|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
Did I miss anything?
Those were the big announcements, yes. I didn't hear anything about the player's companion nor campaign setting lines. Well, we did hear some about inner sea races, but I am blanking on what at the moment. There were announcements about the adventure card game and pathfinder society but I wasn't paying attention during those parts. Obsidian showed off their adventure card game computer/tablet game, which I pay attention to either. There was this trailer for pathfinder online.
Has it been revealed what kind of kineticist(aether, pyro, etc.) the kineticist iconic is?
While I am not going to outright say since it was massively obvious at the art preview showed the kid holding her own against the breath weapon of a [redacted] dragon, I will say the best hint is in the image in this tweet.
Kevin Mack wrote:
Any good Iconic art in the previews?
That's right there was. Occult adventures iconics were in the art preview. Let me just say that everyone's favorite iconic is going to be the kineticist. She rocks. Also, the ... I'm forgetting which one, the one with the spirit companion rocks. There aren't enough elderly iconics and this is downright cool. There's even an overweight iconic. Its the one with Bob the skull.
Basic pictures are in my twitter feed, and probably Wolfgang's as well.
Art preview for what Dale McCoy Jr.?
Upcoming Paizo releases. ;)
Seriously though, I saw some images of monsters from Bestiary 5. I had to go "Awwww" to the [redacted] with the [redacted]. Considering the looks I got, I don't think that was the desired response. I think they were expecting something more like, "OMGWTFBBQ!"
Also got to see images of the big bad in Giantslayer. All I gotta say is "DAMN!!!" And some from Hell's Rebels. I saw a helper [redacted].
Marc Radle wrote:
He means stuff like this. And rjgrady ain't kidding. I love the stuff that fat goblin does, I just want more of it. I own all but like 2 of them and I want a larger variety. It just isn't enough.
Brandon Hodge wrote:
That's incorrect, DMW. Due to a class with 54 spirits taking up a huge chunk of the book's wordcount, the number of spirits was scaled down to 6, which each one representing an embodiment of classic heroic archetypes (small "a") which correspond to the six mythic tiers. Jason stated they promise to find a home for the 54 in a future product!
As Brandon said, the six spirits correspond to mythic tiers. The idea is that you are channeling the spirit of a former mythic hero. But yea, to do all 54 would have eaten up a third of the book.
Milo v3 wrote:
Wasn't that announced a while ago?
First I heard of it. It was mentioned in this little exchange at the Inside Occult Adventures seminar.
*question about occult monsters in the book*
Erik: We couldn't fit monsters in the book but we have the Occult Bestiary as a hardback this fall ... Which I am not sure it is announced yet.
Fake Healer wrote:
Absolutely, maybe with a section in front of the adventure advising what area(s) would be a good sub in Greyhawk.
Well this, I can't do. Greyhawk is wizards owned so I can't touch it. But I can certainly do adventures involving something along the lines of a corrupt official hiring a band of orcs to harrass the caravan guild as a negotiating tactic to get them to lower their inflated prices to help the poverty stricken population and let you work it into your campaign.
I remember thinking that when I read Pathfinder's main setting books, its like the countries were developed completely independent of each other, or were developed right along side another for a specific campaign in mind.
I've been reading the World of Greyhawk book for the past day and franky, I can't put it down. The countries actually interact. You don't have to do "save the world games". Heck a group of players can be the spies for an advancing army. And a whole number of other campaigns I can't see that (with a few exceptions) can't really be done in the above mentioned CS. It definitely sounds like a nice change from what I have been playing.
Would greyhawk inspired adventures for 5e be of interest to anyone? I can't do Greyhawk itself, but I can certainly make adventures that would fit will in Greyhawk.
Mr. McCoy, you need to make a Herolab package for this
As a fellow hero lab user, I feel you. Unfortunately we are not doing hero lab programming at this time. Even then, we learned the hard way that we don't have the ability to program some of these options in. I.e. Favored class options must be in the same file as the class or the race. Both of those are made by LWD so we don't have the ability to insert that code into their files.
I know its not the answer you want to hear, (its not the answer I want to give) but it is the situation we are in at this time.
Liz Courts wrote:
Also, your anxiety is something that every artist I've ever met experiences, from the beginner to the veteran. We all know its cruel embrace. Punch it in the teeth and keep drawing.
This. Heck, I'll admit to this for everything I write. The fraud syndrome is strong among authors as well as artists. Only thing you can do is stand up to it and put yourself out there.
Andrew Betts wrote:
My wife is asking about Fetchlings and Svirfneblin because of Kaer Maga (although I vetoed the latter because if we play we'll have at least 2 dwarves).
In the ARG, fetchlings are a 17 point race, overpowered compared to humans. But if you removed the spell-like abilities, they are an 11 point race, the same as dwarves. And you can add the spell-like abilities as a racial feat.
The two campaign settings I keep seeing over and over again that people say they want more than anything else are Greyhawk and Dragonlance. I know enough about Dragonlance to know that I will never know enough about Dragonlance. But what is it about Greyhawk that people love? I've only had one campaign in there and let me be generous and say the GM wasn't very good. I've read the Expedition 3.5 mega-adventure and its good but I am not sure what I am missing. I spent most of my D&D gaming career in either homebrews or in FR.
So please tell me what you love about Greyhawk.
I wouldn't be surprised if you could run into the store shortly after retrieving your badge Friday morning.
5. They are martyrs to encourage reckless PCs to waste resources to sweep them quickly when those resources may be better used in the next encounter.
Umm, after having seen this actual play on a very regular basis, no.
Perfect example: my kingmaker game, I brought back the mites for an encounter. And the rest of the party stood back while the fighter killed them all. Not. One. Scratch.
Literally the exchange I had above about "ok, they're did. what's next" happened in that game. So when the mudmen came up in (IIRC) adventure 3 (12 CR 2 monsters), I got rid of that encounter in favor of monsters more CR appropriate. They'd do the exact same thing. I saw them and others do that time and again.
All the rest of your examples can be done with environment. You don't need low level monsters, which eat up XP in the encounter budget, making the actual monsters you want to challenge the adventurers that much less of a challenge.
So no. I disagree. I think a constant increase in BAB is terrible.
Bound accuracy means the monsters are useful at later levels that simply is not possible with Pathfinder today.
But that's not what I'm saying. I'm not saying a single mook should do a serious amount of damage to a higher level PC. I'm saying that 1 kobold in that sea of kobolds attacking you is still going to do his 3-5 damage. He'll be hitting slightly less often since you have bought better armor since the last time you faced off against kobolds, And you are going to hit a little more often since your ability to hit went up some (not alot, but some). You should laugh at the troll that use to be scary because you can deal more damage each round. Lower level it should take the whole team to face off against the troll where at higher level, you're soloing the troll while the rest of the team is trying to press all the buttons in the right order to open up the door in time to get the mcguffin crystal in place before the Great Conjunction.
Bound accuracy is (at the end of the day) about having basic monsters being useful at more levels. Pathfinder, a monster is only good for about 5 levels (2 levels above you and 2 levels below you). It can be a little more each way, but it's really get into territory of being stupid hard or stupid easy. D&D 5e has that number to about 10 level (5 above and below).
Take RotRL for example. What if the hill giants had some goblin servants that were ordered to attack the PCs or die by being squished. Those goblin encounters would vary up the adventure while still having ties to the first adventure. If a GM wants to do that now, he's got to level up the goblins. Do you really think level 5 goblins would be servants? Heck no, they should be running their own goblin tribes. Should the goblins in this encounter be able to do hill giant level damage, heck no. They should do just enough that the players have to use a few lower level cure spells and that's it. Not much, but enough to get them to have to make resource decisions later on.
This is all still zero to hero, still a tactically a foregone conclusion, and you can still have fun roleplaying with the goblins. But they are still more useful at later levels than Pathfinder is.