|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
I don't know, I usually see the whole SJW thing being used as a pejorative that people sling at anyone raising their head to talk about issues that they raise as grievances (the seriousness of which is always a matter of perspective), so maybe it fits, but I've just seen a bit too much of it lately as a rough, reactionary means to stifle any sort of discussion.
And that's my derail.
Unfortunately, when you pull up a metaphorical rock on the internet there is often many a small worm screaming conspiracy. More's the pity, Paizo's Off-topic board is one such rock.
Sorry, OP. I'd suggest, in the future, ask the conspiracy nutters to back it up, or please not derail your topic.
One problem I see right off the bat, and is unfortunately common in a lot of Gunslinger builds, is completely dumping strength. To stay at a light load with a strength of 7 you need to be carrying 23 or fewer pounds in equipment, which you reach pretty quickly with one or more firearms, ammunition, armor and a few pieces of gear.
Yeah, bags of holding/handy haversacks and some equipment help with this, but it doesn't eliminate it entirely.
However, your mileage, houserules and play style may very.
Yes, I'd like to know what is face-palm worthy about calling out this archetype that either wasn't implemented as intended due to shoddy editing or is woefully designed.
The intent behind it seems solid, but lack of exotic crossbow proficiencies, while retaining firearm proficiencies, as well as access to a gunfighter's starting firearm and gunsmithing is silly.
A great idea, but half baked execution. They need to trade out gunsmithing and firearm proficiencies for full crossbow access and, as someonesaid earlier a free rideeload on crossbow of choice and it'll work out well enough.
Also, grit for touch AC on a single attack is very underwhelming. Still, it's more options for crossbows at least.
I think you just sold me on a stinkin' cardgame. Never thought I'd see the day, but that sounds pretty cool.
Marc Radle wrote:
I will favorite your post if you confess that the patch in question is for your stonewashed jean jacket.
Couldn't agree more!
This is big, BIG news for me =)
Even if I'm not thrilled about some tablet e-card game, the idea of eventually seeing a CRPG style game done by Oblivion is wonderful!
Is that the way it's tilting this month?
I see it going either way all the time here. It seems to me that it's usually based off of either posters reacting in support of the person posting or in support of their own preconceived notions formed from their personal experiences.
You honestly haven't seen a lot of people raking DM's over the coals in absentia on these forums? 0.o
That sounds cheesy as hell, but I can certainly see Paizo do it. Whether Bards or skalds need it is, of course, a matter of opinion, but I certainly don't think they do.
It has been a cruel and turbulent age for Dwarves. As the race has dwindled across these lands, their holds and kingdoms falling to age old enemies of the race, their fortunes have likewise waned, their glories tarnished. Now is a time for hope and renewal set against the grim backdrop of a race with its back against the wall. The Dwarven pantheon is in tatters and so too is the race, bought one last chance by a goddess who sacrificed herself so that the Dwarven race may renew itself once again--if it is up to the task.
With the above in mind, I am hoping to run a longterm Kingmaker-inspired game with elements of exploration, intrigue, mystery, kingdom-building, character growth and combat in a setting that will allow for a sandbox approach, as well as overall plot lines or arcs that will occasionally be injected into the world.
I have a few players interested, but could really use 2 or 3 more people. My goal is to meet twice a month on weekends in Westchester. Since the games are only likely to be twice a month (so far all interested parties are professionals in their late 30s to early 40s and scheduling a weekly game would probably be difficult), I am hoping to aim for decent length sitdowns so we can get a fair bit done.
Please PM me or drop a line here if you have questions.
The Magus skill list is very balanced and has 3 great knowledge skills on their list in addition to Spellcraft and UMD, which also help add to that mystical scholarly feel.
If you need more for a character concept, look towards traits, or just throw some ranks in there. With your likely intelligence mod, any knowledge ranks will be well served, even if not class skills.
Phoebus Alexandros wrote:
The first thought that comes to mind is that I've read this exact same thread, or a variant of it everyday I've bothered to come to these forums.
My second thought is that balance, especially as a stated design goal, is a fool's errand, but if Paizo isn't going to let martials be in the same league as other classes, at least unlock the stadium doors on game day and let them have a seat and enjoy a smidge of narrative power.
I'll somewhat steer away from system polemics, because it's been written and re-written a million times before, and just say that I tend not to play what people typically consider tier 1 classes, unless it matches a concept I really want to play.
I will play rogues, fighters and monks, but tend to mid-tier classes that combine fightyness, skills and often some casting. I like the combinations of abilities they often bring to the table on both a combat, problem solving and narrative level.
Inquisitor has Abundant Ammunition as a class spell, that really helps mitigate the GP cost of Firearms.
Did this get FAQed/errataed? Not close to my books, but I remember asking why it wasn't on their spell list previously, and currently it's not listed as on their spell list in either D20pfsrd or the archives.
Almost certain I recall being annoyed it wasn't on their list and possibly even posting a question about it.
Thank you Jiggy and DrDeth for acting out how two reasonable people can escalate a minor online discussion over a niggling subpoint of a topic and mushroom it into a potentially sticky and personal encounter where feelings can get hurt.
This is your brain on internetz, people.
Actually, I think you guys did okay, but had this been a random thread that wasn't about e-decorum in the website feedback thread this last discussion would have probably gone to hell, too.
I can only imagine how difficult it is for a public facing company to deal with this much traffic to their boards. Unfortunately, the usual response of adding unpaid mods from the community also has major drawbacks/risks in a community whose methods related to product use are so subjective and often so entrenched in people's nostalgia, hence highly subject to opinion and debate.
Whoever mentioned adding mods with the *limited* ability to delete multiple posts and scrub spammers, with the idea of taking workload off of staff and freeing them for matters that involve deeper policy decisions, may be on to something, but I wonder if that would even work within the website's framework. It also is still pretty far from foolproof.
tony gent wrote:
Most characters I've played have goals or purposes, but usually not so broadly defined as "fighting evil", though of course many of them feel their enemies or antagonists are evil.
Kirth Gersen wrote:
"Anymore"? In 1e, the game mechanics stressed treasure hunting as the key to advancement.
You know this is one of those "good ol' days" nostalgia threads.
You will have a hard time swaying nostalgia-fueled memories of the way it was for the person who is using their memories to make assumptions about how it was for everyone else and how it should be for all of us today.
Yeah, there was a lot of over the top responses to your initial post and it seemed to escalate quickly.
In any event, I think I'll just avoid any sort of rules discussion in the future. In fact, between this sort of thing and some unpleasantness at PCC, it may be time for a new hobby altogether. Or at least a new RPG. Did I mention I'm playing 13th Age this Saturday?
That's sad to hear, though 13th Age seems decent from what I recall of my initial read through last year.
So...I posted this in the general forum, rather than the rules forum (which was probably an error on my part), but anyone who doubts the OP has a point is invited to peruse this little gem.
Reading over the link you posted there was a fair bit of escalation by you, as well. It's best to not rise to the bait, if possible.
Shar Tahl wrote:
This is a gross oversimplification fueled by nostalgia, among other things
Fake Healer wrote:
Honestly if you as GM have made it so that a player feels he needs to detect magic every 30' in a dungeon, or check for traps every 30', or cast detect secret doors every 30'....then you as a GM made the PCs react that way by horribly overusing a certain "thing" that is supposed to be used somewhat sparingly and in ways that make sense.
Watch you don't fall down a hole jumping to those conclusions.
I think it devolves to that, as the question has been sufficiently answered as to why Paizo has taken such a route and it gets a little old when a few of the free-pdf camp still return to their point, which ultimately boils down to "but I want it."
This is a niche business in a hobby "industry" that has managed to find a model that is working for them and is overall very good to their customers and puts out above-par quality products. "But I want it" is an understandable argument, I can even sympathize with it, but it doesn't override the need for a business to keep its lights on and its personnel paid.
Oops, evenly balanced stat distribution to the rescue! Honestly, it's all the GM's fault? You accept no responsibility for the situation? Who is being childish?
Well, if the group as a whole has some sort of expectations of play style that breaks from the character creation rules it should be mentioned beforehand or civilly discussed as soon as a perceived issue become apparent.
Pretty sure bullying and badwrongfunning someone for their build is not only childish but repugnant, to say the least.
Not sure if this helps but I'm using iZip.com app to download from the Paizo store/DrivethruRPG onto my iPhone/iPad.
^ iZip does the job just fine for me, as well. I think I am using a sample version I downloaded from the istore directly. you just use it to open directly into your ibooks reader.
Wanted to start outlining a new campaign as a means to try out Realm Works, but I am very much in the mood to incorporate sandbox elements that would allow players to world build and put some roots down...build a powerbase etc. That said, are there any campaign hooks integral to or opportunities that would allow for that sort of thing in this AP?
Just wanted to get some input. I fully expect to do extra work with this sort of take on a campaign and wouldn't expect too many details in this respect fom a campaign that seemingly has so many other aspects to focus on and didn't want to invest in the AP if I my get more fun out of playing through it some day, as opposed to owning it and never running it.
I am fairly open on the point of the colony, as I figure my character didn't have much of a choice and has to make do as best he can in the given circumstances.
If it's a group of religious zealots or missionaries, he won't be too pleased at first, but will roll with it and probably see it as a good chance to make headway among what he sees as otherwise distracted religious-types. If it's a company for exploration and the setting up of new trade routes and uncovering of resources, he'll be happy for the lucrative opportunities. He will just try and fall in with a dependable group he can benefit from and seem valuable to while looking for an opportunity to leverage his situation to better his circumstances.