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

Fabius Maximus's page

1,113 posts (1,114 including aliases). No reviews. No lists. 1 wishlist. 1 alias.


RSS

1 to 50 of 1,113 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

Swashbuckler? Absolutely.

I'm not so sure about firearms. Since Artificers can produce magic items cheaper than usual, there is no need for firearms on Eberron.


Terevalis Unctio of House Mysti wrote:
Depends on the world that you are playing in, for example, in Dragonlance, wizards who pass the Test of High Sorcery tend to wear the color of the Order, at least on formal occassions.

Aren't they required to wear their order's colours?


Sissyl wrote:
Then... the key is that someone gets the right to define the other's "offended card" as "given in bad faith". The one with the most popular support gets to determine that, as in all purely subjective situations. And the one with that support gets to decide in every instance whether to allow a discussion to continue. Right?

I'm not sure what you're saying.

The whole thing is a balancing act. Everbody gets offended sometimes. Articulating this should not be met with distrust first hand (which would take the argument in bad faith), especially if the offended party explains why they feel that way - which is a good idea, but not always possible, depending in which the state the person is. The "key" is not to look for the fault in others, but rather to consider what you did before you start accusing someone else of wrongdoing, openly or not.

There may be times when someone uses being offended to "win" the discussion (which is a silly concept altogether, but not entirely avoidable, I guess), not or only vaguely explaining why they were offended. In that case, I would still try to give them the benefit of the doubt and rephrase my argument once. If the other side still insists on dying on that particular hill, withdrawing is the best option, because there is nothing to be gained anymore. They may think they have won, but you didn't concede anything, and "winning" is meaningless in this case, anyway.

OTOH, I'm bad at following my own advice and as a result, I rarely get into arguments on these boards - or anywhere - anymore.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
WormysQueue wrote:
Quote:
You may be careful about how you frame your opinion, but that is still coloured by how you are generally used to argue a point.

I totally get that which is why I'm not adversed to explain myself once again if I get the feeling that I transferred my opinion the wrong way. I'm also not generally averse to apologize if I unintentionally hurt someone's feelings about something.

So I'm not generally against James' suggestions how to handle forum stuff.Still, living in a country where only recently feminists claimed that if a woman claims to have been sexually harassed, this claim alone is sufficient as proof (in a case where the court eventually rightfully decided said claim to be untrue) and where, on the other hand, the society tends to think that gender equality has already been reached when it has clearly not and people get offended just by women (or men) pointing that fact out, I'm not too fond of the thought that only the receiver of an alleged offense may decide if it really is an offense.

That would most surely eventually lead to a severe impediment of free speech, because as soon as I don't like what you say, I can play the offense card, and you can do nothing about it.

I don't agree with you on the sexual harrassment issue, but that is not the subject of this thread.

If you think someone is playing the "offended card", you might try to rephrase your previous statement. If the same happens again, you disengage because the discussion is over. However, if someone is really offended by what you said, you don't get to decide whether that is justified or not. People have different thresholds of what they find acceptable.

The matter here, I believe, is whether one takes an argument in good faith or not. Thinking another person is playing the above mentioned card could be just taking the person's argument in bad faith.

I also think everybody should remember the wise words of Raylan Givens (apologies for the swearing): "If you run into an a!*+@~@ in the morning, you ran into an a+$&$#!. If you run into a+*@$!+s all day, you're the a##+@#$."


WormysQueue wrote:
Steve Geddes wrote:
Cheers. I don't think I've ever seen that happen - I can see it's a theoretical possibility, but I've never seen anyone claim offense where I didn't really believe they were offended.

Oh, I've had pointed out to me more than once that sometimes my posts are felt as being offensive when the only thing I try to do is to be as concise and exact as possible. And when I asked what exactly I had done wrong, the only answer was that the offended people got the vibe from my post that I was too convinced that I was right.

Which is why I normally try to be extra careful not to speak in absolutes but that (and other things happening here in Germany) is also why I don't share JJ's sentiment that only the people feeling offended have the right to define what's an offense and what's not. Because I see some of them use this on a daily basis to try and shut you down.

Quote:
I think this is excellent advice. If there's nobody replying to the "fake offendee" then I think the tactic will be pretty transparent.
Problem being that now the "fake offendee" might feel offended by getting ignored by you. :) Still, probably the best thing one can do.

You have to remind yourself that we are more used to tell others our opinion in a straightforward manner in Germany, while that is not so much the case in Anglo-Saxon societies, for example. We might have better mechanisms to deal with direct confrontation.

You may be careful about how you frame your opinion, but that is still coloured by how you are generally used to argue a point.


Apraham Lincoln wrote:
Nice handy list of stuff and that fits in a Handy Haversack

That is indeed very convenient.


A Bag of Holding or similar magical container. We usually notice when it comes to determine who is going to carry all the loot.


Rakshaka wrote:

It can't be avoided, its literally at the beginning of the dungeon. Unfortunately, what is written in the module is exactly how your DM ran it; I called it the Room of Infinite Shadows, because as written, there was no upper limit to the number of shadows that could come out of the mirror/obelisk. The only change is that I remember it being a mirror, not a monolith, but otherwise, yeah, your DM ran it as printed.

Out of an otherwise outstanding module, this is the one problem encounter that has made a few DMs scratch their heads. [Can we just farm shadows for experience??]

Rakshaka, I think he's talking about the

Spoiler:
dead Kyton that serves as a power conduit for the Nessian Spiral.

Urath DM wrote:
James Jacobs wrote:
Zaister wrote:
It seems the Divine Fighting Technique feat in this book is slightly different from the one from Weapon Master's Handbook. I wonder if this intentional, and which version should actually be used?
It's intentional. They are similar things, but not identical things. Use the version attached to the book from which you took the technique.

That's.... really REALLY bad for people trying to program this for tools like HeroLab (or any VTT that maintains your character for you, etc.).

If they are intended to be "similar but not identical", then they should have different names, not the same name. Precedent says that a new version of a Feat of the same name replaces the prior version.

Computers are really REALLY bad with "this means A sometimes, and B other times". And so are (we) programmers. :)

People in general a really bad with that.


Alexander Augunas wrote:
CBDunkerson wrote:
Alexander Augunas wrote:
Its time for everyone's favorite game—"Guess what Alex Augunas wrote in Divine Anthology!"
Some (e.g. Desnan) or all of the divine fighting styles.

1 of 2 sections guessed!

I did some (but not all) of the Divine Fighting Techniques. I didn't do Sarenrae (there wasn't space in my turnover for Sarenrae despite my pleaing, so I'm tickled pink that the developer found a way to include the Dawnflower).

[...]

If you don't mind me asking: why was the Divine Fighting Technique feat changed?


It seems like your GM made some modifications to the device. As per the book, it is a somewhat challenging, but optional, encounter.

My player took a good look at it from a distance and decided that they didn't want to mess with the thing.


I think I stumbled over another glitch: The benefit and the completion benefit of the Puppet Master story feat are the same.


Eric Hinkle wrote:
I got the book and I like it, but I would like to ask if game information for the Stateless Agent drawback or Heir to Corruption trait has been listed anywhere. Neither are described in the book itself though they're both listed for sample backgrounds on page 5.

I would like to know this as well.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Advice re Twinings: only drink their product if you live in the UK or maybe Ireland. The company's export teas are dreck. (If you are in Ireland, there are much better teas available, notably by Lyons and Bewley's.)

I also would stay away from anything called "Irish Breakfast" in the beginning. That stuff usually is pretty strong.

I would recommend starting with a Darjeeling. It's the mildest sort of black tea. If you don't like the grassy taste, move on to Ceylon. And don't go for the cheap stuff.


For the uninitiated, the Lagavulin 16 is quite an assault on the taste buds, though.


Soos, Handyman of Mystery wrote:
I'm pretty sure the mailman is a Werewolf.

There only is one mailman.


Squiggit wrote:
Fabius Maximus wrote:


If you want non-magical martial characters to have quasi-magical abilities, there are games for that. Pathfinder is not one of them (if you count out certain 3pp books).

But that's clearly not true. You cite an example of that being incorrect literally in your next line. Throw in other examples (like HP and saves and evasion and so on) and it's very obviously not the case even by default. Martials, past low levels, exist far beyond the realm of realism. If you want to call that quasi-magical, that's fine, but it is what it is.

It's like some people think "extraordinary" is supposed to mean extra ordinary.

There is a difference between abstractions like HP and abilities that enable non-magical classes to do the same things as magic-users. A certain level of reality-bending is expected in heroic fantasy. Putting magic-users and non-magic characters on the same level, however, has been tried and it was a failure.


I'm going to regret getting involved, but here goes nothing:

Derklord wrote:
@Goblin_Priest: Martials that don't break the laws of physics have no reason to exist in a world of widely aviable, safe, and reliable magic. If you don't like that, don't play Pathfinder.

Magic in Golarion is neither widely available, nor is it altogether safe.

If you want non-magical martial characters to have quasi-magical abilities, there are games for that. Pathfinder is not one of them (if you count out certain 3pp books).

And yes, Ricochet Toss is pretty silly.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
kyrt-ryder wrote:
Bluenose wrote:
Steve Geddes wrote:
I think I do this to a large extent. I'm going to claim that it is okay to prejudge erroneously in this way - in my case, I'm happy to concede that there's a high risk of error due to ignorance. I'm not aware of the differences between various kinds of 'asian animation styles' (I didn't even really know there were multiple styles until stumbling over threads like this. I've always just assumed that "Japanese animation is too over-the-top for my tastes").
Anime is just the medium, in which there's a lot of different genres. I recommend Moribito (I always recommend Moribito) for a well made 'anime warrior' series. Or Slayers, which is over the top comedy action. Or Ghost in the Shell, cyberpunk classic.
If fantasy is the goal but you want more grit less magic, the original Berserk series comes highly recommended. Now with a mixed reviews cgi followup.

If somebody wants to try the original Berzerk, I suggest to start with the second episode. The first one has next to nothing to do with the rest of the series and you might expect something very different after watching it.


I'm Hiding In Your Closet wrote:
Thank you - how do I install it properly?

I have no bloody clue. It's been years since I've played the game and then only incompletely, because it's so badly optimised.


I'm Hiding In Your Closet wrote:
It doesn't seem to have what I'm looking for - I just want the official updates put out by the company that made the game. The auto-updater doesn't seem to be able to find them anymore.

I seem to have found them: Neverwintervault.org, although you might have to fiddle around with the search parameters at the top.


I'm Hiding In Your Closet wrote:
Anyone else?

Have you tried Nexusmods?


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Drahliana Moonrunner wrote:
Air0r wrote:

What makes it sci-fi? Besides it's name.

Outside of naming convention everything psionics DOES is what magic does, but using a point system and focus mechanic instead of a slot system.

Names are not a trivial consideration. But consider where the term was first used... Fringe science, Pulp sci-fi magazines, and comic books. Mention psionics to any number of people and those who don't give you blank stares will probably give you back either X-Men, Scanners, or the Power of Matthew Star, assuming they don't go all New Age and crystal pyramid on you.

And then of course there's the official Wiki Dictionary definition:

Psionics is the study of paranormal phenomena in relation to the application of electronics. The term comes from psi ('psyche') and the -onics from electronics (machine). It is closely related to the field of radionics. There is no scientific evidence that psionic abilities exist.

Psychic powers however pretty much date back to Victorian literature and gypsy lore.

That may all be true. However, nothing in D&D or Dreamscarred's Pathfinder psionics deals with electronics (although you could say that since brains run on electricity, they are biological machines).

There also is a significant overlap between D&D/Dreamscarred psionics and Paizo's psychic spellcasting in overall methods as well as in powers.


Hama wrote:
I couldn't care less about some random nobodies inside the ship, honestly.

If they are the protagonists of the show, their portrayal is neither random nor are they nobodies.

It certainly does make more sense to have them do the jobs instead of showing the main commanding officers and the bridge crew going on away missions.


Duiker wrote:

Anywhere but Varisia, the end of the world seems to try to happen there every three years. Cursed to live in interesting times and all that...

It's kind of a fantasy Heisenberg principle. Knowing about a place means that bad things happen there, so the nicest place to live is going to be one you know nothing about.

Sarusan, then.


8 people marked this as a favorite.

I think it goes back to some BS race theory from the 19th century.


Thanks. I'll put it on my list.


This is relevant to my interests, but sounds like young adult fiction, which I'm generally not a fan of (anymore).


You want to make sure people remember your face? Give them too much money for too little in return.


Kobold Cleaver wrote:

I'm kind of sad the base races are all on the way out except boring old humans. Mainly just because of gnomes, though. I think gnomes, those eccentric fey constantly a desaturation away from insanity and death, would be a lot of fun in space. I hope they still exist as a rarer species.

What I don't want to see, Pt. 1:

Giffs.

Scros.


Werthead wrote:

Clearly we disagree on the issue, so rather than carry on with that dead end, I'll drop that there.

For those who may be interested, here's a selection of other reviews of the series:

Help me out here. Is that what you call an appeal to authority?


That is good news.


When you've finished with Breaking Bad, give Better Call Saul a try. That show is much better, mainly because it much more focussed and has a somewhat likable main character.

I suggest The Americans as replacement for The Man in the High Castle. No Nazis involved, but a couple of Soviet sleeper agents in the US of the 1980s.


A clinically depressed person who has difficulties feeling anything. She tries to find a way to cure her ailment, but it is hard for her to care for anything anymore. The person works with others out of necessity, but would rather remain alone. An Alchemist or maybe a (Transmuter) Wizard would work. (Any sulky teenagers will receive a dose of a mild poison from her so that they finally have a reason to complain about something.)

A person who has lost her memory who is trying to piece together her former life. I'm thinking a Mesmerist trying to find ways to send herself in ever deeper trances.


Hitdice wrote:
Fabius Maximus wrote:
Irontruth wrote:
Fabius Maximus wrote:
I've recently made the discovery that the Glenlivet 15 does not really taste more interesting than the 12-year-old.

In some ways, age really is just a number. Even if a whisky changes over the years, it might not be for the better. That said, older whiskys will always be more expensive, because you're paying for the storage space for all those years.

Most American whiskey is only aged 2-6 years, with few being aged for 10+ (15+ is exceptionally rare in America).

Just seeing this now.

I expect older whiskeys to at least have a more complex aroma (if that makes sense) than their younger selves, but the 15-year-old Glenlivet is basically the same as the 12-year-old, although it may be a little smoother.

Still, it is not a bad whiskey. And it beats the Green Spot, which I was looking forward to due to high praise. Maybe pot still whiskey is not for me.

Does it taste sort of hoppy or something? I'm not saying I'd turn down a sample, but it sounds like weird, weird flavor combination.

What do you mean?


Irontruth wrote:
Fabius Maximus wrote:
I've recently made the discovery that the Glenlivet 15 does not really taste more interesting than the 12-year-old.

In some ways, age really is just a number. Even if a whisky changes over the years, it might not be for the better. That said, older whiskys will always be more expensive, because you're paying for the storage space for all those years.

Most American whiskey is only aged 2-6 years, with few being aged for 10+ (15+ is exceptionally rare in America).

Just seeing this now.

I expect older whiskeys to at least have a more complex aroma (if that makes sense) than their younger selves, but the 15-year-old Glenlivet is basically the same as the 12-year-old, although it may be a little smoother.

Still, it is not a bad whiskey. And it beats the Green Spot, which I was looking forward to due to high praise. Maybe pot still whiskey is not for me.


Fabius Maximus wrote:

People are upset because they took a thoroughly Japanese story set in Japan told through Japanese characters and mainly cast non-Japanese actors without even bothering to change the characters' names. They could have adapted the Laughing Man story by setting it in an alternate universe. There even is precedent within Ghost in the Shell lore, as the series and movies only share characters and themes.

There is also the question that if the filmakers can't even be arsed to remain faithful to the original in casting, how can they faithfully adapt the rest of the material in its complexity to a live-action version?

Nothing against Johansson; she's good, as are a lot of the other actors. But this white-washing nonsense has to stop. I'm getting tired of always seeing the same type of face on the screen. Rinko Kikuchi would have been a better choice for the role of Major Kusanagi, for example.

As for financial success: I couldn't care less. The franchise is not doomed; Arise just came out last year. It wasn't as good as Stand Alone Complex, but good enough.

Arise unfortunately WASN'T good enough. Arise was supposed to be a 6 episode OVA but failed to get enough funding to make more than 4 episodes. Talk was that the setting of GitS was dead and soon to be buried. Then out of the blue the American's start a live action movie project and suddenly funding is restored Arise got completed as a TV show instead of an OVA and the setting is once again on people's minds. THIS is why it is important that the live action movie succeed because interest in IT is what is keeping the entire setting alive right now. If a major actress like ScarJo can do the role justice (and I believe she is one of the best people out there who CAN... certainly not Ming Na who we have seen in Agents of SHIELD.) In fact if ANYONE can elevate this production from obscurity it is Scarlett Johansson.

BUT it's whitewashing! So what. I would rather the better actor or actress fill a role than the one with the approved race. Just look at what amazing work Samuel Jackson did as Nick Fury (a white part played by a black actor).

I wasn't aware that they had trouble financing Arise. That sucks.

I suspect Johansson's presence alone will not help much, though. GitS may be pretty high profile for an anime in the Western world, but the movie came out 21 years ago. I don't think that most people know either the series or the sequel. It's not exactly a household name. I doubt that the screenwriters and the director have the experience to turn this into a success.


I avoid anything written by Stephen King, so I have no opinion on the Dark Tower.

I also don't think that a black James Bond would be against the character. Why should it be? Is he intrinsically white?


6 people marked this as a favorite.
Aranna wrote:

Why are people so upset about ScarJo? She is a HUGE action star. Her name alone will fill seats in the theater. I would much rather they keep ScarJo and have a big success with this franchise than use a less known asian actress and risk the movie having a bad launch dooming the franchise.

People are upset because they took a thoroughly Japanese story set in Japan told through Japanese characters and mainly cast non-Japanese actors without even bothering to change the characters' names. They could have adapted the Laughing Man story by setting it in an alternate universe. There even is precedent within Ghost in the Shell lore, as the series and movies only share characters and themes.

There is also the question that if the filmakers can't even be arsed to remain faithful to the original in casting, how can they faithfully adapt the rest of the material in its complexity to a live-action version?

Nothing against Johansson; she's good, as are a lot of the other actors. But this white-washing nonsense has to stop. I'm getting tired of always seeing the same type of face on the screen. Rinko Kikuchi would have been a better choice for the role of Major Kusanagi, for example.

As for financial success: I couldn't care less. The franchise is not doomed; Arise just came out last year. It wasn't as good as Stand Alone Complex, but good enough.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Tacticslion wrote:
Deadmanwalking wrote:

Iomedae has always been pronounced in my head something like this:

EYE-ohm-eh-day

Which doesn't sound that uncomfortable to me. I've always liked the way that one flowed, personally.

For me, it was always Eye-OHM-eh-day. :D

Same here, although I treat the 'I' as a 'J'.


Marvin, I would not recommend Sanderson. Lord Snow's praise was pretty faint, and I had the impression that he uses language like a blunt instrument.


You have to take into account that the Tales line is not only genre fiction, but sub-genre fiction, i.e. Fantasy RPG novels. They primarily exist to show off the setting. That's why many of the Tales are not great, even when written by experienced, previously published authors. Some of them read as if they were rushed through editing. The best ones probably will not offer you anything new, only refreshed old fantasy tropes. Still, they can be enjoyable to read.

Nightglass by Liane Merciel is one of them. The Worldwound Gambit by Robin D. Laws is basically Ocean's 11 with demons. Death's Heretic by James Sutter deals with an atheist who's working for the church of Pharasma against his will. And Wendy N. Wagner's Skinwalkers has a former pirate trying to protect her clan against raiders.

However, if you want something akin to literary fiction in the fantasy genre, you should check out Steven Erikson's A Tale of the Malazan Book of the Fallen. It is 10 thick books long and the first one can be kind of hard to get into, but I rarely have read anything better in any genre.


wraithstrike wrote:
I think orogs were orcs/ogre crossbreeds.

You're right. It was changed for the 3.5 FR, however.


Kazaan wrote:

Well, you could maybe design a "deep orc" race, analogously similar to the relation between Dwarves and Dwergar. It could be a sub-species of Orc that lived particularly deep in the ground and never, ever visits the surface.

That would be Orogs, if I'm not mistaken.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
thejeff wrote:
Fabius Maximus wrote:
Hama wrote:

Audience score is 85%, also audience is comprised of about 120.000 people.

Critics are idiots.

No, they are not. They just have different standards than the average member of the audience, whose opinion generally boils down to "I had fun" or "I did not have fun". That does not tell anything to anyone.

Critics are usually exposed to a wider variety of movies (music, art, what have you) than the average audience member, even if their individual knowledge of the matter differs in composition.

So if a majority of critics say that a movie is not that good and qualifies why, I'm bound to trust their verdict rather than the one of the general public.

Depends what you're looking for. The general public may be a better choice when it comes to "Will I enjoy seeing the movie", which is generally what I'm interested in. The critics may be right on some grander artistic level, but there are plenty of works that I acknowledge as artistic masterpieces, but don't actually like. And plenty of more formulaic things that I greatly enjoy.

I repeatedly found that the general public's sense of enjoyment and mine differ wildly.


Hama wrote:

Audience score is 85%, also audience is comprised of about 120.000 people.

Critics are idiots.

No, they are not. They just have different standards than the average member of the audience, whose opinion generally boils down to "I had fun" or "I did not have fun". That does not tell anything to anyone.

Critics are usually exposed to a wider variety of movies (music, art, what have you) than the average audience member, even if their individual knowledge of the matter differs in composition.

So if a majority of critics say that a movie is not that good and qualifies why, I'm bound to trust their verdict rather than the one of the general public.


There used to be 3 women in my group of 6 players. Unfortunately, one had to recently drop out because of her job.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Lamontius wrote:
wait where does it say that this is a new forum version rather than something that broke that Paizo is trying to fix?

Exactly. What new forum?


Marios wrote:
Karui Kage wrote:
Version 1.2: Here

Several years later... hehe... talk about ressurection!

This link doesn't work anymore, anybody got the above mentioned software? Sounds excellent!

I'd say don't use it. The whole sequence is - probably inadvertently - created to bore and frustrate players. I suggest simplifying it; get the PCs lost a couple of times, have them meet goblins once or twice, maybe an Armiger patrol, and throw in some encounters of your own. Then get them to the exit.


BadBird wrote:
Drinking ale instead of Irish whiskey on St.Patrick's day makes me just a little sad. Kind of in the same way as seeing Bono singing somewhere back behind the Dubliners in the video.

That's where he belongs, as far as I'm concerned. Way behind Shane MacGowan.

You could drink Irish red ale.

1 to 50 of 1,113 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2016 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.