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

BPorter's page

Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber. 1,188 posts. 2 reviews. No lists. No wishlists.


RSS

1 to 50 of 1,188 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

6 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
HalifaxDM wrote:
ElyasRavenwood wrote:
I'm happy with pathfinder. I like the system. Can it be improved? sure. Are there things I don't like here or there? sure. But on the whole I am happy with the game.

This. I have played Pathfinder since it's inception migrating from 3.5 (and previous to that all editions back to AD&D and BECM). Yes there are some things that niggle me about PF such as escalating skill bonuses and DCs to ridiculous levels and travel rules that are a little to dull and simplistic but overall PF is one of my two go to games (the other being Savage Worlds).

Go team Paizo!

THIS +1.

And honestly, the constant straw-man arguments permeating the boards these days that you have to like everything to like anything, that if you don't want a completely new edition you're slavishly devoted to butt-kissing Paizo, etc. are becoming more than tiresome.

For those clamoring for a radically new edition, all change is not good. A PF 2.0 will likely not satisfy some, heck even most, of the radical design suggestions being thrown around. Even if/when a substantially different PF 2.0 appears one day, once you realize Paizo didn't adhere to your specific criteria then what? Immediate calls for PF 3.0?

There have been threads recently that have progressed well beyond differences in taste - complaints of developer's turning a deaf ear & blind eye to the poster's obvious RPG genius, calling Paizo incompetent, exaggerated claims of bloat, references to new material as "tumors" & "cancerous". Not to mention the dismissive posts or outright attacks on those who don't agree, or even dare to not agree as strongly about the things they view as broken. These are the standard-bearers of the Paizo fanbase that should guide the specs & goals of future Pathfinder content? Do they even like the game that they so radically wish to change? Did they ever?

I like Pathfinder in it's current form. Do I like everything? No, but I look to things like Pathfinder Unchained and third-party publishers to provide me alternatives that don't require me to redo/undo everything. Paizo continues to produce some of the highest quality products in the RPG industry - ever, not just today. They continue to find new design space and creative elements in a system that, according to claims that are very similar to the "PF2 must come!" crowd, was "done" and "used up" back in 2008. Archetypes, new classes, new takes on races and monsters, subsystems like those found in Ultimate Campaign now combining with products like Pathfinder Unchained & Psychic Magic.

Not to mention that they've displayed an incredible amount of skill and knowledge with how to profitably run & just as importantly, grow, a RPG business. Eric Mona has, for several years running, cited that Core Rulebook sales continue to grow.

Yeah, I'll stick with Paizo & Pathfinder. I don't have to like everything, but they're doing a TON of things right.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Apologies for the late post-session feedback but Laying Waste was an even bigger hit than I anticipated!

So far, all indications are that this is THE critical hit/fumble system I have been looking to implement for many, many years.

It's proven to provide the high-five-inducing spectacular "YES!" moments of the old Rolemaster critical hits without the complete-randomness limitations of that and similar systems. It was also very intuitive for me and my players.

Laying Waste is on the fast-track to become one of 3PP rulebooks that are considered "core" for any Pathfinder game (along with Deep Magic & Spellpoints Compilation).

I've got another session coming up this weekend so the system will get another live-fire exercise very soon.

Thanks again for a terrific product.


Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Ahem.

I feel that I have allowed a reasonable amount of time to pass since the conclusion of GENCON. Therefore, I feel that I must ask the following, with the appropriate deference and decorum....

WHERE'S THE SOUTHLANDS KICKSTARTER?!?!?!?!

Inquiring Pathfinder minds want to know. :)

No, seriously, where is it?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Qstor wrote:

Is the gunslinger class appropriate in "base" Midgard?

Mike

It's appropriate if you want it to be. It's not the cop-out answer that it sounds like, they've truly treated it as an optional element that can be utilized or ignored per the GM's desires.

That said, "base" Midgard has the development of gunpowder solely residing with the Cantonal dwarves of the Ironcrag Mountains and it is recommended that a gunslinger PC have a tie to that region to provide a canonical justification.

Also, Kobold Press did a Gunslinger supplement that, as I understand it, introduces Vril "guns" - arcane powered firearms that are tied to ancient & forgotten empires. Even if that doesn't fit your idea of a gunslinger, it shows an example of how to incorporate it into the setting.

I'll close with this:

I'm still on the fence with the gunslinger and firearms in my PFRPG campaigns. That said, I think the more limited, canonical option is a much easier step to take than the "anyone who wants it" approach advocated by the pro-fantasy-firearms crowd wanted to see in Golarion. To be fair to Paizo, they largely held the line of presenting it as an option but the Inner Sea Campaign Guide did retcon earlier treatments on firearms to make it "more possible". --I wasn't a fan of that approach.

Midgard presented in such a way with built-in setting controls that I went so far as to allow a dwarven gunslinger in my Midgard campaign.

Midgard has become the go-to campaign setting for me.


Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Another great piece of Iconic art!

The character write-up is excellent as well. The link to Kyra was a nice touch.


Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Wolfgang Baur wrote:

Really extremely pleased that this book got a nomination. It's loaded with good material from very savvy designers and writers.

I'd appreciate your vote in the Best Aid/Accessory Category!

Done!


Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

And if demon-lords are in the CR 20-30 range, I don't think Zeus is a CR 15.


Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Lemmy wrote:
BPorter wrote:

Save your sarcasm. Hercules is a demigod and Beowulf, with the hyperbolic style of the Norse ballads may as well be one.

Counterbalancing those two examples are my two floor-to-ceiling bookshelves filled with fantasy warriors & rogues that aren't demigods.

It doesn't matter what they are.

If Beowulf is a demigod with CR 15, then a 15th level Fighter should theoretically be just as powerful as Beowulf, since they have the same CR.

And your books simply star low-level characters. So what?

The point was that Mythic specifically addresses the "I wanna play a demigod" trope and that some people want to play a mortal, heroic, non-caster rather than flip the "I went from Batman to Superman" switch with the same character.

If that's too difficult to follow, let's leave it at that. If you simply disagree b/c you want a power-bump, that's cool but not wanting it is a valid opinion I can offer in a thread asking which way the power-pendulum should swing.


Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Anzyr wrote:
BPorter wrote:
DominusMegadeus wrote:
The problem is that martials are not Beowulf or Hercules. They're not even close.

That's what Mythic rules are for.

Casters should be scaled down. As the OP indicated, they have no parallel in fiction or other genre-related material, including most game-fiction tie-ins like D&D & Pathfinder novels & comics.

The solution to the caster:martial disparity isn't to amp everything & power-inflate everything further.

Yes because, "I'm able to place my attacks very quickly and precisely" (ie. Add Dex to damage) is the kind of mindblowing power that must be Mythic.

(/sarcasm.)

It's not power inflation btw, since the Fighter and Rogue were never inflated to begin with.

Save your sarcasm. Hercules is a demigod and Beowulf, with the hyperbolic style of the Norse ballads may as well be one.

Counterbalancing those two examples are my two floor-to-ceiling bookshelves filled with fantasy warriors & rogues that aren't demigods.


Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
DominusMegadeus wrote:
The problem is that martials are not Beowulf or Hercules. They're not even close.

That's what Mythic rules are for.

Casters should be scaled down. As the OP indicated, they have no parallel in fiction or other genre-related material, including most game-fiction tie-ins like D&D & Pathfinder novels & comics.

The solution to the caster:martial disparity isn't to amp everything & power-inflate everything further.


Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Wolfgang Rolf wrote:

@Alexander I am glad that it isn't.

MMCJawa wrote:

Wolfgang...that's great and all, but:

Insain Dragon has kept telling people to vote for whether they want an unchained fighter, and keeps citing those poll numbers. Certainly Odraude's point is relevant if at this point in the forum history a lot of people do their best at this point to avoid any discussion whatsoever of fighters. Which means that the poll is going to select towards people who are very unhappy with the fighter.

With all due respect I couldn't care less about poll numbers or why people avoid discussions about the fighter. My main issue is that people are against optional versions of existing classes, they can choose to use them or not, so instead of saying "I don't think class x needs a change, but I am happy that the option will exist for people who think otherwise" We get "Class X doesn't need to change, stop whining you class X haters" I've seen enough arguments from both sides and while I think the fighter needs some changes, I am not going to bother trying to convince someone who thinks the class doesn't, because I am assuming that that person has already read the class, played it and doesn't see any problems with it.

I've said it before but honestly at this point its worth repeating; This is not Pathfinder 2.0 or even 1.5, this is a book to offer you a different and OPTIONAL take on certain classes, you can take them or leave them, there is really no reason to say "I don't want Paizo to do this with Class A or B" No on is forcing to buy or even use the book, your core, apg, uc and um will still be relevant when this comes out, so really its a win win situation for everyone...and yet people are unhappy.

The problem with that argument is the assumption that all ideas/requests have equal merit. Some ideas could create new issues, be lame, or might impose powers or restrictions that are viewed negatively by a wider (but quieter) majority.

Providing feedback arguing against sweeping changes is, from a customer-purchase & publisher-business perspective, just as valuable as the "I want X"-style of feedback.

Additionally, since Paizo does a pretty good job of incorporating new rules/options in all of their products, the "you can just ignore it" defense doesn't carry as much weight.


Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Ok, I'll be digesting this for a while and won't get to see it in play until next weekend but at first glance, this is superb!

It seems to provide the flavor I want from combat, it utilizes the Pathfinder conditions to great effect, and addresses the "Crits aren't fair to PCs!" complaint through the saving throw.

I love that crits scale and the names for many of the crits and fumbles are priceless.

I'm so bummed that I had to miss out on the kickstarter, but anxiously awaiting the Hero Lab files and the magic-crit companion!


Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Want much-ly. So bummed that I missed out on the Kickstarter.


Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Thanks, mighty kobolds!

You've stopped next week's "where's the next update?" message.....for now. :)


Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Looking forward to this one!


Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I've been Wayne Reynolds fan for years but I have to say that all of the new iconics are as awesome as the originals! It's really difficult to make even a short list of favorites.


Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Ross Byers wrote:
All I see here is Erik saying he wants to write a Ostog and Hakon novel for Pathfinder Tales.

And it would be glorious!


Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Insain Dragoon wrote:
Because the bestiary already exists. Unless you're saying these classes can meet the number requirements without the core items.

So you're saying that the ONLY way to build in the assumed "big 6" bonuses is via magic items? It would be impossible to do a level- or feat-based system or Mythic-style overlay?

Color me unconvinced.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
John Kretzer wrote:

I am kinda of interesting in the Pathfinder Unleashed....but one of the main things I liked about Pathfinder is the backwards compatibility of the game. While I am interested in what they will do...I think most of the options will not be used in my games.

Also I am kinda sadden by the fact they are reacting to what looks like me a vocal minority on these boards about certain classes needing to be 'fixed'. It usually lead to some very poor design decisions as it did with the 3.0 to 3.5 transition.

But I am very excited about the Giant Slayer AP. I am wondering if the next one will deal with Drow, The Darklands and slaves in some way.

I had a similar reaction initially, that the stamp-my-foot crowd "won". However, I trust Paizo to create interesting but not unbalanced options.

Hopefully, they'll be better developed and able to be integrated easily than much of Unearthed Arcana was (and I love that book, btw, but it's a mixed bag) or certain Ultimate Combat options were.

I'd like to see broader playtest support for more than classes for this book, honestly.


Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Auxmaulous wrote:
BPorter wrote:
I'm likely an auto-buy anyway, but I'd love to see some changes that would lessen the dependence on 3.5-legacy Christmas Tree Effect magic items.
That would require a re-write of the core game or a way to incorporate numerical assumptions in the character advancement rules, RE: not going to happen/don't hold your breath.

I agree that it's unlikely (but with far less negative motives than what you seem to be assigning to Paizo - I'm NOT looking for a rewrite/unrecognizable PF), but if it's ever going to be attempted then why the frak not in a book breaking with 3.5 comparability concerns?


Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Matt Thomason wrote:
Axial wrote:
As psyched as I am over Pathfinder Unchained, will the "rebuilt" versions of the Monk, Summoner, Rogue et cetera be compatible with Pathfinder's published archetypes for those classes?

I'm guessing not - from the sounds of it they're completely new classes sharing only a name and concept with the original version. Otherwise they would be tied to some level of compatibility (the very thing they expressly don't want) to be able to use those archetypes.

This sounds like the very thing the game needed - a refresh of the class layer while retaining the underlying PF/d20 system. Hopefully the first of many incremental changes.

Except for the fact that archetypes are a PF thing, not a 3.5 thing. If archetypes are invalidated, the this appears to be an options patch to address the forum-bloat of "X sucks" rather than the new "standard". I can see advantages to both approaches, so I don't have a strong leaning towards either direction yet. More details will likely change that.

I'm likely an auto-buy anyway, but I'd love to see some changes that would lessen the dependence on 3.5-legacy Christmas Tree Effect magic items.


Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

(Reads Mr. Radle's post and then begins singing/hissing a kobold battle hymn.)

Thanks, Marc! That'll do....for now. :)


Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

It's been 5 minutes. WTH? No update?

What, is it We No Work Day again already?


Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Dear Kobold Taskmasters,

This time last year, you had seduced me with all things Midgardian and then announced the Deep Magic kickstarter while I was on vacation. It was my first Kickstarter and Deep Magic did not disappoint!

So...

I'm on vacation. I need to be enticed each day with an ever growing list of stretch goals! I want that PF Southlands hardcover! Please take my money!

Seriously, I have it set aside. When are we going to see a Kickstarter announcement?

Sincerely,

Desperate for more PF Midgard Goodness.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
magnuskn wrote:
Kajehase wrote:
Fnipernackle wrote:
This is FANTASTIC news. This should put to rest all those Pathfinder 2.0 threads/theories.
Kinda suspect they're more likely to fan the flames of them, actually.
Yeah, it's more that they are testing the waters for their ideas for PF 2.0. Sorry, Fnipernackle, but it's coming sooner or later. Maybe a bit later with this release, but it's coming.

Perhaps. However, this sounds much more like an evolution/refinement of a game (you know, what almost every RPG means when they use the word "edition") rather than the major rules re-write every edition that we get with D&D.

I'm all for tweaks & refinements. However, I'm done with the "blow up the game & start over" approach to editions. If PF 2.0 (whenever it happens) is a shift on par with 3e -> 4e -> 5e, I'm done.


Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

So what kind of armor is he wearing?


Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

These were two sets of optional rules that I was really looking forward to in Ultimate Combat. In fact, they were two of the primary reasons for wanting to buy the book.

Unlike in SW Saga, however, critical hits still have to burn through vitality instead of going straight to wounds (though you also subtract a wound point per the crit multiplier on each hit so there is some auto-wound damage).

While I liked that it provided a better segmentation of hit points than the default abstract, made for longer adventuring days, and lessened the dependence on healing magic, I found that lengthened combats pretty significantly. For some, that might be a feature, but ultimately, I felt that it was adding complexity for little return. In fairness, I was trying these rules with my kids when they were still relatively new to the game so their opinions and mine might differ if we try them again.

On paper, I like the system well enough. In play, I felt that it improved some things and complicated others.

Armor as DR, which I felt worked very well in OGL games like Conan and Iron Heroes, needed more than the two pages of rules that it got, IMO. While it works, it almost works too well. Also, having to convert monsters to get the proper Defense and DR scores ultimately proved to be more trouble than the system was worth. Now, I tried this prior to becoming a Hero Lab user, so if I was letting HL do all of the calculating for me, I probably wouldn't mind that fact. However, having played games where I felt Armor as DR was implemented in a superior fashion I still think I'd be reluctant to use this option even with Hero Lab.


Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I regularly see fighters, rogues, and cavaliers at my table. No one has complained yet about feeling underpowered. I'm firmly convinced that the idea of underpowered classes is primarily the province of power gamers.


6 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Atarlost wrote:

The AP sales may not be faltering, but people are getting more dissatisfied with the game rules and that's eventually going to become an opening for another system to take away the customers who aren't satisfied with the lack of revision.

According to what, o revered Internet oracle? Paizo staff have cited in multiple interviews that core rule book sales have increased every year for multiple years (I think year 2 was the only one to come in lower and that was following the launch year).

The complaints of min-maxers, disenchanted 4e fans, or forum-only-RPG-business experts notwithstanding, plenty of people are happy with the game. If you go through the various "X is underpowered", "time for PF2e", and the "better change or D&D will leave you behind" threads, you're going to see a lot of the same names. Being vocal doesn't mean you're correct or have numbers on your side.

I remember similar claims were made when Paizo opted to develop the PFRPG rather than get on the GSL bandwagon. Those dire predictions, threats, and "expert business recommendations" were spectacularly wrong.

I'm all for making improvements in the game but claiming that "people are becoming more dissatisfied with the game rules" with nothing to back it up other than your desire to see development embrace what you want is a bit disingenuous.

I'm sure D&D5e will make a big splash initially. Time will tell if it has staying power greater than 4e did. Reflexively doing a major product shift on what might happen seems like a pretty bad way to run a business.

I'll trust Paizo to make that decision over the prophecies of forum-posters every time.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I'm going to respectfully disagree with the E6/E8 suggestions. You can certainly go that route but I don't think that should be your primary focus. Here's what I would suggest.

Rule #1: You're converting a world/setting. You are NOT converting a rules-system. Presumably, you've picked Pathfinder as the system for a reason and the more you try to transform it the less time you'll be spending on playing up the aspects of the setting that (presumably) enticed you to consider this.

Rule #2: Dark Fantasy, not Low Fantasy. Warhammer is a pretty high-magic world but it's dark. By most measurable criteria, Evil (Chaos) is winning. There are two aspects you need to keep in mind to slant the game towards Dark Fantasy: 1-Dangers lurk everywhere, there are very few idyllic forest glens, there are many dark, haunted woods. 2-Choices are NEVER black-and-white. Choices should always have a consequence and usually should be choices that have to be made where somebody in the game world loses. The heroes saved the village but that farmer and his family were slaughtered by orcs. You stopped the cultists' ritual but half the city burned down, etc.

Rule #3: Status matters. A primary tenet of the Warhammer setting is that social status matters. This is largely reflected in Warhammer's career system where you have to "pay your dues" to advance to the more prestigious careers. You need to have some kind of social status mechanism. For example, the Midgard Campaign setting has such a mechanic and while your Charisma stat can influence it, it's not the sole (or even primary) driver.

Rule #4: Factions, agendas, and conspiracies. Everyone, even the PCs, should be tied to a faction, religion, organization, philosophy - something. And it should be pretty common that those elements of the world will be at odds with each other on occasion. This church doesn't like that church. This soldier doesn't like people from that country. Nobles scheme. Cultists plot.

Rule #5: Magic is dangerous & powerful PCs will be the primary exception to this rule, especially in a system like Pathfinder where so many classes are spellcasting ones. So you'll need to reflect this in the world around them -- most NPCs aren't spellcasters, outside of arcane orders and churches, there really aren't "magic shops" as they exist in some Pathfinder campaigns. Oh, and see Rule #4 - those orders and churches really don't care if you have the coin. You better have the coin AND be willing to do something on that group's behalf if you want to purchase any magical assistance from them.

Rule #6: Magic is feared Yes, the PCs probably have access to more magic than most groups in a given area. Guess what? They're viewed with suspicion and fear as a result. Even allies will be wary about the person who can charm them or blast a group of cavalry with a spell. And if a spellcaster becomes a threat, don't expect local authorities to pull any punches. Spellcasters are a threat and they're going to react accordingly.

Rule #7: Make choices; say "no" when appropriate: This isn't the cantina scene from Star Wars. "No, Fred, I'm sorry, you can't be an Oread undead-blooded sorcerer. Why? Because you'll be viewed as a monster and a freak by every settlement in the the world and attacked on sight. Since this is a campaign involving intrigue in a city, that won't work."

As for specific Pathfinder-adaptation suggestions:

1. Use the low-magic treasure rules. Wealth should be harder to come by to help drive the grubby/gritty side of the Warhammer experience.

2. Use the slow XP progression. Warhammer characters don't typically go from Ratcatcher to Noble quickly. Since in a level-based game like Pathfinder, character level directly translates to character ability/power, you need to slow things down.

3. Standard point-buy should be the highest used. Not Heroic, certainly not anything higher.

4. Setting integration over character-optimization. You can play an elf in the center of a human city but the player better be willing to accept the buy-in that the elf will be viewed as a rarity. No, you can't be a Chaos Knight and openly walk the streets. If you want to be a half-orc, you best stick to the borderlands or wilderness or expect knights, soldiers, guardsmen, etc. to try to kill you. If they're successful, they'll suffer no legal ramifications. (Obviously, there are exceptions to this suggestion, but they need to be just that - rare exceptions that are well-integrated into the game. They shouldn't just be hand-waived away because someone will say "you're limiting my fun".)

5. Forget about CR...mostly You want to make PCs feel like life is cheap and dangerous? Stop worrying about whether encounters are perfectly balanced. Now, I'm not saying ignore CR altogether. What I'm saying is don't adhere to the conventional wisdom of "this many below-APL encounters, this many at-APL encounters, this many above-APL encounters". A mob of commoners or goblins? Throw as many as required to make them a substantial threat. The adventure is a ghost story? Worry less about whether the PCs have a magic weapon and more about what relics they need or actions that they need to complete to banish the spirit or put it to rest. And don't be afraid to lean towards the higher-end of the CR/encounter scale - you want to bloody their noses more often than not.

You can also add house-rules or 3rd-party supplements to further reinforce the "threat" of the world: spell-failure tables, etc. I definitely recommend things that amp-up the threat of combat like the Critical Hit Deck or Torn Asunder but those should be added to provide the final tweaks to the setting. Modifying the mechanics should be seasoning, not the meal. The setting is the main course.


Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I just wanted to say thank you for this product. I've been running a series of Pathfinder campaigns for my kids and some of their friends for a couple of years now. Perhaps unsurprisingly, they gravitated to the martial classes for the most part. However, those that dabbled with spellcasters universally did not care for the Vancian spell-slot system.

This weekend, we started a new campaign that included a sorcerer, a magus, a ranger/sorcerer, and a fighter/sorcerer (going for arcane archer). Plus they had to contend with enemy spellcasters including several clerics and a necromancer. I introduced the spellpoint system and it got a baptism by fire for sure in that session.

It was a spectacular success. The kids loved it and for the first time in a d20-based game, I experienced a game where magic worked more like it does in fiction without needless complication.

Hands-down, this is one of the best supplements I've ever purchased for Pathfinder or any other system.

Thanks again! I'll try to get a review up at some point.


Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Another iconic full of awesome. Great stuff, great art!


Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Tom Phillips wrote:

Incidentally, the city of Maerh-Varza is a mish-mash of Rome and San Francisco, albeit with a heavy sprinkling of ancient dwarven architecture.

Keen readers will note that the book does not come with a map of the city. In my home games, I've been using this excellent map by the talented Terry Maranda.

Thanks for the additional info/insight. Very cool.

I picked the City of Melana in Midgard primarily b/c it was on the border of the two regions I was trying to settle on - the Crossroads region (but Zobeck didn't see to quite fit) and the Seven cities. I picked Melana b/c of it's dwarven population seemed to match up with Maerh-Varza's dwarven architecture. The Seven Cities are inspired, at least in part, by the Italian city states.

Given your additional insight, not a bad choice!


Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Another winner!


Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I'm going to be running this adventure as well. Not exactly sure when I'll be starting it, but my guess is sometime this month.

I'm still reading through the adventure so my list of modifications isn't complete, but I'll be setting it in Midgard, in the city of Malena, the City of Iron, in the Seven Cities region.


Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Lord Fyre wrote:


But they no longer fit into the art style that Paizo is using for Golarion (and all their products in general). I am talking about artistic consistency, not the rightness or wrongness of fanservice.

Um,sure they fit.

You're talking about a world that has literally, dozens of races and dozens of cultures. You don't see uniformity of dress on Earth, why would you have it in Golarion?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Lord Fyre wrote:

I don't know if others have noticed, but since the Skull & Shackles adventure path, Paizo has had a shift in art direction to more egalitarian and realistic clothing. One of the results of this is that the fanservice-y costumes of Amri,Seoni, Alahazra, and Feiya are becoming increasingly "out of step" with the fashions of the world setting.

Regardless, of your opinions on "fanservice,"... My question is, do these characters need an art update to dress them more "realistically" for the Golarion setting?

No.


Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Well, damn. That's one of the best-looking iconics (and they're all top-shelf) and I think she has the best backstory.

Well done, Paizo!


Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Soooo.... does anybody use the Kingdom Building rules outside of Kingmaker?


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Sticking with Pathfinder for the following reasons.

#1. It scratches most of my FRPG itches even with legacy items like Vancian casting and the X-mas Tree effect.

#2. I've been with Paizo since RotRL#1 and they've continued to impress and expand the game into new territories without losing sight of what works. Honestly, the bigger threat to my Paizo spend each month is that Golarion's less attractive bits bother me more than the RPG unattractive bits. Midgard continues to impress and so long as the Kobold's continue to support Pathfinder, setting/rules compatibility isn't an issue.

#3. Economics. I'm fortunate enough that my hobby isn't breaking the bank, but rainy days always come around now and again. If my d20 investment prevented me from going to 4e (that and it's design...), that investment is substantially greater now. My days of buying games I won't/can't play are behind me.

#4. If I'm going to break away from Pathfinder in search of something simpler/easier to run, it would be Savage Worlds, not D&DN/5e. Savage Worlds has all of the core components I expect and is much, much easier to customize without sacrificing setting/story flavor.

#5. D&DN/5e - It just isn't appealing to me and WotC's business model of the last 5-6 years is just at odds with what I want from RPG publishers. I like my OGL, my HeroLab, & my 3rd-party publisher support. I like my free PDF with my hardcopy subscriptions. I like not seeing Christmas layoffs, etc.

As a side note, if/when a Pathfinder 2.0 comes around, if it's a "rewrite" New Edition rather than a "update" New Edition, then I'll either stick with the current edition of Pathfinder or switch over entirely to Savage Worlds.

I'm pretty much done with Edition Treadmills, especially for "D&D-style Fantasy".


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
LoneKnave wrote:
@BPorter: Hey, do you think casters are overpowered? If not, you aren't really the audience being polled. Just thought I'd mention.

Yes, I tend to think casters are over-powered at high levels. The level of power introduces problems with campaign consistency, genre emulation, and feeds the power creep cycle.

The fix, however, should lay in scaling back that power (reserving current high-level spell abilities for Mythic) instead of straining the game by trying to amp everything else to "catch up".


Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Ssalarn wrote:


I don't think I've heard anyone say casters are the only classes worth playing, just that martials don't compare, especially at higher levels.
Which is true.

If everyone is playing martial characters no one is going to notice that casters out-perform them, in the same way that someone who always plays Mario Bros. is never going to care that an MMO like WoW is a more robust platform capable of more varied and complex dynamics.

The forums are littered with "fix the rogue", "fix the fighter", "why can't (martial) have nice things?" threads.

While most of those threads come at the game from a "everyone should be magic-powered/wuxia-capable", a lot of players want to emulate heroes they see in fiction.

I'm not disputing that high-level casters can invoke greater power than their spell-less counterparts. I just take issue with the notion that spell-less character classes must be broken as a result.


Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Martials are preferred by far in my groups.

The most popular classes are:

1. Fighter (current archetypes in use: Crossbowman, Two-Weapon, Two-Handed, Mobile Fighter, & Roughrider)
2. Rogue (Burglar, Spy, Pirate
3. Ranger [Skirmisher archetype has been most popular] (of late, it's being displaced with Kobold Press' Spell-less Ranger)
4. Cavalier

So yeah, the whole "Fighters & Rogues are broken, casters are the only classes worth playing" has been relegated to a failed Internet meme by my group.


Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I really like the Settlement- & Kingdom-building rules that started in Kingmaker, got cleaned up in Ultimate Combat, and received further expansion through Legendary Games’ Ultimate Rulership. I haven’t yet used them in play, however and have some questions that fall into two broader topics that I’d like to throw out to the Paizo community.

Part 1: Applying to established realms
Has anyone integrated these rules into your campaign play by “statting” an existing settlement, realm, or nation?

Does it work well? If not, why doesn’t it?

My campaigns, at least at present, do not follow the “Start from scratch” model of Kingmaker. My reason for wanting to do this is that the majority of my players prefer PC-driven adventures & sandbox adventuring. I learned long ago that I have far more success presenting the setting events as a backdrop rather than forcing a predetermined storyline upon the players. That said, I don’t want my world to be static.

The kingdom-building rules seem like they would be an excellent framework for allowing randomly-generated events, or even GM- or player-initiated events play out without having to rely solely on GM fiat. In much the same way that a detailed NPC or location generates ideas for me, I’m thinking things like, trade, wars, and settlement- or nation-affecting events would flow naturally and help avoid having a static world, even if the players choose not to follow every plot seed.

My Concern: That the rules DON’T lend themselves well to established areas; that the level of abstraction either invalidates the effort or undermines the desired effect.

Part 2: The GM’s mini-game
It’s a popular GM theory to not create more than you need. Fair enough and advice I typically follow. However, as I’ve previously noted above, some of my best story arcs and campaigns came from having fully-developed/realized NPCs that either inspired a new plot point or facilitated easier improvisation b/c I understood the NPC and his motivations.

I want to apply this method for similar reasons to setting development & prep. Once my elements are “statted up”, the event/management phases become something of a mini-game that I can play through. This would be especially desirable during “session droughts” where it’s tough to get a game together or when writer’s/GM’s block rears its ugly head.

Does anyone else utilize random events to help determine the progression of the setting? Or is old-school GM-fiat the sole driving force?

What methods work for you (or your GM)?


Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I've been using 15-point buy since the First Printing and have never had an issue with it or have my players complain about it. Works just fine.


Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Deep Magic was delivered yesterday! This is truly an eldritch tome that meets and exceeds my expectations. This was my first Kickstarter project that I backed and WOW is this thing great. So many things that I've wanted to see for years finally codified and available for Pathfinder.

Thanks, mighty kobolds! Another great book!


Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Kvantum wrote:

Fantasy as a genre? No. But I'd argue it is a pretty fundamental part of higher level D&D or Pathfinder.

And therein lies the problem. In almost 30 years of gaming, no player has come to my game hoping to emulate "D&D Fantasy", they're drawn in by other fantasy influences. I understand that many people want their "D&Disms" preserved - teleport, raise dead, Christmas-tree effect, etc. But there are plenty of people that want to emulate fantasy as depicted in film, books, and other media that don't require those things. Those features are another person's "bugs" and given how the game has historically leaned much more closely to the lower end of play (1-10) vs. higher-level/epic/mythic (11-20) in terms of product support publishers are certainly aware that these elements are problematic to many groups.

The culmination of this problem is the forced conceit that a player must go from "zero to demigod". RPG fans of crunch heavy systems such as D&D or Pathfinder want robust character development options but not everyone wants the game to make campaign-shaking shifts as the character develops.

And I'll be honest, it's these kind of "the game's always had them; the scope of the campaign has to change" elements are the biggest reason I start becoming disenchanted with d20 games and start looking at other RPGs that don't force my campaigns down this path. I hate it, because I really love Pathfinder, but ultimately I want my campaigns to be fun and evoke the fantasy influences that inspired them - not be its own fantasy sub-genre. Pathfinder is still my go-to fantasy game and likely always will be, but I'm tinkering with how to tone down the elements I dislike but there are some games that are tempting with their ability to emulate any kind of fantasy instead of "D&D/Pathfinder sub-genre fantasy".

YMMV.


Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Wolfgang Baur wrote:

Yep. I sort of wrote it expecting some honest disagreement, and I have a lot of respect for people who want to deal with scry, buff, and teleport. I'm personally tired of dealing with it, and I'm thinking that its not a feature, it's a flaw of teleport.

It boils down to my enjoyment of adventure tales that require the journey (Sindbad's Golden Voyages, to name one). Teleport sometimes takes that away. You *can* work around it (and that essay makes the point that it's not hard to fix).

But you shouldn't feel required to work around it. Fantasy as a genre doesn't NEED teleport the same way it needs charm person or polymorph.

I'm 100% in agreement with you and have felt this way for years. Glad to find out that I'm not alone in that assessment.

I loved the article and this book is fantastic!


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Damn, that was a great movie! It had everything I wanted from a modern-era Cap movie. It's my new favorite superhero movie.


Pathfinder Comics Subscriber; Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

In order of interest:

1.

DM Papa.DRB wrote:
Well, what I would really like is a complete update to The Book of the Righteous,

THIS. Most of the book is fluff vs. crunch. So while it's not an insignificant undertaking, a PF update of the crunch in this book is what I'd like to see.

2. Fang & Fury

3. Unholy Warrior's Handbook.

4. Also, the Advanced GM Guide, chapters 2, 7, & 8 specifically.

1 to 50 of 1,188 << 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.