|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
Well, there is foreshadowing at the end of the first adventure - in the form of a letter, in fact (although the one adressed is not very smart and kept it).
Maybe let them listen in to a discussion about a shady business deal and the council's rules about conducting illicit business in the city.
I had a barkeep open his mouth to wide and let the rumoured existance of the council slip. That was much later in the AP, though.
Orfamay Quest wrote:
Sure, if they are consenting adults.
Seriously, though, it's called the Golden Rule and is found in most major religions and philosophies in some form. There is also the Silver Rule ("One should not treat others in ways that one would not like to be treated") and the Platinum Rule ("You should do onto others as they would do on themselves"), which - admittedly - is what you said. I think neither can exist without the other and all three from a good foundation on how to communicate with other people.
You can also try to apply Kant's categorical imperative ("Act only according to that maxim whereby you can, at the same time, will that it should become a universal law."), although that one comes with a whole lot of philosophical baggage.
Orfamay Quest wrote:
I think you're both wrong. You should treat other people like you want to be treated by them.
Maybe the name Chainmail is part of the license.
I'd add Fergus of the Sweet/True Lips to the list. He appears in an adaption of the Fenian Cycle from the 15th century ("The Battle of the White Strand" or "Cath Finntrágha"). He literally helps people fight better by "praising" them.
I haven't been able to look closely at the classes, but here are my initial thoughts.
Arcanist: The concept is mildly interesting, but I don't know what niche it is supposed to fill.
Bloodrager: Again, I don't know what its niche is supposed to be.
Brawler: Some interesting abilities, but overall, the class seems to be mediocre. I prefer the Brawler archetype.
Hunter: Completely redundant.
Investigator: Interesting. I can see myself playing one.
Shaman: The best class in the book. I've never had much interest in playing a Druid, but always wanted to play a druid character. Now, I can. The spell list needs some work, though.
Skald: This is not a class, it's a Bard archetype. I might try it out, though.
Slayer: Should have been called Hunter. A good substitute for the Ranger for people who don't like spells (although we already have the Skirmisher archetype).
Swashbuckler: I'm not interested in playing one, but extending the grit mechanic to other classes is a good idea. I can see why other people would be interested in this.
Warpriest: Completely redundant. The Cleric already is a fighting priest and has an even more "fighty" archetype in the Crusader.
Victor Zajic wrote:
Tell me that again when they start gnawing your legs off.
Define "pretty clear" in context to Islam.
Sure, there are ideas about policital organization in there, but you find those in Marx' works, as well. That doesn't mean they contain a whole framework on which a state can be founded, like in Rousseau's The Social Contract, for example.
Well, you should already be able to use the Shaman spells for the Paizo class.
When I read through the spells, though, I not only noticed that the Witch got the short end of the stick again (the class doesn't even get Cursed Gift, which is frankly ridiculous), but found myself saying out loud: "How is that not a [insert class here] spell?" quite frequently. The overlap between Ranger and Elven Archer should be bigger, for example.
I know my GMs will be quite lenient if I want to use a spell that's not on my character's class list, but others might not be.
Kirth Gersen wrote:
Speaking of Bourbon: I tried Elijah Craig a while ago and found it too sweet for my liking. It worked quite nicely in Highballs, though.
Are there any Bourbons that are not as sweet?
Well, there was a small scare going on in the media (in ZDF, I believe) regarding LARPs in the 90s, including devil worship and the like. When I told my parents about my interest in D&D, my mother got rather concerned because of that and send my father with me to the store to get my first gaming materials.
The bloody clerk steered my towards The Dark Eye, because D&D allegedly was "too complicated" for my young, teenage mind.
I did have some success. One of my fellow RL players ran an online campaign in the FR for a group of international friends. We made it through to the end (though the sequel fell apart).
The other games I tried didn't work. I guess the trick is to find players who don't think they are writing a novel. That means describing their character's thoughts in excruciating detail, so you have to wade through all that useless chaff to filter out what the characters are doing and saying.
Me, too. I started relatively late with D&D and would want to try out Planescape, Dark Sun and Ravenloft. Alas, Planescape loses a lot in translation to another language and no one I know is interested in playing the other two.
I also own the Dresden Files RPG PDFs, which I didn't use to play it yet.
My group's not finished yet, but I'll bite.
1) 4. The unnecessarily huge amount of background information is scattered through the modules and contradicts itself frequently. You have to make a study out of it to get a clear picture of what's supposed to be going on. The maps are unusable as handouts and the layouts of the mayor's mansion as well as Walcourt look as if they were designed by Numerobis.
2) 4. The story is really disjointed and doesn't make much sense right from the start. Before I stopped following it (for the most part), my players got very frustrated at times. Take module 2 for example: The play itself is great. But the plan involving it to get into the mayor's party is much too complicated.
3) If you straighten out the plot, it's an 8. Unedited, it's a 5. You can find several good roleplaying opportunites, but the inevitable frustration among the players will lower their motivation to do so.
4) 6. There are a few very hard encounters for a standard party with PB 15 to be found, which could end in a TPK. It gets harder without a standard party, especially if there is no Cleric.
5) 4. Like Scaevola, I had to heavily modify the campaign, including changing the order of the module, dropping the last one and changing the plot. I may be dropping module 4, as well. (Which is a pity, because it looks to be the best of them all. Unfortunately, it doesn't fit well in the campaign.)
The whole thing was a mess of bad preparation and bad tactics from the start. The party noticed the ambush before it could start. They got hit by a few fireballs nonetheless, dispatched one thug quickly, incapacitated another and weakened a third. The party's wizard was injured pretty badly and used Greater Invisibility to hide, after which he struck at the attackers; the Druid wildshaped into a bird and resorted to aerial lightning strikes. The party's bruiser held his own against Kruthe, while the Wizard, Magus and Ilo dispatched the rest of the thugs. However, none of them could match Maglin's Stealth check result.
The party may be able to come up with the funds to get her raised, but they lack a cleric to go to, as they don't want to get involved with the church of Asmodeus.
Ross Byers wrote:
I though Space Orks just had a cockney accent.
I thought the inhabitants of Sigil spoke cockney.
ALSO, German is a rather rough dialect. I speak quite a lot because I lived there for 3 years.
Which German dialect would that be? They are pretty varied.
German is actually a very "open" sounding language, with regional dialects getting really soft (especially on the coast).
EDIT@Jeremias: I disagree that English is harsher than German. They are both pretty soft. If you want a harsh sounding language (and I don't mean this disparagingly), look to Arabic or Spanish.
But yeah: I find this whole idea rather silly, as well
Brom the Obnoxiously Awesome wrote:
Orc: Czech or German (again, rough and gruff)
Yeah, right. I take it you only heard these languages in Hollywood movies? And yes, you should explain why Halflings supposedly speak Maori.
At least you didn't give Dwarves a Scottish accent...
Insain Dragoon wrote:
Planar Binding OT:
If one of my player's characters was dumb enough to summon Barghests, Demons or Qlippoth, there would be repercussions.
Using Soul Eaters already is a gamble, at best, because if they fail to kill a target, they return and attack their summoner. And elementals have superiors.
I don't really know how far Gangelt is from Cologne or Aachen, but there is a Pathfinder Society Venture Captain for that region.
This is the official forum for Pathfinder in Germany (and in German). I linked the Gamer Connection subforum directly. It could be you get lucky there.
As far as new systems go: Don't get suckered into trying The Dark Eye (Das Schwarze Auge). Trust me.
Opening Paragraph wrote:
OK, here’s the thing: the head of the Venetian state was called a Doge. It’s a regional spin on Dux (or Duke) but that’s beside the point, because you’ll all be picturing that f*****g dog anyway. For a time I despaired and judged you in advance, finding you lacking and basic. But then I remembered that Venetians also named part of their land army “The Dalmatian Guard,” and there’s only so much self-sabotage I’m willing to mitigate. So have your giggles, and hopefully they won’t derail the story — because this one’s kind of sad.
I consider The Worldwound Gambit the best PF Tales novel to date. YMMV.
I half suspect that Nick gave Murphy one of the Coins (maybe Deirdre's) because of the dream Harry had and what his subconscious tells him later.
I also have been thinking for a long time now that Mac's the original Merlin.
Best line in the book: "You are a genuine Greek god. You're the Lord of the Underworld. And...you named your dog Spot?"
on the lester/jerry thing, I think they are being very heavy handed with lester's motivations and treatment on the show. Jerry was a normal guy who had big dreams and took steps that quickly escalated out of his control in the film. Lester was bullied by a classmate, his wife, and even his brother in ridiculous proportions. The film did a good job of making Jerry a belivable character where as lester is more like a caricature of a person in the show. IMO
Unfortunately, there are persons like Lester in real life.
I wont disagree with that Fabius.
I just wanted to underscore their differences. Both Lester and Jerry are somewhat similar, as they are both what you could call "losers". However, I remember Jerry as being more erratic and sloppy in his mannerisms, while Lester is so tightly wound he'd explode if prodded in the wrong place.
Maybe I should rewatch the movie, though.
The driving habits of their owner sure are fiendish.
Lemures and other evil outsiders are made from evil souls. They are evil incarnate. Azatoth isn't. He just exists.
And remember: Destruction can also be a good thing. Take forest fires, for example.
I've got another question about nascent demon lords. Under the obediences listed for Sithhud, Treerazer and Yamasoth, there are no profane boni mentioned, only the boons. Is that intentional?
I ask because it looks like an oversight. It's weird that they wouldn't grant the most fundamental bonus for an obedience. They are also the last three nascent demon lords in that chapter.
James Jacobs wrote:
Thanks. That does make sense.