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

Fake Healer's page

Pathfinder Society Member. 7,367 posts (9,896 including aliases). 8 reviews. No lists. 2 wishlists. 2 Pathfinder Society characters. 15 aliases.


1 to 50 of 7,367 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
The Exchange

"I made ready to leave, thanking the man for his time."
from Black Wings of Cthulhu: Twenty-one Tales of Lovecraftian Horror. This passage comes from Desert Dreams by Donald R. Burleson.
I only just started the book and am still on Pickman's Other Model....

The Exchange

Very nicely done. I love the use of dots instead of a grid or +'s at the corners of the makes the floor look more natural and clean. I usually do similar stuff for the larger/more memorable battles in a campaign and I like how you did this. Did you use a wire knife or carve it with an exacto knife?

The Exchange

Mark Thomas 66 wrote:

Yeah I've always figured all conversation comes to a screeching halt when a high level sorceror walks into the room.

Ever stood next to a top notch professional athlete on game day...a sorcerer gives that off.....all the time.

There's a reason some mages hang in the back.

Another example is actor/resses. People get all flustered talking to a person of fame that they recognize. Not all people, but a good amount. George Clooney/Brad Pitt/Norman Reedus/Halle Berry walks into someplace and they are now the topic of conversation and getting all the focus. If a hero with a 25+ charisma wants to go about without being noticed it is gonna take a disguise check (which may have some difficulty adjustment based on local/regional fame).

The Exchange

DM_Blake wrote:
Triune wrote:
I think all of the responses along the lines of "well, if you think about it realistically, this type of character would be screwed over" to be entirely missing the point. This is not a video game. The purpose of the game is to HAVE FUN. If one of the players isn't having fun as a result of your DMing choices, you have failed, end of story. DMs hold all the cards and as such shoulder the lion's share of responsibility. If a player comes to you with a one trick pony before the campaign that you, using the knowledge exclusive to you as a DM, know will not work, it is your responsibility to warn them. That's why they went to you in the first place.

No, that's going too far.

Sure, I agree, the GM should make the game fun for everybody. But the players cannot be childish about it (unless they actually are children). I'm not trying to say the OP or anyone else is childish, but I am trying to say that some players DO have a childish mentality that goes like this: "I have made a one-trick-pony character that must devastate all encounters and if the GM doesn't let me devastate every encounter then the GM is being a big fat bully and it's no fair!"

That's silly and childish.

Now I'm sure nobody posting here has that kind of mentality, but some of the posts on this thread seem to be suggesting that it's a GM's responsibility to handle every player as if they did have it.

I disagree.

It's also the player's responsibility to know his limitations and expect the game-world to occasionally throw him a curve ball that makes him deal with adverse situations.

Triune wrote:
I think a lot of players get trapped in a PFS mindset. One of the major advantages of a home game is that you can play that odd character that wouldn't work anywhere else. You can play a one trick pony that normally wouldn't work because you can trust the DM not to dick you over.
If I make a kobold-slayer with favored enemy kobold, bane weapons vs. kobolds, and every trick I can imagine to make me...

I disagree with your example because this isn't about being a kobold killer and expecting to only fight kobolds. This is more like kobold killer going up against kobolds who are suddenly immune to his damage. The GM made a race of people that is totally immune to a dude that is supposed to be good at controlling people. He created a race to specifically nullify a character's ability with foreknowledge of the character. He could have said "they all have +4 to enchantment saves" but he didn't, he made them immune. This is more like "well the kobolds in this area of the world actually descended from the heavens and technically aren't kobolds so your favored enemy, bane, and all the anti-kobold stuff you have doesn't work on them.

That's bad GMing whether it was intended or not, and even if not intended it should be something the GM sees going on and corrects it. It's bad form.

The Exchange

Between this and the Eberron supplement they put out I am happy. I like the new features, classes and such that they are putting out. They are seeming to be very well balanced against the core despite some not liking some of the ways they are balancing stuff. I love it. Also even if I don't want to add in Eberron stuff, I can reflavor and rename stuff to fit however I feel and it all helps to increase some of the player's options.

The Exchange

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Back to the original topic.....
In life I generally give a degree of trust unilaterally to everyone. I tend to take people at face value and assume they aren't actively out to screw me over. As those people perform actions in life around me I give or take away trust depending on the action. The initial degree of trust is usually rather low and grows or shrinks rather quickly.
I follow a similar method with D&D/Pathfinder GMs. When I GM a game tell the players the rule that are available and how I run a game. I tell them that I roll in the open and the dice fall where they fall. I explain that they are the stars and I am setting the stage for them to tell a story.
When I am a player I come to the table with expectations that I am part of a team of people trying to have fun and create a cool story.
I have seen GMs that after several sessions I realized that they are telling THEIR story, not a story of the characters, and there was no variation from their plotline or deviation from how they wanted things to play out. This has shown up as on-the-spot-rules to de-power a player or empower a bad guy that MUST make his showing, or in GM fiat that eliminates a player's action.
I have seen 4-5 bad GMs in my gaming life of around 34 years. I usually figure out after a few sessions what a GM is like and then I decide if I can adjust to their style or not. I have been blessed with long-term groups in the past with good GMs, and I love GMing so it usually works out well but before those and now recently I am finding that since I moved away from long-time group, there are some bad GMs out there.
Currently my tolerance level is lower than usual but I still portion out the trust and try to back that up with privately voicing concerns with GMs if there is something going on that I don't particularly like. If they choose to totally ignore my concerns then I can see that there is a gap between our play styles that either I have to bridge or I have to walk away and find a new game.

I am currently in a game where the GM is using some vague houserule for passing through ally's squares, perception checks for looking past allies into a combat and random ridiculous checks for stuff that is covered in the rules but doesn't fit his view of things and when approached about it was dismissive and showed no concern for my opinion (which mirrors most of the other player's). The group is planning to split shortly with me and another player going to alternate GMing.

The Exchange

So no one has any ideas if there is a Lands of Mystery download somewhere with the labels removed....or any of the old Maps of Mystery?

The Exchange

I miss seeing West maps and Dungeon mag (the print version). That said I am gonna use Lands of Mystery as my campaign world in an upcoming series of campaigns and was wondering if there is a good quality download of it somewhere and maybe a download that has the labels removed (or some of them, don't really mind the regional stuff like "The Inner Sea" and cities but would like ruins and such to disappear). Glad to see I am not the only one with a Maps of Mystery folder of all Dungeon Mags old offerings. It was a Golden Age.

The Exchange

bookrat wrote:
I ban the CRB.

I banned Pathfinder. When I was running Pfinder I saw broken stuff all the time and if you didn't purposely look for every angle in every class/race/feat combo you would be surprised sooner or later. Higher level combat was a combo of rocket tag and endurance simulation with hour long combats being more and more frequent.

I switched to 5E D&D and it is so much easier to play and run and if I want an option for my idea that isn't covered, it is easy to create an option to cover it. I haven't been this happy with a game system since early Basic D&D and maybe Legend of the 5 Rings.

The Exchange

So does RavingDork intend to mount his cock and ride it a lot? If so there are some other feats he should be looking at....

The Exchange

The game is realtime combat with the ability to pause. I read an article a few days ago about it and it spelled that part out. I personally prefer the option to switch from realtime with pause and turn-based (especially the turn-based when playing a single-player game that has a party). I have played a couple of games a long time back that had that ability but don't remember their names, only that I enjoyed the combat aspect of them immensely.

The Exchange

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I don't have a problem with the books or the movie's kink and sex parts. It is fine. What I have a problem with is outside of is a story about a dude who is using mental and verbal abuse to reduce his girlfriend's mental image of herself into her being nothing but his property to do with as he pleases, not just in a sexual manner. He is imposing martial law over her entirety. If you replaced the BDSM elements with straight up beatings, punching, yelling and such you would see better the controlling abuse and mental breaking down of the victim until she has no self-worth and is nothing without her man.
Why women see this as a sexual awakening film is beyond me. I like BDSM, participated in some cool stuff and have no issues with such but is there really a large population of women in the world that want to lose all self worth and be nothing but a meat-puppet for some spoiled brat to play with? I don't think so. I think some are interested in the BDSM parts and purposely blinding themselves to the mental and verbal abuse that goes beyond the bedroom games.

The Exchange

BTW, Hollow's Last Hope and it's followers were written up for 3.5 but the conversion is so terribly simple....just swapping out monsters and some skill updates....that I didn't feel like it was a detractor to it's worth as an easy to run adventure.
Just an FYI...

The Exchange

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I will agree with the people saying Rise of the Runelords and Crypt of the Everflame, but here is an option you should definitely explore.....

Hollow's Last Hope. It is a FREE download of a Free RPG Day adventure that has 32 reviews on this site and 4.5 stars out of 5.
I thoroughly enjoyed the module and if you like it there are several other adventures set in the area that can be tacked on to create a mini-campaign, all of which are great modules. Crown of the Kobold King, Carnival of Tears, Hungry are the Dead....all modules that add onto the region of Falcon's Hollow (the main town in Hollow's Last Hope) and expand on the area and campaign. There is also the Guide to Darkmoon Vale that gives a ton of info on the region...64 pages of it!
But like I was saying....for a free, short adventure to test the waters you should absolutely check out Hollow's Last Hope. At worst it isn't what you want, at best you took a risk-free step into a campaign based around 4 adventure modules and a regional supplement book with a ton of details to flesh out your campaign.

Good luck and have fun.

The Exchange

Vic Wertz wrote:
... because he's a fictional character?

Boooo!!!! Party foul! You suck, Wertz, way to break the mood!


The Exchange

D to the O to the T.
And Thanks Lorathorn...having a consolidated list of resources is really cool and make life easy. You rock!

The Exchange

Legowaffles wrote:

I once amused myself with the idea of a Handy Haversack containing about 1,000,000 Type 4 Bags of Holding. The goal being to have enough carrying capacity (spread out though it was) with a strength score of five to literally steal a castle (brick by brick by brick) whilst still being under a light load.

I didn't actually know about a Fortifying Stone. I assume you could not use multiple Fortifying Stones on the same item and benefit from all of them however.

"Extradimensional Spaces

A number of spells and magic items utilize extradimensional spaces, such as rope trick, a bag of holding, a handy haversack, and a portable hole. These spells and magic items create a tiny pocket space that does not exist in any dimension. Such items do not function, however, inside another extradimensional space. If placed inside such a space, they cease to function until removed from the extradimensional space. For example, if a bag of holding is brought into a rope trick, the contents of the bag of holding become inaccessible until the bag of holding is taken outside the rope trick. The only exception to this is when a bag of holding and a portable hole interact, forming a rift to the Astral Plane, as noted in their descriptions."

Placing Bag of Holdings in a Handy Haversack or vice versa makes them cease to work. No castle in bags for you.

The Exchange

2 people marked this as a favorite.
MAJT69 wrote:

No, by 'vendor trash' I meant:

"Okay, the fight's over, you search the bodies and find 20 +1 items."

"Okay, stick 'em in the Bag of Holding and we'll sell them back at town.'

In other words, extraneous low-level magic items that exist only to be sold to shops. My players seriously think it undervalues the concept of magic. They want something other than 'Diablo' or similar games where trash loot is commonplace.

So you want a game that fixes the Christmas Tree Effect and the rampant magic items everywhere? That is 5E. I don't understand where you are getting that 5E is going to be mostly represented by MMOs and boardgames...they have slowed down with the supplement books a bit from their past, but they are focusing on good adventures and quality supplements. You have knee-jerked the system based on absolutely zero understanding of how the game is progressing...hit the forums and troll around and you will see more about the path forward, unless you already closed off your mind to 5E. It really is an awesome game for eliminating the magic mart/christmas tree syndrome.

Pathfinder is almost impossible to make work in the same way without massive houserules and such.

The Exchange

Go old school and convert the 3.5 Dungeon mag adventure path Savage Tide. It's too fun not to run through and there is thorough posting on this site about the problem areas and how to correct some of the problematic higher-level stuff.
Diseased Savage Monkeys are too awesome not to unleash upon a group that may have never see such....

The Exchange

Plastic tool and screw/nail organizers work really well and you can label the chambers with sharpies to tell what minis are where without having to root around. Any soft foam can serve to cushion and line the box to keep metal minis from being damaged.
The best part.....they are cheap and they come in a huge variety of sizes and configurations so they can meet whatever need you have.
Lowes or Home Depot. Good luck.

The Exchange

You can't is the proper answer....even fantasy RPGs see archery as a stand still and shoot with a quiver of arrows type of combat style. I think 5E has a better chance of getting close though with movement being something that can be broken up any way you want with attacks spaced within the movement wherever you wish.

The Exchange

Southeast Jerome wrote:

Hmmmmm, official announcement doesn't mention anything about the Adventurers Handbook. Looks like there will be a free PDF with adventure-specific player options, instead. The Princes of the Apocalypse HC will include "new elemental spells and the element-touched genasi as a new playable race," and the free download will include "more new races plus the player content available in Princes of the Apocalypse."

Not bad.

Adventurers Handbook is scrapped. Mike Mearls made several statements about how Wizards sometimes make plans that change and that mock-ups and proposed covers are not necessarily a guarantee that a product is getting made.

People on the Wizards forums are guessing that the stuff that was to become the Adventurer's Handbook was either too little to warrant a book or some of it was subpar and Wizards decided to merge parts into the Elemental Evil product. There is also going to be a free download of the player content for EE out in March that includes new stuff like possibly race(s), Class(es), spells, and other such.

The Exchange

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Chengar Qordath wrote:
Ascalaphus wrote:

Alchemical Allocation is pretty powerful, in that it basically makes something free that would otherwise be living beyond your means (regular use of higher-level potions). I'm not convinced publishing it was a good move. Of course, now that it exists, I'm using it too.

And then there's this Elixir. I'm fairly confident that whoever wrote the elixir, and whoever wrote Alchemical Allocation, did not expect those two to be used. I mean, now that both of them exist, it makes sense to use it, but it's not likely something that the writer(s) planned. It's just an unexpected combination.

I can see how a GM would be frustrated that you bypassed an adventure. The first time, it'd be annoying but the right thing to do would be to say "well, I didn't see that coming.. you're not getting loot from the encounters you never ran into of course, but you're well on your way with your main mission". The second time, he could've been ready for it;

- You still actually need to get to the hostage. He could plan the challenge of the adventure more around getting in than around getting out.

- You might have encounters on the shadow plane. And given how you're getting there at relatively low level, that could be scary.

- Since you don't have a lot of control on where you exit, you might stumble into a random encounter on exit. That could just be a fight, but it could also be something more creative, like in the middle of a tense negotiation between two organized crime cartels. Who now both think the others hired the PCs for a double-cross, so there's this confusing three-way battle.

Have to agree with this. Part of the GM's job is to roll with the punches when your players come up with something legitimately clever.

Yup, too often GMs use "No" as their answer to rolling with the punches or they just plain ban stuff. I can understand that they don't want to be steamrolled but a good GM would find a countermeasure and use it sparingly to show that there is some risk to using a certain action....not that they should constantly use the countermeasure but slip it in enough that the PC knows that the exploit isn't free and without risks.

The Exchange

♣♠Magic♦♥ wrote:
That's a mace. Morningstar is a mace with a chain attaching the ball to the stick instead of directly.

Not correct per Pathfinder/3.5...a morningstar is a shaft with a spikey round head, a mace is a shaft with a variety of different head styles, usually fluted. A flail is like either but with a head attached to the shaft by a length of chain.

Not accurate historically but that is how it pans out in PRPG and 3.5.

The Exchange

1 person marked this as a favorite.
R_Chance wrote:

Another older player here. I started playing D&D in 1974. I'm 56 :) 5E is looking pretty good. For me, it's about the world and the adventure, not the perfect character build.

I started in '79 and I feel the same way...the personality I instill in the character has more to do with who he/she is than any mechanics. I love the options presented in 5E and think that they make a great base to build on. I find the game to be quick, fun and easy to play. This is a welcome relief after spending huge tracts of time creating PCs, NPCs, and customizing monsters. I haven't DMed 5e much but I find that enjoyable also.

Kthulhu wrote:

I prefer games where you spend more time adventuring with the character than creating him / leveling him up.

Also agreed...the games I have played in 5E have awesome pacing to them and at the end of a night I feel like we have accomplished something and advanced the storyline well. In 3.5/Pathfinder I found that often a whole night was spent clearing 2-3 rooms of a dungeon and it sometimes took weeks to get out of dungeon combat mode and into some story advancement.

The Exchange

Kthulhu wrote:
David Bowles wrote:
SR went from shutting down spells to giving "advantage" on saving throws. Another gutted ability in 5th.

3.0 also gutted Spell Resistance. It was much stronger in all the pre-d20 editions, which you have made perfectly clear that you hold in complete contempt.

Of course, I"m making the assumption you actually know anything about them and aren't just mindlessly hating them because they aren't 3.x/PFRPG. Something I've seen on these boards a few times.

Also if we look at advantage/disadvantage the numbers are roughly a +4.5 or -4.5 on average which is a pretty nice bonus to saves. I found the older version of the caster rolling to overcome was usually just a matter of rolling higher than a 5 in most cases if you built to be fairly decent at overcoming SR. I like 5E's approach because it steamlines the mechanical aspect while making it a significant boost.

The Exchange

7 people marked this as a favorite.
David Bowles wrote:
Laurefindel wrote:
David Bowles wrote:
I'm mostly dismayed at how much play testing and development went into 5th and that the final result is so underwhelming.

David, stating your opinion is one thing, trolling is another... please cut it out.

There's a fine line, isn't there?

Yeah, back about 10 pages of puking on anyone's opinion that likes 5E was the line.

The worst thing I keep hearing from you is "they sure did nerf this or that". No they didn't. They built a new and different game with different parameters for how much damage, what average attack modifiers are, etc.. You keep acting like this is Pathfinder 2 and that damage output, AC, to hit, etc. all should be matching up or it is nerfed. It is a new system that operates in it's own parameter and it does it well despite you hating on it for not being just a new Pathfinder/3.5 clone.
Stop trolling, it is getting old and is making you look petty and juvenile.

The Exchange

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Steve Geddes wrote:
David Bowles wrote:

"since your PCs aren't going to be facing creatures built using the PC rules which probably changes the analysis "

Why not? It doesn't make any sense not to fight other PC classes. PCs are not unique in the world. Throwing that out is a mistake, I think. It also ties the GM's hand in terms of fighting fire with fire when it comes to PC builds.

Whatever ones preferences, that's not how 5E is designed to work. It doesn't have the same simulationist approach that pathfinder does in that realm.


"The classes which "lose" multiple attacks "gain" other features and it's difficult to view one feature in isolation (it's not right to consider the various class features as a change - its a different approach to encapsulating a similar concept)"

I'm not sure how anyone can claim that the cleric didn't lose way more than it gained from PF.

My point is that there wasn't a switch from pathfinder to 5E. They're two different approaches to representing similar concepts.

The risk in thinking of it as a change from the pathfinder default is you focus on one difference and interpret it as a "reduction in power" based on how that feature would work if it were imported to a pathfinder game.

I have a friend tossing up between rogue and fighter, for example. He's building spreadsheets, running simulations and doing what he enjoys with character building. The fighter gets more attacks than the rogue, yet the rogue can out damage the fighter (just) - paying for that damage in a reduced survivability. It's not immediately obvious that the two classes' DPRs are going to track so similarly. He hasn't got any interest in a cleric, so I haven't seen similar analysis - nonetheless, I'd be willing to bet there's some feature a 5E cleric gets that a pathfinder cleric doesn't which mitigates the lack of multiple attacks.

Well said and this covers most of my 5E experience so far. It is a different game and saying "allowing movement between the various attacks is powerful and uber" is flat out wrong because in 5E it is balanced. In Pathfinder it would be broken without overhauling the rules a bit to incorporate it.

i wish people would stop hating on 5E without even trying it....just go through the introductory adventure that takes you from 1st to 5th level and you will have a great idea on how well the system performs as a whole. It is elegant, fun, and fast in combat. I also love that the game gives a bit more creative license back to the's refreshing.

The Exchange

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pan wrote:
captain yesterday wrote:
i like the picture of the halfling in the player's handbook, makes me laugh every time i see it at the bookstore:-)
Yeap, I laugh too as I toss the book on the shelf and pass on buying it.

I hated 4E, but I gave 5E a chance and I am glad I did. If you pass it up for a drawing without even looking at it, then you do yourself an injustice and should be cursing your closed-mind. It isn't perfect but is a good game with some good ingenuity and some nice mechanics. I was staunchly Pathfinder and now I am swayed to 5E and it's elegant simplicity and a return to D&D.

The Exchange

My DM is having us make perception checks throughout combat, not just during surprise. Three rounds in the people in the back still need to make perception checks to see if they can see the bad guy thats been fighting their buddies....
I will have to remember that about Dwarven vision though. It's really irritating how much they keep changing that from edition to edition...I still remember infravision and such...

The Exchange

Terquem wrote:

But if the same sort of situations came up in one of my games, say a PC wanted to "notice" an enemy approaching and there were people between the PC and the enemy (a crowd, friends, whatever) I would categorize the DC of the active Skill Check as either Medium DC 15(2-10 people)or Hard Dc 20 (11+ people) and then apply Disadvantage to the roll if the conditions of Light or such things as smoke or fog applied

So you would rule that in a lit room your 2 allies being between you and an enemy 20 feet away would require a DC 15 perception check to even see that the enemy is there? That seems a bit harsh and would make bars and malls IRL really odd places.

The Exchange

So on the vision thingy- If I am a dwarf standing 10 feet in front of my human friend who is carrying a light source giving off 20 feet of light, I can see 10 feet in the light and then 50 feet with darkvision, or can I only see 10 feet and after that darkvision is nulled because the light is within my square?

The Exchange

Adjule wrote:

Are these things that your DM has said happen? Or are these things you think should be happening but the DM doesn't?

The DM is currently ruling in these ways and I have only seen rules that contradict those's frustrating me because I really am trying to stay as close to real rules as possible as we test the system but some of these "houseruley" type of rulings just seem to be slowing down the game and adding in weirdness by making people have to make odd checks to move through allies squares and even seeing if there is an enemy 20 feet away if an ally or 2 are in between the looker and the enemy. I want to gather information to present actual rule info when the weirdness pops up next.

The Exchange

Also what about soft cover or targeting enemies with allies in between you and the enemy? Is there a rule that either gives an advantage/disadvantage or something?
My DM has been running pretty loose on the rules and I want to iron some of this out so I can play the game by the rules instead of by some loose houserules if at all possible.

The Exchange

Is there a rule about making a perception check or something to see an enemy when there is an ally or 2 between you and the enemy?
What about darkvision, does a torch in the area totally negate it or does it work outside of the torch area?
How about moving through a friendly pc's space during combat, is there a check to do it or is it ok as long as you don't end movement in an occupied square?

The Exchange

4 people marked this as a favorite.

I'm sorry to say this but as soon as any person says "Quit being a baby" when I express dislike of a ruling or gaming situation I am done with that person. Who the f**k thinks they can talk to someone like that without a bunch of players that don't want to play with a bully GM? Even if I was one of the other players in the game I would have been out, how dare you disrespect and degrade another player in front of everyone...I don't want to around people like this in a paying job or life in general, why the hell would I put up with that treatment during my fun recreational time.
Most of my old groups would have banded together and told him to leave. We play a co-op game, not a GM is God VS the players.

The Exchange

penut88 wrote:
I want to run rise of the rune lords but my players don't seem to be intrested in playing a prewrittin campange what can I do to intice them a bit more

Sandpoint can be an excellent sandbox to start is a town with a lot going on in and around it. A little bit of prep work can make it more accessible as an open area with some good leads to draw them in different directions. Write up an old fashioned flow chart with all the stuff in the area and any possible side leads....then you can see things clearer and adjust to the party roaming the town exploring as they wish.

The Exchange

bugleyman wrote:

The 5E PHB and MM did not disappoint me; I have no reason to believe the 5E DMG would, either.

On the other hand, if they truly do miss the mark as completely as you fear, I'm reminded of Hanlon's Razor (though I'd substitute "incompetence" for "stupidity.")

I agree. I am loving the PHB and MM, I can't imagine the DMG being a sudden departure from what is already laid out. I will wait until I hold it, have read through it, and have used some of it in game before I condemn it....5e thus far has earned the benefit of the doubt to me.

The Exchange

Had a dog chew up 15-20 of my Forgotten Realms and Dragonlance novels.... He grew out of that kinda stuff though rather quick and was a pretty cool dog, a basset hound with 10" long ears. Broke my heart when she passed. Long-bodied and barrel-chested dogs sometime have their stomachs twist up on them pinching off blood vessels and their throat and intestines. I learned about that from her on Christmas night 2007.
Ah well, I still have a few of the half-chewed reminders lying around sans covers and mostly unimportant pages to remind me of the little darling.

The Exchange

2 people marked this as a favorite.

If a friend of 25 years walks out over something that had this much meaning to you then I would seriously re-evaluate the friendship and see where it actually ended, because it's been over for a while if it ever really was in the first place. A friendship is about give and take and compromise, like any relationship.

The Exchange

I love the one post that says "i told him not to turn to page 74!"...too funny. Much respect for a man who wrote books that not only helped foster a love of reading in me but expanded my sense of fantasy, make-believe, and creativity. Thank you for entertaining your passion and entertaining my younger mind. I am saddened but glad to know that the legacy is passed on to my kids....
If you agree with this post turn to page 93.
If not turn to page 4.

The Exchange

Kirth Gersen wrote:

I love my daughter. I can't wait until she's old enough to play.

That said, I also love a beer-fueled adult game, full of moral ambiguities, insanely convoluted plot lines, savage revenge, all kinds of NC-17 goings-on offstage, etc. And I would not really want her playing in such a game at age 12. I would not want to forcibly mix the two, or dilute the one, or whatever.

Instead, I would try like hell to have two separate games, one PG-13 and one R, if you will.

Explaining to the 12-year-old that there are two different games, one which he's allowed to play, and one that he's not, shouldn't be too different than explaining why he's not allowed to watch movies with "Emmaneulle" in the title. Yeah, it's slightly awkward, but doable.

*Wall O' Text*

This is kinda where I am at. I love playing as an adult with my "how much is a night going for, strumpet" character partying it up. However I also think that bringing new blood into the game is good. It sounds like the OP is solo-gaming with his son on the side and has his son around during game sessions (freely roaming around the house at the time) so in theory the game is already somewhat being played at a level that a 12 year old is able to be present without wondering why the barbarian is "paying those 3 ladies to spend the night with him and what are they smoking?".
I take my adult game away from the kids, and if there is a kid nearby it quickly gets cleaned up for their presence so I assume that the OP's current game is somewhat kosher for the kid. I am wondering if there is some underlying issue with the kid....does he act bratty, show lack of attention, or poor sportsmanship when the group is around and they are reacting to that and not the age issue?
If you could iron out the whys you may have a better idea of how to incorporate the kid into the game.

I would also suggest that maybe you run a once a month game in place of the regular game where the kid can play with the group, and ask the group to help make him into a good player by offering RP tips, tactical suggestions, helping with attentiveness and good sportsmanship....if it works out over the course of a couple months and the players are feeling good about his gameplay then adding him to the regular group would be much better received and the transition much easier. If it doesn't work out after a few sessions then you can drop the once a month thing and wait until the kid is more ready. During the time, after games, offer your boy gentle critiques on his behavior, how he RPed, social cues and such....remember that we all had to develop to be good gamers (and some are still having issues with it after years of gaming!) and that you and your friends are trying to make a good gamer. A lot of people wish they had a good system of guidance to help them become good gamers instead of trial and error until we got better.

The Exchange

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Draco Bahamut wrote:

I would love to play a "low magic" magic game, but i guess i simple don't have the time for it.

I often wonder if what many GMs really wanted is a SLOWER game, where people has time to discuss the lore about that +1 longsword, or tracking over half the kingdom a potion seller who has potions of cure moderate wounds. After years and years of campaing, people deserve to be teleporting around the continent because they already been everywhere.
Some people long for a more literally game how was played back then in 1E. But nowdays everything is fastpaced, you didn't even used that 3rd level spell and you already learning the 4th.

I guess it's sad.

Yup, pcs can hit 20th level in a couple of months of adventuring. I love a slower paced game. I liked the years of campaigning to get a character to grow. Everyone seems to be on a "1-20 in as quick a timeframe as possible then onto the next PC". We used to cherish the journey and now it seems to be all about the destination. It is sad...and I have seen quite a few times where I got new shiny abilities without using the ones gained 2 sessions ago when I leveled before. I want a slow burn, lots of downtime, not gaining 2-3 levels in one adventure/dungeon. Even on slow XP rate it isn't slow enough for me. I want to play once a week for 3-4 hours each time and take a year to get to level 6. Another year to get to 12....I want to invest in my PC instead of keep wishing for more and more faster and faster until I wish my PC into retirement because the campaign was over so quick....

The Exchange

Dazing Metamagic rod instead of Extend....that's all.

The Exchange

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Werebat wrote:

Great question, Ragnarok.

I started playing D&D way back in the red box days.

We moved on to AD&D, then 2nd Edition, then 3rd Edition. When 4th Edition rolled around, I and my gaming group (mostly friends from college by that point) decided it wasn't for us and liked the feel of Pathfinder more.

I guess you could say it felt like a better progression of the rules to us.

I personally liked how PF guided players away from multiclassing mayhem, beefed up some classes that needed it (sorcerer, for example), and rewrote some of the more problematic 3.5 options such as the Scout class in order to bring them back down to earth.

Today we play Pathfinder because we're still running one campaign that started about three years ago, and the other GM who is just starting out is using PF because he's most comfortable with it. The general consensus seems to be that we're getting ready to move on to 5th Edition D&D, though.

PF has just become too "bloated" for our tastes -- there are many ways to describe this, but the one that comes to mind first (because I've been doing it this week) is that it takes forever to pore over every PF book that exists trying to build characters for fear of missing some interesting or competitive option. Don't look at me like that -- if there's ONE powergamer at the table, EVERYONE has to be one or they'll be swimming in his wake the entire campaign.

So, the short answer would be -- I switched to PF because I didn't like what I saw in 4e, but I expect I'll soon be switching to 5e because I'm seeing it as a possible refinement of PF, or maybe a palatable synthesis of 3.5 and 4e, as I realize PF has grown to have lost much of what I liked about it in the first place.

I switched to 5e a couple months ago and it is refreshing....the bloat from PF made higher level games a grind and lower levels were a constant scouring of books so you didn't miss something that your character would love. I may look at Pathfinder 2 when/if it comes out but D&D 5 would have to really make some mistakes with splatbooks to lose me now.

The Exchange

I am gonna be running a one-shot for Next week, 5E, and I need 7 or 8 pregens for the game....
I am looking for odd combos of race and class, 3rd level, with basic equipment...
Any help would be welcome. For stats I want to stick with the basic array in the PHB.

The Exchange

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Kirth Gersen wrote:
What I want to know is, does it rhyme with "Zebu?"

And more importantly is a Zebu the same as a "Cebu?

Sad cebu is rowing and crying "Boo-hoo Moo-moo, Boo-hoo Moo-moo, Boo-hoo Moo-moo moo mooo."

The Exchange

Kirth Gersen wrote:
Fake Healer wrote:

I didn't have a Phantom Cat instance but I remember something distinctly when I was younger, around 6 or so, and we lived in an old 2-story farmhouse in South Jersey. I woke up one night, looked across my room and saw my Lion piggy-bank(Cartoony character, not a realistic lion) climb down off of my dresser, using the handles of the drawers to climb down. I was terrified and it felt like my throat was paralyzed and my body refused to move. I could hear it coming across the wooden floor to my bed. I felt the pull of the covers at my feet where it had grabbed them and started pulling itself up onto my bed. Then I heard the sound of ceramic tinking against my footboard as it hauled itself up and I finally was able to scream and I continued until my mother and father were both in the room holding me as I cried hysterically. They asked me what was wrong and when I could speak enough I said "my lion-bank was coming to get me..." they looked at my dresser and didn't see it then they looked around the room. It was lying on floor by the foot of my bed.

I slept with them for several weeks after that. I had several weird things happen in that house while we lived there but nothing that was so real and that stuck with me in such detail. I don't know if it was a creative nightmare or something else but I am open to the possibilities...
Poor kitteh just wanted to be petted.

I explain it away in my rationality as I must have dreamed it after messing with my Lion-bank and leaving it on the floor and my dream used that....but I don't remember messing around with the Lion-bank before and it was always on my dresser, complete with dust-ring around it.

The Exchange

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I didn't have a Phantom Cat instance but I remember something distinctly when I was younger, around 6 or so, and we lived in an old 2-story farmhouse in South Jersey. I woke up one night, looked across my room and saw my Lion piggy-bank(Cartoony character, not a realistic lion) climb down off of my dresser, using the handles of the drawers to climb down. I was terrified and it felt like my throat was paralyzed and my body refused to move. I could hear it coming across the wooden floor to my bed. I felt the pull of the covers at my feet where it had grabbed them and started pulling itself up onto my bed. Then I heard the sound of ceramic tinking against my footboard as it hauled itself up and I finally was able to scream and I continued until my mother and father were both in the room holding me as I cried hysterically. They asked me what was wrong and when I could speak enough I said "my lion-bank was coming to get me..." they looked at my dresser and didn't see it then they looked around the room. It was lying on floor by the foot of my bed.
I slept with them for several weeks after that. I had several weird things happen in that house while we lived there but nothing that was so real and that stuck with me in such detail. I don't know if it was a creative nightmare or something else but I am open to the possibilities...

The Exchange

claudekennilol wrote:
Malag wrote:


While it might be true to what you say, per default game rules, nothing is sure. Cities usually have written "2d6 minor magical items, 1d6 major magical items, etc." which they currently have. These are default game rules for settlements and if GM decides to enforce it, it can change game direction a lot. Players will have to buy whatever is currently available or sit on their cash hoard and wait, hoping to get lucky.

Or take crafting feats and simply break the WBL standards. I'd much rather have whatever I want freely available than have someone take crafting feats and then simply buy whatever I want for half price.

Which is exactly what the players do when the GM implements the true "magic items available" rule.....

Tell them ahead of time that magic stuff is gonna not be whatever they want from the book and watch how you suddenly have monks and sorcerers and classes that don't rely on magic items that much....

1 to 50 of 7,367 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2015 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email 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.