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

Jiggy's page

RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32. RPG Superstar 6 Season Marathon Voter, 7 Season Dedicated Voter, 8 Season Dedicated Voter. FullStarFullStar Pathfinder Society GM. 20,305 posts (24,339 including aliases). 17 reviews. 4 lists. 1 wishlist. 13 Pathfinder Society characters. 36 aliases.


1 to 50 of 4,227 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Gorbacz wrote:

Disclaimer: I am a manga/anime fan, currently halfway through Macross Delta and Seven Deadly Sins. So yeah, if you hope for some quality harping on how weaboo wuxia bullcrap killed Gary Gygax, not here.

Anyway. I've noticed a conjecture. Several of the most outspoken "martial-caster disparity/Fighters need to be more awesome/Failzo failed us again by failing" people are big on action anime. Either they profess it openly here, or a cursory glance at the Internet reveals their passionate presence on anime forums or their YouTube channels full of Ninja Scroll clips or their 18+ Sailor Moon tumblrs. Also, Book of Nine Swords was the bestest d20 supplement ever.

This got me thinking. Perhaps, after watching this, this and of course this, their expectations regarding sword-swinging characters are at a level which Pathfinder, a game designed mostly by non-anime-watching folks who apparently envision high level Fighters more something like this, cannot quite satisfy. Which leads to frustrations elaborated in all the locked threads.

Maybe there is a game out there which caters better to running barefoot on clouds, swinging your sword so that mountains are torn assunder, EXCEPT YOUR SWORD DOESN'T EVEN TOUCH THESE MOUNTAINS, IT'S THE SONIC WAVE OF MANA WHICH THE SWING GENERATES THAT TEARS THE WORLD APART?

Your perception is a bit off. Or at least, incomplete.

You see, Pathfinder is a game where some of the classes already can walk barefoot on clouds and tear mountains (or reality itself) asunder without touching them. But then other classes can't. Yet all of these classes are presented as being equal, both on the player side (same XP to level up, same stat allotments, etc) and on the GM side (same CR to encounter the guy who can walk on the clouds as to encounter the guy who can't).

You seem to think that the Pathfinder game exists in a quasi-realistic space where there's no high-anime craziness going on, and the people who want their fighters to really go nuts should probably be using a different game because that's not the kind of stuff Pathfinder supports.

But you're wrong. Pathfinder does support wacky anime stuff, just not for every class. Half the classes in Pathfinder are already playing super-wowza action-anime, including the very abilities you thought you were being hyperbolic with, while other classes don't get to participate in what the first half is doing. The folks you're (sort of) listening to are only asking that the rest of the classes get to play the same game that some of them already are, not asking for some of the classes to leap into territory that's outside the scope of what Pathfinder already deals with.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Murdock Mudeater wrote:
The thing calculates damage based on average AC and attack values, but most PCs and monsters will be constantly subject to contextual modifiers that make much of this meaningless.

Variations don't make the baseline meaningless; they're the reason you want to know the baseline in the first place. Knowing the neutral baseline is the only way to figure out how impactful all those "contextual modifiers" actually are, so that you can make informed decisions when they come up. (For example: do you keep full-attacking despite being Shaken, or do you take a round off for a potion of remove fear? If you don't know the baselines, you're just guessing.)

Quote:
So it's useful, if the PC and their enemy are just slapping each other back and forth, waiting to see which will drop first

That's how Pathfinder martial combat is designed to work (especially once you hit BAB+6 and start full-attacking). It is extremely rare that there's anything a Pathfinder weapon-user can do (other than cast a spell) that's going to be a better tactical choice than simply continuing to full-attack. Pathfinder is designed that way.

Sure, plenty of things come to mind that you could do: tricks you've seen in movies or books, which use terrain or other elements of the environment to tilt a battle in your favor. But if you look at how the Pathfinder game actually implements those things, you discover that they pale in comparison to just full-attacking.

That's among the major issues cited by folks who abandon or heavily houserule Pathfinder: the dynamic, cinematic combat that narrative-minded folks want in their RPG just isn't supported in Pathfinder (past the first few levels).

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Good to hear. If I finally caught my 100 Magikarp and got a Gyarados and he only stayed relevant for a weekend, I'd be pretty pissed.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Think there's enough stardust in the "micro-economy" to allow a single favorite to "keep up"? Or maybe two? That'd at least be something.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Well, I've come up with something that I think I don't like about this game. It seems that, in terms of fighting ability, pokemon have a rather limited "shelf life". It seems to stem from the fact that (A) all your critters' max CP increases as you gain levels, and (B) the CP of a wild pokemon you encounter can be anywhere on the available spectrum for your level.

For example:
I caught a bunch of Spearows and eventually evolved a Fearow. The Spearow I chose for evolving was the highest-CP one I had; the gauge was nearly at max. Thus, the Fearow had the same "relative" CP (i.e., nearly max on the CP arc). Best Fearow I could hope for. But then a few levels later, the cap has raised. My Fearow is no longer "nearly max CP", and then I randomly encounter a wild Fearow that is nearly max CP, and it's about 100CP higher than the one I evolved.

From that point on, my old Fearow is basically obsolete (to say nothing of his possibility of having already been obsolete if I just happen to be surrounded by higher-level gyms, but that's a different topic), and the only value of the original Fearow was whatever fights he was able to win in the time between evolving him and finding the better one.

Which was about two or three days.

Really? So I could spend who knows how long gathering enough redundant pokemon to evolve my best one, then have it exist near the top of my roster for just however long it takes me to run across a stronger replacement?

Clearly, the "Power Up" option seems to be the way to help your current strongest pokemon remain relevant, but can that even keep up? I mean, assuming that the pokemon you evolve is, at time of evolution, as close to the top of the curve as you could ever reasonably expect to find (meaning, if you found a high-power "replacement" a mere 5 minutes later, it wouldn't be any stronger than what you evolved), and then every time you level up (raising the CP cap) you power up that pokemon, would that do it? If you do one power up for each level gained since acquisition, will they "keep up"?

Even if the answer to the above is "yes", can you even DO that? Stardust costs keep rising, and you never gain stardust without gaining XP (thus causing you to level up, which means you need another power up...). And then you have to do that for AT LEAST six pokemon.

And if that isn't enough to keep up, then that means your best bet will always be whatever your most recent good catch was, and you just cycle through them constantly, replacing with new catches whichever ones have fallen behind. But then that would mean that the entire power up mechanic (the only use for stardust) is completely meaningless.

Am I missing something?

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Went on a "PokeDate" with my wife to one of the larger parks in my area. And holy balls, I should have been going there from the beginning. It is ridiculously jam-packed with PokeStops, and lots of interesting spawns. There are places where you can stand in the overlapping area of 3-4 PokeStops at once, which of course means that groups of friends would show up and activate Lure Modules on all of them, then stand in the overlap and be catching something every 90 seconds or so. Sometimes cool things were spawning faster than I could catch them.

At the main conservatory building, there was a gym, and about a dozen PokeStops, all with Lures running constantly. Congregated in the area were about 75-100 people, all with phones out, yelling out when they found something good or cheering about what they'd just caught. It was unreal. Last time I've seen that many people congregated in the park, there was a popular musician performing for them. Had two different bewildered people ask what the hell was going on.

I caught nearly half a dozen each of Eevee, Goldeen, Magikarp, and Oddish; two Magmar; Bellsprout; Abra; Poliwag; Poliwhirl; bulbasaur; squirtle; seel; and maybe a couple others I can't remember (not to mention innumerable jank). Oh, also hatched my first 10km egg (while my first Lucky Egg was running!) and got an Electabuzz.

Man, what a night.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I got a Charmander as my starter, and another in an egg. I've never seen one in the wild; not even on my "Nearby" list, where I've occasionally seen both Bulbasaurs and Squirtles.

Ironically, I would have picked Squirtle as my starter, but I figured I didn't know where to catch fire-types and had plenty of lakes around (I'm in Minnesota) for catching water-types, so I thought I'd diversify by picking Charmander instead. Had I realized then that evolving requires catching multiples of a single Pokémon, I'd have made the exact opposite choice: give up on Charmander since there's no way I'll ever evolve him, and stick with Squirtle in hopes of an eventual Blastoise.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

1 person marked this as a favorite.

There's a gas station on my way to work that I stopped at a couple of times, and both times it was chock full of pokemon. The other day there was a Jinx and a Gastly and a couple other things. Today was two Drowzee, a Fearow, a Bellsprout, an Oddish, and I think something else. In like ten minutes.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Kalindlara wrote:

Even I've gotten dragged into toxic and offensive behavior lately. It hurts, to know that I can't remain civil, and for everyone to see it... to break my promise and ruin my reputation. I might not be around much longer as a result.

Good luck, Hmm. I hope you succeed where I failed.

You've gotta do what's best for you, whether that's to stay involved and vigilantly police your own behavior, or withdraw (to whatever degree).

I tried soldiering on for quite a while, hoping that maybe I could help put things right from time to time. However, it eventually became clear that the stress and anger building up from the unchecked abuse running rampant (not just in the forums, but through private channels and in person as well) were getting to the point of affecting my overall quality of life. I had to get out, and since doing so, I've become a substantially happier and kinder person.

But maybe you can achieve a different result; best of luck to you. :)

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Matrix Dragon wrote:
Has anyone else been having trouble with their pokemon finder today? I seem to be suffering from a bug that prevents it from properly showing how far away pokemon are from me. Everything shows as three footprints, even when I am right on top of them.

Just got back from my lunch break, and yeah, everything was at 3, even if I was staring at it. Which sucks, because otherwise I'd have chased down a Drowzee (the last I need to evolve one) and a Gastly. >:(

Also had a few freeze-ups.

On the bright side, I managed to catch my first Abra, hatch a Likitung, evolve a Ratatta and a Zubat, and hit 9th level.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Cripes, I didn't even know the CPs went that high. O_O

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Caineach wrote:
Jiggy wrote:
Dang, maybe I need to actually start trying to learn to throw curveballs, then.
I have never actively tried to throw a curveball and gotten the bonus, but I will randomly get the bonus for normal throws all the time.

I played around with it a little, and discovered that you don't have to "go all the way" on a curve ball to get the bonus. That is, you're supposed to spin it until it starts glowing, but if you kind of just jostle it enough to turn it over, and throw it before it loses that momentum, you'll still get the curveball bonus.

So, for instance, if you started to throw, but bailed out because you saw the target start to move around, then immediately reinitiate a throw, you could give it just enough spin from that extra bit of motion that it counts as a curveball.

Also, if you touch too much of the screen at once (like if your thumb is lying somewhat flat on the screen), you can confuse the touchscreen enough to make it think you're moving around and spinning the ball.

Your unintentional curveballs might be something like that.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Dang, maybe I need to actually start trying to learn to throw curveballs, then.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Rysky wrote:
I just ran out of pokeballs -_-

Hit as many PokeStops as you can. Spinning the little circle that you see when you tap a PokeStop within range will cause it to spit out items (mostly pokeballs, especially at low levels) and turn purple. In about 5 minutes, it will turn blue again and you can repeat the process. If you can find a place where you can walk in a 5-10min circle while hitting multiple PokeStops, you can hit them all with each lap and really rack up the items.

Also, you get fresh batches of pokeballs every time you level up, so gaining XP is important. You get a little XP each time you hit a PokeStop, thus the above is doubly important. You also get XP for catching pokemon, so if you're close to leveling, spending what few pokeballs you have left on a couple of easy 'Mon that you can probably catch in one try will likely be a good move. Also, when you're low on pokeballs, prioritize the catching of new pokemon over ones that you've caught before; there's a big first-time-catch XP bonus that will help you level up faster to get more pokeballs.

Hope that helps!

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Rysky wrote:
Got home and my house is stuffed with Evees and Clefairys!

After nearly a week of playing, my wife and I have only just managed to get two Eevees apiece, yet we keep seeing gyms sporting the various evolved forms. There must be an abundance of Eevees somewhere in our general region, but we sure are having trouble finding the wellspring. :/

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

2 people marked this as a favorite.

What are your current top 3 Pokémon you've acquired in Pokémon Go?

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

4 people marked this as a favorite.

For years I've had the thought of taking walks on my lunch break for exercise. Never actually did it until it offered me a high density of PokeStops (half of which are often running a Lure).

A couple of weeks ago, my wife and I talked about how we hadn't really taken walks together in a while. Got the app on Monday night, and we've taken a walk every night this week.

I have never exercised so much in such a short period in my life.

And now I'm running low on pokeballs, so I'm wracking my brain trying to think of a place likely to have a high density of PokeStops (but unlike downtown, also have free parking) so I can just walk in a circle for an hour or more. On purpose.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Caineach wrote:
...some of the terrible mechanics in this.

Like what? I'm not too far into the game yet (only just hit 6th level, haven't tried a gym), but so far I haven't run into anything and thought "Wow, that's dumb". My only complaints so far have been the bugginess (the app freezes sometimes, etc) and that there's a lot of the game that you have to figure out for yourself because they don't tell you how it works. But for the actual mechanics themselves, I haven't noticed anything really bad. What parts are you not liking?

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Matrix Dragon wrote:
Krell44 wrote:
Question: I use an Android device, and my GPS locator always seems to be off by a block or so. Is there a way to correct this?
I find that an android gps can often be fixed by turning it off in the system pulldown menu, letting the game complain that there is no gps, and then turning it back on. This forces the game to update your position.

Interesting, I'll have to keep that in mind.

On the other hand, my most common GPS glitch is keeping me from having to cross the street from my workplace's front door to the nearest PokeStop, so maybe I don't want to fix it...?

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Caineach wrote:
The blue bars indicate how often they can be used. The more bars, the less time it takes to power 1 charge up and the more charges you can have. More bars also tends to be less powerful.

How does this relate to moves that have no blue bars at all?

Also, what does the number to the right of each move mean?

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Okay, let's talk moves.

So I figured the only use of duplicate pokemon is to trade in all but one to get candy to evolve that one. So at first I was going to start just looking at which one had the highest CP and trade in all the rest. But then I noticed that some of them had different moves, and I wondered if I should be accounting for that. Does it matter what moves a pokemon has prior to being evolved, or will the moves just get started fresh upon evolution anyway? How much should I care?

Also, how do I read the moves? There's a number on the right for each of them, and some of them have 2-4 blue bars next to them. What does all that mean?

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

2 people marked this as a favorite.

So, all in all, it's sounding like I need to be really aggressive in catching as many pokemon as I can, rather than being "picky" like I was back when I was playing Red/Blue twenty years ago. Seems that evolving any given pokemon is going to require catching and "selling" one or two dozen of the exact same kind, so I need to grind like crazy if I ever want, say, a Pidgeot or a Hypno. Plus, catching more pokemon (even if I already have duplicates) is the fastest way to level up, which seems to be important.

So basically, catchCATCHCATCH is the name of the game. Am I understanding this right?

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Okay, so Red Gryffindor, Blue Ravenclaw, Yellow Elves. Got it.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Sundakan wrote:
Jiggy wrote:

Just found out that two of my brothers are Team Instinct. Having not reached level 5 yet, I haven't picked, and I'm now torn between joining them and betraying them.

Is there any actual difference between the teams, whether mechanics-wise or identity-wise?

Mechanics-wise, no, identity-wise sort of.

In-game it basically goes: Valor is the "Gryffindors" of the grup, Mystics are the brainy scientists, and Instinct are the "Be friends with Pokemon and raise them well and they'll be strong!" group.

I've also been hearing these teams referred to by color names...?

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Just found out that two of my brothers are Team Instinct. Having not reached level 5 yet, I haven't picked, and I'm now torn between joining them and betraying them.

Is there any actual difference between the teams, whether mechanics-wise or identity-wise?

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

1 person marked this as a favorite.

So... I get that supposedly you can find pokemon near their typical habitat, with the go-to example being to hunt lakes and rivers for water-types. But what about, say, fire-types? My wife is hoping to find a Vulpix and/or a Ponyta, but we have no clue where to go for our best odds.

Also, is there a way my wife and I can trade with each other? Or battle each other?

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

1 person marked this as a favorite.

My wife and I got the app and went out on our first hunt last night. We were all of 20 feet up the street when a car stopped next to us and the driver said "Are you guys playing Go?". When we said we were, he advised us that he'd spotted a Gloom half a block back, and a Dratini in the school parking lot nearby. Sadly, both were gone by the time we got to those areas. Almost an hour later (how the time flies!) another random stranger asked if we'd caught anything good (didn't even have to ask what we were doing) and advised us that the nearby pond typically had good stuff and he'd caught a Rhydon there a few days ago.

By the end of the night, I'd caught a Pidgey, a Spearow, and a Rattata. Lost a Pidgeotto to a server crash. My wife got a Pidgey, Spearow, and Nidoran. We'd spent a good chunk of the evening chasing Gastly and Drowzee all over creation, but never found them.

This morning, my wife was in the passenger seat on my drive into work, and was scooping up new pokemon left and right. Don't even know everything she got. Totally jealous.

We'll see how my lunch break goes.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

4 people marked this as a favorite.

Sounds great! If your own pleasant manner manages to get absorbed into the PFS leadership culture in place of what's currently considered acceptable, then I'd call that a win. :)

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Wei Ji the Learner wrote:
Jiggy wrote:
Also be aware that if a specific poster has a trend toward toxicity, you can email community@paizo.com to report them. No idea what happens once you do, but there you go.
While that would be a 'nice option' I'm not going to insist that my sense of toxicity is at the same standard or tolerance as someone else. If I start going that way, I become as bad as the individual in question.

That's why emailing that address is a means of communicating with the moderation team, rather than a means of you enforcing things yourself. Maybe you have a lower threshold than what the forum's standard is and nothing happens, or maybe they agree about the toxicity and take action. You just give them the information, and let them decide what to do with it. Letting them know you're finding Poster X consistently irksome does NOT equate to insisting upon the enforcement of your own toxicity threshold.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Caineach wrote:
Jiggy wrote:

Nearly a year ago, I was commenting to my wife that it'd be cool to implement something like this. Totes claiming credit.

Now, how good of a device do I need in order to get started?

I give credit to google's 2014 April Fools

Nonsense! If I didn't know about it, it doesn't count! It's my idea! WHERE ARE MY ROYALTIES?!

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Nearly a year ago, I was commenting to my wife that it'd be cool to implement something like this. Totes claiming credit.

Now, how good of a device do I need in order to get started?

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

1 person marked this as a favorite.
thegreenteagamer wrote:
1.) Having a GM that actually knows the rules. It's infuriating as a player to know your GM is wrong on a call and shut up and take it until the session is over. If I know that I know that I know that they're wrong, it's like nails on a chalkboard to not lawyer up. It's unfortunate to have a nearly eidetic memory when the person in charge gets stuff wrong all the time. Yeah, I can shut up, and I absolutely do unless the GM asks me, but when I'm the GM, I can rest assured that if I correct a player, I'm just doing my job instead of being a rules lawyer. Being stressless on this issue is fun.

One nice thing about PbP is that there's a space for out-of-game dialogue (like rules disputes, and plenty else) in the form of a dedicated Discussion thread. So you can pop in there and point something out, and there's no worry about disrupting the game because it's in a whole different thread.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Tormsskull wrote:
I think its important in most game systems to keep level 1 as a novice. It seems that there is a certain segment of players that want their characters to be accomplished heroes at level 1, regardless of the system used.

Anyone else chuckling at the irony here? :)


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Aaaaand I'm back! To my surprise, I didn't get much chance to check on PbPs while I was out, but I'm working on them now.

Relatedly, prior to going on vacation I messaged Wraith to ask if she was still around, since she hadn't posted in two weeks. She hasn't replied, so unfortunately she's no longer part of the campaign.

That leaves a 4-PC party. As we advance toward the resolution of this arc, be thinking about what you'd prefer: to continue with a party of four; to recruit a new fifth PC; or to let the campaign resolve at the end of this arc. Feel free to discuss back and forth here in discussion.

In the meantime, I'm going to retcon Wraith out of the current fight, removing her opponent and moving Gwen over to where the rest of the action is.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

1 person marked this as a favorite.
James Risner wrote:

I wish there was a fix for the toxicity, I personally know people turned away by it.

I believe the root cause is some posters believe the rules are written like computer code with only one way to interpret them and they know the correct way.

Well, that's one of the causes.

I've also encountered the following:


  • GMs declaring "That rule/FAQ is clearly cheese, despite being official; sometimes Paizo is wrong. I won't be allowing it at my table," with no repercussions from leadership, and heaps of verbal abuse to anyone who points out that that's not allowed.
  • Folks sending PMs or personal emails for no other purpose than to cuss people out for things like having pointed out their circular logic in the rules forum.
  • Folks who respond to rules that explicitly contradict their view by saying "Well, it's ambiguous, and as GM I have the right to adjudicate gray areas" and cite rules that are silent on a given topic as "supporting" their views that were already disproven elsewhere.
  • VOs who cry wolf "cry rules lawyer" against differing opinions, even when the differing opinion is a plain-english reading of the rule and their own "interpretation" is a tortured twisting of the language.
  • Leadership figures (VOs/multi-star GMs) who respond to requests to cease their verbal abuse by stating that the fact they haven't been stripped of their titles/removed from PFS proves they're not doing anything wrong.
  • Plenty of other stories I could tell.

But, yes, there is also some toxicity from folks who behave as you described. They're in there too. But you have to be wearing some pretty big blinders to pin that little subgroup as the categorical "root cause" of the PFS forums' toxicity. Correspondingly, whatever solution one might try to implement will need to cover a lot more bases than the single one you identified.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Mudfoot wrote:

On the face of it, a penalty to strength (including that from RoE) doesn't affect carrying capacity. And likewise any temporary bonus doesn't affect it either. Is this right?

Regarding STR penalty:

Core Rulebook wrote:
Some spells and abilities cause you to take an ability penalty for a limited amount of time. While in effect, these penalties function just like ability damage...
Core Rulebook wrote:

Diseases, poisons, spells, and other abilities can all deal damage directly to your ability scores. This damage does not actually reduce an ability, but it does apply a penalty to the skills and statistics that are based on that ability.

For every 2 points of damage you take to a single ability, apply a –1 penalty to skills and statistics listed with the relevant ability.

You could debate whether carrying capacity is a "statistic listed with the relevant ability", but even if it is, then the result is to "apply a —1 penalty to [carrying capacity]", whatever the hell that would mean.

As for temporary bonuses, there's actually a FAQ explaining that temporary bonuses are supposed to affect everything that a permanent bonus would affect. This sort of leaves some unanswered questions about the purpose of some actual rules language in the Core Rulebook, but hey, internal consistency was never one of Pathfinder's strengths. :/

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Jessica Price wrote:
Jiggy wrote:

Could have said "for those who have an issue with" in order to communicate the same message, sans the belittlement of holders of opposing viewpoints.

I don't remember exactly what I posted in here before, but I know I've since come around to acceptance of the singular "they". However, you were not helpful/relevant in making that happen. Change how you approach disagreements, and maybe next time you will be.

"I'll support people respecting your wish to be called by your pronouns, but only if you ask in ways I like."

That's known as tone policing. Don't do it.

Didn't do it.

EDIT: More specifically, I very clearly stated that I had already decided to use the desired pronouns, prior to and independently of Caineach's post. I then also, additionally, separately suggested a way for them to be nicer and perhaps find more success in the future.

The connection of dependency, that I will only say "they" if I'm asked a certain way, is something you made up yourself.

You criticized me for your own words, rather than mine.

I request that you not do that anymore. And whether you honor that request or not, I'm still going to try to listen and learn and get better and better at understanding and respecting the people around me.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

1 person marked this as a favorite.
NenkotaMoon wrote:
Then why have classes, what makes each unique.

Things other than what they add to their d20 rolls, funnily enough.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I don't believe there's a universal mechanic that explicitly mentions that function, so assigning it to a skill seems appropriate.

However, Sense Motive? I have no idea why your GM thinks Sense Motive is a more appropriate skill than Heal for making a medical assessment of an injured creature. Or are we talking about if someone's trying to pretend to be more/less injured than they really are, making it Bluff versus Sense Motive?

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Hmm wrote:
And Jiggy, your point about how gamer talk can be seen by other posters is a good one. I did a search and found at least 10 Hmm posts in Gamer Talk -- probably all from PFS threads that got moved, or me following a link from elsewhere. So I've been in that forum without even realizing it!

Yep, the internet may have its flaws, but it also has assets; interconnectivity is one of them. :)

Quote:
I'm sorry you gave up on PFS. I enjoyed playing with you!

And I you! Sadly, you (and those like you) were outnumbered.

Quote:
But I'm glad you're still part of the PFS boards.

Huh?

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

6 people marked this as a favorite.
Hmm wrote:

Hey Chris and other Friendly Forum Staff --

The PFS forums can get really grumpy at times*. I'd like to start a thread with suggestions about productive and friendly ways to disagree. I want to write it for the PFS forum, about the PFS forum, without naming names or pointing fingers. I'm a fairly tactful poster, and I think that I could manage this balancing act, but I'm worried about two things.

THING ONE: Would a thread of friendly suggestions be considered over stepping into moderator territory?

THING TWO: Would it be considered off-topic? I'm afraid that it would immediately get moved to website feedback or gamer talk. If I started such a thread, and it stayed polite, would it be possible for it to stay in the PFS forum for a bit?

Hmm

___
* The most recent flamewar was especially toxic. It made me feel horrid, and caused at least a few of the other women posters I know to wonder if they even want to be in PFS.

You could always go ahead and write it, let it be in Gamer Talk, and continually link to it whenever it's relevant to an active PFS thread. It's not like you need to meet a minimum Gamer Talk activity quota before you can engage in a major conversation there. ;) As more people read and like it, there will also be more people who link it and encourage others to read it.

I've seen a similar phenomenon take place elsewhere on the boards. For example, there used to be an astute poster named Grick who frequented the Rules forum and wrote an excellent guide to how the Magus' Spellstrike and Spell Combat class features work (because lots of people don't get it at first). That existed over in the Rules forum, but the people who saw it there would save the post (whether as a "favorite" or with the "list" feature) and then link it whenever the topic came up in any other forum: Advice, Houserules, General Discussion, wherever. I've seen it with other posts as well.

Just because it's in Gamer Talk doesn't mean only "the Gamer Talk posters" will see it. Some of them will also be PFS forum posters, and they (along with you) will link it in relevant PFS threads. Then some of the PFS posters will get to see it even if they never otherwise go to Gamer Talk, and they too will save a link. If people like it, its presence will snowball, possibly to the point of it not even mattering which forum it's in at all, as everybody reaches it through links or the "recent threads" sidebar.

Even though I've personally given up on PFS, I'm still totally in favor of those who can still wring some good out of it fighting to protect it. Best of luck to you. :)

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

7 people marked this as a favorite.

You might be looking at poor examples, Tequila Sunrise.

One that I remember causing a big kerfuffle wasn't actually a feat, but an item: the potion sponge. It's a special item whose primary purpose is to enable the underwater consumption of potions. I heard lots of complaints (this was in my PFS days) from players who previously believed their potions could be consumed underwater already, who now felt like an item from a book they didn't own was taking that away.

Or if you want a truly atrocious feat example, try... crap, I forget the name. Something like "Helpless Prisoner"...? It's a gnome-only feat that enables you to use the Bluff skill to convince a guard that your manacles are too tight in hopes that they'll loosen them so that when you later try to escape, you get a minor bonus to your Escape Artist check to get out of your bonds. You have to be a gnome, you have to have the feat, and I think there might have been some other prereq as well.

Your own examples don't sound that bad to me, just like you found for yourself. But there are some real stinkers out there, too.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

1 person marked this as a favorite.
thejeff wrote:
Jiggy wrote:
cuatroespada wrote:
Jiggy wrote:
Lazlo.Arcadia wrote:
As for the assumption that everyone other than PC's were 1 - 3 commoners, that is not what I said.

What you said:

"RAW puts the total world population at 95% Non-PC classed (most of the world are level 1 - 3 commoners)..."
A mid-sentence parenthetical statement is a clarification of what came right before it. So when you said "most of the world are level 1-3 commoners" as a parenthetical explanation, you were defining your previous statement. That is, you stated that 95% of the population was non-PC-classed, and then explicitly defined that statement to be a reference to level 1-3 commoners.
Jiggy, that's not necessarily true. a parenthetical statement isn't necessarily an appositive. it's just more information. that might be to specify or it might just be extra. i read it to mean that most of that 95% were 1-3 commoners not that the entire 95% were.
** spoiler omitted **
** spoiler omitted **

I promise I'm done now:

What's that got to do with anything? I was talking about the meaning of what he said, not whether or not one or both statements were accurate.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

1 person marked this as a favorite.
cuatroespada wrote:
Jiggy wrote:
Lazlo.Arcadia wrote:
As for the assumption that everyone other than PC's were 1 - 3 commoners, that is not what I said.

What you said:

"RAW puts the total world population at 95% Non-PC classed (most of the world are level 1 - 3 commoners)..."
A mid-sentence parenthetical statement is a clarification of what came right before it. So when you said "most of the world are level 1-3 commoners" as a parenthetical explanation, you were defining your previous statement. That is, you stated that 95% of the population was non-PC-classed, and then explicitly defined that statement to be a reference to level 1-3 commoners.
Jiggy, that's not necessarily true. a parenthetical statement isn't necessarily an appositive. it's just more information. that might be to specify or it might just be extra. i read it to mean that most of that 95% were 1-3 commoners not that the entire 95% were.

Spoiler'd for derailing:
The phrase inside the parentheses was "most of the world", not "most of them" or "most of said group" or "most of that 95%" or even just the vague and interpretable "most".

Alternatively, if we had been in a discussion of a population that extended beyond "the world" (such as a sci-fi universe where people lived on the world, the moon, and in a space station), then the original "95% of the population" could have been all-encompassing while the "most of the world" was only the subgroup living on the planet. However, this was clearly not the context of the discussion.

Therefore, there is no valid reading in which the group referenced in parentheses is a smaller sub-grouping within the original 95%. Had they been two separate sentences, then that would have been sufficient separation to allow a distinction between the "95%" and the "most"; however, the use of parentheses connects them closely.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Lazlo.Arcadia wrote:
As for the assumption that everyone other than PC's were 1 - 3 commoners, that is not what I said.

What you said:

"RAW puts the total world population at 95% Non-PC classed (most of the world are level 1 - 3 commoners)..."
A mid-sentence parenthetical statement is a clarification of what came right before it. So when you said "most of the world are level 1-3 commoners" as a parenthetical explanation, you were defining your previous statement. That is, you stated that 95% of the population was non-PC-classed, and then explicitly defined that statement to be a reference to level 1-3 commoners.

So that's why people took you to mean that: because that's what you actually said. If you don't want the two statements to be connected so closely, then don't use functions like parentheses to explicitly connect them. If they're separate, state them separately.

Now I'm afraid you've got a bit of de-confusion work to do.

Quote:
...and to be equally honest have not yet had the time to read up on the Ultimate Rulership / Kingdom building material recently released by Paizo / Pathfinder.

I can't speak for everyone else in the thread, but I've only been referencing the Core Rulebook and the Gamemastery Guide, not anything "recently released" that you wouldn't have had time to look at. Core Rulebook says there are five NPC classes (one of them a spellcaster) and eleven core PC classes (seven of them spellcasters). The GMG is what contains the settlement rules being discussed (regarding maximum spellcasting level in a given town size, etc).

That's what forms the baseline of how common magic is in Pathfinder. Sounds like it differs significantly from 3.0, then? I wouldn't know, as I haven't played 3.0.

Quote:
Either way, are you guys using a different reference doc for building settlements? If so what have you found that works well for you?

I think most people either use a published town, use the settlement rules from the GMG (or a modified version of them), or just free-hand it.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

1 person marked this as a favorite.
taks wrote:
Not sure I can get into PBP. Seems too slow. I'm an anxious anticipator and would probably lose my $@#! waiting around. :)

That's why you join multiple campaigns. ;)

My general routine is that I have a couple of spare minutes every now and then at work, so I'll check up on my various games and make short posts. If I need to make a long post (more common when I'm the GM), it waits until lunch. In total, I'm usually posting multiple times per day while still leaving my evenings free for spending time with my wife or doing errands or whatever. Or if I do have some downtime in the evenings, I can post even more. :D

If I were only in one game, I'd probably go crazy too. But with multiples, I've actually heard of people having to drop out of games because they got into so many at once that they couldn't handle it all. So, PbP might be worth a second look.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Tormsskull wrote:

Hello all,

I've noticed a trend with 5e in which a lot of the players that are new are being introduced to the hobby by way of watching recorded / livestreamed games.

Really? That's kind of fascinating. Where can I look at this data?

Quote:

The expectations that these new players and DMs seem to have is far different from what I am used to.

The two expectations that stand out to me are high production values and a fairly railroaded type of game.

To make sure I'm understanding you, you mean when you're looking at bringing a new player into your game, they're demonstrating these expectations? Or are you encountering this expectations in some other context? (Also, when you say "expectation", do you mean "requirement" or "anticipation"?)

Quote:
Has anyone else noticed this or have any experience with the impact of these type of games on the player base?

I was barely aware that these gameplay videos even existed, so I've got nothin', sorry.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Zhangar wrote:
...explaining that less than 0.1% of Korvosa's population is capable to magically curing disease. (Or to be more precise, out of a population of 18,486 people, only about a dozen of them can remove disease.)

I would imagine this has more to do with demographics of levels than with demographics of casters/non-casters.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Lazlo.Arcadia wrote:

As I looked into it deeper, some of the demographics involved started to unfold for me, here is what I came to understand.

1) Disclaimer: my campaign is hard capped at level 13 (vs the level 20 of PF RAW), which means it's spell levels are capped at 7th level spells. It is a low magic environment with few magic items. It is based on that statement these figures were generated.

Noted.

Quote:
2) RAW puts the total world population at 95% Non-PC classed (most of the world are level 1 - 3 commoners), and only the remaining 5% as possessing a PC class.

First, I can't seem to find where any published Pathfinder material says that 95% of of the population is limited to non-PC classes. Where did you get that number?

Second, why have you combined all the non-PC-classed population into just commoners, with no adepts, experts, aristocrats, or warriors? Even if we take your word that 95% of the population is NPC-classed, that doesn't mean they're all commoners. Theoretically, they might be evenly distributed between the NPC classes, which would put 19% of the world population as being adepts. Combined with the PC-classed population, that means that 1 in 5 people in the world are spellcasters.

So where are you getting these ideas about "the world is 95% commoners"? You need to back that up. I mean, sure, maybe that's how YOUR campaign world is set up (you did say it's low magic), but you're claiming that this is the written default, not your campaign. What gives?

Quote:
3) Of the 5% with PC classes, 4% are Non-spellcasters (Fighter, Rogue, etc) & the remaining 1% are the spell casters (combined arcane and divine).

Putting aside the population percentage issue that I've already mentioned, there are 11 classes just in the Core Rulebook. Seven of them are spellcasters. That's more than half.

So when more than half of the Core PC classes are spellcasters, why are you saying they comprise only a fifth of the PC-classed population? How are you getting to that conclusion?

Quote:
4) This amounts to about 10,000 casters, across all classes and levels, out of a 1 million population. It also means that martial characters (non-casters) are 400 times more likely to appear than a caster of any class.

I wonder what the statistics would look like based on valid published information.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I have one face-to-face group that meets every week, but sometimes I or the GM or the host can't make it, so I probably average about twice a month, or a little more.

The rest of my gaming is via Play-by-Post (currently two games as GM, three as a player), and is therefore daily.

1 to 50 of 4,227 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2016 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com 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.