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

Kain Darkwind's page

Goblin Squad Member. Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber. 1,630 posts. 3 reviews. No lists. 1 wishlist.


RSS

1 to 50 of 1,630 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

It is pretty obviously a charge. Otherwise they would have said that you can teleport and attack, not make a special charge.

Things that function on a charge would seem to function while using this feat.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Set wrote:
Readerbreeder wrote:
@Set: I missed that about Wintergreen; was that based on a significant piece of an episode, or a throwaway line/easter egg that I missed?

It was mentioned a few times, and I vaguely recall some sort of fight between Slade and Wintergreen, where, IIRC, Slade finally ended up killing him. Blah, blah, we used to be best friends, saved each others lives, and then teary betrayal and stabby-stab.

I might be paraphrasing that a bit...

:)

Oliver and Yao Fei confronted a man wearing the Deathstroke mask several times in the flashbacks from season 1. This man worked for Eddie Fyers on the Isle.

That was Wintergreen. Slade told Oliver that they were both Australian SF when Oliver found Slade's own deathstroke mask.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Quark Blast wrote:
Could I actually say anything to persuade you? Be honest now when you answer that question for yourself.

Reminding me to be honest suggests that there is a choice there that I would find objectionable to the point of preferring to lie about making it. This isn't your high school, where popularity or peer pressure is somehow going to try and make me feel bad about expressing myself. You ask as though you expect that I will have to answer 'yes', or sound as though I possess a closed mind.

You have spent the entirety of our interaction together degrading the initial amount of credibility I ascribe to a person on the internet that I do not know.

Not only have you shown yourself to be the type of person who is quick to assert things without evidence or research, but you have also demonstrated that when you are confronted with evidence to the contrary, you simply ignore it, pretend it said what you said, or claim to be arguing something else.

As a result, there is nothing you could say right now to persuade me of anything. I wouldn't take your word on the subject of the peanut butter and jelly sandwich.

That doesn't mean you couldn't alter that opinion. There are people on these very boards who I held an opinion about who have changed it. They didn't change it to suit me, either, they changed it by demonstrating qualities, on their own, that they had not previously demonstrated. That isn't inherently good or bad, either, one can adjust a poor or positive impression. That is because I adjust my own opinions based on new evidence that I am confronted with.

There's the honest answer you requested. Do with it what you will.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Quark Blast wrote:
2) To the extent that the problem is solvable, the next cycle of history* will wash back solutions the other way.

First off, you have demonstrated repeatedly that you lack the credibility to utilize the word 'history' in any context. You seem to make errors of assumption even given a recent slice of history such as 'the span of this thread'. At this point, one would likely have to Google or otherwise confirm even the most innocuous use of the term by you, such as 'I was enrolled in a history class'.

Second off, history has shown repetition and progress throughout its span. For you to claim that a cycle of history will undo any solution is, once again, ignoring history and its tales of solutions that have stuck, and which are around with us even today. We make use of breakthroughs that are over thousands and even tens of thousands of years old every day. They haven't been washed away yet. Would you care to offer some evidence that you can determine that which will remain and that which will fade?

You don't listen to or read what others say very well. Your general arguments are false, fallacious or rely on shifting goal posts. Often a combination of all three. In general, you've proven yourself to be an ineffective communicator of ideas. Your ability to persuade anyone of anything beyond the fact that you have poorly informed opinions has suffered as a result.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Set wrote:
Readerbreeder wrote:
Having gotten to "know" the character of Slade Wilson during the '80s run of Teen Titans, now that he's back in the main storyline I keep wondering whether Jericho or Wintergreen will show up (or the Titans themselves; does anyone know if any treatment of them aside from the animated show is in the works).

In the Arrow-verse, 'Billy' Wintergreen was another commando sent to the island, Slade's partner, who wore an identical mask and ended up on opposite sides from him, working with the bad-guys that the commandos were apparently sent to stop.

Jericho seems even less likely (with Isabel / Summer Glau's character kind of filling the protégé role on the show, and Slade no longer being a focus).

While I agree with you about Slade no longer being a focus (which is a damn shame, easily the best villain/non-original character on the show thus far), Isabel was more akin to Rose Wilson, not Jericho.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Abraham spalding wrote:

We'll get Comrade in here in a minute talking about the old myths about asceticism was just the nobility and powerful of the time trying to trick the poor into thinking being poor made them powerful.

"Me kicking you is you having power!"

Are we comparing the asceticism of monks and other such characters in myth to simple poverty?

It seems to me that many of the monastic orders, while personally poor and humble of belongings, possessed fairly extensive political power. The real kind, not simply the ability to be kicked.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Damon Griffin wrote:

Resurrecting Sara and sending her after Malcolm might make a certain amount of sense, given that he was responsible for her death; resurrecting Tommy and spending months (it should be years, but we all know what this show is like) turning him into an assassin makes no sense at all. Way too much time and effort invested for something the League can do much more easily some other way.

From the League's point of view, their best bet may be to bring Thea to Nanda Parbat for advanced training and point her at Malcolm; they get the same advantage of Malcolm having to fight his own child, without having to use the Lazarus Pit and then start training someone new from scratch.

Malcolm said Ras would kill Thea because she's the one who fired the shots that killed Sara, but Malcolm could be either wrong or lying. If he knows what drug was used to control Thea, Ras might see her as a weapon, no more deserving of punishment for Sara's death than the bow or the arrows.

Not if Tommy is already alive. Merlyn had already failed the League when Tommy died. It has been at least a year, maybe two since he died. Moreover, they did not know Thea was his child. He absolutely could be pointed at Malcom, even half-assed, hoping that he would have just enough skill to force his father into murdering him.

I'm not saying it will happen, but I'd like more Tommy than I would more Sara.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
DM Barcas wrote:
I reiterate my prediction that Tommy and/or Sara will be resurrected by the League by the end of this season. Tommy has been in way more flashbacks this season, almost unneccessarily.

I'm hoping Tommy. I'm hoping he is turned into an assassin by the league and comes after his dad.

I've been expecting a revival since I first heard that Ras was showing up this season.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Spoiler:
Chief. :( First time in a long time that a TV show hurt me like that.

I felt this show, like Agents of Shield, started slow, but once it picked up, it didn't let up. I truly hope to see more of Peggy Carter in the future.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I feel Slade just needs Oliver to give him a hug.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Aberzombie wrote:
That's weird. I could have sworn this was a thread about the Flash TV series.

You still can swear that, without changing anything. Most courts will not find you in contempt if you do.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Heimdall bugged me for a little bit when I heard, for the Norse gods shouldn't be black thing.

Then someone told me about black Vikings. If I wasn't already over it, that got me the rest of the way there.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Routh was a good Supes, in a terrible movie. Which is still more watchable than the Quest for Peace, and that had the best Superman on the screen ever.

This episode has finally started changing my opinion about Laurel. That ship has been torturously slow to turn around. I hope they can keep it up, keep it building. I'd like to like her, but she started pretty low on the list even in Season 1. Her scenes with her father, and with Felicity were good though.

On the whole though, I feel this show has lost a little bit of its steam, and it has Flash more than ready to run off with its thunder.

Spoiler:
I was a little pissed how easily the jerkwad assassin whipped Roy though. Did we really need him to get his ass kicked in front of Thea?


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Quark Blast wrote:


Nice effort. Ignores U.S. history though.

Wow. You are accusing Coriat of ignoring history?


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I'm beginning to think that John John feels that there are no fun monsters for their CR. He's listed damn near the entire Bestiary.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
kestral287 wrote:
More-vaguely-on-topic... after getting the story about the forced-level-thing from Kain, I can safely say that I would have walked immediately. Call me narrow-minded if you like, but unless there's more to the story that wasn't shared that would have immediately proven to be a game I no longer had interest in. I like my characters, and I like them on my terms.

Which is absolutely fair. Your terms may very well have been 'leave them gone'. I suppose the 'more to the story' would be the two to three years of building up trust and understanding between players and DM. Alternately, seek out the player's perspectives on the matter. It certainly wasn't an idle decision.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Rynjin wrote:

And if you have resorted to taking control of your player's characters at random times, you have VIOLATED that trust, and no longer deserve it.

There are in-game mechanics that allow you to do that. They can be avoided, and have chance of failure, as it should be. The GM suddenly deciding that a player's character is his now turns the whole game into a guessing game of when you're allowed to do things of your own free will, and when the GM is going to go "Okay, no, you don't do THAT, you do this now, I like that better".

The GM has the entire game world to play around with, he can leave 4 people alone.

It also shows a marked lack of creativity if you turn to Fiat to just make something happen, rather than working inside your limits (which are, as a GM, essentially "Don't touch the players", everything else is fair game so it's not like this is difficult).

You can change how a character speaks and acts with Dominate or Geas, or even just plain old coercion. You can replace him with a doppelganger, or his long lost twin brother.

Hell, you can even accomplish all this by speaking with his player, and convincing him to play along with whatever it is you're trying to do, like a reasonable human being.

So no, I am not narrow minded for saying it's bad form for you to "force" things on people you should not be forcing on them. I recognize that there are different ways to accomplish what I want than simply bludgeoning it with a hammer and taking the most direct route.

What you have typed here is the definition of narrow minded. Your thinking does not encompass nor acknowledge all possible scenarios, yet your judgement is being applied to them regardless.

I am happy to be the conduit for you to fulfill your need of attempting to tear down someone else's fun, and declare it unfun.

TOZ wrote:
Kain Darkwind wrote:
That trust is slow built, and the pushing must be executed carefully, but it is possible, and in fact, quite a bit of fun when done right.
Which roleplay are we talking about now, d20 or BDSM?

An apt analogy.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Rynjin wrote:

If the GM controls:

-What levels the character takes
-What thoughts he takes
-What actions he takes
-What the character says

What else is there for the player to do? Since according to Kain, I am wrong when I say the player controls those things.

Because you are wrong, in that you are acting as though that is 100% the case. As I stated, it can be the case and it might not be.

From your list above, I have, at various times, violated three of the four explicitly, and the last (thoughts) implicitly.

With regards to an earlier point you made, it is not a 'houserule' to only allow certain classes at the beginning of the game. House rules are things like allowing breath of life to be cast spontaneously as a cure spell, things that work explicitly different from tables without that rule. Beginning as wizards, or spellcasters or evil characters or paladins or non-minotaurs are just campaign choices, set at the beginning and agreed to before character creation. And I absolutely agree, that's very different than forcing a level on someone midway through the game.

With regards to your earlier attempted insult about being an insufferable $#!!, I forgive you, and your limited point of view. You're wrong, there is more in the game world than dreamed of in your narrow minded philosophy, but I will not hold it against you. Some people need to call out others for badwrongfun.

I've personally found DnD/PF to work best when there is a certain level of trust between the players and GM, trust to allow the other parties to push the boundaries. That trust is slow built, and the pushing must be executed carefully, but it is possible, and in fact, quite a bit of fun when done right.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
chbgraphicarts wrote:
Duiker wrote:
Eh, I agree with you if the situation is: "alright everyone level up to seven, I already did it for you, here are your character sheets", but I can also see it being a fun story point if done as part of a conversation between DM and players. Like, okay, the story hinges on being part of a wizards guild, so everyone has one level of wizard, and we're starting at level 2. Or giving everyone the same free level of something in the midlevels as part of a plot point.

I can kinda see that, but at the same time, I think it's better to say "it's a wizards' guild, so everyone needs to have at least a Caster Level of 1"

That still fits into the theme, but allows players to pick from: Ranger, Paladin, Bloodrager, Bard, Inquisitor, Warpriest, Magus, Summoner, Skald, Alchemist, Investigator, Wizard, Sorcerer, Witch, Cleric, Oracle, Shaman, Druid, and Arcanist.

You might think it's better, but it is just variations of a degree. I think Rynjin will agree with me here, it is still forcing an option on a PC and limiting another. The difference is only in the number of players who are feeling restricted. If you were going to take one of those classes, this 'restriction' isn't one. But if my fighter PC that I forced to take a level of barbarian was going to take a level of barbarian, it wouldn't be a restriction there either. To those PCs who really had their heart set on taking a level of fighter, neither of our options represent the ability to do what they want, and become restrictions. In a game where 'no fighters' was right up front, that isn't really a big deal. But right in the middle of things? It becomes quite the issue.

As a general rule, despite what I have done specifically, DMs are best to limit options at the outset of the game, and allow players as much choice as they are comfortable with. From there on out, it is very tricky to balance interfering in a PC like that without ruining a player's agency.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Rynjin wrote:
Kain Darkwind wrote:
Dirk Buckler wrote:
NOTE: As a DM, never try to weaken the PCs, take their stuff away, or mess around at character creation - THAT just demoralizes everyone!
I have forced particular class levels onto my PCs, and disallowed them from retraining them (although other levels are allowed to be retrained). .

This right here would make me walk, immediately.

Cut me, stab me, burn me, muilate me, kill me all you want. All that is outside forces acting on the character.

"Your character has decided to pursue this avenue of training and is so attached to it he can't ever undo it" is mucking around with s!*% the DM shouldn't be mucking around with. The player controls what the PC says, does, thinks, and takes levels in. Not you.

Actually I do. What you control is right up there at the top, the ability to walk if you don't like it. DM can't run without players, players can't play without a DM. In between those two extremes, there exists a wide spectrum of various levels of power balance. Some favor the DM, some favor the PCs. But either party can always walk away if they don't like where it sits.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Dirk Buckler wrote:
NOTE: As a DM, never try to weaken the PCs, take their stuff away, or mess around at character creation - THAT just demoralizes everyone!

I have forced particular class levels onto my PCs, and disallowed them from retraining them (although other levels are allowed to be retrained). I once ran an entire sub-adventure at high level after stripping them of all of their gear. Not only that, but I gave said gear to some of the bad guys they were facing and made them win it back the hard way. And every so often, I cut off or out one of their body parts. You can always tell a new character, because they haven't lost any organs, limbs or digits.

So I don't know about 'never'.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

As a DM, I like to give my players options, but Core seems to be where I tend to build with. Probably 80% of my stuff is built with Core, and 95% with Core plus APG. That said, I like ninjas, samurai, magi, gunslingers, etc, but as flavoring, not the main course.

The game being fun or not tends to have nothing to do with the restricted books, and everything to do with the group, the story, the DM's descriptive ability, etc. Give me an all core rogue party before you give me a jerk in our group.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

This system seems to be simply pressuring teachers even harder to give out puffery laced grades.

Make public higher education free. No student loans. Fund the public universities directly.

Seriously, what's the worst that is going to happen? Someone will trick the system into educating them twice?

Who cares? We have layabouts now, just lacking a degree, or with crippling loans that prevent them from taking part in the larger economy.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
BigDTBone wrote:
LazarX wrote:
Yes, but to use that ancedote to claim that conditions haven't changed significantly from the 1840's would be absurd to the extreme. Slavery is not presently a sanctioned activity in this country that can be applied to anyone because of the color of their skin. Where it does happen, it is an illegal underground occurrence. Or it's virtual slavery such as the cases of certain foreign born housekeepers in cities like New York.

Or in cases of 100% legal *essentially slavery* where young girls who are on their own are preyed upon, "voluntarily" taken to brothels in Nevada, and forced to stay there even during time off, not given the option to decline johns, receiving less than half of the transaction amount, and being forced to use that money to buy her own contraceptives, and pay back high interest loans issued by her employer (pimp/slave-master).

This, of course, doesn't include the compounding issue that in a non-trivial number of cases the employer intentionally addicts her to narcotics which he also sells to her at a rate that indebts her indefinitely. So the employer has a human that he makes money off of selling her body to other people, makes money from selling her narcotics, has open access to her sexually, she isn't allowed to leave, she doesn't have any money if she could leave, and she doesn't have the ability to say no to a John.

With the notable exception of the narcotics, all of this is completely legal. All of it happens everyday, and the frequency with which it happens is increasing everyday.

That is not a case of binary-semantics. That is a case of legal slavery in the United States today. To split a hair and say that *that* isn't slavery is the abuse of semantics.

Please demonstrate any of the following.

1. Someone on these boards said that modern day slavery was not slavery, or was not bad.

2. Modern day slavery is objectively worse than pre-civil war slavery.

3. You don't care about the points at hand and just want to argue about modern day slavery against men of straw.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
thejeff wrote:
Kain Darkwind wrote:

No, the point has been lost, I think, in speaking past one another.

Side A has said "Human slavery is illegal and thus drastically less widespread than it was in pre-Civil War America."

Side B has said "Human slavery still goes on today, and Side A is painting a rosy picture of its modern face."

Except no one from Side A has been claiming that modern forms of slavery are nice, pretty, kind, or non-existent.

Sort of like a family member dying is a tragedy, and a family member snapping and killing dozens of others in a mass murder is a tragedy, and yet one of those things is worse than the other. No one is trying to be unsympathetic to the first scenario.

More like Side Q said "Nothing ever gets better"

Side B has said "Human slavery is illegal and thus drastically less widespread than it was in pre-Civil War America."

Side C has said "Human slavery still goes on today, and Side B is painting a rosy picture of its modern face."

Side Q said "See, slavery still exists. Nothing ever gets better. I'm right."

Side D said "Internet arguments never get better. That much is true."

Fixed that up for us. I think Stonebreaker delivered the knockout punch awhile ago though.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

No, the point has been lost, I think, in speaking past one another.

Side A has said "Human slavery is illegal and thus drastically less widespread than it was in pre-Civil War America."

Side B has said "Human slavery still goes on today, and Side A is painting a rosy picture of its modern face."

Except no one from Side A has been claiming that modern forms of slavery are nice, pretty, kind, or non-existent.

Sort of like a family member dying is a tragedy, and a family member snapping and killing dozens of others in a mass murder is a tragedy, and yet one of those things is worse than the other. No one is trying to be unsympathetic to the first scenario.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
James Jacobs wrote:
Kain Darkwind wrote:

What would be your top 3 depictions of really scary fae creatures in fantasy literature?

What about in movies? (If you include Pan's Labyrinth, go to 4 please.:) )

(Figured since you moved on to later questions it got missed in the shuffle.)

I missed it because it required more thought than I had at the time to give to answering it, since Pan's Labyrinth IS my number one example of scary fay creatures. So, I'll leave it out of the lists below since you specifically requested that it be excluded.

Now that the work day is 5 seconds from being over, I have time to answer a bit before I head home. And since the definition of "fey/fay/fae" or however you spell it varies so widely, I'm going to define it here as being a "supernatural creature associated with the wilderness or abandoned areas of the world."

LITERATURE
1: The White People from Arthur Machen's story, "The White People"
2: The creepy denizens of the wood in Ramsey Campbell's novel, "The Darkest Part of the Woods"
3: The sinister entity from T.E.D. Klein's novel, "The Ceremonies"

FILM
1: Slenderman (from various you-tube videos and independent horror movies)
2: The Blair Witch
3: The monster from Absentia (this is more of an urban fey thing than nature, I guess)

:) Pan's Labyrinth is my favorite too. Such an awesome movie. Other than Blair Witch (and a passing familiarity with Slenderman), I'm actually familiar with none of these, so I'm going to have to check them out. Thanks James!


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

What would be your top 3 depictions of really scary fae creatures in fantasy literature?

What about in movies? (If you include Pan's Labyrinth, go to 4 please.:) )

(Figured since you moved on to later questions it got missed in the shuffle.)


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

What would be your top 3 depictions of really scary fae creatures in fantasy literature?

What about in movies? (If you include Pan's Labyrinth, go to 4 please.:) )


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I apologize for my tone being vitriolic when speaking with certain people on these boards.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Quark Blast wrote:
Coriat wrote:
Quote:

Yes, there have always been poor.

But not by the hundreds of millions

There were hundreds of millions of poor people in the world in the days of Rome too.

Specifically about two hundred and thirty million poor people during Augustus's reign.

No, I'm pretty sure most of them were employed flogg'n the dirt.

Not poking through garbage dumps looking for stuff to recycle.

Not sure what 'flogging the dirt' means, it could be farming, I suppose. The one thing I am certain of is that whenever you say "I'm pretty sure...", it's synonymous with "I'm wrong about..."

But just to give you the benefit of the doubt, are you saying that a poor farmer in antiquity was much better off than a poor person in America today? Or in Africa? Or are you saying something else entirely?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Skeld wrote:
Charles Scholz wrote:

I read about 2/3 of the books. I don't remember which book I stopped at, but I do know it was before ** spoiler omitted **

The thing that got to me was they were just too powerful. Nobody could win against them. There were never any victories, only defeats or stalemates. It got depressing.

I hate to say it, but I have not read any Star Wars books since. That includes the prequals.

Same for me. I read a couple books further into the series than you, but I got tired of it. It dragged on too long, was too monotonous, too grim-dark for no reason other than to be grim-dark, and just overall very depressing and unfun. I haven't picked up a star wars book since.

Edit: A clear casualty of the Vong war was my desire to read any more books about the Vong war.

Both of these define my position and experience precisely.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I did a rewrite of some of the rogue talents here if you are interested.

A lot of them are too limited or niche to be of use in a real game as written, so this somewhat fixes that.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I think Skull and Shackles is the best one at providing early interaction with the NPCs that are important at the end of the adventure path. Largely due to the way the AP kicks off.

Second in my mind would be Legacy of Fire, if you make sure things stay on the railroad.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Your ad hominem is a deflection from the fact you have nothing of merit to say. Like all else you've put forth, it is an opinion given with zero facts to support. Dissembling about how the graph must be a poor example of graphics is precisely the type of feckless response typified throughout your entire conversation.

It is fairly clear that when it comes to decorum, debate, the ancient world or the modern one, you are as Jon Snow.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Quark Blast wrote:

@Coriat:

If you take that graph at face value then there are no doctors (or anyone else) with an IQ above about 133.
...so I was off by 5 IQ points, my point still stands as...

You'll also note that MDs have the tightest curve and highest skew shown. Which emphatically supports my main point that Med School is one long IQ test.

Not only can you not infer from the graph properly (not 'everyone' is represented, thus taking it at face value to suggest no IQs above 133 is fallacious to begin with, ignoring the highest and lowest outliers not represented on the graph), not only can you not read the graph properly (the low point for doctors is 105, thus you were off by 20 IQ points, the difference between mental retardation and above average intelligence), but you have absolutely zero credibility when it comes to making a statement like 'this graph demonstrates the IQ test qualities of med school'.

You've literally been wrong on nearly all of your claims, the sole source of which you've provided for is your opinion. Your point not only does not stand, your entire credibility in talking about modern doctors, ancient emperors or anything in between is utterly shot. Despite that, you persist in acting as though you are the one ahead in the debate. Anyone with an ounce of integrity would pause at this point, and reeducate themselves on the topics before speaking further.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Got my package today with all books involved. Thanks Paizo!


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Matthew Downie wrote:
stormcrow27 wrote:
Swarms are easy to handle if you have anything that does energy damage. That's why carrying torches is handy at any level, because you can burn (provided the swarm isn't immune or resistant to fire) them

I don't think there's any rules support for hurting a swarm of spiders or whatever with a torch. Torches don't do area effect damage.

"If a torch is used in combat, treat it as a one-handed improvised weapon that deals bludgeoning damage equal to that of a gauntlet of its size, plus 1 point of fire damage."

So if you are facing a swarm that is immune to your weapon damage, you can use a torch to deal them 1 point of fire damage.

So like 9 rounds of combat (divided by the number of players with torches) for a CR 1 spider swarm, assuming you successfully hit AC 17 each round.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Speaking is a free action, but you still need your mouth free to do so.

Listening (passively) is a free/non-action, but you still need your ears to do so.

Manipulating material components might be a free action, but that doesn't circumvent the need for a means with which to do so. It doesn't just automatically happen because it's a free action.

Schrodinger's wizard is not in the box though, this seems like a simple enough obstacle to overcome.

Regarding the earlier discussion about time stop and getting the rest of your turn. Please note that fireball, magic missile and wall of force do not say you get the rest of your turn after casting them either, but you still do, because they are standard actions. The reason Anzyr doesn't get the rest of his turn is not because time stop robs you of a move action, but because maximizing it with a metamagic rod makes it a full round action.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

My players complained about clockwork soldiers (CR 5ish?), at level 14. What are you going to do?

I mean, it isn't like I had stripped them of all their magical gear and forced them to get out of an antimagic, wall of force, adamantine prison practically naked and then attacked them with these soldiers while they had no protective gear.

Apparently clockwork soldiers have high hit and damage for their CR. Who knew?


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Seannoss wrote:
And Anzyr... thanks for all this (seriously!) I do not play high levels much and after this discussion have zero interest in it ever. And if I run something at higher levels, this will give me a list of things to ban/nerf.

This right here is one of the only reasons I ever bother to engage Anzyr on these boards. Not for him, but for those out there who are buying into his product. He portrays one very specific possibility for high level play, Seannoss, and dismisses all other possibilities as 'not the rules'. His specific possibility is not fun for everyone, but it is presented as just 'the way things are'.

You don't need a giant nerf bat to have fun with high level games. Just like you don't need a houserule to determine that a given question is 'hard' despite it normally falling under 'easy' sans mitigating circumstances. There are plenty of other ways to use the rules. Hopefully you don't let Anzyr drive you away from something that has been rewarding and fun for thousands of quieter, less obstinate players across the world.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

The date for this blog entry appears to be a year off.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
BigDTBone wrote:
Kain Darkwind wrote:
I'm actually quite uninterested in combing the rulebooks to find some statement that supports the common sense innate within determining that the provincial level 1 rogue who has grown up in Diamond Lake cannot use his +6 Knowledge (local) modifier to answer questions about destinations on the other side of the world. Much less that those questions are the exact same DC as those about the locale with which is he eminently familiar. That you pretend such is otherwise is simply testament to the fact that you are unable to understand or accommodate other points of view. That you do so belligerently and dismissively is your own personal flawed choice to make, but contributes to me not intending to retread this tired ground about your fantasies of martial inferiority. My suspicion is that even logical and reasonable concerns about caster/martial imbalance are ignored or passed over by the developers, due to the sheer degree of hyperbolic claims made by you and those who share your views.

Common sense or no, Anzyr has the right of how knowledge (local) works. There isn't really any room for saying otherwise. The fact that you refuse to even *look* for the rule to support your claim implies that you already know this but simply don't like it.

My sense is this is true of martial/caster disparity as well. You know it is real but simply don't like the idea so you deny it.

See Anzyr's response to Coriat, who bothered to provide rules (which have been provided to him before)? That's why. It isn't because I 'know I'm wrong'. It's because the convoluted and obstinate way Anzyr presents his ideas is immune to reasonable discourse, and I'll not waste effort on his behalf.

There is absolutely nothing wrong (or houserule/nerf/dick DMing) with evaluating whether the information sought is easy, moderate or difficult. For the planetary traveler to Castrovel, his knowledge (local) eventually comes to encompass that which he's learned on Castrovel, and basic questions about their society ARE easy for him. The round after he arrives? They aren't.

As for the martial/caster disparity, I believe there are issues. I also believe that the incredibly loud vocal minority has distorted the conversation to the point where their nonsensical scenarios are the face of the argument to the developers and have caused it to be completely ignored. This isn't a 'with me or against me' issue. There is room for concern without being a fanatic ranting.


1 person marked this as FAQ candidate.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I'm actually quite uninterested in combing the rulebooks to find some statement that supports the common sense innate within determining that the provincial level 1 rogue who has grown up in Diamond Lake cannot use his +6 Knowledge (local) modifier to answer questions about destinations on the other side of the world. Much less that those questions are the exact same DC as those about the locale with which is he eminently familiar. That you pretend such is otherwise is simply testament to the fact that you are unable to understand or accommodate other points of view. That you do so belligerently and dismissively is your own personal flawed choice to make, but contributes to me not intending to retread this tired ground about your fantasies of martial inferiority. My suspicion is that even logical and reasonable concerns about caster/martial imbalance are ignored or passed over by the developers, due to the sheer degree of hyperbolic claims made by you and those who share your views.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Thank you for proving my point on Knowledge. Knowledge (local of everywhere).

Only in the same way that walking down the road is in the game. It is something you can attempt within the rules, something that you use the rules to work for. But no one is 'entitled' to get down the road without incident. In fact, most of the game is based on the idea that there will be incidents. It is comically simply for a DM to prevent a PC from gaining free wishes, while still allowing them to utilize those other methods for other purposes. Perhaps even to gain paid-for wishes. Since none of your methods other than blood money rely on your own innate power, the entities involved can simply say 'no', or cut you off after a few, or raise the price, etc. In regards to Blood Money shenanigans, it seems fairly simple to ambush such fools with dispels or to not allow bonuses to your ability score to apply. It's silly to say that the PCs can change tactic to get their free wishes, but the DM can't possibly adjust tactics to ensure that they pay for them.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Anzyr wrote:

Power attack with a high STR and a two-handed weapon aren't a real thing in any game where they are not desired in. I'm not sure what that has to do with anything though. Could you elaborate?

Unlikely to your satisfaction, given that you believe and argue strenuously that a DC 10 knowledge check gives you the names of hundreds (or all) metropolis sized cities on a planet.

However, given that your satisfaction means very little to me, 'free wishes' isn't something innate in the game, making it different from things like elves, the sorcerer class, Power Attack, etc. It is an interpretation of something that exists in the game (wish) and potential ways to obtain these things. Saying 'no' to the typically convoluted methods employed is not a rule change.

I agree that simulacrum could be better worded, or at least examples given. But by its current wording, the DM, not the player, gets to determine 'appropriate' by whatever standard they choose. And that includes nixing 9th level spell-like abilities. If those are appropriate to the style of game they are running, great. If not, kiss them goodbye. That's not a houserule, that's a ruling. Which is what the DM is for.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I happen to have that 'developmental disorder', Chris, and I don't know why people act ashamed about it. And I wasn't conflating anything. I know all too well how irritating it is to disregard a rule like it wasn't there. I have found more fellows on the spectrum gaming than I have at awareness conventions. It's not some dirty secret that you can't discuss or mention.

On topic, free wishes aren't a real thing in any game where they are not a desired thing.

(Also, I didn't see any replies to my comment, so if you were upset or had something particularly clever to say about it, feel free to pm me.)


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Wrong. Invisibility has two advantages. 1. Your opponents lose their Dexterity. 2. Your opponents have to guess which square you are in.

Pinpointing you only negates (2).

As for a creature covered in flour or tar, that's got to be up to the DM. I personally would have it negate invisibility, same as glitterdust or whatever that sparkle spell is.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Coriat wrote:
ckdragons wrote:
Coriat wrote:
Our game has actually gone the opposite route of late, keeping the numbers lower but making it harder to completely bypass DR.
Would you mind elaborating on your game mechanics with DR?
I actually don't recall or have handy the exact details (it's largely implemented on the DM side), but I'll go looking.

I have the following DR.

DR/magic (greater magic requires +3, high magic requires +5, epic requires +6)
DR/alignment (good, evil, chaotic, lawful)
DR/material (adamantine, cold iron, silver, etc)
DR/type (slashing, bludgeoning, piercing)
DR/-

A +5 club (for instance) doesn't penetrate anything other than high magic and lower. Not DR/evil, not DR/slashing.

And we don't use the nonsense "+6 total enhancement bonus" crap for DR/epic. If you don't have a +4 appropriate bane weapon, or a +6 actual enhancement bonus, you don't go through it.

A paladin's smite evil penetrates DR/good. Not all DR.

Mythic as well. Mythic abilities that allow you to 'ignore DR', allow you to 'penetrate epic DR'. Not holy or barbarian or such.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Modules, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

No apologies necessary, Sara Marie, things happen. Especially during holidays. Thank you for making it right.

1 to 50 of 1,630 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2015 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.