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

Digitalelf's page

Goblin Squad Member. Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber. Pathfinder Society Member. 2,576 posts (2,653 including aliases). No reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 1 Pathfinder Society character. 3 aliases.


RSS

1 to 50 of 2,576 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
kyrt-ryder wrote:
Psionics = Magic is the default though, and is the method I was addressing.

Yeah, psionics being different than magic is a "default" holdover from 2nd edition that I had kept back when I played 3rd edition, and then Pathfinder...

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
kyrt-ryder wrote:
On the surface Psionics is just magic. An NPC could be a Sorcerer or a Psion and without comparing the spell lists it would be almost impossible to tell between [unless the GM was announcing his moves out loud and declaring the use of power points or metapsionic feats or whatnot.]

Since in my games psionic abilities are not magic, when I played 3rd edition and Pathfinder, I gave spell-casting classes a (secret) "Spellcraft" check, and non-spell casters a (once again, secret) "Perception" check to notice if there was anything "unusual" about the way the psion/psionicist was "casting" his "spells".

Now that I play 2nd edition once again, I do something very similar, only now I’m using the proficiency system.

Grand Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I use psionics in my campaigns, and have no qualms about mixing sci-fi with fantasy, as I never viewed psionics as belonging solely to any one category (which are very nebulous to begin with).

I take the rather unpopular stance that psionis are not magic. I run 2nd edition AD&D, and the introduction of "The Complete Psionics Handbook" says (very loosely paraphrased) that magic is an external force, that casting spells is the shaping of that external force, while psionics on the other hand is a completely internal force, and using psionic abilities shape that internal force and then "throws" that power outward from within the user.

Later the book has this to say about the effects of magic on psionics and vice-versa:

The Complete Psionics Handbook wrote:

The essences of magic and psionics are wholly different. A wizard or cleric who can detect magic will never detect psionics. Nor will a psionicist who scans for psionic activity ever detect spell-casting. This holds true even if the effect of a particular magical and psionic skill is identical, or nearly identical. For example, a wizard can use hold portal to hold a door shut. In his own way, using psychokinesis, so can a psionicist. If a psionicist is holding a door shut, and a wizard casts detect magic on the door, the wizard will find nothing unusual about it. If the wizard casts dispel magic, the door will not open. No magical forces are at work on the door.

Exceptions do exist, but they're fairly easy to determine. For example, a wizard who casts a detect invisibility spell will see a character using psionic invisibility because the spell description states specifically that the spell does not discriminate between types of invisibility.

From what I have read here on this message-board, a lot of posters, even those that use psionics, do not agree with that, and therefore let magic effect psionics and vice versa.

I happen to like keeping the two independent of one another in that regard.

Grand Lodge

6 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

13. Drinking the host's milk. ;-)

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I was wondering if anyone that purchased these brand new (unopened), knew the exact number of cards each set contained.

I recently bought these 2 sets used, and the boxes only says that they contains "Over 400 encounters" (each)... Hardly an exact number.

I am curious, as I would like to know if I managed to buy complete sets...

Thank you all in advance,

-That One Digitalelf Fellow-

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
DSXMachina wrote:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but in the older versions of D&D the 'weight' in pounds of items was actually a weight/volume.

The D&D Rules Cyclopedia says: "All coins are about equal in size and weight. Each coin weighs about 1/1O of a pound."

The 1st edition AD&D Player's Handbook says: "It is assumed that the size and weight of each coin is relatively equal to each other coin, regardless of type."

Later the 1st edition Player's Handbook states: "Weight is usually stated in gold pieces, 10 gold pieces equaling 1# (pound)."

And the 2nd edition DMG says: "Coins (regardless of metal) normally weigh in at 50 to the pound."

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Queen Moragan wrote:

This sounds like something like...

How many coins in a coffer?

Dragon Magazine, Issue #80 - December of 1983.

Wow, I'm just old...

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I've been a GM since I was introduced to D&D, nearly 34 years ago. For me, I prefer to GM, as it caters to my creative side more than playing a PC does, and I like that. When I am behind the GM screen, I can assume the role of anyone within the game world that the player characters interact with, from the guy behind the bar to the horrible monsters and other foes the Player Character's must face; which to me, is far more exciting that playing just one single PC at a time. Being a GM also lets me create the world around the player characters, it lets me draw the maps to the locales that they will explore, etc.

So yeah, it lets me be creative in ways that playing one single character at a time just cannot accomplish.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Orfamay Quest wrote:
a wizard, for example, to dump strength is not really a handicap.

The problem comes if the GM, like I did back when I played PF, uses the encumbrance rules...

That 7 in STR is all nice and good until you realize that your character can't carry anything over 23 lbs. without suffering penalties for movement and a limit to the character's maximum DEX bonus.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Jacob Saltband wrote:
I have played with alot of people over the years, maybe it was just 'luck' that I came across so many who play very similiar to the other people I played with before.

I too have had many years of gaming with many players from across several different states (here in the US) that have all pretty much shared my personal tastes in gaming, but all of that, is my own personal experience, and no matter how many games we've all played or the number of players that we've met whom share similar gaming experiences and expectations, it's ALL anecdotal, every last bit of it...

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
DungeonmasterCal wrote:
I had to have some emergency cash a few months ago and sold a bunch of 2e stuff (I kept the core stuff). I hated hated hated to part with it, but times were tough.

Well, I hope you at least got a decent price out of them, and that the financial woes that forced you to sell them in the first place are well behind you now :-)

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
DungeonmasterCal wrote:
Man, we had some good times.

Oh yeah, same here! LOL... I even pulled several more of those old notes (in addition to that one on fighting styles) in order to make use of them once again as well in my current 2e campaign.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
DM Under The Bridge wrote:
Any good? All you remember and more?

Yeah, it is pretty much as I remembered. As for the quality, it was one of the better "user" files uploaded to TSR Online back in the day; wish it had the author's name on it somewhere so I could give credit where credit was due... Oh well.

But man, going through 18 year old (and in some cases, much older) campaign notes and print-outs sure brought back a lot of memories.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I found what I was looking for! And it wasn't in Dragon Magazine after all.

It was an RTF file I downloaded and printed out 18 odd years ago from TSR Online (back when TSR's major online presence was accessed through AOL).

So now, not only do I feel a tad silly for remembering it as an article in Dragon Magazine, I feel quite old...

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Yeah, that was the first place I checked, to no avail. :-(

Thank you though...

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

There was an old issue of Dragon Magazine during the 2nd edition era that contained an article on various fighting styles and the schools associated with them.

I am familiar with the article in issue #232 ("En Garde: Secret weapon passes for the Savage Coast online campaign"), but that is not the article I am looking for.

In the article that I am looking for, one of the fighting schools is called "The Edge"; unfortunately, other than the name of that one school, I do not recall anything else about the article.

Does anyone here know of the article and what issue of Dragon Magazine it can be found in?

I thank you in advance. :-)

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
thejeff wrote:
On the other hand:
CRB pg 403 wrote:
Rolling Dice: Some GMs prefer to roll all of their dice in front of the players, letting the results fall where they may. Others prefer to make all rolls behind a screen, hiding the results from the PC so that, if they need to, they can fudge the dice results to make the game do what they want. Neitehr way is the "correct" way; choose whichever you wish, or even mix and match as feels right for you.

There's also this from page 402 of the CRB:

CRB page 402 wrote:
Cheating and Fudging: We all know that cheating is bad. But sometimes, as a GM, you might find yourself in a situation where cheating might improve the game. We prefer to call this “fudging” rather than cheating, and while you should try to avoid it when you can, you are the law in your world, and you shouldn’t feel bound by the dice.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Thanael wrote:
Google Dyson Logos

Wow!

I can only dream of having that kind of talent (or patience for that matter)...

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Jacob Saltband wrote:

"....will reward role-play and creativity...."

"We sometimes go entire sessions with out rolling dice."

I give out XP for good RP, and many of my sessions do play out entirely without any dice being rolled.

That being said, I don't require my players to physically act anything out. I do however, encourage the players to speak as if they were their characters (e.g. saying to me, "I go through the door", instead of "my character goes through the door"), but nothing more than that is required to gain any extra XP for RP (and speaking in character, again while encouraged, is not necessary to receive any XP for "good" RP within my games).

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
MMCJawa wrote:
I don't think most of the modules and APs would adapt well. As RPG materials, the most important elements of the story (The characters) are intentionally left a blank slate.

it's been done before. HERE is just a recent example of putting a story behind a module/series of modules.

Grand Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Irontruth wrote:
You can respond with more righteous indignation, but it'll be pointless, because you'll be tilting at windmills that you built, not my windmills.

Wow, such hostility from the get-go... Especially if you believe it is from what amounts to a simple misinterpreting of your post; there is just no need of it.

For the record, I take you saying that if you provide a high adventure game, and then later ask for saves for monoxide poisoning (which I take to be seemingly out of the blue), then that is a bait and switch. I am simply wondering why? I hardly see the need for such hostility for a question that might stem from a simple misunderstanding...

My last post may have been a tad on the snarky side, but I don't feel that either of them were of an accusatory nature, but if you read them as such, then I apologize, as that was not my intent.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Irontruth wrote:
It's like you saying you like chocolate and then me responding "no you don't." It's a pointless debate, as is pulling out the word verisimilitude.

Verisimilitude in this particular context means, consistent with itself, which is what I said; an internally consistent game setting, that has a gritty, realistic feel, and contains elements of high fantasy... So, yeah, that can mean two different things for two different people, but many on these boards like to scoff at those who like to use the term "realistic" when discussing D&D, as if it had absolutely no place in the game.

You said: "If you tell them it's a high adventure story with action and excitement, then call for saves due to carbon monoxide poisoning, there's a bit of a bait and switch going on."

My post just asked the question of why is it baiting and switching if you've run a high fantasy game and then call for a save later on in the campaign if the party, up until that point in the campaign, never entered a dungeon with that type of hazard?

Just because the characters have not encountered something within the campaign setting before, does not mean that the "something" just sprang into existence the moment the GM uses it; especially if, yeah, here it comes, he has a setting with any verisimilitude to it...

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Irontruth wrote:
If you tell your players that this will be a realistic and technical portrayal of underground exploration, go for it. If you tell them it's a high adventure story with action and excitement, then call for saves due to carbon monoxide poisoning, there's a bit of a bait and switch going on.

Why does it have to be one or the other?? It's like people don't want any kind of internal realism or verisimilitude, because, you know, dragons... Or don't want dragons because, you know, realism...

What's so wrong with an internally consistent, realistic fantasy game setting, that has dragons, giants, wizards that can lob fireballs, and dungeons occasionally filled with poisonous gases?

As long as the setting’s verisimilitude is kept consistent with itself, I just don’t see the problem...

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Kthulhu wrote:
Not actually that dangerous. Remember that prior to 2000, a "turn" was a period of 10 minutes.

Yeah a turn was 10 minutes, and the module was designed for tournament play (i.e. get-in, get-out within 4 hours of real time), but the tomb level in question is quite extensive and has many obstacles intended to slow the party's progress through it.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Krensky wrote:

What possible purpose does that serve other than getting your jerkholery on?

That's pretty much a textbook example of how not to design an adventure.

If you say so…

You are of course entitled to your opinion, but I don't agree; not by a long-shot!

One of my favorite AD&D modules:

TSR Module C1:

The 1st edition AD&D module "The Hidden Shrine of Tamoachan" (for characters level 5 - 7) featured a dungeon/tomb in which the lower levels were filled with poison.

Dungeon Module C1 wrote:
Another hazard of these ruins is that the lower levels are filled with poisonous gas. This includes the rooms and passages from encounter areas #1 through #38 (which makes up the entire 1st level of the tomb). A character will suffer 1-6 hit points of damage for every turn spent in the gas. A neutralize poison will reduce damage to half for 1 turn. If the character remains in the gas the next turn, normal damage will accrue. A slow poison will reduce damage to 1 point per turn for the duration of the spell.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Icyshadow wrote:
So long as you are more or less a decent person, God has no reason to send you to Hell.

Except the part in The New Testament of the Bible where Christ says, "The only way to the Father, is through the Son."

In Christianity, simply "being a good person" is not enough to get into Heaven, one must believe whole-heartedly that Christ is our Lord and Savior, and that he died on the cross for all of our sins, and was resurrected three days later...

Not saying you have to believe that, that's what free-will is all about...

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
TOZ wrote:

I walked into 3.5 wanting to play a Final Fantasy Tactics Monk.

I got the 3.5 Monk.

Isn't that like going into Taco Bell wanting to get a Big Mac??

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Vincent Takeda wrote:
I started with gamma world, them picked up becmi, then 2e, then heroes unlimited and ninjas and superspies just as 2e was starting to do silly things like spelljammer and class 'kits' and I had to bail because it felt like they were publishing to make money and not make good content anymore...

Back in the day, you must have only played 2nd edition for just a few months before transitioning to those last two games, as 2nd edition AD&D itself, along with the Spelljammer boxed set, and the introduction of character kits (with the publication of the Complete Fighter's Handbook) all came out in the latter half of 1989... :-P

Grand Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
thegreenteagamer wrote:
When it comes to Grognards, my thoughts are usually, "if second edition was so good, why aren't you playing second edition?"

It was, and I am... ;-)

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
UnArcaneElection wrote:
This reminds me of a Dragon magazine article from 1st Edition D&D times about the missing Chromatic Dragons: Orange, Yellow, and Purple.

The Yellow Dragon made it into the 2nd edition Monstrous Manual, and the Orange and Purple Dragons were in the 2nd edition Monstrous Manual Annual Volume Four; though their breath weapons were slightly different from that original (1st edition) Dragon Magazine article (e.g. the Yellow Dragon's breath weapon is a blast of heated air and sand).

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
NewXToa wrote:
It's the Basic Set of BECMI.

There is a strong following over at "The Piazza" and "Dragonsfoot" forums.

The Piazza is more setting based, which has its own Mystara (BECMI's default setting) subforum.

On the Dragonsfoot forum, you'll want to look into the "Classic D&D" subforum.

Links:

The Piazza

Dragonsfoot "Classic D&D" Forum

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
TarkXT wrote:
They didn't state any religion (though it tends to encompass most) and it is entirely possible to have this particular taboo without attaching it to dogma.

You're right, so I changed my post to better reflect that...

Grand Lodge

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Sissyl wrote:
No sex until after marriage needs to die in a fire

It is entire possible to state one's opinion without attacking another person's beliefs (be they religious based or what have you).

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Freehold DM wrote:
I hate the kidnapping aspect of ravenloft and planescape.

None of the people that have played at my table through the years have ever had a problem with that.

But then, how it should work (at least IMO), is, the characters get to Ravenloft, have an adventure or two, and then return home (unless the players like the new environment, and want to stay longer).

Most of the modules for Ravenloft offered a way to leave the demi-plane once the adventure was over (hence the term, "Weekend in Hell"), so it's not like going to Ravenloft was a one-way trip unless the DM made it so...

And Planescape, well, Planescape had portals everywhere (to everywhere), so getting home often just meant you had to do something for someone (i.e. an adventure or two), and they'd send you home. So again, the stay was not permanent, unless the DM made it so...

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Aelryinth wrote:
Theives got DOUBLE xp for gold. Everyone else got single.

Aside from Rogues (because it applied to Bards as well as Thieves) getting 2 XP per gold piece value of treasure obtained, XP for gold for "everyone else" was purely optional (page 69 of the 1995/2014 DMG):

The 2nd Edition AD&D DMG wrote:
As an option, the DM can award XP for the cash value of non-magical treasures. One XP can be given per gold piece found. However, overuse of this option can increase the tendency to give out too much treasure in the campaign.

Also...

Aelryinth wrote:
Clerics got xp for healing npc's.

Actually, Priests (as this also applied to Druids) only received XP for casting spells to overcome foes or problems and not just for casting their spells in general (page 70 of the 1995/2014 DMG).

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Scythia wrote:
The world is a sad and desolate place. The people live in fear, and hope lies crushed beneath the weight of despair. Enter our heroes, who through their brave efforts will change... absolutely nothing.

I love Fantasy Flight Games' Midnight setting! It was awesome... Though, it wouldn't make a great "go-to" campaign setting IMO, as it is really dark and bleak, but I think it is a perfectly valid setting.

A GM would need the players to be on board for this kind of game of course...

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Fencer_guy wrote:

You are the DM and have a group of people Pathfinder and you have to hand out the XP. Does it matter if its an AP or home brew?

If people show up (no matter what they do or don't do) they get equal share of the xp?

Do you reward people for whatever?

Should XP be "fair"?

I use XP, but I run 2nd edition AD&D, so having characters of varying level is not a concern, as each class levels at different times, and the DM is encouraged by the rules to give out individual XP rewards.

I am not a believer of "missing a session is punishment enough", but then, I don't think it's fair to get something I did not earn. And my players are of a like mind in that regard...

So, to answer your questions:

1 - I use XP no matter if I am using a published module or something of my own design.

2 - Players only receive XP if they show up.

3 - I use individual XP rewards for a variety of things that a player might do in-game (though I never hand out XP for out-of-game reasons, like bringing snacks or what have you).

4 - I give out group XP for group activities (e.g. defeating monsters and for story awards), so I think XP should be fair as far as that's concerned. But like I said, I will give out individual XP, so I do not think that every character should receive an equal share of all XP that is handed out during a session.

I will also use gold for XP depending upon how fast I want a particular campaign to progress (but this varies from campaign to campaign).

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Durngrun Stonebreaker wrote:
the thought of not being able to control what you say seems very odd to me.

It's like people keep saying in this thread; everyone is different, and just because one person is able to do something with ease, does not mean everyone else can do likewise...

I'm not saying this of you, but people (in general) love to claim, "If I can do it, so can you!". But that's just not true.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Durngrun Stonebreaker wrote:
I just don't see how it takes so much effort not to swear.

For me, as I have stated in this and other threads before, I was not always a Christian, and using profanity was a part of my daily language, my mannerisms, etc.

It took a concerted effort on my part to change that, to change the way I spoke; and to this day, it is one of my struggles as a Christian (though thankfully, I usually "catch myself" before I say something profane, but not always - as The Good Lord knows, I am not perfect).

Grand Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
memorax wrote:
I will never ever respect low self imposed tolerance levels. When one is certain age it comes across as being social awkward.

I don't go out of my way to avoid someone that lets slip the occasional profane word or two, but if I call that person friend, and that person claims to call me friend as well, yet that person just refuses to even try and make a sincere attempt to avoid using profanity around me (I don't expect perfection), I have to wonder... As I do my best to not do something that I know offends or annoys the people I call friends, no matter how small or insignificant I personally see the action (and yes, I sometimes fail at it).

Grand Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
memorax wrote:
being bothered by the occasional swear word. Or even just "damn I almost I died". Is trying to hide behind fake innocence as far as I'm concerned.

Being bothered by profanity, is not necessarily trying to hide behind anything, let alone "innocence". The reasons for being bothered by it vary from individual to individual...

As for myself, since I am a Christian, I try not to be around it, as it is a habit from a time before I was a Christian that I sometimes struggle with; but I am not trying to claim innocence, I just don't like being around it. So yes, that does sometimes limit what I am or am not willing to do (like watch certain movies, listen to certain comedians, or being around certain people if they are absolutely unwilling to "watch their language" around me), but that's a conscious decision that I make, and I am perfectly willing to live with any consequences that may come from that decision (which isn't to say that I always like the potential consequences, it's just that I am willing to live and deal with any that may come up).

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
LazarX wrote:
Actually the XP tables were in the Player's Handbook way back in First Edition.

In 1st edition, the XP tables that told the DM how much XP any given monster was worth were in the DMG...

Grand Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Jerry Wright 307 wrote:
For me, it isn't a matter of trust. It's probably my gaming background talking

I know everyone's backgrounds and experiences are different, but not that long ago, all I needed to say to a perspective player was: "Hey, you want to play some D&D?" And that was it! I did not have to hand the players a packet containing the house-rules I used, nor give them a syllabus outlining the upcoming campaign... We just played...

For example, the campaign might have started in the Forgotten Realms, and then during an adventure, the characters tripped a portal, and it sent them to some far off outer plane, and the characters had adventures while trying to get home to the Prime Material Plane, but when they did... It's wasn't Toril they ended up on, it was...

And the players didn't get mad, or annoyed, or frustrated; they just rolled with it and had fun doing it.

But like I said, that has been my experience with gaming, and I know other people have had other experiences shape the way they game...

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
thejeff wrote:
I think is that the nature of the system encourages GM to make house rules to fill the holes when they came up

That may be how people played it, but Gygax definitely had an opinion about the over use of house rules (especially rules-changing house rules):

Gary Gygax wrote:

While [original] D&D campaigns can be those which feature comic book spells, 43rd level balrogs as player characters, and include a plethora of trash from various and sundry sources, AD&D cannot be so composed. Either a DM runs an AD&D campaign, or else it is something else. This is clearly stated within the work, and it is a mandate which will be unchanging...

...it is understood they must adhere to the form of AD&D. Otherwise what they referee is a variant adventure game.

The advantages of such a game are obvious. Because the integral features are known and immutable, there can be no debate as to what is correct. A meaningful dialog can be carried on between DMs, regardless of what region they play in. Players can move from one AD&D campaign to another and know at the very least the basic precepts of the game—that magic-users will not wield swords, that fighters don’t have instant death to give or take with critical hits or double damage, that strange classes of characters do not rule the campaign, that the various deities will not be constantly popping in and out of the game at the beck and call of player characters, etc. AD&D will suffer no such abuses, and DMs who allow them must realize this up front...

...Once everybody is actually playing a game which is basically the same from campaign to campaign, any flaws or shortcomings of the basic systems and/or rules will become apparent. With [original] D&D, arguments regarding some rule are lost due to the differences in play and the wide variety of solutions proposed—most of which reflect the propensities of local groups reacting to some variant system which their DM uses in his or her campaign in the first place. With AD&D, such aberrations will be excluded

That comes from issue #12 of "The Dragon" (June of 1979). The whole article is three pages in length.

And whether you agree or vehemently disagree with him, you can see that Gygax was certainly against the idea of adding house rules that effect any changes to the game...

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Auren "Rin" Cloudstrider wrote:
1st Edition wasn't rules light. it was extremely complicated

A game can be complex, even extremely complex, and still remain rules-lite...

The majority of the tables you refer to were "to hit" charts, and situational modifier tables.

But I think that when a lot of people refer to OD&D, 1st edition AD&D, and 2nd edition AD&D, as being "rules-lite" they are usually referring to the fact, that there were either no rules for every little action that a character could or could not do, or very little of such rules, and that it was solely the DM's call on such things...

Grand Lodge

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I got tired and board with Pathfinder and 3rd edition/d20 in general. So I actually went back and started playing 2nd edition AD&D about two years ago, and have never really looked back... In fact, I just started a new campaign set in The World of Greyhawk this past weekend!

I run 2nd edition pretty much by the book, using most of the various optional rules provided, but I do not make much use of the optional "Player's Option" books, just tidbits of them here and there.

I don't think at this point, I'd ever run a game of Pathfinder or any other d20 based game (including 3rd edition) again; I might be willing to play in one however, if the opportunity arose.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Please cancel my subscription to the Pathfinder Modules line.

Thank you.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Jerry Wright 307 wrote:
I'm really not interested in your new car, or the court case your brother is mired in, or the fact your kids' grades are falling. If the only reason you come to game is to vent or boast, take it to a bar. Gaming time is for gaming.

I tend to game with friends, so I do care about what's going on in their lives. I agree though, that game time should be spent gaming, but it is difficult sometimes when you only get to see certain people, certain friends, once a week for "X" amount of time...

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I've gamed online using both Skype and Roll20, and they both are a good surrogate for not being able to game face-to-face, especially when one or more people from your normal/regular group has moved away...

These games tend to run pretty much like games run face-to-face, especially if you utilize web cams. Using a VTT (Virtual Table Top) like Roll20 allows for things like making characters, rolling dice, sharing handouts, and sending private "notes" to the GM or other players. If you just use something like Skype without a VTT, then these things can be accomplished using IM's and sending handouts and other game related items via email.

If you are going to run a game, and use published material, having access to the PDF is a plus (as it makes sharing handouts much easier).

To get involved in a game using Roll20 for example (which can support any game system), you should visit their forums and see who's running a game, or who is looking for one; though if you're a GM looking for players, then you need to be a registered user and logged in. It's also worth noting, that Roll20 does not support Internet Explorer, and requires the use of Chrome or Firefox in order to play, but IE works just fine for poking around the site to see what's there. :-)

Here is a link to the "Looking for a Group" forums on Roll20: Find a game on Roll20

Lots of people also game via pbp (play by post), but these games tend to go at a much slower pace, so it is something to be considered if you've never done it before. This medium, IMO, is less like a face-to-face game in that the game is played entirely through text; not saying that is a bad thing, it's just not everyone's proverbial cup of tea...

As for getting involved in a pbp game, this site has a recruitment thread for those looking for a game and/or players. Also, RPoL (Role Playing onLine) is great web site totally dedicated to pbp games.

Here is a link to that site: RPoL

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

2nd Edition AD&D had both Padded Cotton armor and Stiffened Fiber armor.

Both of these came from the Maztica Boxed set for the Forgotten Realms...

In Pathfinder, Padded Cotton armor would cost 3 gp and give you a +1 to AC, and Stiffened Fiber armor would cost 10 gp and grant a +2 to AC.

1 to 50 of 2,576 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2015 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours: Monday–Friday, 10 AM–5 PM Pacific Time. View our privacy policy. Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc., and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Online, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.