|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
Jason Nelson wrote:
At some point you've gotta find a good place to stop and then start the next one. The heroes-to-armies piece was a casualty of that this time around, but it'll be front and center when Ultimate Armies comes to town. :)
Both good advice and good news. I'll be looking forward to this book.
I beg pardon, but "blot"?
Jason Nelson wrote:
It was there, I just downloaded it. Thanks!
That's odd. My PDF has its cover but it has some of those other little problems I listed in an earlier post. It's also labeled 'UltimateWar2', I don't know if that means it's a different version from yours or what.
In any event, I really do enjoy this PDF, it was more than worth the wait.
Some quick comments from the read-through of the PDF:
The siege rules. Oh my yes. Such a wonderful collection of weapons and attics for conducting a siege. And I love the magical siege weapons -- zombie apocalypse siege shot, anyone? A new and novel use for all those corpses that pile up around a city under siege!
The new command boons are very good. I like the war chant and surgical strike ones in particular.
Aerial warfare -- I admit, going in I expected to dislike this. I'm rather a 'traditionalist', preferring a 'Dark Ages - Renaissance' level of of technology in my games. Thus convinced me otherwise, with the inventive tactics, the vehicles, and the ideas on how to use them in non-military ways, like for trade. The latter is especially good to me. Besides, if we go by books like the Dragonslayer Guide Player Companion aerial warfare already does exist in Golarion to some extent.
Naval Warfare -- Yes! I love the variety of ships, ranging from the real world to steampunk for those interested. You see ship types here that almost never get mentioned in fantasy -- Galleys and Longships and Roundships and Barges to such exotica as Dreadnoughts and Ironclads and Nautiluses. Truly wonderful, though it's a shame that I'll probably never get to use some of them (what with that Kingmaker campaign set along rivers rather than oceans). Nice range of tactics too as well as ways to see them in both war and peace aside from the standard 'sight enemy, sink same'.
There seem to be some minor errors with the lists of ships in the book. For example, Table 9 on page 21 lists the required types of buildings for every sort of ship except the Nautilus. Not a major error, as I'd assume it needs the same ones as the Dreadnought (and let me say, I love the addition of needing not just BPs but certin kinds of buildings to make certain vessels; as well as the idea of artillerymen and ships' crews being separate from the soldiers in armies while still counting against the maximum forces you can have).
Also, in Table 11 on page 23, some entries for things like required crew for the Dreadnought and Greatship, with a '1' for the former (just one crew? Talk about a ship that sails itself!) and a '?' for both crew and oars for the latter. I assume the proper number of crew for a Dreadnought is meant to be '100' and ''50' for a Greatship, the same as a Longship and Gallleass, and that it needs no oars given that no oar speed is listed for it.
And on page 22 something seems to be missing. Right after the lsiting for 'Crew' we get a paragraph that reads:
The number of passengers the ship can carry. This
However, there is no listing for heading for 'Passengers'. Again, this isn't a big thing but I thought maybe it needed to be brought up.
Also, with the listings for various ships for the number of oars -- are these to mean 'oarsmen' in addition to the regular crew, or just the number of oars on the ship?
Sorry to be a nit-picking pain but I wanted to be sure that I wasn't misreading some of those entries. Again, I [b]LOVE[/b} this book and am looking forward to the hardcopy. It really is great and I'm looking forward to the next one in the series, Ultimate Armies, whenever it comes out.
Thanks again for all the great books you publish.
James Jacobs wrote:
Nope. The Azlanti were here (and indeed had been destroyed by Earthfall) well before the ship crashed into Numeria.
Ah. Darn, I was wondering if Pathfinder was going to go with the old 'Atlanteans were the spacemen' argument I remember from some lost civilization/ancient astronaut literature.
James Jacobs wrote:
As fro the rebirthing chamber... it's an artifact. It gets to break the rules, and is more powerful than the "Sorshen trap" you cite. A character who is rebirthed by one gains a +2 inherent bonus to all her stats and has her age reset to young adult. A live creature that's rebirthed by the device doesn't gain negative levels.
Translation, if I don't want it to be abused, then think twice and think twice again before introducing it? And/or give it some nasty side effects?
Thanks for the advice.
Sauce, Troll -- I looked at the PRD, and yeah, they're impressive enough that I question the wisdom of a GM who allows PCs to get their hands on them. Of course for some groups that's part of the appeal.
Also, the rebirthing machine, hmm, I wonder how best to handle the effects it has on a character who gets rebirthed by one (along with the +2 to all stats)? I guess the easiest way is to just do what was done with 'PC becomes Sorshen the pure Azlanti' and have them lose two levels.
And now I wonder if the Azlanti are/were descended from the space people in setting.
I just read the description, and -- extinction wave device? Let me guess, this is something that goes under the 'never ever let people who can't resist pressing the Big Red Button touch it' heading?
And just how good is the death ray? I hope this isn't like, "Death ray, bah! It doesn't even knock 'em down!"
It was directly inspired by a mix of his work with the barbarian and Korean folklore (unlike the Japanese or Chinese, Korean stories about nine-tailed foxes are almost ubiquitously about them murdering people)
Ahh, the infamous gumiho. Who live in cemeteries, defile the dead, and replace people so they can murder their entire family for laughs. Such pleasant creatures.
Beg pardon, this will be OT here but what is the 'enormous bonus for wizards' that you can find in Kingmaker? I have the entire AP and I'm banking on this right now.
And speaking on a purely personal level, I prefer the sorcerer as Pathfinder does them. Less versatility than the wizard, yes, but to me the color and flavor of the bloodlines can more than make up for it. I think they do tend towards being best when specialized, though.
That said you can overcome some of that by having a second arcane caster in the party, like an alchemist or magus.
I have one dumb question about the slayer class: is this or is this not basically a not required to be evil version of the assassin? I know, if you what non-evil assassins in a campaign than all you need is to get the GM to say, 'they don't have to be evil' but I suppose want an 'official' response.
Because if so then I might want to use these guys with those Daggermark killers, the Yenchabur.
It's also a way for your villain PCs to
become major devils without having to spend 1000 years as the lemure cleaning out Baalzebul's chamber pot.
I got it, and I like it. I love the detail on what you can do if you set up that wizard's school mentioned in book 6 (magic gate-powered trading and zombie hordes, anyone?), the way to use the one dead dragon's library to make technological superweapons, and the humorous bits. Yes, it gives you the funny, with notes on how to portray Grumblejack, including how to handle his romance with another ogre and the ensuing horde of kids and MinionQuest: learn what it's like to be the flunkies of evil! Done with NPC classes who don't even get names because they won't last enough for it to matter...
I actually like the look and fluff of Pathfinder goblinoids...they actually feel rather distinctive. I always felt that the DnD goblinoids were kind of just there, and fairly generic (at least compared to better fleshed out bad guys like Drow and such)
I'm with you. I just wish they did more with the whole 'bugbears as terror-rousing serial killers' idea; whenever they do show up in an adventure, they seem to be just simple thugs for PCs who haven't graduated to facing ogres and trolls yet.
John Kretzer wrote:
John Kretzer wrote:
Not to disagree with you...but I always took orcs was meant to represented the worst of humanity while elves were the best of humanity.
This is probably true, given that some sources identify the elves as being basically incarnate angels or unfallen humanity while the orcs are elves tortured into madness and savagery.
Tolkien also once told a young lady who asked him about his WW1 experiences that: "We all became Orcs in those trenches."
More on topic, while hordes of good orcs would probably be a bit much, I hope we get some neutral ones in Belkzen.
Dustin Ashe wrote:
Unfortunately, I have to add a 'me too' to this.
I'd say it works just fine for different levels of power; again, my problems with the high-level units are more of a personal thing. It just feels odd to me have units of 100-200 10+ level characters roaming around. At that point I'd rather go with giants or monstrous humanoids and give them some character levels.
But it is a great product. The little in-character bits of information were especially well done.
Jason Nelson wrote:
It's on the drawing board, but it has to wait for me to complete Ultimate War, which with my newfound status as a full-time author/publisher (instead of just doing it in my spare time) is finally on the way to getting accomplished!
Good news! Rest assured that I will be getting a copy! I'm really eager to see the rules for sieges, naval warfare and that modular system for making 'mixed arms' units. Heck, I'll do my absolute best to get that hardcover compilation too if it ever happens, and I hope it does.