|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
Interestingly enough, the gains in ice at the South Pole is proof of human caused changes in climate.
If you remember the ozone layer scare back in the 80's and 90's, then large steps were take to prevent human caused depletion of this layer. One of the effects of the loss of the ozone layer would be increased heat in stratosphere. This additional heat impacts things like weather.
Know where the hole in the ozone layer was? Antarctica.
So, humans pumped chemicals into the atmosphere all around the world, but it caused an accumulation problem on the one continent where humans don't live. Strange. Then, we stopped pumping those chemicals into the air and the problem those chemicals could cause stopped happening. Really strange.
It's almost like human actions can impact the climate. Except it's not "like" that, because it actually is that.
My favorite is when Katrina's aftermath had an impact on climate is used as proof that humans can't impact climate.
As far as whether climate change is happening and whether we're causing it or not, I still haven't seen someone debunk this article, where scientists measure the effective change on the absorption rate of CO2 in the atmosphere.
To prove climate change isn't happening, that science would have to be wrong. Ditto for human impact on said climate change.
Things like Icon rolls are really for a DM who wants to run adventures by the seat of their pants. If you have it more planned out, it's not as useful. If you want to come up with stuff on the fly, it works well.
I play a lot of 13th age as well, I find Icon's work better when you get the group to focus on just a few to keep adventures more focused. I think about 5-6 icons total for the group is a good max.
I've never played a game and thought "man, I wish there were more traps in these adventures".
Traps always felt like a series of trick questions that basically slowed the game to a crawl because if you aren't suspicious of everything and carefully inspect every square inch, something killed you. I particularly disliked it when a DM required you to be better than him at mechanical engineering to survive, regardless of rolls.
I'd rather get to the action or interact with an NPC than encounter a trap.
Yup, you could either expand on that ability, or add something new. If the campaign was centered around one city (if I were DM), I'd allow something like: You've built a network of connections within your city of friends, allies and informants. You know what's going on and when. You have advantage whenever you attempt to gather information within your city.
That'd be a nice 7th level ability that reinforced your background. It could easily be about disguising yourself within the city, how you've now become a recognized member of the city, or even a benefit to your lifestyle (or maybe just income) due to parkour performances.
For a soldier, at 7th level they might start being treated like an officer/knight/higher rank when interacting with other military people, then at 15th level, people start treating them like a war hero/general. Even if it's not a military campaign, if the character maintains those links, they get treated with respect like they held that position.
The 5.11 Rush 12 is a good pack. Normally $100, it's listed on Amazon for about $85. I wouldn't go for the Rush 24, I think it's design isn't appropriate for how heavy you can load it. You can still load the Rush 12 pretty heavy, but the size will keep you reasonable.
Something to look for with carrying more than a couple books, side compression straps. Books will lean out away from your body and put stress on the pack, which in many bags means stress on the zipper. If you carry about 10 lbs of books, a side strap will pull the bag tighter. This reduces shifting in the bag and takes the stress off the zipper, meaning your bag lasts longer and in better shape.
A good backpack will last 10-20 years (or more) and treat you well.
A cheap backpack will last a while and break when it's inconvenient.
A friend when backpacking with me for a short trip, just 2 nights and 3 days. He wasn't sure if he wanted to commit to camping a lot, so he bought cheap equipment at Walmart. His backpack literally broke on day one. We spent probably 5-10 minutes jury-rigging it every hour to make it usable.
10 years later, I'm still using the exact same equipment I had that weekend. Except for my spoon. I lost that spoon on a different trip (I have horrible luck with my camping silverware and constantly lose it).
What style of bag do you like? Messenger, backpack, tactical? What size container are you carrying mini's in? What's your price range?
The Timbuk2 Command is a highly rated messenger bag, runs about $100-150, but this will be the cadillac of messenger bags. They have a cheaper model, around $70, but it's not quite as nice (though still good). I personally am not a fan of 1-shoulder bags, I like to distribute the weight to both shoulders.
For backpacks, I actually love mountaineering packs. They're usually designed to stay close to the body, easy to tighten them down so that everything inside stays put and doesn't shift. You can also carry the weight much more easily than in a 1-shoulder bag or in your hands. I have a small one and at conventions carry about 20-25 lbs of stuff with me, sometimes all day. I also do a lot of hiking and mountain trekking, so something like that is multi-purpose. A place like REI will have lots of options and prices. Prices range from $50 to $250.
My bag is from Millet, over the past 5 years it's been to GenCon twice, spent several months in the wilderness (not all at once), climbed a half dozen mountains and been my general purpose backpack around town. It has a few stains and discolorations, but otherwise is in perfect working order.
Tactical bags have a good shape to them, plus lots of compartments. They don't carry the best, more like a gym bag or duffel bag, though slightly better. If you get the right size, they will definitely carry books and boxes of mini's well, plus dice, pencils, etc. They'll stay organized and be easy to toss in and out of the car. Very similar to the messenger bag in a lot of ways, but more options on size and configuration IMO. Prices are $30-$100 for the most part.
Something I've thought about a little is expanding on the Backgrounds, so that they improve as you level.
For example, at 5th level, it might give you another skill/tool proficiency. I understand that they're supposed to be "backgrounds", but it feels like an opportunity to help continue to grow the character in a way that isn't related to their class. Maybe a second background ability gained at 8th level. Could even leave them open ended, so that players design their own and have to justify them in the story, perhaps making them related to their Bond.
This also gets to the concept of broadening who the Characters are without increasing power level.
captain yesterday wrote:
I don't really care about him either way really, but it woulda been amusing to see him try and play QB, in a can't look away from a car crash sort of way.
Edited to add some stuff:
He tried playing for the Vikings back in '04. He got cut during the preseason after being tossed around like a rag doll by opposing offensive linemen. He wasn't soft, his combine stats were excellent. He actually compares favorably to JJ Watt, Watt had a few more bench reps, but Lesnar was about 0.15 sec faster in the 40, and that's a pretty big gap in the NFL.
Physically, he was capable, he just didn't have the technical skill to compete. If you watch the little tap there is of him, he pretty much never gets anywhere close to the QB during a pass rush. A couple times he ends up on the ground.
G%! d#@n. I can't believe that that was 11 years ago. I could have sworn it was only 5 or 6.
Picked up a PS4 and am enjoying Destiny so far. I've had an itch for an MMO-feeling game for a long while and this is scratching that itch nicely.
Went with a PS4, cause I want some of the releases that are slated for next year and I can work through some back catalog until then. Specifically Ico and Shadow of the Colossus.
I was asking the same question all 3 times, and it wasn't until I added the hypothetical that you actually answered it. So evidently it was necessary.
I have no interest in condemning people for their preferences on this topic.
If you continue to ask me questions or make statements about my opinion on the morality of this topic, or attempt to re-engage me on the morality issue, I'm going to point you back to this statement.
I understand you like to interpret these responses as a desire to engage. I just want to make it really clear, that's my stance and that's the only stance I'm going to have, regardless of how you want to try and interpret other things I've said.
I've made efforts to talk about this issue as it relates to game design. You haven't asked me anything related to that. Instead, you asked questions about things I never mentioned. I think you are the one who isn't interested in the topic. I think you want to talk about a different topic.
Do you have anything to say concerning RPG game design and mental illness? Or do you only want to talk about imaginary moral crusades you think other people are on?
If you are interested in RPG game design and mental illness, you could prove it by making a post that doesn't reference anyone's real world moral obligations, but instead actually talk about game design.
From a game design perspective, which do you think is better, my "Madness of the Void" or Paizo's "Schizophrenia"? Specifically, which do you think is more evocative of a fantasy world and provides more interesting opportunities for roleplaying?
Roleplaying is that thing we do that we talk about on these forums.
I like discussing these things. I like discussing them with people I have something in common with, like an unrelated interest or hobby (as well as actually discussing that hobby too). I hope they don't go away.
There are literally dozens of threads I have no interest in on these forums every day. I really only look at about 6-8 sub-forums. I do think that as a board culture, we tend to get off-topic (not related to the sub-forum) quite often. I think if we ourselves policed that better and stayed on topic it would prevent the stuff people don't want to see from spilling into threads they want to read. I know I've been an offender of that in the past, though I'm trying to improve.
I hope the forums don't become too narrowly defined. I would like to see the culture of how we post and where improve though.
You're right. I edit a lot. A lot. I recommend waiting a little bit until replying to me. There's no way of knowing that ahead of time, it's just a habit of mine. Not your fault.
So, now that we have that answer out of the way, do you want to discuss what I actually said? Or do you want to ask more questions about things I didn't say?
Edit: don't worry, I found an alternate solution. For everyone else, I'd love to continue talking about mental illness and RPG's, particularly in the vein of game design.
I would appreciate if you could rephrase the question without such a heavy handed premise. It's a leading question that's attempting to paint me into a corner. If that isn't your intention, try removing the premise and asking me what my position is.
I'm willing to discuss my actual positions. But when responses are responses to things that aren't my position, am I allowed to say that they aren't my position? Or do I have to defend them?
If something isn't my position, what should I do? Accept it as my position, or point out that I didn't say it, and it's not my position?
When someone attributes a position to you, but you don't hold that position, what verb would you use for that?
Yes and I'm allowed to point out that it's a straw man. No one is claiming that RPG books have an obligation to raise awareness. I have no interest in defending something I'm not saying. His quoting of me and saying that is an implication that I'm making that assertion, which I'm not.
I really don't want to debate the fiction that someone else imagines I'm saying. I'd rather defend MY ACTUAL POSITIONS and not something that someone invents for me.
Did I ever claim that RPG books have an obligation to raise awareness on anything?
It's a simple question, and is directed towards you, Alzrius. I'd appreciate a simple answer.
If you want to make a primary damage dealer, you shouldn't go sword+board. You'd want to use a 2-handed weapon so you get a bigger damage die.
You can always wear Gauntlets of Ogre Power.
The damage bonus really isn't that big. It's useful, but it's not huge. If you're rolling a d12 for damage dice, the variation on the die is going to be the strongest determinant of whether you drop an enemy or not.
I can't find a single option in the game that lets you sacrifice 2 damage per hit to get +3 AC. It's actually a pretty powerful option in this regard.
Goth Guru wrote:
Thank you for sharing that.
Game-wise, I think your last paragraph is interesting. The concept of altering it to a sort of haunting by a force only the character can see. It definitely takes it's inspiration from the real world, it also provides greater context for what is affecting the character and how to roleplay it.
Just like RPG's routinely take things like religion or magic and makes them "real", it could take the same approach to mental disorders. What if the delusions weren't delusions, but rather the removal of filters our minds have to make it possible to cope with the world.
What if witnessing "Elder Beings" removed those filters, causing other beings who can only interact with you once you've been afflicted to be able to contact your mind? Yes, it isn't hard to trace this concept back to schizophrenia, but the point isn't to have schizophrenia, the point is to have madness be a thing in the game.
Madness from the Void
Type insanity; Save Will DC 16 Onset 1d6 days Effect –4 penalty on all Wisdom and Charisma-based skill checks; cannot take 10 or take 20; chance of becoming confused (see below)
Having witnessed horrors most can't imagine the character's perception of reality has changed. They can now see and hear beings from other dimensions who can only influence this world by communicating with the character. This is difficult for the character to rationalize and it makes every day interactions harder. In addition, during stressful situations the character sometimes can't distinguish one reality from the other. Make a Will save or be confused for 1d6 rounds.
And this gets to the crux of my argument in this: Does anyone think that the Pathfinder description for schizophrenia is better or more interesting than that?
Grey Lensman wrote:
They're also really good friends. They play golf and have dinner together in the off-season.
My point is that in the interest of realism, modeling one symptom out of dozens of symptoms is not realistic. The argument that to maintain realism, the name of the affliction must be used, is bunk, because what is being modeled is not realistic. Therefore, removing the name schizophrenia, and putting a fantastical mental affliction in it's place would do zero harm to the realism of the game.
My post had nothing to do with you, I was just making a separate and different point. Why would you assume my post was a response to you?
If you fail the counter spell, targets of the spell gain a bonus to their saving throw equal to the level of the spell slot you sacrificed in your attempt.
Realistically, people with schizophrenia are rarely violent. Roughly 1% of the population has the disorder, but their rates of violence correspond much more closely to their economic, employment and education status* than it does to their disease. There is an increased likelihood of violence amongst people with schizophrenia who also exhibit anti-social behavior (and other conduct disorders), but then again, anti-social behavior is a strong contributor to violent behavior alone.
*It happens that people with schizophrenia tend to be unemployed, poor and uneducated, largely because their disorder can make it hard to finish school and/or keep a job.
People with mental illness are predominately more disposed to harming themselves than they are others. Realistically speaking.
Edit: Adding a video.
Anderson Cooper demonstrating a schizophrenia simulator. Of course, the voices are what's called a positive symptom (adding something that isn't normally there). The negative symptoms, lack of social skills, depression, reduced motor control, inability to follow moving objects with your eyes, inability to sit still or organize your thoughts in a way that resembles a paragraph, those aren't really possible to simulate, but they're also very impactful.
A wizard wouldn't be able to study their spells for the day, most likely ever again.
The Sword wrote:
Paizo hasn't exactly gone out of business by producing PDF's or having their content online in SRD format. People do buy the books anyways.
I personally haven't purchased D&D 5E, but that's because they don't have them in PDF format, which is the sole format I buy RPG books in now and have for the past 5-6 years.
For the most part, you don't need a ton of storage space for PDF's. I have 7.1G worth of PDF's on my tablet and that includes:
Corebooks for 38 different RPG's
I can only comment on Apple tablets, so afraid I'm not much help on the hardware front that meets your price goals.
Did I say it's the RPG books job was to raise awareness? I don't think I did. Let me check. Nope, I didn't say that.
Were you quoting me and directing the comment to someone else? That seems to happen a lot.
Your ability priorities are Con -> Dex -> Str
I've actually thought about this build and I would have made it if my previous character hadn't already been a barbarian. It's incredibly resilient. Con adds to your AC just as fast as Dex, but raging doubles your HP effectively, meaning Con is your #1. You want to maximize the effectiveness of your Resistance to damage, focus on defenses to avoid hits, so that the few that get through, barely do anything.
If you have a bard or paladin in the group, a Heroism spell on you will be amazing if you're in a position to take the brunt of all damage.
The 3rd level Bear totem ability extends your Resistance to all damage types except Psychic.
The US has spent several trillion dollars waging war in the Middle East recently. If that same money had been invested in respective countries instead, would it be possible that there would today be thriving, vibrant trade partners that exported things other than terrorists there instead?
Yes, it would have. For one, the invasion of Iraq and how it was handled wouldn't have happened. The core of ISIS and it's initial power base stems from former Iraqi army members. During the US occupation of Iraq the army was disbanded. The problem was that in preparation for a US invasion the Iraqi army decentralized their weapon storage, officers and soldiers knew where the stuff was stashed, or even kept the weapons at home. We left these men unemployed and heavily armed.
Would that mean that Iraq would be a vibrant trading partner? No, but they weren't exporting terrorist prior to the US invasion either.
Well, you advance non-violence by refusing to engage in violence. I don't want to engage in to much analogy, but stop adding fuel to the fire. The reasons non-violence worked in South Africa, India and the US was by meeting violence passively, eventually the energy behind it diminishes.
On the state level though, that doesn't completely work, as you have a duty and obligation to protect your citizens. You can't just turn the other cheek as it were, because that cheek is another person's life. This is where the degrade and destroy strategy comes into play, though I would just leave it at degrade. When ISIS strikes out, do our best to limit their capacity to do it again. The problem with terrorist attacks like what happened in Paris, is they're cheap and easy. It's really not possible to stop those. The best thing to do is limit their capacity to make war on their neighbors, prevent or limit their expansion as much as possible.
The real method of destroying them is providing economic opportunity to the majority of citizens in neighboring regions. People who are fed and feel that their children are already guaranteed better opportunities than they had aren't the target demographic for suicide bomber recruitment.
People who are desperate and hungry don't want to sit at a table and negotiate.
Consider US relations between the USSR and Cuba. We were regularly in talks with the Soviets over the years and eventually deals were made cultural and economic exchanges started to happen, several years prior to the fall of the Soviet Union. Contrast that with Cuba, which all contact was forbidden until fairly recently and the people in power stayed there, very entrenched.
I'd agree that ISIS isn't a group we can make deals with. There won't be any negotiations, at least not in the foreseeable future. But enhancing ties throughout the region and encouraging economic stability will greatly limit ISIS potential for growth and possibly deny them resources.
There will be no justice for the attacks on Paris. The French can obtain a form of retribution or vengeance, but nothing resembling justice. I have significant doubts that any amount of retribution will prevent future attacks.
Just a quick question, do you think the Middle-East was fine prior to the genesis of ISIS?
Edited to add:
ISIS is definitely a problem. I don't deny it.
So far, I haven't heard a single solution to deal with them though that doesn't sound exactly like something else that's been done that has produced an organization that has committed horrible atrocities.
The old adage: Treat the cause, not the symptom... is stupid and shouldn't be given credence. Even in medicine, you routinely treat symptoms, because symptoms can be life threatening. There is no disease called "fever", but a fever can still kill you long before the underlying disease is cured.
ISIS needs to be dealt with. At the same time, there needs to be a plan to solve the more long term problems. I don't think that Muslim people or Arab countries are more prone to violence, but rather that a situation has been created where routinely, violence is seen as the only solution to people in those countries. We might destroy ISIS, but another group is just going to coalesce and cause problems, unless we also address the root causes.
Violence doesn't kill ideologies. It entrenches them. Think about the US after 9/11. Did we say to ourselves "Wow, those guys really hate us, maybe we should back off and leave them alone." No, we doubled down, sent in troops to one country, then a second unrelated one "just to be sure".
Right now, France isn't backing down, it's increasing the number of airstrikes they're participating in.
Bombing the people drawn to ISIS ideology isn't going to stop them from joining, they're going to double down and join twice as fast. The only way violence can solve the problem is by killing every man, woman and child.
Violence begets more violence. Sometimes violence is required, but we need to be prepared to look for alternate solutions that will mitigate and hopefully stop the violence at some point. If we participate in the cycle of violence without trying to stop it, it will only ever get worse.