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

Jason S's page

RPG Superstar 2013 Star Voter. FullStar Pathfinder Society GM. 2,283 posts (2,309 including aliases). 88 reviews. 2 lists. No wishlists. 11 Pathfinder Society characters.


1 to 50 of 2,283 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

bdub wrote:
What do you think can be done to make roleplaying games more appealing to women (teenage and older)?

Be normal? I don't think there should be any special rules or pandering towards women, except to be respectful of course. But that should be towards all human beings.

Better yet, invite them to the table. The only reason why 3 of the players at my table are women is because I went out of my way to invite them to play and teach them the game. Roleplaying isn't something easy to pickup, the first time you play it's likely to be with friends and family.

So invite your (female) friends and family to play! Maybe starting with some boardgames and moving into a Pathfinder society game (using a pregen) where there is no commitment or work to be done. That's how you bring women (and people) into the hobby.

If you're not playing OP, with Siwar I would:

1) Have all 3 spells as offensive spells until she gains more spell cards. You're a party of 4, should be OK without Cure.

2) Focus on upgrading her items to wands, to handle easy monsters. Considering the number of items you get in RoR, with a little bit of farming it shouldn't be that bad.

3) Have her focus on locations without monsters.

That's what I'd do anyway.

Related question. Can Fox (who adds 1d4 to your intelligence or wisdom check) buff Ezren's arcane check with a Force Missile?

My first inclination is to say 'no', because it's an arcane check, not an intelligence check. But I have to ask, one of my players has a bee in his bonnet about this.

grasp wrote:

yes, that mistake is minimal, almost comical... but in portuguese cure reads like thhis

"Shuffle 1d4 cards from your discard pile INTO YOUR HAND"

OK, so that's a bad error. It's good Paizo is getting some feedback, hopefully they can improve in future versions or get a different company to do it and/or do more QA.

Kl3in wrote:

- In the Weapons/Armor section of Harsk, you can see that the names of cards are identical! Maybe Harsk wears "Shurikens" as Armor...Awesome!

- In the Allys/Blessings section of Valeros, you can see that the names of cards are identical! Maybe Valeros has a God called Nightwatch...Awesome!

If that's the worst translation error, that's not too bad. People should only use the suggested starting decks if you want to quick start the campaign. They are horrible card choices anyway, I suggest you ignore them in any language.

I work in software and we're translated into 15 languages and let me tell you, it's a nightmare. We leave it to the regional distributors to handle (as part of their customer support).

If you get 4 translators into a room, they're all say the other translations are crap and their translation is good... it's quite funny. :)

No baby is born evil.

Better idea, do away with the alignment system, most players don't know how to use it and it results in boring clichéd games and weak roleplay.

There are some but it could be argued that anyone could use them. Amulet of Fists (monk) and (good) attack spells for divine casters (Holy Light will probably be in your deck a long time). So if you want a divine character that uses attack spells, I might consider the RoR add-on essential.

For me, mostly the add-on decks give me enough cards to build basic characters for everyone without making too many compromises.

a6ra wrote:
If I have a modified skill, say Dexterity, with a bonus of say +3

Just to clarify, you earned the +3 to Dex by completing the base set scenarios, Burnt Offerings, and Skinsaw right? I had a friend who didn't understand how upgrades worked and thought Ezren got a +4 bonus to everything based on Intelligence.

a6ra wrote:
If I play a blessing of erastil on a combat check, adn I'm using a Deathbane Crossbow, am I really now rolling 3 d12 +9 + a d8 (and whatever else I care to add).

= 1d12 (Dex) + 2d12 (Erastil) + 3 (skill upgrade) + d8 (xbow) + 1 (xbow)

= 3d12 + d8 + 4

Like the others said, the skill bonuses are added only once.

a6ra wrote:
We also played Blackfangs dungeon 3 or four times before completing it

YMMV but failing it 3-4 times in a row doesn't sound like the game is a pushover to me... how many times do you want to fail?

As a result of repeating Blackfang, you got lots of blessing upgrades, so you reaped rewards so that future scenarios will be a lot easier. Sounds fair to me.

a6ra wrote:
This is a legitimate way to optimize your decks? I gathered that getting rid of your Blessings of the Gods Asap and replacing them with character specific blessings is the first major goal in making a character strong

Yeah, it's a legit tactic but it's boring to do unless you are legitimately failing.

Don't worry, the game gets harder. There's going to be times when your characters will take damage and you have nothing to soak it, and you have no healer.

But yeah, I'm not sure the game is as hard as you want it to be. I believe organized play is a lot harder, if you're looking for challenge.

Btw, make sure healing potions end up back in the box, they don't have the "basic" trait so they can't be re-added to your deck at the end of the scenario.

Thanks for everyone's input, I'm definitely going to do something about Holy Candle (I won't remove it, but the effect will banish instead of bury) and I'll continue to think about Haste/Restoration.

Just to make it clear, I didn't say RoR was easy, that's just the impression I get from reading the forums for the past 4 months.

Having said that, I'm completed RoR solo up to Hooked Horror with Lini with very few problems, no deaths, and not even a failure, so that experience supports the theory.

Yes, if you finish an AP and you never fail a scenario, I consider that too easy. YMMV.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Alzrius wrote:
My understanding is that Jensen tweeted that there was going to be an eleventh season, but there hadn't been any official confirmation yet.

Really? They've been saying all season (even at the fan festival), that this would be the last season.

I guess we'll see. All things have to end, but I really like this show...

I have a group of friends that just started the RoR campaign.

The general consensus on the forums seems to be:
1) RoR is fairly easy and;
2) There are some overpowered cards in the campaign.

So my question is, do you think it would be more fun to play RoR if we removed these OP cards from the set?

Here's a list of potential cards to remove: Holy Candle, Haste, Restoration. Are there more?

Thanks for your input.

Oh, if it's solo play only I'm not as interested.

When they do multiplayer, they need to have a way of playing solo until the matchmaker finds other players. I've played some other games where you need to wait real time for other players, and it just kills the multiplayer aspect of the game, because no one wants to wait around for 5-20 minutes waiting for other players.

This is a huge tease, I would buy this in an instant. I wish we had an idea of the release date.

"Supernatural the Musical" was a great epsisode and they could have ended the series with that episode imo. /sad

Makes me realize it's all coming to an end soon. :(

Season 5 is the best so far, for me anyway.

It's a home game so you can do whatever you like.

Having said that, I wouldn't add the cards from the class decks if you're doing a Rise of the Runelords campaign.

1) There are a lot of cards in there that have nothing to do with RoR (pirates, ships, etc).

2) Also, part of the challenge is working with the cards you're given. If you add in another 6 haste spells (just an example don't read too much into it), perhaps all of the sudden things might get too easy.

I think it's more fun to run it as intended personally, but YMMV.

If you only have 2 cards left in your deck as Ezren, you’re in trouble.

You’re forgetting about failing to recharge, which is not a guarantee with Ezren. Infinite loop is not so infinite…

In the rare case that this happens, I don’t think it really matters if Ezren views all the cards in the location with Augury.

Meh, why didn’t I just say +1 Hawk. :)

100% support characters aren’t for everyone, but I’m glad someone likes it. I’m sure most people like it when their characters get buffed and healed each turn. :) And it’s certainly a SAFER play style.

I play a lot of 6 player games though and in those games it’s very non-optimal if characters are losing their free explorations each turn and too many blessings are going to buffs. Some targeted buffing is good, a lot is bad.

Probably so she can explore faster. Amiri is a really slow character and weapons and items tend to get stuck in your hand with no way to cycle them out (beside burying them which also leaves you in a tough position later potentially).

Amiri needs all the help she can get and is by far my lowest rated character in RoR. I won't give her to new players anymore, too many players have already gotten upset with the lack of choice and things to do each round.

We're talking about table sizes of 6.

I've had a fair number of games now with table size 6 and haven't come close to (permanently) closing all locations, so I'm wondering how it's happening consistently.

It's still easier (and more typical) to win a game by temp closing locations compared to closing all locations.

Agree, some of the card choices for the class decks are really odd (and poor) at times. You'd think with such a limited choice of cards that they'd be more custom for the characters in the deck. Sigh.

Having said that, as Ezren, I often trade my weapon to a character that needs it in turn 1. Non-spells ruin my cycle. So for me it's not a factor.

Someone mentioned Darago. Darago is just bad with the class deck (and probably with the base set as well). Two slots for weapons and 2 slots for armor are wasted on him, with no chance to gain proficiency in either. To add insult to injury he has bad Str and Dex. I'm not sure what the designers were thinking, but the only reason to play him is to nerf the table if you think OP is too easy. :)

Some things to consider.

As you adds allies and blessings, you will see your weapons less often and won't be able to depend on the recharge ability to boost you in combat. If you buff with blessings you'll be bleeding out more, but I suppose that's OK with Lini. I would upgrade blessings before allies, they're more universally useful.

Combat challenges automatically levels up by at least +1 per adventure and then scale up quickly from AP 3.

To me, I want characters to be good at their niche roles. If you can't do that what's the point? I've seen Amiri upgrade everything but STR and by AP 3 she loses a lot of combats. If you have a combat character that is no longer good at combat, it's a problem. IMHO.

1) It’s OK to help other characters, however it really hurts if you lose your free explore each turn (especially in a 6 person game, which will probably be the norm for organized play). You need to be able to explore at least once per round with a reasonable chance of success.

Also, I find that support characters aren’t always able to be supportive in every circumstance (or not as optimally as I’d like). For that reason I strongly prefer characters that are solid in solo play with some support.

If you know who you’re playing with, it makes a lot of sense to trade cards etc if it makes you better as a team. Unless you travel and play with the same people all the time, could be a problem with OP.

When I build characters for new players (I’ve introduced 8 people to the game and will introduce another 16 next month), I try not to make characters support-only, because of what I said above, but also because it’s boring for most people to play. Some support is good, all support is bad.

I’ve had some new players bummed out because they could only explore once per round (Amiri compared to a Seoni who can burn through her deck fast and explore multiple times per round).

2) As I said above, I don’t think playing a “support only” character is optimal (if you lose your free explore or have limited ability for success), so however Paizo balances the game is fine.

But at the end of the day, everyone is free to play however they like, there’s no right or wrong.

There are a LOT of characters that aren't supported properly by their class decks. Tarlin is just one, there are several class decks without enough appropriate weapons, items, attack spells, and cure spells. For that reason, the organized play characters are weaker than their campaign counterparts.

For Tarlin, there aren't enough good 2-handed weapons in the class deck. And yeah, thematically there should be swords, but I can overlook that or pretend it's a 2-handed sword. Mechanics are more of a problem imo. If Tarlin was playing RoR, he would have 4 good 2-handed (bladed) weapons at every stage of the adventure and you wouldn't need to consider using a quarterstaff after adventure 1 (or adventure 0 for that matter).

I guess they could errata it, but I highly doubt it. You either just live with it, play another character, or play the character in a non-OP game.

I'd go "Way of the Wicked" for an all evil party, although I'm sure you could retro fit a lot of other APs. WotW was designed for evil parties and is all around awesome (if that's what you want to play).

It's still a frequently asked question, whether it's vaguely in the rules or not. There are a lot of things about this game that could be explained better in the FAQ... that's what FAQs are for. People play this game but play it wrong a lot of the time (and not on purpose).

Anyway, whatever.

This was another question I had. Probably should go in the FAQ.

Yeah, I was wondering if you could delay gaining a power feat and save it until you get your role (which would lead to many different builds potentially), but I guess I got my answer... can't be done in organized play at least. At home you can do anything you like.

Kryzbyn wrote:

I'd say leave them as is.

If during the flow of combat, however, they seem to be a bit much, just mentally subtract 1 or 2 from every roll, and lower thier HP a little bit.

What he said. I also made everyone fairly deadly.

Especially Glorio, I made him a ninja (with greater invisibility trick), I know they are just going into this guns blazing and I want to punish that. I want them to need either Vimanda or Glorio (to defeat the other guy) and I want one of them to survive (ideally).

Tarrintino wrote:
The first is a player that makes no attempt to create a unique persona for a character when sitting down to play. It gets to me when I ask, “Tell me about your character” and get told, “Dwarf Fighter.”

Totally agree with you, it’s very annoying. Having said that, while backstory is nice, it’s much more important for a character to have a fun and memorable personality.

Fellow players I know have created characters with awesome backstories… but when they play the character, they character is completely uninteresting or memorable.

Also, please keep in mind that nobody wants to hear your characters backstory. Or at least not all at once. A little bit sprinkled into the session is cool.

So when I make a character, I always think about how I want that character to act first. Backstory is second (and maybe not fleshed out at all until I get a feel for the character).

Tarrintino wrote:
My second pet peeve is players who fail to role-play their characters appropriately, and GM’s who let these players get away with it.

Yeah, most players suck, I don’t know what to tell you. As a GM you can only coax so much… what are you going to do except not invite people back or play with a different group? Most players only play their character when it’s convenient for them… as soon as a logical choice becomes inconvenient, they choose the easy path. That’s why I don’t even bother with the alignment system anymore, just play your character however you want to play, at least it’s more organic and authentic and enjoyable.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Highly doubt it will be better. If it's as good as #3, I'll be happy. Have no faith in JJ and I'm not impressed with the CGI compared to model starships (looks fake).

Mechalibur wrote:
She's overpowered, but it's a cooperative game. Don't play her, or change the power yourself if you don't like it. No need for errata.

Agree, do whatever you want in home games, but if you really believe that's true it still causes the following problems.

1) It's still a problem that RoR characters are allowed to be used in Organized Play. It's only a matter of time before the Druid Class Deck comes out.

2) That makes Heggal OP as well.

Wow, what weird timing, I was just about to post the same question. I'll just add it to this post.

So I understand that it’s possible to (automatically) fail a check to acquire a boon, close a location, or recharge a card on purpose (by choosing not to try). That’s mostly because those cases use the word “may”.

I know it’s peculiar, but is it also possible to (automatically) fail to defeat a bane on purpose (by not trying)?

Lini walks a fine line between being overpowered and sucking. Lini would really suck if it was changed to recharge. I play Lini and there are times when Lini loses her animal ally and doesn't see it again for a very long time. If the ability were changed to recharge, the ability could hardly even be used.

I think Lini is definitely one of the strongest overall characters in RoR, but I'm not sure that's a reason to nerf. In adventures 4-6 there are other characters that are much more dominating imo.

Your boss was wrong, knows nothing about probability, and likes to waste time. LOL.

What everyone else said. You are right.

Thanks for the clarification.

Sorry, let me clarify, the (before and after encounter) damage was often typed, but not as combat or non-combat damage. I thoroughly read the rules and it never stated which damage type to assume. Obviously if the damage is coming from a barrier you can assume non-combat damage, but it's not as clear when coming from a monster/henchman/villain.

Does Gogmurt really work that way? I would assume since you failed a combat check that the damage would also be combat damage (with the fire trait).

Thanks for your response.

A number of monsters and henchmen do damage to you before and after combat and the damage type isn't specified. Is that damage combat or non-combat damage?

For example:

1) Enchantress (monster): Does 1 damage before the encounter and 1 damage after the encounter.

2) Blackfang (villain): Does damage before the encounter if you fail a check.

3) Poison trap (henchman): Does damage to all characters at the location if undefeated.

Is the damage assumed to be combat damage if it comes from a monster/henchman/villain? Or is the assumption that it's non-combat damage unless you fail the main check to defeat the bane?

S&S is a bigger "kick in the teeth" as an RPG compared to the card game. But it's all in good fun either way.

Looking forward to more challenging and innovative scenarios.

I personally don't like Evasion spells either. The opportunity cost is too great if your character isn't built around it.

It doesn't always work out. Our Ezren forgot he had no attack spells in his hand, encountered an Ogre (combat 14), and died. Was pretty funny when the player realized what happened.

First of all, all the characters are viable and can be used. There are only a few things characters need to do well: Combat, Acquire Boons, Explore several times per turn, Close Locations.

But if you want to make an easy-mode party in ROR, this is what I’d go with:

1) Lini: She can do everything and do it well. She explores quickly. She casts divine spells and cures. In short, she is overpowered and if you’re strictly talking about optimization, I don’t know how you leave her out.

2) Ezren: Powerful combat with the ability to recycle spells and explore quickly. Arcane spellcaster. Decent ability to acquire boons.

3) Seelah: Powerful combat, cure spell, and can dump cards to do everything well.

4) Either Valeros or Harsk or Lem: Good combat and most importantly good support for everyone else, but not effective at boons/barriers.

Reasons I would leave other characters out of an “optimal party”.

Kyra: It’s not that she’s bad, she’s just bad compared to Lini. One healer is enough, so she’s really unneeded. Not a fan of her power. Still, she is OK and you could have her in spot #4.

Sajan: He’s OK but he’s really weak in combat initially and will drain party resources. Has limited opportunity to explore because of his hand size and discarding to be effective at combat. Becomes more effective when roles and blessing upgrades are gained.

Merisiel: Best solo character and does everything well, but also has limited synergy with other characters. Still not a bad option and could replace Seelah (although I prefer Seelah).

Amiri: Good combat but extremely limited ability to close and acquire boons.

Seoni: I don’t find that she starts with enough spells in her hand to be as effective as other spell casters or as effective in combat compared to other characters. Limited ability to recharge means she’s extremely healer dependent and is a resource drain. Has died more than any other character because of her hand size.

But in the end it all comes down to this:

"Play whatever makes you happy"

You only "win" this game if you're having fun.

Some characters are harder than others, but I've played all of the characters solo in Blackfang and Brigadoom, and they're all capable. Some characters get stuck (and couldn't complete a scenario sometimes) but I never died.

Lini is my favorite character and I've soloed Lini all the way to the end of Burnt Offerings and found it fairly easy (she never gets stuck like other solo characters). Never came close to dying and I've finished some scenarios extremely fast (less than 10 turns). She is probably too powerful (and I've barely upgraded her), but I enjoy playing her none-the-less.

I think this will be really popular and I'm definitely getting this set.

I started playing with 6 people and it was extremely painful learning the game with that table size. There was 30 minutes between turns. The game was not fun. If I didn't own the game, I probably wouldn't have played again.

It was only when we played a 3 player game (and later several solo games) that I felt the game was fun. The 3 player game felt easier than the 6 player game.

Solo I can finish a game in 30 minutes (sometimes as little as 10 minutes), with 2-3 players in 45-60 minutes, with 6 players it took 3 hours.

I'm sure once everyone gets quick with the game and knows their characters, 6 player games can be very fun, but not initially.

I'm guessing that's why they recommend 4 player games.


The PFS lawyers take care of everything. We're above the law.

Just because someone is in a rival organization (Shadow Lodge, Aspis, another criminal organization) doesn't give us the right to break and enter, assault with a deadly weapon or kill people, and then steal their stuff.

We'd get caught eventually, because let's face it, most scenarios the PCs make no attempts at covering up any evidence, or even wear a disguise when leaving the scene of the crime. That doesn't even take into account magic.

Murderous hobos pretty much sums it up.

Recently quit because I couldn't handle the bad music and sound effects. So super annoying and unpleasant.

The questing and storyline was also horrible of course, but I'm guessing most people don't care about that. Also, the game practically requires you to take a Diablo 3 view of the action in dungeons, hardly immersive.

Anyway, some people definitely like it and it has exceeded expectations, so that's cool. I want to like it, just can't do it.

The biggest thing about the game is this:

1) The questing is bad and it takes forever to level. For a lot of people, this just kills the game for them, sometimes even before level 10. It gets harder to level as you gain more levels.

2) The (levelling!) dungeons are extremely hard and unforgiving for the average player. If people are failing at the levelling dungeons (which are normally not that hard in most games), imagine how hard the end-cap dungeons and raids will be? Only the best of the best will be able to do them.

I predict this game will not do well in a few months due to it being too difficult. Every other game that I've seen that was difficult has eventually become a niche game. They will either dumb their game down or become niche imo.

1 to 50 of 2,283 << 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.