Gotham Gamemaster's page

The most surreal part of this year thus far for me was the other day at dinner, when I asked my wife "For 28 years I've been telling folks I play D&D. It's a word like Kleenex. Even when I used to play Shadowrun or Warhammer others would ask 'how was D&D' or 'oh, they're playing D&D'. What do we tell folks we're playing now?"

And, my wife being oh both wise and kind said "just say D&D, it's all the same." Which is nice, but I among others place value on name recognition and I will be firmly telling folks I play Pathfinder and then explain that's it's 'real D&D'. Evolved, if you will.

-DM Jeff

It's odd for me as well. One of my players insists on using 3.75 (almost like a security blanket) but the rest of us say "Pathfinder."

One of the interesting side effects for me is that since I now play an "alternate" game I find myself now looking at True20 and other systems with genuine interest--whereas before I was 99.9% D&D pure. :)

GMed a 4-hour session of the Pathfinder Module: Carnival of Tears yesterday evening. We had four player characters and one NPC:

Human Sorcerer 5 (3.5 versIon)
Dwarf Wizard 5 (3P version)
Human Cleric 5 (3P version)
Halfling Rogue 5 (3P version)

and

Valeros, Fighter 5 (3.5 as published in back of module)

Almost all of the characters are making use of Pathfinder 1.1 with additional selections from Complete Arcane, Complete Mage, Complete Divine, and Spell Compendium--including reserve feats and the like. In addition, I made use of the Critical Hits and the Critical Misses decks.

The adventure is full of wild social encounters and bizarre combats. My attention as GM was drawn to portraying colorful NPCs, describing the odd atmosphere, playing background music, etc. I adjusted 0% of the published adventure to account for Pathfinder 1.1.

Here's my report--I don't have one! The whole thing ran together seamlessly and spectacularly as the event-based module marched to its dramatic climax. Fireballs exploded, beads of force erupted, swords sang, skill checks were made, saves were made---you name it, it happened and all of it hung together without any noticeable moments where one would say "Oh, that's Pathfinder changing the game!" or "What? These rules don't work together!"

Players and GM alike simply played the game and the blending of 3.5 and 3P happened entirely behind the curtains. I'm not the most mechanically-minded GM, but I thought that fact was worth mentioning on the boards.

in order to streamline the new sneak attack rules, my group has agreed that oozes, incorporeal undead, base elementals, and some constructs are immune to sneak attack. There was some debate over "skeletal" undead, but in the end we included them. We figure you can always break bones, tear muscles, cave in heads, etc. When all you are hitting is negative energy tied to a soul, that gets a little less plausible.

This is how our two Pathfinder playtest groups are playing it as well.

My thinking of backwards compatibility is that in 2009 when a person has a D&D3.5 character that he plays with in a group of people who are still playing D&D3.5, like how some people still play D&D2nd now, and this same person wants to sit in with a group that plays Pathfinder RPG this person will only have to 'plug in' or change maybe up to 5 minor things,add hit points, redo skills,ect.

Unless I am misreading everything that Erik, James, Jason & co. have been posting, it sounds like Souphin's definition could be adopted as the official one for describing "backwards compatibility."

Personally, I'd rather play in an adventure that I've read with a good GM than play in a game with a GM who feels his home-brew adventures are spun gold and isn't big enough to admit that, yes, pre-made adventures CAN be better than his home-grown ones.

It's gems like these that make wading through the storm of house rules that are pelting the Alpha Playtest boards worthwhile. As a GM with many pre-published adventures, you've just added another dimension in which I can enjoy the game.

Thanks for the insight, James. Please keep 'em coming!

So, are you asking that every deity have a martial weapon as their favored weapon? That wouldn't seem to fit flavor-wise with some deity concepts. But I see your point. What if the rule stated that if your deity's weapon is a simple weapon, you receive weapon focus with that weapon instead?

I think in the end, people that think Pathfinder should just be a straight republished 3.5 with new art and a Pathfinder logo are going to be disappointed, and that people that want a d20 fantasy game that is less tied to the archetypes of D&D (but not 4e) are going to be disappointed. In the end, I think Pathfinder will be between the two, but a lot closer to the "straight 3.5" side than the "new paradigm" side.

First off, excellent post. Thoughtful and well-said.

I think that there might be less controversy around such matters if Pathfinder was more accurately thought of as an alternate "4E" or "4E the way you wished it were done." What I mean by that is that the tweaks and improvements of Alpha are akin to the jump from 3.0 to 3.5 and the "3.75" descriptor winds up being a "neither fish nor fowl" descriptor.

Vic Wertz wrote:

Green Ronin's True20 conversion guides for the first two installments of Pathfinder are now available.

Are more to be expected/hoped for?

Rusty

From what I see on the True20 boards, it looks like Green Ronin is searching for volunteers to continue the conversions.

As for including sidebars for every change from 3.5..UGH.

I can't imagine how much this idea would unnecessarily increase the size of the rulebook---and how lacking it would be in terms of flow, presentation and self-identity. I also think it would be needlessly confusing to new players.

Having run elements of Shackled City, Age of Worms and Rise of the Runelords, I'd say that Paizo stretches four-player party design to the limits. Ideally, I like five players for the reasons others have mentioned---but I think the APs might work best with six. The APs seem about as tough as the Baldur's Gate and Icewind Dale computer games and the six person party worked well in both of those.

K wrote:

"Must all balance be combat balance?"

Yes. Next question?

Agreed.

Thirded.

And really, the goblins, and the hillbilly ogres, and the haunted mansion, these are what have shined in pathfinder so far. The actual story, the streets of magnimar, the first town you land in, the thorny forest, these have been so colorless and ignorable, that my players, and myself, have felt that these stories only exist to showcase the bizarre creations of creative minds, in small little windows in between the pieces of fluff that the designers expect everyone wants, but in reality, what we want is the unique haunts, the goblin chants and weapons, the gory hillbilly incest. Stone giants, dungeons under the town, these have been done.

Great observation. I see this discordance as a result of the Pathfinder adventures pushing the envelope in terms of adventure design and content--and not yet finding the sweet spot of convergence between the cutting-edge genre elements you mentioned and the classic dungeon medium these elements must be funneled through.

I want the dungeon under the town. I want the bigger baddie behind the big baddy--and the biggest baddy behind them all. They are core elements of the D&D experience. But, like you, I would like to see the "Pathfinder Goblin" facelift blend more seamlessly (and more integrally) into the dungeon experience.

I'm curious what my fellow Pathfinder GMs are doing with Alpha Playtest rules that they have tried but haven't liked (for either mechanical or non-mechanical reasons):

Do you retain the "undesirable" rule as written for the purity of the playtest and wait for changes from Paizo or do you create a new house rule on the spot?

As for myself, I'm going to keep any "undesirables" intact and allow Paizo to make the changes between now and the final ruleset--at which point, I'll take stock of things.

It seems like the whole 'turning undead' mechanic is intended to recreate the classic aversion that vampires (or other undead) have to crosses (or other holy symbols). I

Ah, this could be the key. But i believe the aversion should exist for vampires only and not the other forms of undead. Zombies in a "Living Dead" flick wouldn't blink twice at someone holding a crucifix. The aversion is too broadly applied when it covers all undead and robs them of their rightful menace.

I actually think healing and damage AND a fleeing effect is just too much. I'd rather see healing and damage and a 1 round daze effect (with no daze effect on a successful save vs. the damage). Undead just seem too easy to kill otherwise.

Hmm. I'm inclined to agree. Undead are meant to supply an element of horrot to the game--and watching them behave like Chicken Little in any way, shape or form isn't very scary.

Hmmm. Interesting observations. What about a feat that increases turning damage against undead? How useful was the ability against undead without turning resistance? What about increasing the frightened condition to the standard 3.5 system of 1 minute (10 rounds)?

There weren't any encounters with creatures without turn resistance but the 2d6 damage would seem balanced there (if the enemies were zombies), so perhaps it is the Resist Positive Energy 5 that's the problem. Good point!

As for the frightened condition, I think extending it is even worse. Fleeing the turner ends the encounter in an unsatisfying, undramatic (and inconclusive) manner.

RULE PLAYTESTED: Turning

EVENT: 4th-Level Cleric vs. various CR ghouls

THE GOOD: The healing effects of the cleric's positive energy burst seemed balanced and entertaining. In fact, a TPK would have almost certainly occurred without the new rules--saving the campaign in a stroke. The dungeon layout prevented the cleric from reaching injured party members with touch spells but the burst effect gave the cleric's injured allies just enough of a boost to continue fighting---but not too much that whatever threat they faced was diminished. Overall, my vote is 100% for the healing effects of the positive energy burst.

THE BAD: The damage inflicted by the 4h-level cleric's positive energy burst was minimal once turn resistance (with its resist positive energy effect) was taken into account and did not seem commensurate with the healing benefits provided by the same burst. Or in other words, turning seemed to function mainly as a mass heal with a few hps of damage offered to undead as an add-on.

THE UGLY: Frightened undead fleeing for 1d4+Cha rounds. Combatants fleeing the battlefield for brief amounts of time was awkward, silly and needlessly complicated (tracking particular creatures for X number of rounds as they paraded to and from the battle was neither dramatic nor sensible).

SUGGESTIONS:

1) Increase the damage effect of a turning burst from its current levels, but retain the healing effect at current levels. So a burst that did 3d6 damage, provides half that in healing (rounded down).

2) Replace the frightened effect with either shaken effect or a dazed effect.

3.5 DMG page 8

Multiple Characters

"Generally, it's best if you keep to one character per player. However, when players are few, you might allow them to run more than one character just to get the group size up to at least four characters."

The main reason we're doing the Pathfinder RPG ISN'T to introduce dramatic new changes to the game; you won't see a new flying PC race, for example, nor will you see alternate magic rules or a 12th core class.

James, thanks for the honest and informative response. At this point, I trust whatever approach you guys decide. And much like Green Ronin, my regard for Paizo's products is greatly enhanced by your participation on these and other boards.

Bruce is a solid writer. I think his involvement in the project bodes well for it being a cool campaign setting when all is said and done.

Yes. But the trashing of the historical Realms on the road to get there is the rub. Creatively, the Spellplague strikes me as the laziest sort of concept. Rather than present something new in an organic way from what has gone before, they hit the apocalypse button.

If Paizo were the caretakers of Faerun, I can't imagine your designers deciding on such a course of action. The "nuking" of the Realms--and not daily powers, skill points or any other crunch-- is the number one reason I choose Pathfinder Chronicles (and the Pathfinder RPG that supports it) for my game.

As typified by the Pathfinder goblin, the classic D&D world has plenty of life left.

Not saying this to stir up trouble, but rather in the hopes that the game can be steered closer to a slightly cleaned up 3.5. Things like big racial changes and specialist do-overs, while cool, don't belong in a product largely intended (by Paizo's own statements) to keep the 3.5 rules in print. I know designers want to design things, but don't hobble yourselves more than you already have. And I say that as a customer who loves your work.

This sounds like a request for Pathfinder to be a straight reprint of the 3.5 SRD. Why would anyone want to buy a reprint and why would Paizo want to sell it? It's free, it's online and it has been available in other forms from other publishers (Mongoose Pocket Handbook, etc.).

Pathfinder is the only thing it can be--an evolution of the 3e ruleset as opposed to the re-invention that 4e is.

Snorter wrote:

We'll just have to make sure he doesn't need to work for WOTC...

One more order for Indulgences Wave One coming up.

Much Like GVDammerung, I found myself turned off by some of Necromancer's 4e posturings--specifically, the announcement of a 4e "Adventure Path" on the heels of the introduction of Pathfinder RPG.

I found the timing of that particular announcement distasteful considering the relationship between the two companies and that (and not the fact that they will be 4e) has soured me on Necromancer's future products.

I would like to see the social skills combined into a single skill.

Have one "Yakking" skill, with several ways to do it; lying (bluff), reason or fellowship (diplomacy), or threats (intimidate).
All are communication, and as closely related as many other skill grouping. Let the different varieties have different effects and modifiers, and consolidate the skill list a bit more.

I agree with Sam here. A Negotiation skill to cover all aspects of interpersonal communication (with an understanding some use an intimidating style, others a more diplomatic approach, etc) with adventure writers giving set DCs and varying levels of tangible results (clues, assistance, rewards)--rather than vague attitude changes.

As a method-actor style roleplayer myself, I know I'm going to continue to use my accents and mannerisms in social encounters regardless of social encounter rules. The acting is just my preferred form of expressing myself and exists independent of the game. The quality of "roleplaying" can never be quantified in an objective manner---so hence mechanical rewards should not be tied to it. The acting style roleplaying is "ars gratia artis."

Adventure: The Skinsaw Murders
Event: Foxglove Manor (Suicide Compulsion Haunt)
Character: Zeric, Elf Fighter 2/Rogue 2 (Pathfinder RPG classes)

The chaotic Zeric, elven fighter-rogue and dual short sword wielder, grew weary of his new allies' cautious nature as they explored the haunted Foxglove Manor. Swords in hand, he kicked in the door of the bedroom before him and launched into the room.

Suddenly, a suicide compulsion swept over him (failed Will save). Without hesitation, the elf thrust his own neck onto a jagged piece of wood in a coup-de-grace suicide attempt. The wood ripped his jugular vein and Zeric expired soundlessly in his own blood (player rolled a natural 1 on the DC 14 Fort save to avoid death).

A new race wouldn't be core whether they were included in the final rulebook or not, it would be an included variant. Golarion's appeal lies in "classic world revisited" rather than "variant world"--the latter are plentiful enough on the market already.

So please, Paizo, no warforged, no tieflings, no dragonborn--those are the exact fantasy elements I'm seeking refuge from in Pathfinder Chronicles.

I don't expect Paizo will put out replacement 'Complete X' books or the like. Their selling point is modules and adventure paths, well written stories. Sure we'll see some class options in Pathfinder, but that will be it. They're still exploring Golarion, and that will take quite a bit of work.

After reading the Alpha Rules, I'm expecting (and hoping for) the opposite--that while Pathfinder should always easily accommodate 3e material, it also have to evolve that material with supplements of its own (like the Complete books). Ideally, those who have extensive 3e libraries can mine their out-of-print material at the same time that new fans can access currently available Pathfinder supplements.

If the idea is to create an entirely new RPG based on D&D, then I could support the approach.

That is not the idea. I don't think we can eliminate attribute scores and have a backward compatible game.

Thanks, Erik. I liken Paizo's approach to evolving 3.5 to Pathfinder to the entertaining and gratifying manner in which comics' scribe Geoff Johns is able to restore (and refresh) the continuity of DC's Comics oldest superheroes--without radical and divisive reboots.

(Does that make 4e the equivalent of One More Day?)

NO, Absolutely do NOT make action points a standard rule in Pathfinder. Preferably keep them out of the game entirely. As a GM, I would be robbed of way too many Player Character kills, and my players would be able to avert many foolish mistakes that would otherwise result in their demises with Action Points readily available.

QFT

Like the Prodigal Son, I have returned to my Pathfinder subscription with this bold announcement from Paizo. And, yes, I was all excited for 4e (to the point that I canceled my charter subscription all too hastily).

But when I finally realized that almost all of the material I have used for my D&D game for years has been from Paizo, coming home again was a no-brainer.

Golarion is a true delight and finding a way to spare it a dramatic and distasteful overhaul for 4e is cause for celebration, indeed.

Down with the Revolution! Long Live the Evolution!

Four Player Party (4e-Style Death & Dying Rules)

Tharazad, dwarven wizard from Janderhoff, was the only survivor of a horrific battle with Malfeshnekor. He returns to Sandpoint almost bereft of aliies. Luckily, Sheriff Hemlock is in Magnimar gathering a new wave of heroes to defend his beloved Sandpoint.

Here's the details (and one earlier death by Gogmurt's animal companion):

MyrtleMyrr
Male Gnome Cleric 3 (Gozreh)
"Burnt Offerings"
Malfeshnekor
This gentle cleric of Gozreh was a hero to the end. As his allies were being slaughtered before his eyes in Malfeshnekor's prison, MyrtleMyrr scurried around the battlefield saving them from death as best he could. Finally, the gnome's efforts caught the ire of vile Malfeshnekor--knowing the danger, the cleric tried to tumble past the beast, but the monster's jaws closed around MyrtleMyrr's vitals and the cleric was torn asunder into countless bloody bits. (I rolled 2 natural 20s on the bite attack)

Octavia
Female Half-elf Fighter 3
"Burnt Offerings"
Malfeshnekor
This lusty, brazen warrior had cut a bloody swath through the goblin hold of Thistletop with her magic greatsword--but she met her end at the claws of Malfeshnekor. Tragically, Octavia was the only one of the Heroes of Sandpoint who correctly surmised that their opponent might not be free to pursue them if they fled the chamber--however, the knowledge came just before two massive claws sent her into unconsciousness. She succumbed to her wounds shortly thereafter as the battle continued to rage. (Failed dying roll 3 times)

Rakvolt
Male Shoanti Ranger 3
"Burnt Offerings"
Malfeshnekor
This grim, no-nonsense archer from the Storval Plains refused to yield in battle with the beast Malfeshnekokr--despite the fact that neither his mundane bow or his native earth breaker were able to wound the beast. The ranger's reward for his courage were a barrage of bloody wounds that stole his life away. (Failed dying roll 3 times)

Milo
Male Halfling Rogue 2
"Burnt Offerings"
Gogmurt
This wry, comical halfling sneak's lack of wisdom proved his undoing--as his propensity for being unobservant combined with his propensity for sneaking ahead of his allies made for a fatal combination. He never saw the fire leopard that pounced on him and ripped his throat out until it was too late. His last sight was of a fetish-covered goblin chanting over his dying face.

To be honest, I like the "detail a world through adventures" approach. I've missed that about D&D. I'm not a big fan of the current approach where you just pump out sourcebooks for eternity.

The "living" worldbuilding method is one of the main attractions of Pathfinder. I actually hope we don't see a setting book--something about game environments becomes immediately moribund once a setting book is published.

Unpainted metal minis? Zero interest, I'm afraid. I view painting miniatures and playing D&D as two completely separate and unrelated hobbies---I have no talent in painting, neither the time nor patience to learn, and no workspace inside my apartment to be be used for painting.

I really was blown away by all the fun fluff for Pathfinder goblins. I'd love to see a book compiling all the monsters used in Rise of the Runelords -- after it's done, or before, whichever -- with all the fluff, the stats and Wayne's reimagined looks, all in one volume, an alternative Monster Manual, as it were.

Failing that, just a book collecting all the fluff between two covers (including sketches or paintings showing the reimagined looks) would be well-liked.

At this point in D&D's history, I'm ready for a new fresh look at a lot of these monsters, and if the goblins are any indication, your take on things will be one I'll want to incorporate into my regular game.

I'm with Whizbang 110%---Wayne Reynolds' re-imagined goblins captivated me. An existing, classic SRD monster with new life breathed into it is much more exciting and interesting (and useful!) to me as a DM than one more new monster---there are dozens of new beasties from Wizards but very, very few of them have the cache that the classic monsters do. To think of an entire book of Wayne Reynolds' art and reborn classics---I'd buy two, that's how good that idea is.

Paizo has put out the greatest issues that Dungeon and Dragon have ever seen and I've happily subscribed to both since the mags were revamped some years back.

This sounds blasphemous (even to me!) but the truth is that I only run pre-published adventures as a DM and Pathfinder will probably be of more direct use to me than the two magazines--and I like the book format better. I can't wait for my first volume to arrive!

I don't know how many people have commented on the new columns, but I just wanted to let you guys know how awesome "Volo's Guide" and "Dragonmarked" are. Keep up the good work Paizo!

I'd like to add my comments to David's---the FR and Eberron columns have made Dragon a much more satisfying read and their inclusion is the reason I renewed my subscription.

Over the last year or so, however, we have also come to realize that we were missing an opportunity by not providing a steady stream of EB and FR material in ever issue. As the only source for such material outside Wotc, and with fans clamoring for the content, it seemed like the best choice.

Jason Bulmahn
Managing Editor of Dragon

Kudos to Jason and everyone at Paizo for always seeking to improve their products and for always being willing listen to the customers. I'll be renewing for sure!

I'm on the opposite side of the fence from Aberzombie. The addition of monthly columns for FR and Eberron is the only thing that will get me to renew my Dragon subscription.

There are only two currently-published WoTC campaign settings for 3.5 and I think it's not unreasonable to expect (and find) monthly features for both in the official D&D magazine.

The Big Apple seems to have some Worms in it!

Wednesday nights, 6 players as well.

Chock up another TPK for 3FOE. Our session (and our Age of Worms game) ended last night with the death of the party near the rope bridge section in the grimlock caves.

Half-orc Scout 3
Human Sorcerer 3
Half-elf Swashbuckler 2/ Bard 1
Human Cleric 3

All standard point-buy.

Everyone was underneath the bridge near the pile of debris. In short order, they split up into two teams and managed to trigger all three encounters near that area at once--the grimlock barbarian, the grimlock guards and the chokers.

While the players enjoyed the variety and creativity of the Age of Worms encounters, they felt it was too unforgiving of any missteps. We'd had two PC deaths in the first 5 sessions and now 4 more in the 6th. That's the highest mortality rate of any campaign we've ever played. We're going to start anew after Gen Con with something less combat-focused.

I have the Dragon Magazine Archive Cds. Recently I bought a new Dell computer and installed the Archives on it. However it won't let me print the articles out! It says it doesn't recognize my printer (or something along those lines). I have a Dell Photo AIO Printer 922. Is there a patch or something that I can download that will allow me to print out articles on my new computer?

I just had this problem last week. There's a patch at the Wizards of the Coast website (although their site seems to be having some problems as I write this reply).

--peter

Eric Boy'd suggested location for Diamond Lake is the town of Daggerford, near Waterdeep. I've send the 124 web supplement to design, so you should see it very soon.

--Erik

Erik, thanks so much for taking the time to supply the info. I subscribed to Dungeon around two years ago when you posted a call for subscribers and I've never regretted it. The best part is that each issue is better than the one before--kudos to everyone at Paizo.

N'wah--thanks for the well-worded advice. I'll definitely be following some of your suggestions on adapting the adventure path.

Peter

We're starting the Whispering Cairn a la the Forgotten Realms on Wednesday night--it sure would be great if the supplement was up by then.

Taking a cue from #324, I was placing Diamond Lake three days travel from Waterdeep but then I saw a post mentioning Calimshan. If the supplement isn't ready, could we just find out what region is recommended for Diamond Lake? Thanks!