BPorter's page

As the title says. What is the distinction between Profession (Soothsayer) and Profession (Fortune Teller)?

As written, Wounds is based on a creatures CON score. Wounds represents the ability to withstand physical damage.

Overall, I like this variant and the manner in which it's presented very much. I do, however, wonder about the implications to undead & constructs.

Neither type has a CON score. However, a zombie should, in my view, be solely dependent upon Wounds. It stops when you physically destroy it. Having a creature be 100% dependent on Vigor seems at odds with the intent of the system.

I'm tempted to say for Undead & Constructs, all hit points are Wound Points, not Vigor Points. But then you have the other niche cases like vampires -- they have a physical body to damage, yet can still learn as free-willed undead, so skill is a factor.

I was thinking hit points from the template = Wounds & hit points from class levels = vigor as for a PC.

Has anyone else given this any thought? Has anyone tested the system in their game yet?

Yep, I have that sci-fi itch that I'm looking to scratch yet again. I've asked before, to limited success, but it's another year, so here goes...

Ever notice how there’s ton of visual media for the sci-fi genre that scratches your average RPGer’s itch?

Ever notice how few novels/series do so? Most are one-trick-ponies (1 exaggerated tech/theme) or still stuck in the Sci-fi-as-morality-play mode.

So what are good sources of “RPGer Sci-Fi”?

Examples of what I’m seeking include:

Firefly/Serenity
Mass Effect 1 & 2
Dead Space 1 & 2
HALO
Star Trek (recent movie  focus on characters & action rather than morality-lesson-of-the-week TV style)
Battlestar Galactica (yeah, it could be preachy, too, but it was well done and presented a fairly consistent universe with lots of action)
Battle: Los Angeles
Alien / Aliens

Honorable Mention Sci-Fi films (fall into trap of 1-trick-pony more than others):
Predator
Terminator films
I, Robot (film)
Minority Report

Also, what novels make for good gamer sci-fi but are classified as adventure, mystery, or some other genre?

Film examples:
Adventure = Indiana Jones – Kingdom of the Crystal Skull
Adventure/Thriller = EagleEye, Source Code
Espionage Thriller = Mission Impossible films (tech), Bond series
Superhero = Batman (recent films), Captain America, Iron Man

What gives? No previews, no updates, no nothing aside from the preliminary info on the new classes.

This is the book that I want to be as much a "must have" as the APG turned out to be. So far, however, what little has been released is stuff I'm not thrilled with (the classes) and there's been no love since. I can't think of any other book in the RPG line that's received this little attention.

So... why?

Like the title says. Any new info?

Any chance of getting official support for the Genius Guide classes & archetypes into Hero Lab? PRETTY PLEASE????

As the title says.

Conceptually, I like the bard. I like the blend of abilties. I think the abilities are cool.

However, I completely fail at describing the class in such a way that players are interested in choosing it. Sadly, I also fail as a GM in portraying their Bardic Performance ability in a way that doesn't seem absurd.

"Ezren just got sniped by an arrow! What do you do?"
PC#1 (on the front line): "Somebody stabilize him!"
Bard: "Why I keep singing to maintain my bardic performance benefits!"
PC#2: "....ok. I guess I stop fighting to do it..."

Yeah, it's an extreme example but I think you get the idea. I get the idea of the bard inspiring troops. I get the idea of influencing crowds. I just can't get my head around the idea that a bard is going to Countersong in the middle of a combat (with an instrument no less).

No other class has resulted in this lack of imagination on my part. Help!

Color me shocked, but it’s begun.

The primary concern that I had with the introduction of Asian-themed elements into the Golarion and the Pathfinder RPG had very little to do with the source material and everything to do with the very vocal “It must be Uber-everything” crowd. The katana must be the most superior weapon in the game, the ninja must be able to out sneak the rogue, out fight the fighter, and out martial arts the monk, and so on.

With the introduction of the archetypes system in the APG, I had hoped that ninja & samurai would end up as archetypes. I figured Paizo would lean towards separate classes (& while there are limitations with the alternate class distinction, it’s still a separate class in the book and on the character sheet) so I wasn’t surprised to see ninja and samurai called out as classes. The gunslinger was a surprising inclusion, I have to admit.

Now we have threads upon threads talking about the inferiority of guns (“I should be able to snipe & one-shot a dragon through the eye!”), the katana (“it can slice through stone”), and the gunslinger and the ninja – the most disturbing posts being the ones that say that the base classes need buffed rather than having the ninja or gunslinger toned down.

Aside from satisfying the fan-boy quest for character coolness, that is simply bad game design. Your 10-min fix can seriously harm the PFRPG’s health and longevity.

1. The first printing of the core rulebook was a mere 18 months ago.

2. Based on various reviews & fan-related feedback of the vast majority of PF fans, Paizo did a bang-up job of improving all of the base classes - -including the rogue. Given the sheer number of increased abilities gained through rogue tricks & advanced tricks (further expanded in the APG), the rogue is fine. It’s one of the most popular classes in both of my player groups and no one’s complaining it’s not effective. I’m sure most classes can’t hold up at the tables of min-maxers that think all classes should do the same DPR, starting characters have to have a 20 stat to be viable, and wizards got “nerfed”.

3. The power scale can’t always go UP. The answer to every overpowered option isn’t to increase the power level of everything else.

If the (playtest) ninja becomes the new baseline power level for class design, you’ve invalidated the core rulebook 18 mos. after its publication. Considering the Paizo staff have expressed a desire of editions going for many years (some posts cited a decade or so if I recall directly), this would seem to be [u]spectacularly stupid[/u] philosophy for them to adopt.

Fortunately, again based on posts from Paizo staff, this idea of buffing the rogue & others seems to hold little or no weight. So while I’m still not a fan of a ninja, samurai, or gunslinger class, I recognize every whim & desire I have for the game isn’t going to be met either. Once again, thank you for giving the game the treatment it deserves and for finding options that appeal to the lion’s share of your fans.

Hopefully, this “buff this” mentality can be relegated to the same bin of bad PFRPG suggestions as incorporating 4e design elements/making PF more 4e-ish into the game…

Over on EN World, there seems to be a great deal of speculation about the health, direction, and even the future ownership of 4e and Dungeons & Dragons as a brand. While I attribute 80% of it to Internet-forum "I'm bored" or "Sky is falling" -type posts, apparently there is little new 4e product appearing on WotC's 2011 publishing schedule.

Some are even speculating that WotC might sell-off or license the intellectual property of the D&D brand. (I don't believe this at this point.) In a delicious turn of irony, some are suggesting that if this comes to pass, the "best case" scenario is that Paizo picks up D&D.

While I find the irony of pro-4e fans speculating a Paizo licensing/purchase of the unstoppable D&D juggernaught amusing, if this highly unlikely situation would arise, I wish to express the following, sincere plea to Paizo:

Don't f-ing do it. Please.

Frankly, you don't need it. While D&D has a large brand recognition within the RPG industry, outside of it, the value of the brand is questionable. Novels - there are far more valuable IPs/brands out there. Video Games - Warcraft trumps D&D by huge orders of magnitude.

If you keep doing what you've been doing with Pathfinder, I think there is a strong possibility that Pathfinder could ultimately eclipse D&D within the hobby.

Clearly, Paizo is already bucking the conventional wisdom:
"3e/OGL games are done" - yet here we have a flourishing Pathfinder game that evolved out of that vintage. All while competing against the current edition of D&D.
"Modules don't sell" - yet APs are Paizo's biggest sellers
"GMs want to make their own fluff"/"Settings need a focused hook/theme" - yet Golarion sourcebooks continue to sell and be developed, despite being a "kitchen sink" setting

Your recipe is working! Keep it up!

My kids have NEVER played Dungeons & Dragons. They do, however, LOVE playing Pathfinder.

As it appears that my current Kalamar campaign is drawing to a close, I’ve been prepping for the next campaign to be set in Pathfinder’s Golarion. As I’m putting the framework together, I’ve been thinking I want to plant the game squarely in the dark fantasy camp. To use video game vernacular, it’s going to be “M”-rated. To use movie vernacular, it’ll be straddling the “PG-13” & “R” fence but will lean more towards the “R” side.

The closest source of inspiration I can cite is Dragon Age: Origins . I want to take a standard Golarion campaign & use it for a dark fantasy campaign much like DA:O takes conventional FRPG elements but puts a dark fantasy lens over it. Taking cues from DA: O, the mechanics aren’t what makes the game a dark fantasy, it’s the story & content. I’ve got the mechanics I need. Instead, I’m looking for theme, mood, NPC, & adventure creation suggestions to help achieve my goal.

What this campaign WILL NOT be:

• A Ravenloft-style horror campaign
  
• A Midnight-style oppressive lost-cause campaign
  
• A no-heroes campaign
  

So to my fellow GMs, how would you go about achieving my goal of a dark fantasy Golarion campaign?

My initial thoughts:

• Tough choices. There should be few choices that lead to better/easier outcomes than others. This isn’t to say all choices must be negative, but the PCs should have to really work to determine the optimal path and the optimal path should never be the easiest one to take.

• Moral ambiguity. Even though PF uses alignment, generally speaking, things are more morally gray.

• Ruthless bad guys. The PCs aren’t facing four-color comic hero villains from the Silver Age of comics, bad guys to bad things – and they often times are being done to good people/innocents.

• Corrupting influences. Things like the 7 Deadly Sins (already in canon per the Runelords) are NPC/villain motivations just as often (or moreso) than Evil as Sauron-style influence. When Outsider-style/otherworldly evil is in around, it’s reeeeaally bad.

• Violence isn’t pretty. It’s bloody, destructive, and not always the best solution.

• Competing factions. Many people find security in group affiliations and many groups are at cross purposes with each other.

• Prejudices. Many people have them & they can be based on just about anything. Those that have them often aren’t shy about displaying them.

• The PC’s actions have lasting consequences. Whether it’s the death of a NPC that might have been saved, the destruction of a village or town, there should be demonstrable consequences of the impact to the setting caused by the PCs actions. Many times, making things better for person/group A means severely impacting person/group B in a detrimental way.
  

Ok, so with the annoying intrusions of that thing called Real Life, my regular gaming sessions haven’t run for almost 2 months. While face-face will always be preferred, I’m thinking of utilizing a VTT for periods where scheduling is more problematic in order to game more frequently, maintain continuity better, and advance a plotline a bit faster.

Here’s the problem: I’ve never utilized one before. I’ve done some preliminary homework and while some have impressive features, I have no appreciation for how complicated or efficient a given VTT is.

Game System: Pathfinder (of course)

Which VTTs do you recommend & why?

How does GM prep increase/decrease for VTT sessions vs. in-person tabletop sessions?

What nuances/gotchas do you need to watch out for?

Has anyone tried applying Arcana Evolved-style spellcasting to Pathfinder? I like the elegance of the AE's use of vancian slots for spells / day yet blending elements of study & intrinsic spell knowledge.

At the time of AE's release it was a bit like combining the best elements of the wizard & sorceror. You used your spellbooks to determine which spells went into your spell readied list but the actual spells cast were determined by your spells/day.

Now with Pathfinder, the wizard & sorceror are much more distinct through their class abilities. I still am not a fan of the old style "geez, I forgot" nature of the Wizard's spell memorization.

So for anyone who's applied the AE spellcasting system (or at least elements of it) to Pathfinder, how did it go? Any recommendations?

Thanks!

From the title it should be clear: I HAAAAAAATE the Christmas Tree effect. I recognize it’s part of the game’s heritage and I like a cool magic item as much as the next guy. People love to hold up the One Ring, Sting, Elric’s Sword, and other examples from fiction as justification for their availability. Yet most of the time, magic items don’t work in-game like their fictional counterparts.

The primary issue I have with it isn’t even one of campaign flavor (although that's a close 2nd) –it’s the impact on players’ mindset: I have to have a magic sword or I’m not effective in combat. I have to have AC boosters to be an effective character. I have to have a stat-booster to compensate for a dump stat or to give my fighter the strength of a giant. etc.,etc. Player’s begin to define their characters by their gear --- that’s my turn-off.

In video games like Dragon Age or Warcraft, those items are just as present (or moreso) as they are in your typical Pathfinder game. Yet because they’re scripted stories to a large degree, they’re moved to the background. Even in a high-magic setting like Harry Potter’s, they’re tools – not extensions of the character.

However, in Pathfinder (& earlier D&D incarnations), they’re front-and-center in many of the players’ minds. As the GM Guide states, you’re trading atmosphere for convenience. I want atmosphere over convenience.

So while it’s easy enough to houserule or import OGL variants to minimize the magic item dependence, I find myself with an atypical scenario: My kids are now playing Pathfinder.

As a result, I’m trying to keep to RAW & keep house- and optional-rules to a minimum. They’re really taking to it and having a ball. I want to provide the wonder of magic items yet avoid having them feel that their characters are defined by them. I’m trying to use the guidelines presented in the GM Guide but honestly, it’s been so long since I’ve opened the Pandora’s Box of commonplace magic that I thought I’d look for advice.

So, how do you help your players avoid the “My Character is his Gear” trap?

One of the things I'm really liking about the PFRPG, esp. with the APG & some great 3PP support, is that the core classes can suitably cover a broader range of archetypes than 3.x could do.

I've seen pit-fighting pugilist barbarians, swashbuckling fighters & rogues, fighter-brawlers, etc. Although I haven't had a chance to see each in play yet, they all seem like interesting builds.

The earlier 3.x class design philosophy, however, seemed to ID a "barter system" as necessary for the variant builds to be viable against the standard class. A few skill points here, a replacement feat there, a new class ability, etc.

I encourage my players to choose an archetype first and then we try to arrive at the most suitable class. The enhancements offered in the PFRPG have me questioning that "barter system" mentality now, however.

Take the mobile swordsman concept: whether it's an Arcana Evolved Unfettered, a Swashbuckler class, or a new archetype out of the APG; this guy is never going to wear anything heavier than medium armor. Maybe he'll fight with a shield, but certainly not a tower shield and isn't likely to use a 2-handed weapon.

His heavy armor proficiency is effectively wasted. If the class didn't have it, he'd have to burn a feat to get it.

Should the ability simply be wasted? Or should he get a replacement feat, skill points, etc.?

Just looking to see how others handle this sort of thing. I'd also find it helpful when I am importing/updating a class from another source what, if anything, I might need to add or remove from a class.

Thanks!

I'll state the following up front. Game play in the high teens, let alone the levels bolted on by Epic rules, do not appeal to me. I can appreciate the power curve of the 1-20 scale, the nod to backwards compatability, etc. IMO, once your adventures have to include plane-hopping & CR20+ outsiders just to provide "level-appropriate challenges" you've already hit the "epic" level of play.

In much of the speculation of future PF RPG products, I've seen repeated references to 2011 = Asian-themed stuff; 2012 = epic rules; 2013 = psionics/Vudra (maybe). At first, I just shrugged it off - maybe I'd get it, maybe I wouldn't.

However, I've arrived at another concern separate from my personal gaming biases.

If an entire year of RPG products are geared toward Epic Rules & epic-rule tie-ins, is that a risk for Paizo's business plan?

Reasons for asking:
1. It's stated that Paizo adventure-related research shows that the most popular adventures span the levels 1-15, hence the increase in the # of APs that top out at those levels rather than run the full 20 levels.

2. Epic-level rules is a step beyond even those levels. If the mid-high teens are a significantly smaller # of gamers than levels 1-15, would it stand to reason the # that are interested in playing at epic levels would at most be comparable to the number that play at levels 16-20.

3. Presumably, if there is an epic-level rule supplement, there would be an AP tie-in or additional PF adventures using epic-level rules. This would result in a sizeable portion of the Paizo product line for 1/2 or most of a year be tied up with a theme that could be of little interest to most of its customers.

Obviously, this is just speculation. (Hopefully unfounded.) Paizo's got a proven track record and haven't let me down yet.

Just curious as to what others think.

Since the PFRG Wizard gets all 0-level spells in their spellbook, how do my fellow GMs out there incorporate the addition of new spell material? If a GM elects to include additional material, do those new 0-level spells retroactively get added to the spellbook?

One of the things I really like about the Pathfinder & Golarion info is the inclusion of sample names. However, the representative lists are fairly short.

Has anyone ID'd good naming sources for use in their Golarion-based campaigns, especially for the human ethnic groups?

So the announcement of Ultimate Magic was a surprise to me, although a very welcome one. In the same vein, I’d like to suggest a similar product for the warriors in us all. Ultimate Combat, perhaps?

Personally, I’d love a Paizo-written treatment on combat expansions & options. Things I’d like to see:

• Armor as DR
• Class Defense Bonuses
• Additional Combat Maneuvers
• Called Shot / Combat tricks options
• Rules for cheating death and/or reducing reliance on healing magic
• Rule for supporting/encouraging action heroics
• Additional class features, feats, & equipment for warrior types
• GM Guide-style advice on running combats, finding the right level of combat crunch for your campaign, & how to make combat as exciting as possible.

I'd pre-order today if I could!

So there's lots of discussion in the AP threads about groups playing through the APs. I love the APs, but I buy them more to mine for ideas for ongoing campaigns, to flesh out settings, for the support articles, and just for a darn good read. I haven't noticed a lot of discussion about ongoing campaigns set in Golarion or being run under the Pathfinder rules.

So tell us about your Pathfinder campaigns.

Here goes:

1. Running a Pathfinder-Golarion campaign for my son. Campaign started and is currently in Nirmathas. I adapted the TSR Eye of the Serpent module and ran it for my eldest's ranger PC and my youngest's "ninja" rogue/monk (he just likes hanging with Dad & big brother, so he's an on-again/off-again PC/NPC). Next up: Crypt of the Everflame where I'll be introducing one of the campaign's primary villains. From there, it's probably homemade adventures leading west to Bloodsworn Vale and into Korvosa.

2. Prepping for new Golarion campaign for main group. Campaign will be set in Varisia and centered in pre-CotCT Korvosa. I picked Varisia since the region clicked with me from the beginning and I have the most setting material for that region. The announcement of a Kaer Maga sourcebook clinched the deal.

However, the Council of Thieves AP provided the Cheliax background I was looking for and I found the region much more intriguing than the typical "evil kingdom". Given Korvosa's heritage with Cheliax, I'm sure the campaign will move to Cheliax & Westcrown, at least for a campaign arc.

In the early days of Golarion supplements and through the CotCT AP, the Shoanti seemed to be strongly influenced/inspired by the Native American culture of North America.

However, the description of Arcadia and the tribes that inhabit it in the Campaign Setting seems to have as strong, if not stronger, corellation to the Native American cultural influences/inspirations, right down to the artwork on the page.

What, if any, would the main differences be between these two cultures? Or is this a case of parallel development where the similarities are acknowledged or intended by the Paizo team?

One of the things I love about the Paizo products is the use of the Iconic Characters in all of the art. Whether inspirational, humorous, or simply illustrative of a scene/culture/setting the artwork containing the iconics has been very, very good.

One question that puzzles me, though, is the near-total lack of variance in character dress. Now in your average adventuring scene, I understand why the characters are wearing their "iconic garb". However, I see little reason why Valeros, Merisiel, & co in the same garb when their in an alpine region searching for Xin Shalast, a desert clime in Katapesh, or the depths of the Mwangi Expanse?

I think the iconics' "iconic look" is pretty well established at this point. Surely, artists could come up with variances in the Iconics' appearances with respect to climate & perhaps, culture?

It's not quite as bad as the comic-book syndrome where the fighting tights protect against arctic winds but still...

One of the things I always loved about the REH stories of Conan was that Conan usually adopted the styles and even the weaponry of different regions (save when he was an impoverished barbarian in a loincloth of course...). It always helped cement the image of not only his status/wealth in a given story but the region & culture where the story took place.

Just a thought/suggestion.

At the present time I don't play frequently enough to utilize the APs in a serial format.

That said, I LOVE them. They give me the nostalgic feeling of reading an adventure from the days of AD&D 1e, when modules were the #1 source of expansion material. They also give me insight on how to better prepare my own adventures. Finally, they're a damn good read as I envision how the iconics might approach it as well as how my players might approach certain areas.

But I love the support articles just as much. The early articles on Sandpoint, Magnimar, and Varisia hooked me. Plagues in a fantasy world? Pure gold. They are, hands down, the best vehicle for niche expansion material I've ever seen -- far superior to the magazine format where I might find a single article that was useful to me.

Unfortunately, a while back I had to cut my AP subscription as part of household belt tightening. I'm looking to re-up my subscription soon and have been working to backfill my collection. In order to prioritize accordingly, though, I'm looking for input on the best support articles out there.

For my own selfish reasons, I have the complete RotRL & CotCT runs. I have the first part of Second Darkness and parts 1-3 of CoT if anyone cares to suggest their "greatest hits" from the issues I'm missing.

Selfish reasons aside, please post the names/issues of your favorite support articles. The AP adventure segments get all the attention, now it's time to give the support articles some lovin'!

(Long post warning)

I have several questions regarding religion in Golarion. I like the distinction drawn between the faithful, atheists, and agnostics. The deities themselves run the gamut from the spectrum from “very cool” to “meh” but I’ve yet to find a RPG pantheon that gets the “very cool” award for each deity.

I’ve got the Campaign Setting, Gods & Magic, and several APs that detail various faiths.

Pros:
• Clear depiction of gods & their spheres/foci/areas of interest
• Universal gods (since they’re demonstrably real that makes sense). No racial pantheons/gods per se although some are favored over others by certain races.
• Nice info on types of personalities & classes that are drawn to the various priesthoods
• Nice info on “typical duties” of priests

Cons:
• Too many gods!!!! (and the number keeps growing!) I thought Greyhawk had a lot but at least they were organized (mostly) into competing pantheons. I get the “nod to Greek mythology” vibe. However, by RAW, ALL of these deities exist. Yet, unlike the gods of the Scarred Lands (to cite an example), tribute/acknowledgement of all of the gods really isn’t expected/required. Do we really need all of this many gods + archdevils + demon lords + etc, etc.?
• Despite Law being an actual force in the universe and having multiple Lawful-Something deities, Golarion is strangely lacking in organized religions operating at anything higher than the temple organizational level. We’ve got assassin’s guild, explorer’s guilds, and merchant consortiums that operate at regional or continental scales of operations. But churches, having an active, demonstrable patron who presumably gains power by the number of followers he/she has can’t establish a central authority?

To illustrate this last point, here’s a summary of info on “Churches” taken from Gods & Magic:

Abadar – heirarchy local to city
Asmodeus – mention of Cheliax and co-existence with nation’s bureaucracy. Secret shrines elsewhere.
Calistria – “very casual” hierarchy. Is it regional, national, city, town, or temple hierarchy?
Cayden Cailean – no hierarchy
Desna – “extremely disorganized” and “no formal chain of command”
Erastil – church is “simple & practical”; comments pertaining to hierarchies seem to refer to temple hierarchies rather than the church/faith as a whole
Gorum – discussion of priests, temples, and pecking order of temple hierarchy. No mention of church/faith as a whole.
Gozreh – follows the priest & temple focus model.
Iomedae – priest & temple focus again. Discussion of church circles, which appear to consist of hierarchy within a given temple.
Irori – temple focus/mention
Lamashtu – church “is scattered and lacks an overall hierarchy”
Nethys – ranking in the church again is limited to ranking within a particular temple (since benevolent and malevolent churches have different ranking systems, clearly they aren’t part of a single, unified faith)
Norgorber – temple focus only
Pharasma – temple focus only
Rovagug – banned faith in most cities; no central authority
Saranrae – allows “mobility between temples”; temples “organized like family”. Theoretically, this could lend itself to regional or national sects, each with a separate hierarchy.
Shelyn – the church “as a whole is disorganized”. Seems to apply to the temple as much as it might be a statement towards the faith as a whole.
Torag – “organized like a defensive army”. Presumably on a city, national, or regional scale. Not sure how you would organize a continental or global faith as an army but I suppose it’s possible.
Urgathoa – church is “scattered and cell-based”
Zon-Kuthon – “no real overarching organizational tenets”. Each cell/temple has its own hierarchy.

Clearly, church is sometimes used as a term for the larger faith as a whole and other times it appears to be limited to “church hierarchy” as it applies to individual temples.

I can appreciate the chaotic faiths being adverse to central authority structures and follow along the lines of mystery cults, independent temples, etc. I’m just struck by the lack of central authorities, even at a regional or sect-level.

Now in many a campaign, is this an issue? No. But it seems that a huge trove of role-playing potential was ignored/discarded for the sake of “keeping it simple” (my estimation – not claiming anyone said this was the reason).

The Mendevian Crusades would make a lot more sense if a central authority was helping to organize the efforts and allocate resources. As written, the folks fighting the Worldwound must have to maintain a hell of a communications network to reach the various circles in Avistan alone.

What about splinter sects?

What about heretical cults/sects? The hells have a whole level devoted to scribing heresies and lies to lead the other gods’ faithful astray. It’s up to each temple to fight the seductive lies of hell all on their own?

I’m not asking these questions to throw stones. I’m a big fan of Golarion, largely due to its treatment on cultures and races. Although there are a lot of great religion-nuggets in the setting, I’m just trying to understand Paizo’s intent with respect to the 2 areas I listed as “cons”. I can come up with my own take on things, I’m just curious as to whether this is “upcoming content”, “working as designed”, “didn’t really focus on that”, or some other reason.

While Pathfinder is my go-to game for fantasy, FantasyCraft has some really great stuff in it. While I'm sure I'll get around to running a FC game somewhere down the line, at present I'm looking at certain subsystems to cherry-pick for insertion into my PF campaigns.

Leading contenders thus far:
1. Defense scores & DR (I'm not a fan of armor = AC)

2. The economy & gear system (I like the ability to customize equipment without resorting to magic items)

3. Lifestyle and its sub-stats Panache & Prudence for PC finances.

4. The Reputation rules. (I really like the contacts & holdings mechanics.)

5. Action Dice

6. Cheating Death (much better than ubiquitous Raise Dead)

Anyone else borrowing from FC for their OGL/PF games?

Chase mechanics have typically been a weak point of RPGs. With the purchase of Tome of Secrets, the Hot Pursuit chase rules were used to great effect in my Pathfinder session I ran for my son. (I had previously purchased Hot Pursuit separately but hadn't used it much.)

Expecting to build off of that success, I created a scenario that included several opportunities for chases with my regular gaming group (all adults, ages 30+). Getting players to pursue foes was easy enough. However, whenever a scenario arose where the players should have considered fleeing, the players always opted to fight. When faced with overwhelming numbers at most they would fall back to a defensive position.

While I applaud their use of defensive tactics, it occurred to me that all these years of gaming with poor chase mechanisms may have conditioned them to a stand-and-fight mentality.

So fellow GMs, any advice on conveying to the players that chases/escapes are sometimes more viable than standing and fighting?

For the players out there, what kind of triggers force the flight-response instead of the fight-response?

I think the premise for the upcoming Kingmaker is fantastic and rulership/realm management is an old but often neglected part of the game's heritage. The AP structure, I think, will lend itself very well to making the governance of a realm integral to the game rather than a bolt-on/afterthought it sometimes ends up being in a standard campaign.

Now I know APs are planned far in advance but Kingmaker has me thinking that an AP structured around an arcane academy or a temple could be equally entertaining. (I mean, c'mon, can you imagine Logue or Pett taking the darker elements of Harry Potter and cranking them up to 11?!?!)

At first glance, my thought was that it would limit PC class choices, but it certainly wouldn't have to be that way. Paizo has already established that priests of the various faiths aren't all clerics, and an arcane order certainly would need support staff and agents that would round out the spellcasters.

So is there anyone else who would like to see an AP delve into the politics and struggles of an arcane order or divine temple?

A request of my fellow Paizo-fans!

At present, I do not have the opportunity to run a Pathfinder AP. I have two campaigns that I'm running and for the moment, none of my players wish to "start over" as it were.

Economic times being what they are, I had to cancel my AP subscription a while back (hoping to restart it in 2010). Despite these issues, I love the AP format as much for the setting content as the adventures themselves.

What I'm considering doing is modifying existing campaigns to incorporate elements from the APs rather than the storylines of the APs.

So, for a GM who wants to cherry-pick locations, setting info, monsters, etc. from APs (or other Pathfinder products), what products/sections/topics would you recommend and why?

Note: I've got the full RotRL & CotCT APs and Pt1 of Second Darkness.

Thanks!

So, in the "Pathfinderize D20 Modern" thread, James states the following:

One of the problems with d20 Modern is that it doesn't know what kind of game it wants to be. Is it a modern-day spy game? An apocalyptic game? A space opera game? With Pathfinder and D&D, there's an implied world and setting behind the rules, and that allows the game itself more focus and more detail.

I'm pretty sure that if we do a modern or sci-fi game, we'll not take the "generic" approach. We won't try to build a game that could be rules for ANY setting... the SRD already does that, actually. It'd be best if a sci-fi/modern game picks its world and presents rules for that specific world, I think.

Assuming James' prediction holds true, what implied setting would YOU want Paizo to do?

My Preferences:

Genre: Science-fiction (specifically: magic-free space opera)

Influences/Implied Setting Sources:
(New) Battlestar Galactica
Lost
Firefly
Mass Effect (sans psionics or with psionics as an optional rule)
Dead Space
Babylon 5
Alien & Aliens (nothing after)
Predator (nothing after)
Blade Runner

Tech:
1. Interstellar Spacecraft (with thrusters/engines - not Star Trek-style nacelles)
2. Interstellar society with aliens (again, more Mass Effect - less Star Wars/Star Trek)
3. Robots
4. Artificial Gravity
5. Near-AI capable computers (optionally, rules for AI PCs/NPCs)
6. Cyberware (lower end of the scale vs. full-body cyborgs)
7. Genetic Engineering/Bioware
8. Artificial life (mutated humans/animals, biological androids)
NO MAGIC!!!

Things to Avoid:
1. Star Wars-style science fantasy. Star Wars cinematic adventure is ok, just not so over-the-top.
2. Star Trek preachiness and uber-tech (no transporters, warp 23,etc.)
3. The Uber-gun or Uber-armor that causes every party to be outfitted in the same fashion.
4. MAGIC!! NO!!

Give me a setting that can handle interstellar war, interstellar trade, noir, gritty horror. Basically, a PG-13 treatment like what's been done with Golarion.

Has anyone taken a stab at converting Arcana Evolved classes to a PF-version?

Obviously, there's a lot of traffic regarding the changes to the cleric class. While I haven't had the chance to see them in play yet, I have to admit I'm surprised by the hue and cry.

In my personal experience, while I've always been a fan of clerics, 80-90% of the players I've GM'd for or played with over the years are not. Also, one of my biggest beefs with the class is that 3.x went closer towards the old-school heal-bot cleric model rather than the powers-tailored-towards-the-diety approach of 2e. (Domain powers notwithstanding.)

All that aside, however, the PFRPG are the core rules for the game. Healing and dealing damage are probably the two most popular cleric modes utilized so it doesn't surprise me that those are the ones handled...first.

I may be dead wrong, but I strongly suspect that those future supplements that will provide new class options will introduce additional channel energy abilities.

Why not address it in the core rulebook? Cleric's already receive a larger than normal class write-up. PF was updating/addressing 3.x as a whole and since cleric's in 3.x only turned or rebuked undead, that was what was addressed in the core rules. At some point Paizo has to say, "this goes in, this comes out".

Maybe I'm totally off base in thinking additional channel energy options are forthcoming, but barring an official Paizo denial, my money's on that happening at some point.

P.S. For what it's worth, I can think of one example of a 3.x supplement that already did this. The Kingdoms of Kalamar Player's Guide offered numerous powers/abilities to substitute for turn/rebuke undead that were more in line with the portfolios of the deities of the setting. I've been using it for several years now, so the idea of alternative channel energy uses is hardly new to my campaign.

With the PFRPG now in hand, next month's gaming budget is freed up for some other wish-list items. Given the PFRPG's redesign to avoid "dead levels", I was wondering if some of the rules/expansions in the Books of Experimental Might could be used to do the following (either/or, or both):

1. Supplement PFRPG. If so, any recommendations on what would work well and what to avoid?

2. Help give 3PP created classes the PF "boost" necessary to put them on par with PF classes? Filling in dead levels with Bonus Feats is certainly viable but I'm wondering if the BoXM would provide additional options that might be a little sexier than just peppering a class with bonus feats.

I've been considering picking up the Books of Experimental Might for a while now and with the Pathfinder RPG now on my desk, next months gaming budget may go towards those books.

For those who've already purchased them - could they:

1) Be used as complementary products with Pathfinder (i.e. cherry pick rules for a PF campaign)

2) Be used to "Pathfinderize" a non-Paizo class? Would the power level come close or is one still dominant?

Like most GMs, I've got my house rules, but I generally tend to mix various sources to arrive at my house rules. Generally speaking, I hate developing game mechanics, so designing/converting classes is not my cup of tea. That said, if the BoXM gave me a toolkit for tweaking 3rd-party classes, I'd buy it in a heartbeat.

(I do have the PF conversion doc but was looking for something a little more toolkit oriented. Filling in dead levels with bonus feats is a decent approach, I suppose - just looking for something with a little more "oomph" so that a player might pick the 3rd-party class over a PF class.)

What the title says. I'd love to see an official Pathfinder update to the Arcana Evolved Races and Classes to bring them to parity with the PF races and classes.

Anyone else think this would be a good product? I was going to post over on Monte's boards as well.

Building off of my Good Sci-Fi for Gamers thread, what books/series can the Paizo fans offer? Trying to browse through the bookstores or Amazon the closest I can seem to get are books categorized as thrillers. Some scratch the itch, others just don't cut it.

Here's what I'm looking for:
Adventure stories set in either the pulp era (1920s-1940s) or modern day.
Adventures of exploration, mystery, etc. with ACTION. Something that'll keep me turning pages and reading into the wee hours.

Sources of inspiration:
Indiana Jones movies (Duh!)
Uncharted: Drake's Fortune video game (closest Indiana Jones style plot set in modern-day I can find)
Doc Savage
Tomb Raider/Laura Croft (I'm reaching a bit here, I think, as she's much more over-the-top)

If it's not too much trouble, please explain WHY you think it makes for good-gamer adventure. Thanks!

I can list off favorite fantasy series without even thinking about it. Sci-fi? Much more difficult to do. While there seems to be no shortage of sci-fi in TV, film, and video games to appeal to my RPG-er side, I always feel like it's a crap shoot when I pick up a sci-fi novel. About the closest I can get is military sci-fi.

Where's Firefly/Serenity-style fiction? Where's a sci-fi series with character development like that found in (the revised) Battlestar Galactica? Where's the action-adventure of a Farscape, Stargate, or DS9?

I'm looking for entertaining sci-fi that takes stories, tropes, etc. and puts them into a coherent sci-fi setting. Hell, I don't care if it's a cop show set in space if it isn't boring.

So can the ranks of Paizodom help me?

Definitions of what Good Gamer Sci-Fi is NOT(by me):
1. Preachy sci-fi is not good gamer sci-fi. I don't want to be persuaded or lectured to. I want to read something that screams "hell, yeah that'd make a great campaign" (not a one-shot).

2. Star Wars is not good gamer sci-fi (although it can come damn close). Star Wars is science-fantasy, a fantasy with sci-fi window dressing. Don't get me wrong, I like my Star Wars and mine it when I can, but it's not gamer sci-fi.

3. One-trick pony settings/stories are not good gamer sci-fi. The one trick pony is the sci-fi story that focuses on a single element that is usually hyper-inflated relative to the rest of the setting's technology. Example#1: the protagonist is a cyborg and nothing but the plight of a cyborg factors into the plot/series. Example#2: The society is modified by one singular technology and the characters are barely relatable due to that one aspect overriding all others -- predictable story about the "rediscovery" of their lost humanity ensues...

4. Crappy tie-ins are not good gamer sci-fi. The original 3 Halo novels are good/passable gamer sci-fi. Most of the starcraft novels I've read are not -- they're barely readable. The sad thing about this is that the tie-in is usually the most-likely to contain good gamer sci-fi. Unfortunately, the writing often kills it.

So any help out there? I'd really like to dive into some good sci-fi novels & series but I'm tired of being disappointed. In advance, thanks!

Examples of Good Gamer Sci-Fi in other media. (Some occasionally are at odds with 1-3, however, overall they win out.)

Farscape
Firefly/Serenity
Babylon 5
Starcraft (video game)
Halo Video games
Mass Effect video game
Terminator movies
Alien, Aliens
Predator
Exploration stories that have conflict worth caring about.
Jericho (post-apocalyptic)
SOME Star Trek

I've been of fan of Paizo's since Rise of the Runelords and in that time have been extremely impressed with their products and Golarion. To date, I've been mining the material for ideas for my ongoing campaign. Getting the Pathfinder RPG was a no-brainer.

I just started running Pathfinder for my oldest son and after a successful trial run, was looking to choose a setting for our Pathfinder RPG goodness.

Although my long-running campaign is going strong with no need to change settings, I thought of going the Golarion route for my son. Yesterday, I perused the Campaign Setting HC at the local bookstore -- but couldn't bring myself to pull the trigger.

Pros:
1. Gorgeous book - standard Paizo top-shelf quality
2. High-level treatment of races, nations, and organizations. In particular, races and organizations stood out.
3. Proper nation-level detail for a CS & book this size.

What I didn't see:
1. Climate/weather patterns for regions
2. No lattitude/longitude representation if I wanted to try and determine them myself
3. Trade winds/prevailing winds
4. Trade routes - overland and sea
5. Religious HQs/seats - are all religions Headquartered in Absalom? 6. Do any of the religions have a centralized authority?
7. Maps without any discernable scale. (My #1 RPG pet-peeve)

Now, perhaps I'm in the minority and most folks hand-wave that kind of stuff away. I've always found ways to turn such info into adventure seeds, ground the setting for the players, and create a more internally-consistent campaign.

Does anyone else care about such things?

Is this type of info in every campaign setting? Of course not. But info along these lines can be found in settings going as far back as Greyhawk.

However, the Campaign Setting HC does it's job. If the Gazetteer is the 100,000' view, the PFCS-HC is a 30,000' view. The Chronicles line provides further detail on specific regions but the ones I have don't really cover this kind of info either.

Not sure that I have a request, complaint, or objection in my musing above. I'm just thinking that instead of spending $50 on the PFCS-HC, I might be better served buying the Chronicles region books of interest since I may have to come up with my desired "missing info" myself. Unfortunately, that's a very piecemeal approach to doing things and ultimately may steer me away from Golarion.

Bottom line, I guess is this: would anyone else be interested in the info I'm seeking? Enough to warrant a future supplement? The following expands beyond my initial "setting wish list" but in order to get that info I'm guessing you'd need a supplement with the proper theme in order to sell it. I suppose you could have them centered on themes like...

1. Climate/Weather/Environment - Kind of a Pathfinder version of the Wilderness Survival Guide? Possibly extend it to include undersea realms, underdark, and other worlds?

2. Trade - overland & sea-based. Running businesses, guilds, cartels, etc. and the regional differences in approaches. Korvosa's pretty damn far from Vudra so these things are in play. Do businesses like Logging Consortiums (Falcon's Hollow) appear in Cheliax, Vudra, Osiron?

Note: I think #1 for sure, and #2 are almost must-haves for nautical campaigns to have any real longevity, but that's me.

3. Religions (not Gods) of Golarion - Rites/ceremonies, church structure/organization, how the church operates across Golarion/within a region. Kind of a Golarion-equivalent Churches of Harn or Book of the Righteous?

4. Magical Traditions of Golarion - Bloatmages, academies, wizard guilds, etc.

Sorry for the long, rambling post. I just thought picking up the PFCS-HC was a slam-dunk. I'm still interested in Golarion - I'm just wondering if there are better vehicles to getting the info I'd like.

After several years of looking at Dad's RPGs and wondering what RPGs were all about, we decided my son was old enough to dive into the deep end. We made up a character last weekend and this weekend was our first session. It was wildly entertaining & nostalgic for me, but the best part was seeing my kid's reaction.

I knew he was having a ball but you know you've got a RPG fan when he said, not once, but three times "You're right, Dad. This is better than a video game."

The little one got in on the act as well, alternating between helping Dad roll dice and playing with his action figures.

A terriffic day all around! Just wanted to share.

Another special round of thanks to Paizo. We played using the Pathfinder rules.

My oldest played a human Ranger. The youngest, claiming he wanted to "play a ninja", got to run a human Monk 1/Rogue 1 until the lure of his action figures won out.

Since I was unsure what my oldest's first go-round would be like, I dusted off my old UK5: The Eye of the Serpent from TSR which was designed to be run for a party or a single Ranger, Druid, or Monk. It worked out great! He's about half-way through.

Materials Used:
Pathfinder RPG - My kid really got into the character creation and quickly picked up the basics
Monster Manual 3.5
Eye of the Serpent module
Hot Pursuit Rules from Tome of Secrets - These worked like a charm. My son loved being chased through a forest while pusued by a Hobgoblin and his three hunting dogs!
I also used Reserve Points from Iron Heroes/Unearthed Arcana to maximize survival chances and compensate for the lack of magical healing.

Oh, and in case the "gorgeous book" praise needs any reinforcement, my little one asked if we can look through the Pathfinder RPG pictures as part of the books-before-bed routine.

I know it's been touched on before. I know you all have a lot of irons in the fire. However, after seeing the Pathfinder RPG in all its glory, I'm begging you to do a Pathfinder-treatment of D20 Modern.

I have total faith that you could do the same improvements and treatments for the modern, pulp, and sci-fi genres.

I know there is a lot of 3rd-party stuff out there and that their are alternatives like True20 (which I like but I still like D20 Modern more) and Modern20 (which I cherry-pick for rules but it changed too much IMO), but there's something about D20 Modern that just clicks for me.

Even though fantasy RPGing is my genre of choice, I find myself evaluating characters in fiction, video games, TV, and movies through the lens of D20 Modern base classes. (She's a Fast/Charismatic, he's a Strong/Fast, he's a Dedicated/Tough, etc.)

I realize it'd be smaller print runs and serves a smaller audience than fantasy, but damn I'd love to have it.

Paizo fans, tell me you wouldn't want the following (apologies for poorly-riffing the Pathfinder meme):

"Explorer: The Role-playing game of Modern adventure" (Pulp, Modern)
-- Genre sourcebooks include:
Sci-fi. C'mon sci-fi treatments from Paizo? Do I even need to say more? Especially with Planet Stories inspriation?
Pulp. You already tap this source of gaming goodness with Pathfinder, so you're capabilities are already proven here. You could even do a pulp-era version of the Pathfinder Society.
Horror You sprinkle this in to great effect now. Logue & Pett unleashed?!? Failed sanity checks abound!

I realize you've probably already kicked this around and have an idea or two or perhaps that door's already closed. However, a Pathfinder fan can dream and after seeing the great job done with the Pathfinder RPG, I know the D20 Modern/Future OGL torch would be in good hands with Paizo as well.

So the wife who manages the Netflix list has The Happening show up at our house. Now, while I don't think M. Night Shyamalan walks on water, I generally like his movies (loved Sixth Sense and Unbreakable, liked The Village and Signs). So while I had heard mixed reviews on The Happening, I figured it couldn't be that bad. I mean, the guy knows how to build suspense, right? The guy knows how to make interesting characters, right?

All I can say is WTF?!?!?!?!?!? I want the 90 minutes I wasted back. This easily goes into the top 5 of worst movies I've seen in the last 5 years. No supsense, crappy dialogue, characters I didn't give a rat's behind about.

What the hell was he on? What the hell was Walhberg thinking? He was like a drone through the whole movie.

I don't expect a home run from MNS every time but he showed up dressed for golf for a baseball game.

I'm now having SERIOUS doubts about his ability to do justice to Avatar: The Last Airbender. I was thrilled when I heard he was doing it. Now I'm dreading it.

I even sat through 30 min of crappy DVD extras hoping to find some insight, some method, to the madness that would cause him to make this movie. I became further disenchanted as he talked about how "horrific" and "suspenseful" the movie was. It just plain sucked. Hard.

I posted this over at ENWorld, but since the PDF debate seems to be going strong here as well, I thought I'd post it here as well in case anyone's interested.

In advance, sorry for the lengthy post.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------- -----

Like many, I've been watching WotC's PDF-pulling with interest. I chose not to ride the 4e train but still purchased older, out-of-print PDFs. I missed the initial wave of announcements and was irritated that some of my wish list had vanished, but it wasn't a devastating development to me personally.

However, I feel it speaks volumes about WotC. For the last 24 hours, I've watched the various posters on both sides and aside from the sheer idiocy in which WotC has handled this situation, I've also been struck by some of the assumptions being made - both in- and against- WotC's favor. While I have no insider information, these assumptions fly in the face of everything I've encountered while working in corporate America for over 13 years. I am a solutions engineer for a technology company and in addition to seeing the operations of my employer, I have the opportunity to have some level of insight into my customers who cover a wide range of industries.

So here's one man's take on some of the conclusions being drawn:

1. Lawyers Don't Run Companies - Lawyers provide counsel. Executives run companies. So the idea that Lawyers are passing edicts to WotC is pretty far-fetched. Lawyers can provide suggestions, can say "yeah, we have a case and can go after X", and will be part of developing contracts, etc. But an executive or executives make the decisions - in this case, WotC executives. Lawyers, may have written the GSL, but someone within WotC said, "yeah that's what we want". Worst case scenario, someone at Hasbro said it for WotC. Which brings me to ...

2. Parent Companies Don't Micromanage Subsidiaries/Divisions - That's why the susidiary/division has it's own executives. The parent company is supposed to focus on the bigger picture, not the day-to-day operations. I seriously doubt Hasbro is running WotC. For that to be true, WotC's executives have to be empty suits and that is a more alarming prospect for the health & future of the company than PDF piracy. The more likely scenario is that Hasbro is dictating targets that are unrealistic, and WotC leadership is making poor decisions in an effort to make those targets. I've seen it first hand with customers and my own employer at different times throughout my career.

3. Companies aren't evil, but they can lose their way - I know we all love some Shadowrun, but corporations aren't evil. They may be run by evil people but it's orders of magnitude more likely that poor choices are made to support a business plan that's not achievable. There are businesses that put customers first because they understand that there will be no company without them. There are other businesses out there that put shareholder profits far above customer satisfaction, employee satisfaction, or any number of other factors. #1 reason? The Internet boom. Many companies expect double-digit returns every quarter even when it's inarguably demonstrable to be unachievable. You know what helps drive that mentality? Being part of a publicly traded company.

I've also read the threads talking about the court cases and PHB2 sales, unsurprisingly, in Internet-land, people want to have it both ways:
"WotC had to pull PDF sales. The volume of lost sales due to piracy was huge."
"See how successful 4e is, they sold out the first printing!"

I see it as "Since every illegal download doesn't equate to a lost sale and since 4e seems to be selling very well, why the draconian reaction to selling PDFs?" There's a wide range of plausible scenarios that have already been debated in earlier threads. Only WotC knows the truth.

I know what I'm about to say will sound harsh and will earn me a WotC-hater label in certain camps. As gamers, we want to think that the flagship RPG publisher is made up of people just like us - and it is. Unfortunately, it's their job and you don't always get to make decisions or take actions you agree with at work. Sometimes you're ordered to do something, sometimes the decisions made above your head. But let's stop burying our heads in the sand. WotC is making the decisions. Put the credit, whether good or bad, where it is due. Cheer them for the success of 4e, but don't absolve them of decisions that hurt the industry or you as a customer.

If Hasbro doesn't like the decisions or doesn't see the results they want, trust me, they'll make changes. Of what type or scale I can't say. My belief is that Hasbro's role as villain starts and stops with the targets they're giving WotC.

Let's face it, folks, 4e could be a success by any objective measure in the RPG industry, and still be viewed as unsuccessful for not being profitable enough from a WotC or Hasbro perspective.

I agree with Stan! - WotC has dropped the mantle of RPG industry leadership. They've got market share, but there are several decisions that, although clearly beneficial to WotC, are not to the industry, 3PPs, or YOU the customer. Just because a company can do something, doesn't mean that it should.

Sorry for the long post, it's been kicking around in my head for a bit.

Lastly, a wise man once told me the following:
1) Never underestimate the stupidity of a corporation.
2) The only entity dumber than a corporation is a government.
3) The only entity dumber than a government is academia.

Maps. How I love them.

Maps. How I seem to suck at making them.

Sure I can do the crude hand-drawn stuff. But every time I try to make a "real map" that has reasonably consistent scaling, can survive annotations, etc. It takes FOREEEEEEEVER to finish.

I tried Campaign Cartographer and got passable results, it's just I couldn't devote the time necessary to finish the map. They always seem to be a work in progress.

Is this just the Achilles' Heel of my GMing skills? Am I truly a mapping grognard who just needs to embrace the digital mapping tools that are available? Or does everyone else suck at making maps also?

Seriously, though, for all the GMs out there:

How do you rate your mapping skills?

What is your primary mapping method/toolset?

'Cause although misery loves company, I'd REAALLLY like to get better at making useful maps. (FWIW, my wilderness-map-fu is my weakest skill.)

P.S. James & Wes, although you previously earned my admiration for your adventure design super skills, your "turnover maps" now make me want to smack you! I can only dream my finished maps come close to your maps! With Envy, I hereby dub thee RBMs! (Rat Bastard Mappers)

While 2008 has come and gone, I'd be remiss to not thank the Paizo team for a fantastic 2008.

With the Pathfinder APs and Modules you are hands-down, the gold-standard of published adventures. Thanks for all of the Golarion goodness and the promise of the Pathfinder RPG. Hell, thank you for choosing to do the Pathfinder RPG in the first place! I'm sure my wallet would be heavier if you went 4e, but I sure am glad you didn't!!

Thanks for making the Beta PDFs free, thanks for teaching this old dog new tricks with adventure and story design, and thanks for keeping 3.x alive, even if in a newly-evolved form!

Most importantly, thank you for the commitment & respect that you show to your customers - you're the gold-standard there as well.

Best wishes for a properous 2009 and the continued rise of Golarion and Pathfinder!

Obviously, the following is a rant from my point of view:

I've been noticing a very disturbing trend for several months now with regards to the Pathfinder RPG. Almost every rules tweak, suggestion, or class modification is in regards to increasing the power level. If even a third of these suggestions are taken, the power creep from 3.x to Pathfinder will be enough to thwart backwards compatibility.

I see little harm in things like additional skill points for classes. But too often I'm seeing "put in stuff like Tome of Battle" or "put in stuff like 4e". If everyone wants to see a signficant bump in power, why aren't you just playing 4e (or Tome of Battle, etc.).

The racial increases in power are already pushing it in my mind. Having meaninful class abilities per level is ok and I'm waiting to see the finished product.

But why must the power always INCREASE? If spellcasters are too powerful at high-levels, wouldn't another option be to reign in the power escalation of those classes rather than making non-spellcasters equivalent to Crouching Tiger-style fantasy?

Eventually, as the power level continues to increase, you're going to get diminishing returns while continuing the "arms race". And for those who complain that high level play is difficult or breaks down, I see the power escalation accelerating the point at which that occurs rather than preventing it. At some point, swords-n-sorcery or lower-magic style games won't even be possible. Everything will be excessively high fantasy or effectively a supers game with fantasy window dressing. If that's what everyone wants, then ok, I guess. However, that's not the vibe I'm getting from Paizo and not the vibe I'm getting from the Pathfinder products.

I'm guessing I'm in the minority. I recognize that Paizo didn't state the design goals as "reduce or even out the power level" or "we're getting rid of the Christmas tree effect". However, I think those are just as feasible a design choice as "let everyone be/use magic".

End of rant. The Fantasy Super Hero Action Hour syndrome of D&D just really turns me off and it seems to be harder and harder to escape anymore. Aside from my own campaigns, that is.

While I'm a huge fan of d20 & OGL games, I'm not much enamored with the default magic system as presented in D&D. I like the idea of sorcery being more "art" than "science" and the pick-and-choose approach of D&D only reinforces this.

I've purchased a lot of variant magic systems. Currently my system of choice is the spellcasting rules from the Thieves' World Player's Manual - good middle ground of spellcasting uncertainty and what I would call "middle fantasy" rather than D&D's "uber-high-fantasy". The other benefit was it used D&D spells, which made source material easy for my players. However, I'm still left with the random pick-and-choose portion.

Previously, I had looked at Elements of Magic. While I loved the idea of magical traditions, EoM as a spellcasting system was too much of a departure for either myself or my players.

I recently learned of the idea of "Spell Paths", originally suggested by Wolfgang Baur in an old Dragon issue (AD&D 2e). Sean K. Reynolds also had a preliminary framework on his website.

Are there any recent d20/OGL products that group spells in "paths" or "traditions" in this type of fashion? I would want to apply this to wizards and sorcerors but I could see how they could be developed/grouped for clerics and druids much as Domains are.

Has anyone played with such a system? Any pros or cons you'd care to share?

Thanks!

After perusing the Pathfinder Chronicles Gazetteer, I'm somewhat confused as to what the general level of technology is in Golarion. I understand the setting is intended to support a wide range of play styles, but I'm seeing a significant increase in what I would view as more Renaissance or even Victorian artwork. In the Pathfinder APs published thus far, they seemed like the exception rather than the rule and I chalked it up to artist interpretation but after reading through portions of the Gazetteer I'm thinking I was off base.

So I'm wondering, what would be the average level of technology of the nations/kingdoms of Golarion? What is the high-water mark?

I know a small portion of the setting has/will have gunpowder, but what about industry, transportation, etc.?

I'm really loving what I've seen of the APs and Golarion thus far. However, I'm a swords-n-sorcery fan and was hoping for something closer to Hyboria or Middle Ages than say, Eberron or Iron Kingdoms - basically not anything more advanced than, say the Old World of WFRP.

So far, at least, all of the iconics seem to leap straight out of a swords-n-sorcery novel, which I love. Elements of the setting seem to be significantly more advanced, however. Are these rare anomalies or commonplace examples of the setting?

Sorry for all of the references to other settings, but they seemed like the simplest comparison points to use.

If the tech level is higher than I'd like, it seems as though it would be easy enough to pare back. I'm just trying to get a better feel. I hate trying to retcon after the fact.

I just got my PC: Gazetteer today, promptly sat down to read some of it, and have been very impressed. It’s a gorgeous book, just like the rest of my ever-growing Pathfinder collection. It’s nice to get a larger view of the world than just the Varisia region (which I'm itching to set a campaign in ASAP).

I’ve only been able read a few sections in detail and have skimmed the rest. Two questions that I have are:

1) Shoanti/Kellid
The Shoanti, as described in the RotRL AP and the Pathfinder’s Journal of that AP in particular, seemed analogous to Earth’s Native American culture and appearance. The picture and description of the Kellid in the human sub-races sidebar also suggest a people/culture inspired by Native American culture. Do the two peoples share a common ancestor race? Are the Shoanti a Kellid offshoot or are the Kellid a more primitive offshoot of the Shoanti?

The Shoanti were not among the subraces listed in the human descriptions. I don’t know if this was an oversight or intentional but between the info on the Kellid and the lack of info on the Shoanti, I started down this line of inquiry.

2) Knights of the Realm
The continents of Avistan and Garund certainly have a wide range of cultures and governments which I really like. I definitely got a classic sword-n-sorcery vibe similar to Howard’s Hyborian Kingdoms without it being generic or feeling too much like a typical D&D “kitchen sink” setting. One thing I did notice, however, was that there were few classical monarchies/feudal societies that would support the classic concept of the knight.

Now given that Pathfinder is evolving out of a D&D 3.x base, that’s not particularly surprising. However, the classic medieval feudal structure is, well a classic for a reason I suppose. I’ve personally found it an easy structure for injecting PCs into the politics of the realm at any level of the power scale because the manorial lord or even the local baron don’t have to have the resources of say a government-sponsored agency, merchant consortium, etc.

For players and DMs seeking realms that support Arthurian themes or Game-of-Thrones style politics and knightly pageantry, what realms are good candidates? If the realms of Avistan and Garund don’t fit the bill, will other countries on other continents in future supplements?

Personally, I tend to prefer cultures and technology closer in line with the Middle Ages than the Renaissance for my RPGs, let alone some of the apparent Victorian-themed elements cropping up in Golarion. (No top hats or other Victorian garb in my Golarion.) Like magic, I tend toward a less-is-more approach and feel it’s easier to ramp the cultural and technological elements up rather than ratchet them back.

Knightly orders of a religious nature clearly exist, primarily to support the paladin class I assume. But what about the adventuring knight errant? I mean, so far, we run the gamut from barbaric nomadic tribes, to Vikings, Egyptian-inspired elements with hints of the Asian cultures (I know how well loved ninjas are within Paizo) and India. Surely there’s room for the classic knight as well?

Overall, I love the book and it’s making me wish the Campaign Setting hardcover would get here sooner. Another home run, Paizo!

I love the inclusion fo the Sorceror bloodlines in PRGP Alpha 2! It definitely sets the sorceror apart from the wizard and is a treasure trove of role-playing fodder. I was similarly impressed by the changes to the wizard class, but this one really did it for me.

As someone who primarily favors warriors, scouts, and thieves over spellcasters, I have to say the PRPG has me jones-ing to play a sorceror!

Great stuff. Keep it coming!