here is horrible. It won't just be a temporary thing if people like it and buy it.

One of the writers that I follow on Twitter is Dan Slott. He's been writing Amazing Spider-Man in some form or another for more than 5 years now I think. When It was introduced that Doc Oc was conciousness was going to be in Peter Parker's body and Parker was going away? The vitriol and bile that he received was just VILE.

I'm cynical enough to know that this is what fandom is. They're not willing to give anything even a bit new a chance and their first action is to attack the creator or state how stupid a concept or an idea is.

About a year later as Superior Spider-Man was wrapping up more than a few people wrote on his twitter feed as well as to his face during signings that I was present at that they were wrong and the book was actually really good.

Made me smile a little bit.

But then responses like most of the ones in this thread remind me of why I despise a lot of my fellow fans so much.

All that said and agreed to. It's still going to be a temporary thing, even if people like it and buy it. At least hopefully it will.

If they're not complete idiots, this is already plotted out as a story arc, ending in Thor becoming worthy again and reclaiming the hammer. Hopefully with some lasting character growth and changes and hopefully leaving the female Thor with an expanded role to play.

If this new character and storyline is really popular, there will be a temptation to spin it out longer, probably derailling the original plotline and leading to a confused mess when they eventually, inevitably bring Thor back. Hopefully, they can resist that temptation, stick with the plan and use the popularity to spin the female Thor into a separate title when she's no longer Thor.

(All of this speculation is made much more complicated by not knowing who she is. It makes it difficult to refer to her, especially talking about what happens...

Thanks guys for being more reasonable... And I would be totally fine if they spin her into her own title later on and keep her as a major face in that universe... I would also be massively let down if they return Thor's hammer later and simply treat her as a discardable character; THAT would be unforgivable, and would prove every neigh sayer right about them. I would boycott all Marvel comics after that... not that they probably care about how one girl feels.

But I guess we won't know till they sell us the issues.


Ashiel wrote:
Aranna wrote:

It seems a lot of people are confusing fatigue based casting with point pool casting; The two are NOTHING alike. In fatigue based casting your actual physical ability is diminished as you cast, while in point pools your physical ability never diminishes... you can try to reskin it as fatigue but when you can swing a sword just as well at 1000 points versus 0 points your argument fails miserably.

Well, funny thing...psionics actually does have options for the fatigue based thing, or pushing yourself beyond your limits. Options such as Body Fuel and Overchannel both allow you to go above and beyond. In the case of Body Fuel, you literally begin burning off your physical ability scores, killing yourself in exchange for juice, while Overchannel allows you to suffer damage to increase the potency of your powers.

A near equivalent would be if sorcerers could burn off their ability scores to cast more spells after they ran out of slots, but AFAIK, no such mechanic exists that gets used much.

This doesn't alter what I said at all. The spending of points isn't fatigue. Just because DSP has a couple things you can do optionally to improve your power at the expense of your body doesn't somehow equate to points suddenly equaling fatigue does it?


Jaelithe wrote:

Could this author be going for another variant of, "Thor needs to learn more humility, and he's utterly uncomprehending of the nature of woman, so I, [insert current ruler of Asgard], am going to change his essential nature into that of a female"?

No matter the justification, though, this is just moronic.

Should we expect the Thor/Sif relationship to now become a lesbian titillation? Will we see the Hulk now interested in banging Thor rather than beating him up? (It'd be interesting to see the female Thor now consistently kicking the Hulk's ass, though [as always should have been], because she'll now rely on her innumerable irresistible cosmic powers rather than attempting to beat him like a drum with her hammer, and using a bit of lightning for effect.)

This is not "an intriguing new take on Thor," however, no matter this author's previous success with the character. It's an asinine grasp at straws ... or should I say removal of straw?

Wanting to see a male stay a male, by the way, is not misogynistic. I'd simply prefer to see a female character of tremendous power created from the ground up, rather than one who, no matter the slant put on it, stole another character's mojo for their own.

This character will never be Thor. End of story (no pun intended).

Um...no. As far as I have heard this won't be a sex change.

No THAT isn't misogynistic, It IS to dismiss all female heroes; which most aren't doing with this. What most ARE doing is failing to recognize that Thor is a title as well as a name.

And unless my history is rusty didn't spider woman and bat girl get the same derision by the male majority when they were introduced? So clearly building a NEW character with the same powers as Thor wasn't going to be the correct path to take. If they were going to change up Thor, then THIS was the correct path for better or worse.

Which IS the real point "for better or worse". We don't know if this is going to be great, meh, or pathetic UNTIL we actually read the issues will we?

All the pre judging in here is horrible. It won't just be a temporary thing if people like it and buy it.

Oh and YES this character WILL BE Thor like it or not at least for some amount of time.


Tiny Coffee Golem wrote:
Kydeem de'Morcaine wrote:
Aranna wrote:
Same with the Mithral chain shirt; no armor check penalties. Even mages can wear them though they do have a small spell failure chance, but that can be magiced away. Giving you nice armor for your wizardlings.
Is there a spell that I forgot that gets rid of spell failure?
In 3.5 there was a +1 armor ability, but I'm not sure with pathfinder

This is what I was thinking of.


It seems a lot of people are confusing fatigue based casting with point pool casting; The two are NOTHING alike. In fatigue based casting your actual physical ability is diminished as you cast, while in point pools your physical ability never diminishes... you can try to reskin it as fatigue but when you can swing a sword just as well at 1000 points versus 0 points your argument fails miserably.


Take it from me making chains is not going to work, no GM will let you get away with it even if it is RAW legal.

So where does it fail? Probably on the real market side. No one wants to buy the chains. You COULD set up shop to sell them yourself (or hire a shopkeeper to do it) but that could take years and the wages and building upkeep would dramatically lower your massive windfall.

If you want the market to absorb this then there ARE ways... make a good that the people normally import and sell it at reduced prices. It could still take weeks to unload and you are going to have the guys who import the stuff putting a price on your head. But if you can survive the assassins, go for it.


Anzyr wrote:
While Psionic style is much much more common.

Is it? We have three classic authors and many others who used Vancian style... I am wondering what authors used psionic style? I can't think of any. I admit I haven't read many novels in the last decade maybe this is a new thing I missed?


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Thomas Long 175 wrote:
Edit: Stop with the food!

Come now everyone loves food. It is the one thing we are all addicted to.

:p


1 person marked this as a favorite.
sunshadow21 wrote:
The powers, the name, the hammer, everything else is staying the same, rendering that one change a silly gimmick that benefits no one.

Um? Excuse me? It benefits young girls who could use more role models. And if what they are doing is a little deliberately sensational then who cares? You should applaud their efforts to revive a dying industry by drawing in new readers. Thor sells 45 thousand comics... any other industry would have given up on such a low rate of consumption. Think about that a second 45k versus the millions of people who still read comics. Clearly he isn't on more than a tiny fraction of pull lists. If this more than doubles his sagging sales and the writing/art can hold the new readers then I predict the female Thor will be a long term addition to the Marvel line up. Who knows if enough of the old Thor readers like the new Thor then people may forget the poorly read old male version all together.


Same with the Mithral chain shirt; no armor check penalties. Even mages can wear them though they do have a small spell failure chance, but that can be magiced away. Giving you nice armor for your wizardlings.


Yes. But that was the grand idea of it if I remember my history correctly. They made the modules, then the developers played those modules, and finally they wrote that play through into novels. So it probably comes across very close to the module.


Scythia wrote:
Aranna wrote:

Monsters SHOULD be run intelligently. Unless they are literally described as mindless. Orcs and Goblins have been relentlessly attacked by the more civilized races for millennia and they are still around so YES they would have excellent tactics and good battle instructors.

Or they breed like rats.

You know, those creatures seen as pests and enemies of humanity for millennia that we haven't wiped out despite our best efforts. If we can't eliminate them, I doubt fantasy world humans could eliminate goblins & orcs. Both are quite willing to live in filth infested warrens that few humans would willingly go near, both feed on the scraps and refuse of civilization, and both reproduce rapidly. While rats are far from stupid, they don't use any kind of real tactics aside from "hide!" and "dash!", but they do fine for themselves.

Except rats are tiny things that can live happily in areas we can't reach. Goblins and Orcs are much much larger. A real world equivalent might be wolves and wolves survive by avoiding human lands. As humans expand we tend to wipe out any enemies we find and wolves have been hunted out of existence in many areas. In my own state they had to import wolves from other wild areas to help keep the deer population down, since we hunted down all our native wolves.

Orcs I usually run as a prmative culture often borrowing ideas from Klingons. Goblins I run as cowardly but cruel. Very different than the brave Golarion goblins.


Kydeem de'Morcaine wrote:

Actually I don't ok most things. Past experience has taught me that most* of what a player wants to bring in IS cheese walking and talking. And no I don't always know it when I see it. Many things seem pretty reasonable until you actually see it in action in combination with other reasonable things at medium to high levels. So I have to look at things very carefully and compare it to other, at least, semi-optimal builds before I bring it in.

Having said that, I found the DSP psionincs a pleasant surprise. Potentially powerful? Yes. But not excessively so when compared to other baseline things that are allowed.

And as I said before. I love the way the system works.
.
.

Aranna wrote:
I have always said since psionics is better, why not just ditch the spell casting classes and go straight psionics in your games. ...
Seriously considering that for the next campaign I GM. About 90% sure that I will if I can get Herolab packages for the psionics books.

Awesome, you sound like a good GM.

Let us know how it goes, please.


Comedic goblins? The Golarion writers play too much Magic the Gathering.


I loved most of Death Gate Cycle... except the part where they turn a powerful female mage into a helpless captive; it made no sense.


I would rule that the player can do whatever they want... but I would simply assign a +0.5 STR bonus on off hand attacks for each off hand used; so two off hands wielding a two handed sword would do +1x STR mod instead of the +1.5x STR mod that a primary and off hand would combine for. And yes that means the primary hand adds in +1x STR when used.


I suspect those numbers are off... mainly because I bet a large percentage fall into more than one category.


FLite wrote:

I have a Gnome with a -5 to most charisma skills, heading toward -7.

He basically is a socially unpleasant gnome (CHA 9 Blight Druid -1) covered in sores and bad smells (wasting oracle -4) Sometimes with green goo dripping out his ears (Clear Ear -2)

At what point does just having him around make the other PC's diplomacy checks harder?

As long as you avoid doing any diplomacy yourself the best is no effect at all and the worst you could do is apply a situational penalty on their rolls depending entirely on how you play this role or who your group is talking to.


Orthos wrote:
Aranna wrote:
Scythia wrote:
NoncompliAut wrote:
Aranna wrote:
LOL if I had a nickle for every time a player mooched food.
I host a game and provide food for the other players & the GM (We're a small group). No matter what it is (grapes, unshelled walnuts, chips, cherries, tangerines), it will all be gone by the end of the session. I am very tempted to serve Brussels sprouts, just for experimental purposes.
Maybe if you cover them in nacho cheese sauce, or ranch dip, or Doritos powder.
Hmmm... good idea. Normally I grill chopped brussel sprouts and use them on sandwiches instead of lettuce. But serving them with a cheese sauce might be tasty as well; although I would use real cheese.
Do a fondue type thing?

Exactly.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Scythia wrote:
NoncompliAut wrote:
Aranna wrote:
LOL if I had a nickle for every time a player mooched food.
I host a game and provide food for the other players & the GM (We're a small group). No matter what it is (grapes, unshelled walnuts, chips, cherries, tangerines), it will all be gone by the end of the session. I am very tempted to serve Brussels sprouts, just for experimental purposes.
Maybe if you cover them in nacho cheese sauce, or ranch dip, or Doritos powder.

Hmmm... good idea. Normally I grill chopped brussel sprouts and use them on sandwiches instead of lettuce. But serving them with a cheese sauce might be tasty as well; although I would use real cheese.


Ashiel wrote:
Aranna wrote:
It isn't weaksauce nor will someone do a very good job incorporating psionics on only 15 minutes of reading. Aranna's rule of good game mastery #1: Know the Rules. If you want to incorporate psionics you will need to be well versed NOT JUST on the mechanics involved in spending psi points and manifesting powers BUT you will also need a strong knowledge of all the various powers that will come up in play PC or villain. And if you want to make psionics shine then you will also need to learn all those tricky little bits that you can combo up with psi powers. That's a lot of learning for some GMs who may be happy with things the way they already are.

By this line of reasoning, every time new spells are published the GM suddenly doesn't comprehend magic anymore, since not only does he have to know how magic works, but he must also need strong knowledge of all spells and their combos.

No, I don't think so. All I need to know how magic works is the Magic chapter in the core rulebook, just like all I need to know how Psionics works is the Psionic Powers chapter in the psionics book. From there, I have the needed knowledge to incorporate any power that is published.

Quote:
Take for example how many times people bring up the fact that not knowing the limit to how much you can pump a power breaks the game... That's a lot of GMs and players getting the basic mechanics wrong and I bet they spent far more than 15 minutes on the rules.

I'd be willing to take that bet, especially since the explanation of how augmenting a power (IE - spending more points on the power) explains the limit. In fact, it has never proved anything other than how people won't read rules before they try to pretend to be experts on them.

Quote:
PS: Options are fine... I just prefer tightly themed games. Just a preference it isn't superior just different.
You should probably remove a good half of the core classes and most splat material, including new classes, as there is much overlap between them, only...

Now your being deliberately difficult. A GM who has mastery of spells doesn't lose that when new spells come out. They just wisely don't include them in their game until they have had time to review them and decide for themselves if they will fit.

As for the bet you will probably lose... most of these people probably spend at least an hour perusing the various powers they can get. And most of them probably at least spent 15 minutes skimming through how powers work.

As for options: I have done that to good effect before. It depends on the theme I am going for... horror? I probably remove many of the classes that specialize in slaughtering undead or keeping people healthy. Gives them good reason to fear the night. So yes with a psionics themed game I would remove the spell casters.


Ashiel wrote:
Aranna wrote:
I have always said since psionics is better, why not just ditch the spell casting classes and go straight psionics in your games. Which is great in theory... now the hard part; finding a GM that not only hasn't banned psionics but knows them well enough to pull this off. Because that is probably the biggest reason psi gets banned anyway; GMs don't know the new system well enough to incorporate it into their game.

It takes about 15 minutes to become capable of adjudicating psionics, so that's a weaksauce excuse. That said, there's a very good reason that I haven't bothered to just change all my campaigns over to psionics as the only form of magic...because there's not much point in it.

Options are good. I find it's just less work for more gain to let everyone have their cake.

It isn't weaksauce nor will someone do a very good job incorporating psionics on only 15 minutes of reading. Aranna's rule of good game mastery #1: Know the Rules. If you want to incorporate psionics you will need to be well versed NOT JUST on the mechanics involved in spending psi points and manifesting powers BUT you will also need a strong knowledge of all the various powers that will come up in play PC or villain. And if you want to make psionics shine then you will also need to learn all those tricky little bits that you can combo up with psi powers. That's a lot of learning for some GMs who may be happy with things the way they already are.

Take for example how many times people bring up the fact that not knowing the limit to how much you can pump a power breaks the game... That's a lot of GMs and players getting the basic mechanics wrong and I bet they spent far more than 15 minutes on the rules.

PS: Options are fine... I just prefer tightly themed games. Just a preference it isn't superior just different.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

LOL if I had a nickle for every time a player mooched food.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Monsters SHOULD be run intelligently. Unless they are literally described as mindless. Orcs and Goblins have been relentlessly attacked by the more civilized races for millennia and they are still around so YES they would have excellent tactics and good battle instructors.


I may be a bit of a newbie to comics having only recently read Ms Marvel... BUT I like that they made Thor a woman. It is as much a title as it is a name, the original Thor will probably still be called Thor, and the new Thor will also have her own real name; just her super hero name will be "Thor". This also makes a lot more sense than creating a new super hero with a hammer and lightning powers because this ties her into a long and glorious history and gives her back story instant depth. Hopefully bringing in old Thor readers as well as the batch of new ones who like the idea.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

I have always said since psionics is better, why not just ditch the spell casting classes and go straight psionics in your games. Which is great in theory... now the hard part; finding a GM that not only hasn't banned psionics but knows them well enough to pull this off. Because that is probably the biggest reason psi gets banned anyway; GMs don't know the new system well enough to incorporate it into their game.


Yeah I absolutely love Word Crimes.


Ashiel wrote:
Aranna wrote:
Ashiel wrote:

I can only assume that you mean the 8th level Kineticist power psionic telekinetic sphere, which does create a telekinetic barrier that is pretty much impervious to damage and stuff. The thing is, this is the description for the power.

Psionic Telekinetic Sphere wrote:
As the telekinetic sphere spell, except as noted here.

Notice something funny about this? It's a power that mimics a spell of the same level, except the power is harder to get (you either have to be a 15th level kineticist, or a 17th level anything else with a feat tax). Even then, it's hardly that amazing as it specifically notes that it can be taken apart with a rod of cancellation, rod of negation, disintegrate or -- ooh, ooh, get this one -- a targeted dispel magic. That's right, dispel magic breaks it.

Sorcery indeed. :P

A dispel needed to roll to take it down and since we were like just hitting early epic levels at this point that wasn't an easy roll to make. Oh the GM did take it down on me a couple times with disjunction I believe but that didn't really detract from it's usefulness.
An 8th level spell/power should be useful. :P

I think the concern was two fold; not only was it (mostly) impenetrable in 3.5e but I could use it once or twice in at least six or more encounters. Which was our typical number of encounters before resting.


Ashiel wrote:

I can only assume that you mean the 8th level Kineticist power psionic telekinetic sphere, which does create a telekinetic barrier that is pretty much impervious to damage and stuff. The thing is, this is the description for the power.

Psionic Telekinetic Sphere wrote:
As the telekinetic sphere spell, except as noted here.

Notice something funny about this? It's a power that mimics a spell of the same level, except the power is harder to get (you either have to be a 15th level kineticist, or a 17th level anything else with a feat tax). Even then, it's hardly that amazing as it specifically notes that it can be taken apart with a rod of cancellation, rod of negation, disintegrate or -- ooh, ooh, get this one -- a targeted dispel magic. That's right, dispel magic breaks it.

Sorcery indeed. :P

A dispel needed to roll to take it down and since we were like just hitting early epic levels at this point that wasn't an easy roll to make. Oh the GM did take it down on me a couple times with disjunction I believe but that didn't really detract from it's usefulness.


Ashiel wrote:
Aranna wrote:
Ashiel wrote:
Aranna wrote:
And if combat turned badly we could hide in my restored impenetrable shield
What sorcery is this? O.o

Not sorcery silly, it was a psionic power... some sort of kinetic barrier if I recall correctly that stopped all attacks regardless of type. I had three free uses from my races 3/day psi power and plenty of points to keep it going after that.

Lol, whut? :P

Is that a serious response?

Wizard's have a similar spell I believe but can't use it this frequently.

1 to 50 of 2,135 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2014 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.