|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
So I will place a suggestion here, even though you expanded upon this in the GM Experience thread.
Instead of just rolling or picking through CR appropriate encounters maybe another method would be to focus on core ideas and themes and write/fit the encounters around those themes or ideas (and motivations).
So in your goblin write up the theme would be: Hunters.
So if you dropped one into your game you could either run it as the PCs meeting the Goblins first, or maybe they can meet the Fey (as it fits the environment) first who thinks its being stalked by creatures trying to catch it or kill it, then shortly followed by using the Goblin hunters encounter.
A method (just an idea really) is to start with a series of basic words/themes. Then see if you can randomly roll or just pick a creature that fits the word/theme to create an encounter. Some you can combine - then let them swirl around in your head. Some combined will not make sense, those are usually the most fun to try to put together.
Some sample words/themes:
BTW, I stole a few words from Cal's post to add to my sample list.
Had a funny "go with it" situation arise in my last Gamma World playtest game night. The characters are low level, armed with crap (xbows, short bows, spears, etc) so they are always on the look out for better weapons or even ancient tech gear while they are on their quest.
So they are exploring a small ruined town, checking some rubble of what's left of a few houses and some businesses. In one of the buildings they find the skeletal remains of an expired mutant (killed by some rubble spiders) - on the body they find some keys and the rest of his gear. No big deal. They fight the rubble spiders in an insane battle for a low level fight with players falling into walls (and almost through them) with a constant threat of the building collapsing (made their luck checks).
Another house over they find a very well hidden cache of survival gear and small locked strong box (they rolled the highest difficulty while searching). Now there are no potions in GW, but there are plenty of fragile items - so they are trying to figure out how to get it open or pick it without damaging the contents. When I wrote the building/loot up, I put the lock in as a challenge - did anyone get lockpicking, is there another way to open it without destroying the contents, etc. Basically a reward for those who invested the right skills or creative problem solving.
One of the players says - "why don't we check the keys we found on that skeleton?"
So I think to myself - "damn, I should have wrote that into the module".
Sometimes the players string together good ideas because they see things from their pov - which is always a nice thing to have when writing (and then re-writing) adventures.
It just comes and goes Hoover - that being said, if the stuff doesn't fit into your "simple encounter" project SAVE IT FOR LATER!
As far as 30 days of 30 simple encounters - start with a guideline and layout. Focus on the basics - the creature(s), a hook, the terrain, the time of day/night - and then confine your encounters to "sort of" fit those parameters.
If you come up with something deeper, set it aside (still work on it though) and focus on generating encounters for the project. Even though its simple in scope and by contrast detailed encounters are great, there's something to be said for sticking by your own rules on a project.
The modules are in you though - if generating encounters serves as a tool for creating bigger things then by all means use it! Even if they just become notes that get set aside.
That was my understanding also - no more subs, but more due to the time pressures and obligations (plus the potential of being late). I think their concern was more of a method of purchase and delivery - aka - the subscription model.
That being said - they still can come out with an Expansion II, III, (Un)Living Rappan Athuk (Campaign guide, plots), Rappan Athuk - The Lost Levels, etc - without putting themselves on the spot or a forced time table that a subscription would require.
I know that FGG wants to expand their Lost Lands Campaign world and that is what gamers want and GMs need to run a long term game, but to me RA is a gold mine of potential material that needs be revisited time to time. I think those opining for it in this thread are going on the information that RA would still be getting some product.
RA is the Lost Lands Castle Greyhawk and Temple of Elemental Evil (combined). It was one of the supplements/mods that hooked people back in the NG days (along with Bard's Gate, Lost City of Barakus, Vault of Larin Karr) and much like Orcus and Tsathoggua it is an iconic dungeon that people remember. To me it would make sense to keep RA in the minds of Lost Lands GMs and players as an important locale of the Lost Lands (much like Tsar).
I suspect the Yellow King plot thread might be one and done for this season. My guess would be next season we will get some thing else with nods to cosmic horror but not specifically the Yellow King. Lots of other material to draw inspiration from.
Paizo.com devoured my post, bleah..
I think this is going to be tied to a sex-cult, possibly mythos related. Possibly Shub-Niggurath. Soon there will be whispers around the water cooler about who or what is the Dark Goat of the Wood with a Thousand Young, just like they did with the Yellow King....maybe not, but possibly. Lemme esplain...
This thing reads like a Delta Green op, but instead of federal agents we have a city cop (the city is supposed to be much like the City of Vernon near LA), Sheriff and CHP and an underworld criminal - so they have all the research points covered.
So my theory on the Shub-Niggurath cult angle -
The crime and the icon plus some peripheral players (the Russians) made me think of the Skoptsi -as written up for Delta Green but could be based off of the real thing, and then the black idol in the car with Caspere made me again think of the Skoptsi and their black icons (and their search for them/importance). So Caspere may have been part of this cult and had his bits and pieces removed because in some way he offended the cult or put a resource at risk. Maybe a track of land? Maybe he found an icon?
Santa Muerte can also be considered an avatar of the Dark Goat - all those found bodies in the field with markers in the opening shot. Missing women, and no doubt they may play up missing children/adoptions from Russia. So this can go a 100 ways. Or maybe a 1000 - Young.
The monk's name who started the Skoptsi - Semyon. Maybe a coincidence with our underworld character in TD2, but the whole thing seems suspect.
Skoptsi/Shub-Niggurath FTW. I'm sticking with that theory until at least the next episode.
So.....how much xp do I get for cracking this thing wide open?
This pretty much right here. I would not write off the quirky Goblins of the keeps so quickly. I think if you added some levels, added in some extra support you may come to like the setup.
I actually have an expansion of the Castle (Beyond Castle Calaelen - original, isn't it) that adds a small secret dungeon and a few entrances throughout the complex (primary one is in the sealed library).
The reason for me is that I always use slow track xp, I tallied up the xp for the entire complex and felt that I still had a budget to work with to add a few more encounters. Going through my written notes in my little blue notebook (have not converted it to word yet) I have added:
Added to Roster:
- A Fiendish Orgekin-Gnoll cleric of Crocutus (level 2, but that's assuming the original mod) - with Fragile and Oversized Maw as features.
Unbreached Crypt (not yet accessed by goblins, entrance is in sealed library):
- Petrified Zombies and Skeletons (increased AC +4, flat DR 5/-, Resist Fire , but move slower). Regenerate 1 point per minute.
- Bat Swarm (Fiendish Bats) I call "Strip Bats" - fly around like a bat swarm at first, then start attacking PCs trying to strip flesh from bone.
- Animated Gibbet (I have a full write up and history of this monster if I ever get the courage to post it).
Advancing the story: Since becoming a cleric of Orcus, Jedra has been given visions of undead by her demon god. She has started to dig around the complex (and is looking for slaves to do the work) to find and free the Petrified Dead. While they are particularly slow monsters, nothing would prevent her from controlling them, rounding them up in a wagon and deploying them on an unsuspecting camp..or town. Somewhere strategically where their slow speed wouldn't be a problem and escape would be difficult.
Lead ins/hooks: Missing farmers or traders in or around Zelkors Ferry are being used as slaves to dig out the Castle or being used as sacrifices by Jedra to give her more "visions" and guidance.
I loved Mr. Clatworthy's original module, my only regret was that it was not longer. So I made it longer.
silverhair (or anyone else interested) PM me if you need ideas on expansion or some of the stat blocks for any of the these additions.
What's ironic about it? Are people at science fiction conventions incapable of racism (I feel required to specify:Racism against people of color.)
I guess its just hard for me to digest this form of racism with the stories of the ones I grew up with - parents in concentration camps, my dad having to give up his house (as a kid) to a Wehrmacht Officer, people being burned alive in their homes because of their race - you know - that kind of racism.
Maybe I am just too privileged to see this softer insidious (and stealth/Sith-like) modern racism that occurs at Science Fiction cons. You know - where a woman of color (who also happens to be a published science fiction writer) advocates reading books along racial gender lines and feels threatened enough to create a safe space for POC. Maybe the racism she fears is as legit as the ones facing POC 40 years ago - lynching, murder - killed by bombs or even just being barred from private spaces?
Barred from privates spaces...hmmm, reminds me of something.....?
Well, technically (at least according to RA) the 2nd level of MoD is the Demon's Gullet (2B) which is easily accessible via MoD.
The thing is (and this may help you), both of them are probably lower level/higher traffic dungeons that frequently get restocked by denizens - so the survival rate is higher than normal. Higher survival rate - means you can use rumors, survivor stories, etc, to communicate what you need to the players.
Of course it doesn't all need to be true.
Example (Info, plus rumor plus potential encounter)
Jacob the Walker (retired level 2 Ranger):
- "I wouldn't say it was all just mindless vermin down there - just by what we saw. The easier parts weren't too big to explore though - the main level that is, but you could dig - go down deeper if you have the courage. We didn't.
The Mouth leads to the Gullet, the Demons Gullet - naturally of course. Though there's nothing natural about that place.
I can say that even on the first floor of the place it marks you (looks down at his mangled leg), not just your body...the place...it leaves a stain on your soul.
I remember the bastard monster who took my leg - the local tribes called him Druhgin Bloodjaw, a local villain with a massive war hammer who controlled the Mouth of Doom- don't know what he was - maybe a very large orc, a half-breed or even an Ogre. Normally I am good at figuring out things like that - awfully hard when you can't see for the blood in your eyes.
Of course Drughin was murdered by his own men a few years back - and being an evil bastard he was reanimated as a zombie by the dark forces that fuel that place. Maybe an Ogre zombie that matches the description of Drughin in room 1C-24 (Empty room).
So with the above rumor/story I am:
Silverhair, I wrote out the above details in bullet points as point of record for others not because I think you don't understand. I would like this to serve as a one-stop shop for RA DMs.
I'm guess that wraith is weighting the "do whatever it takes to make a good/engaging game" attitude of the earlier editions vs. the general harshness you (and I) are associating with those systems HD.
But I am with HD on this one - only in the post 2e era has their really been a push for "make the players happy, even if it means running a death-less game/ignore bad dice rolls" vs. the older style of "just roll up a new guy".
So ignoring dice as it factors into player potential death/unhappiness seems more new school than old school. To this grognard at least.
I hope FGG continues to offer a "Herald" option on the KS (PF and S&W backer). I'm not running PF anymore, though I would still like the complexity and write-up to convert over 2e. I also like having the OE (S&W) version as a good comparison, baseline and final proof for my 2e conversion.
Just a Guess wrote:
Wow - how ignorant. All because some idiot doesn't want to put two plastic grooms on a cake = entering Nazi territory.I wouldn't wish "Nazi territory" on my worst enemies.
Read a book or talk to a survivor (if you can find one) before you spew hyperbole. It just makes you look really bad and undermines your argument.
IDK - are the people in question (aka the "bigots") refusing service to gay people in total or refusing to provide services for a religious function that they disagree with on the grounds of their personal faith (gay marriage)?
In the case with the bakers - are they refusing to sell a chocolate éclair to their gay clientele or telling them that they cannot sit as a couple in their dining area and eat their éclair's together?
Or are they refusing to put two grooms on a custom made wedding cake - refusing to make a specific cake design?
Wow, that's major news if that's the case.
Though from I've seen so far, what they seem to be doing is piggy backing some of their splat content with their module releases (new races, class options, etc).
Don't know if that is part of their master plan or that's just the way it turned out with their initial modules.
Delayed Blast Threadlock wrote:
In - of itself, as in auto-cannibalism?
I cannot comprehend how biting one's nails could constitute an evil act - but it certainly breaks etiquette, so maybe CN?
I have around a 1000 questions relating to the CN alignment, let me know when you guys want me to start a thread.....
for each one.
Delayed Blast Threadlock wrote:
I don't see what this has to do with Paladins and our modern world view of Good and Evil (or lack therof).
Also, if a Paladin falls in the woods, and no one is around to see it - does he need to Atone?
Adam Daigle wrote:
You may have hit the mark, but I think you should have communicated your intent a little better.On more than one occasion this was being presented as an homage to Gamma World or more closely, Expedition to the Barrier Peaks, which it wasn't. In effect those things were minor background and window dressing to a story about about divine ascendancy, which is on par with return of the Ancient Big Bad (RotRL, CotCT, etc) which has already been done in other APs. This could have gone several other ways, better ones imo - the threat of Ancient Technology that should not be tampered with as the BBEG vs. an AI, a Big Liftoff or inversely a Return of the Masters. Maybe it was the threat in the AP, Unity just didn't seem scary or nefarious as far as demented AI threats go.
And I get it it, Iron Gods being the title and all. I guess based upon how much S3 was being touted as an influence pre-release I was expecting more "Iron" and less "Gods", because the emphasis on the latter is in every other AP. I think many of us were waiting for an "Iron" that we didn't care about some of the other aspects, but the AP was not compelling. Again, this could have been the way Unity was set up as a foe - with the AI not even feeling like a threat.
I was pretty let down with IG. I held off any criticism till it ran its course, but in the end it was (for me) a big let down. After Lords of Rust I just stuck with the AP because the maps could be recycled for other games.
aka the Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz game.
The irony (oh the irony) is that there are actually game publishers and not just singular GMs who promote this type of game.
THE GAME COMPANY THAT PROMOTES TEACHABLE GAMING VIA PRODUCT
Just fix your damn game or try to write adventures that are compelling and worth running.
Suggestion: Switch game systems or just ignore/delete the "message" promoted by their products if the system is worth playing.
Since your character isn't a person and therefore doesn't need motivation, you'll always be looking to the next room, rather than considering whether this is something Stockdwarf #13448 would actually choose to do.
Wait, characters in PF are not a bundle of stats and in fact are real people???1?!??
Or...PF characters are real characters (with feelings, sex drives and other motivations) while all other characters in all other games in every edition made (and yet to be created) are just "a bundle of stats"?
Good try, fail - but herculean in effort so credit for that one.
Greg, any update on the demon-god of Gnolls? I know that the current demon lord (his name escapes me - featured in Bards Gate I think) defeated another demon lord of Gnolls who wielded a triple-flail (who cannot be named) who held that title for several years.
As far as Gnomes are concerned I would go with a mix of Sylvan and civil - not rural per se (that is more Halfling territory) but something that strikes a good compromise between rolling hills and hearth. I like the last the name of Mosstone(s) or Greenstone(s) but I can't think of a first name.
The problems with Gnomish names, especially a gods name - is that it has to strike a balance between sounding Gnomish, and hard (because he's a God that fights Orcs, Goblins and Kobolds + giants) without the whole thing sounding silly.
I wish I could be more helpful - but I'm in the middle of a re-write of Gamma World so all I have on my mind is Central Nervous System Syndrome, long term effects of surviving radiation exposure and ammo quality & sort rates.
Everything you've posted so far is very impressive. It's just too bad that the Lost Lands are so many years away. It would be nice (and I know it would sell) if you guys could put out a small holdover item with maps. Something along the lines of a Lost Lands folio edition - maps with a booklet (36 pages) that give a very basic outline of the core world - just to get the world out so people can start campaigns not directly tied to the main existing modules (Barakus, Bards Gate, RA or Tsar).
Something like this. The 1980 folio edition.
As a holdover item for people who want to run a wider LL campaign (which is a few years off at this point) I know it would sell.
Just an idea.
I am a right wing conservative extremist and I loved the character Mr. Spock.
And it wasn't just Star Trek that impressed me with Mr. Nimoy's work - his narration of In Search of.. put him on par with such TV greats as Rod Serling (who hosted the original show/feature). The man was good at his trade and helped to create a character that is both iconic in fiction and in gaming. His impact on me and several of my friends was profound.
To me Spock transcends the Left v Right paradigm. He espoused aspects of both (the better parts) and I find it strange that a conservative - who should value logic vs. emotion (a conservative mantra) would rail against a character based in reason vs. emotion in his decision making process (which was flawed at times).
Spock was the best of both sides while being neither. Even his hippy aspects that this joker is railing against - the individual vs. the group - I just don't see it as leftist preaching. Spock, if anything was his own person - I can't remember an incarnation where he asked someone else to sacrifice themselves for the greater good - if it was ever proposed it was always his own neck on the line. So I don't see this as a leftist position.
I refrained for a few days getting in on this one - but I do feel that the writer of this piece waited a week (for the body to get cold) and then used it as a hit job on the current POTUS (who I dislike). Just a cheap shot with minimal consequence or risk. Aka Chicken s*+&.
2e has rules in place for awarding xp for: clever ideas, idea that saves the party, RP character, encouraging others to participate, successful use of granted power (not always combat), Spells to further ethos, making magic items, successful research, getting treasure or using Rogue abilities successfully.
Sounds like Murderhobo/Greedy system alright.
Wait, do the older systems have a WBL system or was that Pathfinder?
Yes - 3/x is the system where money is everything - where it's really important that you need X cash/level to buy or build your own (boring) magic items to change your stats.
Dire Mongoose wrote:
If you have bad DMs or DMs who really want casters to dominate the field then it works that way. If you actually read the spell and run it the way it's listed, it doesn't:
"Items dropped or put down by the invisible creature become visible; items picked up disappear if tucked into the clothing or pouches worn by the creature."
If he's flying around doing nothing then he is not much of a threat unless he is summoning creatures. Anything else constitutes an attack.
"Note that the priest spells bless, chant, and prayer are not attacks for this purpose."
Dire Mongoose wrote:
Good luck guessing where to throw darts (which actually is one of the better ways to deal with the spell as a humanoid) since there's no such thing as a Spot, Listen, or Perception skill.
Here is your perception check: "All highly Intelligent (Intelligence 13 or more) creatures with 10 or more Hit Dice or levels of experience have a chance to detect invisible objects (they roll saving throws vs. spell; success means they noticed the invisible object)."That Int 13 was more viable in older editions because there were no dump stats (another bad gaming idea) - so you could easily have ANY character with a 13 Int just by virtue of rolls since 13 is not a high stat value when rolling stats.
So no, not that powerful.
Dire Mongoose wrote:
When people make an argument that the 3E caster is best, they often assume that the caster is prepped for the encounter at hand, which in an actual game they might or might not be. In 2E with its titanic defensive/utility spell durations you always would be ready. The 2E Wizard's Handbook even basically says you're an idiot if you're walking around without a fresh Stoneskin because there's no reason that you have to.
And again, anyone can grapple the wizard, which ignores the stoneskin and also shuts down the wizards ability to cast spells unless they are verbal. But I don't want to re-hash that one. Stoneskin has already been proven to not be the spell you originally presented and without the need of using pebbles to negate it (I would never rule that way). For what you have to spend and the ease of it coming off from any crappy attack it just isn't that good.
3e based casters are the best - they are not even playing on the same level of rules, they are playing above them. A whole set of mechanics were designed - the skill system (which is a terrible and game-able binary +X system) and then the casters just take a giant steaming one right on it - since they operate a level above. Terrible design.
3e based casters are OP, unbalanced and one of the reasons why 3e games are terribly unbalanced (and unfun). I would rather take a jumble of incoherent rules than to play a game that was written by frustrated 2e casters trying to appeal to the lowest common denominator in gaming and is fundamentally broken.
Recently went back to 2nd - some info is hard to find, some data inconstant and layout could be better but it's a 1000% better than PF just by virtue of actual game play and fun.
Legendary martials weren't Christmas Trees, eh? Let's just LOOK at King Arthur a second here...
This individual is arguing against x-mass tree affect without even understanding it (which is always fun).Having 15 melee weapons is not x-mass tree effect. Needing six core items so you can survive due to inherent required math is x-mass tree.
That isn't a 1st ed AD&D, 2nd ed AD&D or Basic D&D invention, that's 3rd ed based invention in gaming. A terrible and unforgivable one. Done.
Pathfinder does a better job at making Martials more impressive than earlier Editions,..
No, they do not. I have yet to see it. Maybe in Unchained?
Dire Mongoose wrote:
No, we actually read the rules and ran it the way it was written.
Even your 7th level wizard comment is so incorrect it needs to be addressed. You get 1d4+1/per two caster levels for stoneskin, so your 7th level caster is going to have 1d4+3 stone skins. Max 7 blocks. Tarrasque gets 6 attacks per round. So on the second round that 7th level wizard is eviscerated lunchmeat.
Also, you do know that each "attack" against a caster wearing stone skin loses a hit?
So two level 1 characters just negated the higher level wizards spell without making one die roll. All they need to do is say I throw 3 or shoot 2, and they stone skins are marked off.
Maybe you and other players ran it differently, but when you run it by the book the spell was not as powerful as people frequently ran it (which was incorrectly).
Here is the quote from the spell entry-
So, no - not that good. Misused and misunderstood.
The only wizards that run roughshod over everything else are from 3rd ed + variants. 2e wizards were very manageable and required tremendous support so they could be effective.
They are very different mechanically and in respective power levels of characters.
There is no universal d20 mechanic. Skill (Non-weapon proficiencies)are a roll under an associated stat with a modifier.
AC is based around a target Armor Class value of 0, with armor class starting at 10 and going down to -10 (more for ultra powerful unique creatures). So if you have a THAC0 of 15, that means you hit an AC of 0 on a 15, and AC of 1 on a 14, an AC of 3 on a 12, etc. Point of reference - Plate Mail w/shield is AC 2.
Attributes have built in detailed function and are more detailed at different values than a +1 or +2 modifiers to rolls.
Magic Items do not replicate spells (not exactly, they have some unique non-spell powers and minor differences).
Hit points and all around damage are less. So a 5th level fighter with 40 hp is decent.
Casters are considerably weaker - less spell options, less spell use over the course of a scenario (less slots). Spell casting in direct combat is highly dangerous.
Fighters are considerably more powerful, get multiple attacks with no negatives and attack rate is also tied with the weapon you are using (throw 2 daggers per round, fire 2 arrows) at no penalty.
There are too many difference to list here tbh (and I need to get back to re-writing my own game).
Just try to go into it with an open mind and if you have a good DM it should be fun. I'm sure other posters will soldier on in telling you how bad it's going to be.
It de-emphasizes character build and choices and focuses a bit more on play (exploration and combat are considerably faster than PF).
Grind my gears....
Threadcrapping/badwrongfun in the suggestion forums.
We get it, you don't even like the notion that someone would want to run a Low Magic Game or even consider the mechanics behind it. But the SUGGESTION FORUMS, where someone is looking for ideas on how to do so is not the place soapbox your gameview.
And this is not specific to low magic questions/suggestions/offerings. The above comment can also be phrased with "X topic" in the place of Low Magic Game.
Like DE, I don't run PF anymore but when I did I gave out xp under the following criteria:
1) Xp is given out on managing encounters - avoiding, talking through or fighting. If for example they encounter a group of orcs - they get xp for evading, fighting or talking themselves out of the encounter. You don't get points for circumventing the orcs because you chose Path B over A, but if you go down Path A (orcs) and get past them without a fight, yes - you "beat" that encounter.
2) Xp for encounters are for the encounter - if they fight that group of orcs and half the orcs flee - then they get the whole allotment of xp for dealing with that encounter. Doesn't need to be a body=xp formula (imo). In many cases capturing or even just talking through encounters instead of fighting yields more - you get the xp and the info.
3) If a player could not make it but we still game and run their character in fights/encounters/exploring - they get xp for the session for those events. They do not get special xp.
4) Special xp: This is done in two ways. First, I award xp for exceptional gaming - crazy ideas, good roleplaying, daring maneuvers with some lucky rolls....and daring maneuvers with some unlucky rolls. Yes, I reward some bad ideas and bad luck - if the intent was good. NPC'd PCs (players who miss sessions) do not get this xp.
5) Xp awards are done at the start of the next session as sort of an opening of the meeting. This serves multiple functions:
I run mostly open sandbox and somewhat non-linear/non-railroad games - so I feel tracking xp works for that style of game since I need to measure tasks/actions as markers vs. story progression markers. And just for the record - I have no problem with railroad games - I think it is a viable playstyle and adventure design and has its own merits and (good) value. I would have no problem running a heavy linear game.
Should XP be "fair"?
No. But my opinion on the matter is in the minority over here.
I do think that xp should be awarded evenly to playstyles. Let me explain the last one:
If I have a -
I should reward each for what they do when they do it.
I think this was supposed to be a be an episode about faith and hope and the loss of both (and regaining it possibly). In Maggie's case she has just been burned to many times and seems to have lost her faith - yet the episode closes with a bit of a miracle. I think the priest just symbolizes that resentment she has towards putting energy and faith in a higher power - so Gabriel gets to be the punching bag.
It continues with the theme with emo Daryl at the beginning of the episode to him coming to terms about both Beth and Tyreese near the end.
Can't wait for the new nemesis to show up on scene - should be good times once the group has something to fight.
Orfamay Quest wrote:
Subjective and your opinion (which to me, is worthless).
By your logic McDonalds has the best food on the planet since they are the #1 fast food chain in the world. Avatar is the top grossing movie (of all time), do you think its the best? Because if you say it isn't then by your own (herd) logic you are wrong. BTW- Two Transformers movies are in the top 10 besides it (one is #7 and one is #10). I mean, all those people can't be wrong?
This is wholly a subjective issue of like or dislike that you are trying to bootstomp into a better vs. worse issue. The mods must be asleep on this one - but you really should stop already. You are coming off like a goon.
No - you are not understanding what I was saying with the Dwarf Wizard
Player 1: "Can I run a Dwarf Wizard?"
Player 2 is in the background busy making a Universalist Human wizard that is slightly less restrictive in stat requirement but of course less specialized.
I never said drop requirements at random/on a whim.
In the end - the PB values are the same and add up the same - how stats are laid out in an array in his game vs. generic cookie-cutter PF characters in every other game is where the difference lies.
If they get fighty about their disagreement, like the OP came off as (to me at least), then they should realize the natural conclusion of these facts.
That may have happened when people (rynjin) basically said he was a bad person for posting his idea and it was stupid (because you know, he didn't like it). Or others saying he was a bad GM (Orfamy), last I checked the OP wasn't attacking anyone. Everyone else pretty much wolf-packed the guy with their best argument being "but it's unfun to me".
- And Ninja'd (with no stat min requirements) by Torger on the last point
That said, let's ask you the same thing the OP was asked: how does this make Pathfinder more fun to play?
If it makes him happy, then it makes Pathfinder more fun for him to play. And that's the only answer that matters.
Damn the people on the internets and what they think. Who cares?
As far as PB and arrays are concerned I never said 15/15/17 array. I said bump some of the lower ones to a higher stat requirements. An 11/11/17 costs 15 points. The numbers are dependent on his PB allotment. 15 point standard - then the high stat should be 15. More PB, then he can tweak the numbers.
Also - he could make allowances/required stats if the player plays a specific kind of Dwarven Wizard - maybe lowering the threshold for thematic options like Dwarven Evokers, Conjurers and Transmuters. Its all very workable depending on what he wants (what classes are more common, and which ones are rare).
But again, that's why I said he should probably discard PB since it doesn't support the system well.
This rage though needs to end.
Thank you for proving my point of "not getting it".
There are worlds of difference between needing a +1 or +2 to hit a creature vs. the big-six level assumed: Required Stats (items), Required Save Bonuses (Cloaks), Required Natural Armor Bonuses, Required Deflection Bonuses (Rings), Required Weapon, Required Armor.
I'm just not seeing the close similarity or "its always been there". Just not true.
Here, I want to ask about the ‘Christmas Tree Syndrome’. One of the things that turned many of us off 3rd edition was the laundry-lists of magic items,
This has not been addressed in PF nor will it get addressed in the future. The core PF game has several built-in mathematical assumptions that makes the Xmass tree part of the game unless you revise it on your own - which is a product supplement/rules re-write all on its own (new bestiary also).
Pathfinder has loads of 'extras', but the players concerns are that any 3rd edition style game is literally unplayable unless the characters are completely optimised, that it's irredeemably broken unless it spends every last gp on the correct combat items for its wealth-by-level.
Those loads of "extras" are a mini-game. If your players are the type who like to optimize and see CharGen as a separate challenge in then PF is a good option for your group. If you actually want to focus less on CharOp and more on playing (Combat, exploring, RP) then you are better off at sticking with 5e or going with an older system, non-3rd ed based game system.
PF rewards system mastery - and you can do things "wrong". Older systems give less options and CharGen, or those features are not as relevant to actual play - and thus greater focus is on actual game play and not character building.
My advice to would be to stick with 5e.
I would look into buying and converting as much 1e and 2e material they have online for 5e content and go with that game system instead. Even converting some 3rd ed stuff for 5e - I've eyeballed it and it doesn't look too hard to do - though tbh I haven't actually tried yet.
A "well supported system" does not always equal good. Or at least good for you and what you and your group are looking for. PF is great system for most of those who loved 3.5 - if you had problems with that system then no amount of book support or adventures is going to make it different with PF. In fact, it may just frustrate you more.
I don't have anything invested in this race - I run a modified 1e/2e game when I do run AD&D, so no 5e for me.
I think people backing this - sight unseen as a KS project is a tough prospect. My suggestions to you would be to:
- Get a website for the game going
If this is going to be an efile than some of the KS logistics are not so hard to work out - though commissioning art and paying for it are a point of concern. Do you have other people to help you with proofing, layout and editing or is this a one-person show?
Will the book be in print (after the KS as part of a fulfillment)? Do you have prices quoted based off of color, cover, shipping, etc.
I might back a project like this if it had some momentum and history behind it - without knowing who you are and having a sample of your work I would have to say no.
Many KS have failed, even with skilled writers behind them. In many cases it's just not managing the money or pacing of the project, in others its just logistics (can't afford to ship for free after all). Many do a one-man show and encounter rl problems.
My simple advice to you - you need to set up a network, put something out there and develop a following.
Auxmaulos, which punkrock band would that be?
I was (still am I suppose) heavily into early 80's hardcore punk - Black Flag, Circle Jerks, Fear, Misfits, Social Distortion- but going into the late 80s and early 90s (before the Green Day pop-punk revival) the bands that were big in So Cal and were still playing gigs: DI, Adolescents, Angry Samoans, TSOL, MDC, Agent Orange, Youth Brigade.
I suppose I was lucky that many of the bands I like were actually in So Cal and played on for many years after punk died out (for me - I would say it peaked in 82-83). There still was a vibrant underground scene in LA going into the 90's - but most shows stopped midway due to fights, riots, stormtroopers/wp skins, etc. Still - good times.
Mix tapes and Micronauts (70's cross-over to early 80's). Atari 2600.
Also - I miss thinking that the D&D box sets came with the monster figures inside.
Grenadier and Ral Partha minis, Grenadier box set art - I could never afford all of them as a little kid - just got the Dwellers Below and Denizens and I cherished both those sets.
I miss playing D&D or Gamma World with my friends on Friday nights and Saturday mornings. I miss gamming on summer days when school was out. It was a colossal waste of time - wouldn't trade it for anything. Just wish we actually played more
cap yesterday - I think that game was called Splatterhouse.
I miss Saturday afternoons in dark arcades
and too many others to name...
Not related to tech or games but...
When I do my re-writes for the tables, I will probably list "NPC" encounter as a 50/50 in the range where I have the Omen/Portent entry.
There might be some Bards gate or other Lost Lands references/tie-ins - but I will probably keep it local. If I seed too much stuff to a remote area, my players will bite and leave the adventure area! But I do plan on tying in more leads - the frog cultists (human or otherwise) would have some clues and items tied to the Cloister - for example.
The NPCs will be drawn from a pool already provide with a few new ones thrown in. The idea would be for them to be a source of replacement npcs, info and lead-ins to small side missions. And of course, some will have their own motivations, backgrounds and agendas.
Focus for me on this side project was to have a series of low-level encounters that are thematic to the region.
It opened for me right in google docs Aux. Love it.
Needs some corrections and a slight re-write (typos and sentence structure).
Going to reformat this and my other tables before I send them out.
If anyone is interested, here are some ideas/previews from the the low-level encounter list heading to area 1, with some foreshadowing to turn back unless you are ...."this level".
Boggards vs. Tsathar - yes, I run both similar creatures in my world as genetic variants off of a progenitor frog race. And of course these demon worshiping savages hate each other. So plenty of mixed combat encounters as the brutes fight and all out war for the attention of the Herald of the Frog God (the Frogemoth). May even sneak in a low CR demon or two on the re-write.
Diseased and dying cultist from the Cloister march to offer themselves to Frog God of the swamp as living sacrifices. Of course, these suicidal loons would love to sacrifice themselves stopping interlopers who trespass on the Herald's unholy land.
Only the Strong Survive:
Multiple write of up cannibalistic Frogemoth Tadpoles! Favorite prey - each other, after that - anything else alive. Of course the Frogemoth hunts these, so an encounter with a Phase II or III tadpole means the mutant monstrosity may not be far behind.
Plus swamp mutations, reject inbred cultist and degenerate brigands. Table dangers and mutations get progressively worse as the players move closer to the source of genetic corruption.