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

Buri's page

Pathfinder Society Member. 3,464 posts. 1 review. 1 list. No wishlists. 5 Pathfinder Society characters.

1 to 50 of 246 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.
sunshadow21 wrote:
To me, the biggest flag of concern is that they don't even have an idea of how to do a campaign guide for FR yet.

This is utterly baseless. A lack of announcement in no way implies a lack of vision or intent. They've decades of experience in business let alone tabletop gaming or even Dungeons and Dragons. It is much more likely they, in fact, do have a roadmap for the settings and certainly so for one of their largest to date.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Not being able to criticize a company is part of the us vs them dynamic. That comment simply highlights that. It's a problem how?

3 people marked this as a favorite.

I think the position that Paizo is or has beat Wizards in all segments is simply wrong. Wizards dominates the electronic gaming space if not by sales (which is already many, many millions from over a decade of experience) then by mere virtue of Paizo's lack of participation therein as PfO isn't even released yet. They're only relatively weak in the table top segment, which, as its own market is smaller. So, not all battlefields are on the same level here. Paizo is fighting up hill in the electronic arena, but, yes, their tabletop presence is strong. Don't assume that as soon as Pathfinder Online is released that it's going to be a hit and Wizards will be scrambling. That's an unrealistic outlook.

The Neverwinter MMO is thriving, reviews be damned. I logged in just last week and easily got a pick up group for instances and saw zones very healthily populated outside of instances. PfO has a lot to prove. Just because they have Ryan who worked for CCP Games for a time doesn't mean the mix of game he's making for the Pathfinder IP will be a hit. That's an alchemy no one has come even close to mastering.

Make no mistake that Wizards has more muscle to flex here if not from money then from sheer experience in the market and if not from that then from a more diverse product offering. They're anything but weak. I could see them still thriving off just IP royalties and other product lines and ending tabletop D&D development altogether. That's a luxury Paizo simply doesn't have. They need success in Pathfinder/Golarion or they die or transform into a fundamentally different entity. Then, there's the ability for Wizards to get access to Hasbro's pockets which makes them more intractible as a corporation meaning they're not going anywhere.

Those are just facts. What I find personally interesting is the us/them dynamic on these boards. There can be no inbetween, and Paizo is seemingly king of all tabletop. All other signs that could even potentially endanger that view is badwrongfun. Paizo has done well for themselves and has a lot to be proud of. I think there's some deification of them, though, as if they are nigh infallible. A lot of this comes from the Paizo leadership. Which, if pride cometh before a fall, then they better brace themselves.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

The thing that gets me is that they want fighters et al. to be able to cut mountains in half and such. The wizard can do nothing like that. Sure, they can create a pocket dimension but it's tiny. Fireballs are only 40ft in diameter. Their spell for actually moving earth can only handle up to a couple tons of dirt in a few hundred sq feet tops. So, before any rebalance can be done, I think we need some honest discussion around the wizard's limits, because they do have limits and they are many.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Well, you can bleed out for minutes in Pathfinder until you die depending on your Con score. :/ Plus, you just need a single save there. In 5th, you need 3 successes to pull you out of the threat of death.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
sunshadow21 wrote:
The wizard is still the softest and easiest to kill target on the field even without spells making him a major threat. Add in that I've been seeing indications that controlling the battlefield and enemy movement is going to be difficult at best, and going after the caster doesn't lose any appeal, it just now gives different reasons to do so. It will be interesting to see how things shake out over time, but the problem hasn't been removed, just shifted, from what we have seen so far.

There are a couple devastatingly effective spells at higher levels. One example, can't remember the name, is an 8 hour duration spell that makes all attacks against you take disadvantage and you can't be surprised. It will be interesting to see how it plays out but those gems are still there.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Paladin of Baha-who? wrote:
Making casters kind of useless, that's new. Unless you want to be a wizard who wears armor and swings a sword, you can do that now. But reshaping reality on a whim? They don't do that kind of thing anymore.

They still can. Note that 5e wish only has a verbal component now. Spells are overall more robust and singularly more powerful than in previous editions but spell slots are what's precious. On a stretch of downtime, though, that can still be 10+ wishes done between sessions. Plus, you can actually create wealth with it to the tune of 25k gp per casting.

To add to the thread though, each class basically has its own spell list even between the sorcerer and wizard. Some features in other classes let you cherry pick a spell from different lists here or there, though.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Chris Lambertz wrote:
Removed some back and forth sniping and responses to it. This thread has been unraveling quite a bit, let's bring it back around to the rules question, please.


Can you spend your wealth to gain advantage in this scenario, yes or no? If not, then PC wealth is out of the window. If yes, Cthulu gets to spend his treasure value to be genericly outfitted and not for this particular fight whatsoever.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

If I were to run Big C he would absolutely have an array of abodes and toys lined up as anything would that's been around since pretty much the beginning of time. If he were hellbent on trying to actually kill you I might not even let you roll initiative. You just die especially if you're not mythic. If you are, then I'll describe his opening volley and ask if you have anything to handle that. No? Dead. Yes? Roll initiative.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

To say this trick works on Cthulu is to make him utterly inept. Sure, if he's not responding, just shows up fresh on the scene like a stroll through a garden, sure, you can surprise him. However, as I've shown in the other thread about this he gets mythic contingency. That's 6 spells he basically has on him for 30 day stretches of time. With a fairly simpl contingency command like "should anything kill me cast x just before" and poof he's got something at the ready.

Plus, the double standard in tactics is utterly assinine. He's got CWI just like most any wizard but for some reason he can't use it even though he's marked as having TRIPLE treasure? That's just stupid. Basically, we've got a mythic wishing monstronsity that can crank out more/better magic items than a level 20 wizard and you think the wizard will win? I smell some poo on the mere premise. THEN, he's got hundreds of HP more and boat load of abilities and racial features that already make him a level 20 dude in his own right but he still loses? You gotta be kidding me. Point is, Cthulu can act like Shrodinger's wizard every much as Shrodinger's wizard can but better.

With his fluff that ties him close to gods, something no theorycrafted character has out of the gate, you STILL think he's such a push over even for a level 20 caster? Please...

1 person marked this as a favorite.

He can make wondrous items that let him cast whatever spell he wants.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
ulgulanoth wrote:
Also, doesn't Cthulhu need to read the runes for them to go off? He is an eldrich horror, he doesn't have time to read!

That's the point of the intentionally failed dispel. That can trigger them.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Cranky Dog wrote:

Extra detail we haven't covered yet: Greater Dispel Magic's range.

Spell range is 100ft + 10ft/lvl
Nalfeshnee's CL: 12th
Max range: 220ft (240ft if you include the Area of Effect's 20ft radius).
Cthulhu's distance: 300ft (from center position of Cthulhu)

There's 60ft missing somewhere (80ft-20ft size from center of Cthulhu)

You'll have to choose what you're doing, moving or readying, with that standard action from being staggered.

Cthulu's range, though, is 400ft.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

In my best Bane voice

It doesn't matter that he has no Mythic Spellcasting ability. All that matters is what he is.

Great Old One wrote:
Mythic (Su) A Great Old One has Mythic Power (10/day, Surge +1d12) and counts as a 10th-rank Mythic creature. A Great Old One can use any of its spell-like abilities as the Mythic versions of those spells (if a Mythic version of that spell exists), expending Mythic Power as normal. It can also expend Mythic Power to use the augmented versions of these spell-like abilities.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Don't forget all spells of 7th level and lower are included in that, again, in their mythic versions. Explosive runes, daze, etc. are not issues. With the trick I mentioned with mythic contingency he still has his wish available to him because that SOB lasts 30 days per casting.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Reposting this here because it's totally something a CL 30 caster would do:

I just had a thought. Has anyone considered the idea that Cthulu casts mythic version of his spells? That means by spending mythic power he can activate any wizard spell of 8th level as mythic. This let's you do things like mythic contingency to have 6 spells on you at the same time for 30 days each. I'd use that to set up a gtr teleport and series of gates to call in reinforcements just before any effect that would kill me if I were him just for starters. Then there's mythic wish's alter fate. You know that save you need? It's a 1 cuz mythic.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I just had a thought. Has anyone considered the idea that Cthulu casts mythic version of his spells? That means by spending mythic power he can activate any wizard spell of 8th level as mythic. This let's you do things like mythic contingency to have 6 spells on you at the same time for 30 days each. I'd use that to set up a gtr teleport and series of gates to call in reinforcements just before any effect that would kill me if I were him just for starters. Then there's mythic wish's alter fate. You know that save you need? It's a 1 cuz mythic.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

You know what'd be a perfect outcome of 'defeating' Cthulu? It turns out it was its astral projection the whole time. By time you realize this that whole kingdom/town/whatever you thought you were saving is being destroyed.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Cranky Dog wrote:

BTW, what does Cthulhu do during all this time before the Almighty-Wizard-Who-Always-Has-Everything-Perfectly-Prepared arrives? Fiddle his thumbs tentacles or prepare something nasty?

Ultimately, do we have a lazy GM or not?

Of course we do. How else would the perfectly prepared wizard win if he weren't calling the shots? At least our dolt of a GM can rest easy that he didn't have to try.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Cerberus Seven wrote:
Only within 120 feet. See Invisibility is the one with infinite range.

They still go nuts.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Cthulu has true seeing constant. Invis is useless. Also, being invisible doesn't stop them from gaining an insanity.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

What happens when the nalfeshnee goes insane?

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Anzyr wrote:
You ready an action to cast it once the time stop ends. Then you use your move to get out of dodge. Also, Explosive Runes are permanent. What GM wouldn't let you stockpile them?

Why ready? That consumes your standard. Just do it once it ends. What are you going to do with a 30/60/120(depending on build)ft move action that has meaning against a 300ft aura and 200ft fly speed? He can just double move for 400ft and you're right in his aura.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Anzyr wrote:
Eh... once he's killed once, my casters would arrange to make him resurrecting again a waste of time.

If you keep killing the Pope of the Old Gods as someone said before, I'd expect them to take notice and do something about it even if it's just whisking away his remains so he can properly plan for you next time.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

One of the main points of 5e is to be friendly to being molded as needed by GMs. It is a perfectly fine solution and can be done many times with the tools provided so it gets what you want a good majority of the time without feeling contrived. Magic is described as rare, magic items are explicitly not available for sale. To say 'no casters' for a campaign is perfectly legit and viable.

I have yet to see you point out something that doesn't work. It's like you're waiving your arms screaming foul not at anything in particular but just to say something's wrong. But I'm acting bizarre? Whatever. The only thing you've explicitly stated is that you don't like the system. Nothing will change that. That's all on you. But, if you want to actually talk about the system and its particulars then that's something we can have a discussion over. I have zero interest in 'converting' you or changing your view on it.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I never called you an enemy. Do not put words in my mouth. I never prescribed you labels either. Put your offense somewhere else. What I said is correct, though. For someone to have talked like they read the Basic 5e rules, you misrepresent them as a whole by claiming they are inadequate to run the game you want. They're not. That doesn't force you to like the system, but it can fit many play styles and campaigns no less adequately than in previous ones.

My crap? I just outlined your own statements and responded to them candidly. If you don't like that, then make different ones.

If you don't like 5th, that's fine. Carry on. My speech is simply pointing out the features of the system as they are and pointing when things aren't given credit so that it's not misrepresented.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Hama wrote:
So, after playing two test sessions of this, one as a player, other as a GM, I can certainly say that I will not be buying a single book. It's not for me. Nor people I game with. And I definitely don't want to introduce it to new people. Pathfinder is more than good enough.

Can you detail why? Which pain points did you run into?

4 people marked this as a favorite.

Oh, yes, I'm the CEO. :D

I can't bring myself to quite simply avoid coming here because I've been a PF player and GM for a while. I can see why there is bias on a competitors forum but to wholly discount things when it's obvious you either haven't even looked at the competing product, you're lying, or being intentionally obtuse just grates me. In the other thread about trust, people really need to grow up and learn to be accountable for themselves which is another thing that grates on me. Actual age is secondary there which is even more frustrating.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Sure it is. There are three forms of ability score generation provided. Use whichever one your group likes. That is modularity.

Also, don't discount the others by soap boxing on one you dislike.

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Rathendar wrote:
How about you buy it, go to bed, and look to download it after work the next day only to find it not available? Still wouldn't feel wronged?

Nope; I had my opportunity. That'd be when I contact customer service for a refund. Failing that, because the transaction is super fresh, I can call my bank and tell them it was a fraudulent charge because I was denied the product so the business transaction was incomplete and the merchant was unwilling/able to complete it. Like magic I have my money back. I've done this before. It's a matter of understanding who actually works for you and putting that to use.

To the point, as a matter of principle I download my products right away because I don't trust a business. Being a programmer, I'm well aware that business decisions change daily which has sweeping repercussions on tech. I literally see it all the time in emails, in code that I have to ask questions about to find out base assumption has changed, etc. On top of that the random issues that can crop up in tech can also deny you access. Basically, get it while the getting is good.

The concept of trust in business is a PR scam even with Paizo. If they found it expedient to do so, their PDFs would be down in a matter of moments. That's just the reality of business. The only thing in business of import is what you have legal obligations to do so, period. Everything else is secondary. You don't trust companies, or, rather, you shouldn't.

2 people marked this as a favorite.
thejeff wrote:

We're not talking about keeping things for decades. We're talking about something you could have bought yesterday not being in the companies download library tomorrow.

Hope you got the warning email.

So, I bought the product and had a chance to download it. How was I wronged? Just because it wasn't up the next day? That's immaterial. Unless there was a binding agreement (read: in a legal agreement and not some marketing slogan on the site) that you had with DTRPG then there's zero guarantee. That's a universal truth in business. If there were a binding agreement, then you'd have grounds to sue.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I added a list of optional rules built in I could think of. They're all in the Basic pdf.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
thejeff wrote:
As far as I can tell, the whole "adjustable dials"/modularity thing isn't part of the game. Isn't even really being talked about any more. The only vestige I see is the "Use feats or just get stat increases" thing.

It's implemented. New things are being talked about. There are a lot of sidebars in the basic rules talking about optional variants and the DMG will contain many more. If the feats things is all you know about then you're going based on word of mouth rather than looking into the product yourself.

Optional systems off the top of my head:

alternate ability score generation
alternate racial stats depending on race (human is one)
optional encumbrance rules vs the default carry capacity

2 people marked this as a favorite.
bugleyman wrote:

That's extremely disingenuous of you. There's a big difference between "decide who distributes their products" and "make unavailable something that has already been paid for."

Furthermore, this is precisely the sort of argumentation for which you're constantly taking others to task.

It is technically, financially, and practically untenable to expect a resource to exist forever. Paizo and/or Pathfinder won't always be around, and neither will the PRD. I guarantee it.

Anyway, for some comparison here's a timeline of editions:

d&d: 1974 (3 years)
ad&d: 1977 (12 years)
d&d2e: 1989 (11 years)
d&d3e: 2000 (3 years)
d&d3.5e: 2003 (4 years)
d&d4e: 2007 (7 years)
d&d5e: 2014

pf: 2009 (5 years)

If the time that a company keeps a product available and supports it determines how much trust that company has, then Wizards is still way above Paizo with an average product lifespan of 6.7 years and two whole editions for lasting over a decade. Since 3.5 worked with 3 that shifts their average produce lifespan to 8 years counting them together. The actual problem is a perception and entitlement one.

The PDF thing sucks, but, and this has become acutely important of late, no company is going out of their way to ensure your individual, personal best interest. Not even Paizo does that. You bought the product and got your copy. To keep that copy in the same place and expect nothing to happen ever is, as I said, untenable. The folks who bought them were responsible for their upkeep. Get a thumb drive, keep a zip file locally, and since I'm doing timelines, Dropbox became a thing in 2008: use it.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

The trust argument is blown way out of proportion. The basic rules are available for free and gives a very good impression of the core game. Look at them and see if you like it or not. There have been many, many articles written on the theory and decisions into Next for all to see. You can accurately see where they're going. Whether or not you like their implementation of those ideals is secondary but is where the trust part comes in. But, again, I would point you to the free basic rules PDF so you can see what that implementation can look like.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Logan1138 wrote:

I plan to (if I ever DM).

I like 5E (at least what little I have seen so far) more than 3.X/4E and Pathfinder but there are still plenty of things that make me cringe including: the evoker's Sculpt Spells ability, healing Hit Dice, "encounter" powers that "recharge" after a short rest and completely healing back to full hit points after a long rest.

To me, it's a strength of the system that you can tweak a couple things and accomplish most of what you want without needing a lot of other changes to keep things balanced. The modularty is nice.

For sculpt spells you could say all the allies gain is advantage on the saving throw and be done with it.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

The basic rules imply potions and scrolls are about the only magic items in regular supply.

2 people marked this as a favorite.
JoeJ wrote:

Something I haven't seen mentioned here regarding concentration is that it looks like most of the battlefield control spells are also concentration: Antimagic Field, Blade Barrier, Faerie Fire, Globe of Invulnerability, Maze, Wall of Stone, and Web. So a caster can have one of those going or buff somebody, but not both.

This really changes the tactical situation. Most of what worked on the battlefield in 3.5/PF isn't going to work in 5E.

Nope. You'll have to make some genuinely hard choices. That's a good thing though. Wizards occupy the top still in terms of the system overall, but that ceiling has been reduced drastically.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Lisa Stevens wrote:

We may very well be "kicked down" to #2, but it would be more accurate to say "kicked up" to #2, because Pathfinder continues to grow and sell more and more Core Rulebooks. This quarter we are in right now, the one where D&D 5e is releasing, will see us sell more Beginner's Boxes and Core Rulebooks than any other quarter outside of the ones the two products were released in!

It seems pretty clear to me that D&D5 is going to scratch an itch for some customers that wouldn't be interested in Pathfinder. Different strokes for different folks. I don't think there is all that much overlap between our two markets, which is great for roleplaying games, since that means more people playing RPGs. If we were just divvying up the same shrinking pie, then it would be a losing situation for all. But for my vantage, it seems like RPGs are growing. I know that Pathfinder sure is!


Well, Pathfinder lost me. Customers come and go, absolutely. But, some little things lead by some huge recent moves just ended my enjoyment of the system. Primarly, I can't escape the feeling that PFS is dictating the future direction of Pathfinder at large more and more. Many genuinely unique things got trashed like Crane Wing all because of PFS complaints. The two should be separate. The thing with spells known also smells of the same situation. It all seems to work toward a generalizing of the system skewing towards more of what 4E was.

Also, the manner of sweeping nature of those changes by way of errata rather than making them really work with a new system with staff comments here and there makes me think Paizo will evolve Pathfinder rather than releasing a new edition. Thus, there is no permanence or sense of mastery of the system since what the system is can and will change based on the needs of the moment rather than what works with the system overall.

A minor nitpick has been the recent book styling. Part of what drew me in to the aesthetics of the CRB was that 'old tome' page design. The new style isn't bad. It's just not what hooked me. In relation to the above points this is incredibly minor.

Anyway, I hope you see this as I've thoroughly enjoyed Pathfinder since beta. My introduction was literally during a 3.5 session with my DM dragging our characters through a portal into Golarion where we then made Pathfinder versions of our characters with beta rules. That was cool. I'm sure you do get tons of feedback how awesome Pathfinder is. It really is. The shakiness is something I can't accept from an expensive hobby. Looking at 5th presents a system that is flavorful, concise, and feels genuinely evolutionary in its concepts. I understand that Paizo has a lot invested into what Pathfinder currently is, but I hope you find the courage to really create your own niche and try to solve all those pesky problems that make you feel like you need to change the base system to cater to a vocal minority of your customers.

All the best.

1 to 50 of 246 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>

©2002–2014 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email 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.