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

Kelsey MacAilbert's page

Pathfinder Society Member. 3,360 posts (6,516 including aliases). 3 reviews. 2 lists. 1 wishlist. 63 aliases.


1 to 50 of 356 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | next > last >>

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Since this is the house rule thread, I will say that, while I do prefer perma-death (sorry, but I like death to be ultimate and inviolate), I do love resuscitation. I even got the idea from real life: if someone's heart stops, but you get it restarted within a few minutes, you might be able to preserve their life. I went with the exact same logic, just with healing magic. If you can get the dead character's HP above their death threshold within a few minutes of death, you can bring that character back. After a few minutes, it's just too late. It nicely reconciles perma-death and being able to keep characters, since a few minutes gives you at least 30 rounds.

The visual of a Paladin or Cleric defibrillating somebody with healing magic is also just plain awesome.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'm always writing awesome character concepts, such as above. Then I GM instead.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
thegreenteagamer wrote:
I like this one, as long as the player can't cherry pick the given up stuff, but its GM chosen, otherwise you end up with build-a-class.

Well, I use Talented Classes, so build-a-class is something of a possibility already. In my eyes, it's on the balance of things a positive.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

Firearms and bows in the same setting. At first, I was strongly in the camp of having guns either be the primary weapon of the setting or not having guns at all, with no in between. Mixing guns with longbows and crossbows made me unhappy. Now mixing guns with bows and crossbows is exactly what I do in my campaign setting. Not really sure what changed my mind.

Summoners. Used to ban them completely. Then I watched Fairy Tail, and now I don't ban them, even if I'm unlikely to play one myself.

Anything that doesn't have a full BAB. Back when I played 3.5, I wouldn't play anything that was missing even one point of BAB. That changed when I switched over to Pathfinder and saw how cool the Witch and Sorcerer were.

The biggest one, however, is Psionics/Rune Mages. Originally wasn't too interested in psionics, despite having the Dreamscarred Press books. Thought about refluffing psionics, saw the rune mage suggestion, and rejected it as not particularly good and went looking for other fluff. See, to me runes are Germanic writing, like so. I do think that picture looks pretty cool, but using Germanic writing as the basis for an entire magic system? That just doesn't work for me. Then I had the thought that since, to me, runes come from a language, they are a means for a spellcaster to communicate intent. Which in turn means that a spellcaster who's language does not use runes should use their own alphabet and language. So, the first picture remains a completely valid choice for how a rune mage might use runes, but this is just as valid. If you speak a Latin based language, it even makes more sense. Likewise, you can do this, this, this, this, or this. There isn't a set alphabet. Even those who use the same alphabet may use very different art styles. Of course, runes drawn in the air during combat are not so fancy as the runes one would use when enchanting an item. No time for that kind of detail. Rune mages should be the best when it comes to magic items, in fact, because flavor.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

If you really want to take two archetypes, but they both replace the same ability, I'll allow you to have one replace a different ability if I feel it will be balanced.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
GentleGiant wrote:


Does that mean that everyone here has a degree? Not at all. We still have a lot of unskilled labourers. We still have people who go the tradesman route.

In America we have very poor provisions for trade educations. We have a (quite disgusting, honestly) tendency to look down on people who work in the trades, and, while we certainly have trade schools, they don't really get much in the way of support. Most of the big ones you see advertised like ITT Tech or Devry are showing off their computer technology and medical programs and maybe automotive or welding, with construction and maintenance and the like not really getting attention. Plus, ITT Tech and Devry are both extremely shady institutions, with ITT Tech having been sued by the Feds last year and both having an absolute laundry list of complaints against them. America's trade school scene is pretty bad, and we need to stop looking down on trades workers and laborers.

In fact, you know who seems to do a lot of trade schooling? The community colleges. That might we an angle worth looking into. Free community college plus buffing up the resources for the trade programs and making an effort to teach HS students that trade careers are worthwhile. Boom. Now young people have an accessible alternative path to academia.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Quark Blast wrote:
Freehold DM wrote:
stuff... While I see where you are coming from, personally speaking, I'm going to need to see some evidence of this- after all, we have both Pell and TAP- neither are forcing professors to pass students. Why would that happen here? ...stuff...

Ever hear of grade inflation? Is that coming solely from Pell/TAP? Don't know but it can't be helping.

Public institutions that are chronically being underfunded (State U e.g.) are loathe to say no to easy money. A kid walks in with funding, no matter what the source, and as long as their activities aren't criminal, there is financial pressure to let them stay regardless of performance.

Give them a "C-" and keep the money coming in or give them a "F+" and lose the student and her money? Hmmm? Let's see. The college has a potential budget shortfall so.... sure, give'm a "C-" and let'm stay.

Not to mention all the hassle an "underpaid" college professor has to go through if she actually dares to flunk a deserving student. The horror!

I see students get failed in every single class I take. In fact, it is in every instructor's contract that they get to grade as they wish, and it is grounds for a lawsuit if the college tries to interfere outside of equal opportunity violations. Since we are a CC, we have a lot of transfer students. If transfer students start failing university courses, the universities take a look at our standards of education (yes, the universities actually do keep track of the academic performance of CC students by both CC of origin and major). That leads to articulation getting pulled or students from our college being less likely to be accepted for transfer by those universities, and that would hurt us worse than failing students getting thrown out and not bringing in money would. So, we have more interest in not bumping an F to a C.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Usual Suspect wrote:
Kelsey Arwen MacAilbert wrote:

I don't like it when GMs use elements of my backstories as adventure hooks. I'd like my characters to actually be able to have family without worrying about them being used as hostages or killed.

Usual Suspect wrote:
But any post start use of your back story should be up to your GM. If you put relatives, loved ones, and friends into your background story you have to expect, and even want the GM to make them part of the story. Otherwise, your entire life is just cheep window dressing.

I wouldn't want it any other way. I put a LOT of effort into backstories. I don't want the GM to come and start messing with that effort. I would also like to focus on actually doing the job my character was hired to do, not gallivanting about paying more attention to her personal affairs than her job.

I think the reason I dislike it so heavily is that I tend to play characters in positions of authority, and one of my biggest crime drama pet peeves is the storyline where a cop's family is kidnapped or killed and the cop goes after the perpetrator. That's a situation where the cop should not be allowed to have any involvement in investigating the case or pursing the perpetrator under threat of suspension or termination from the force, not a situation where the cop should go after the guys who did it. It's a massive conflict of interest likely to result in the cop losing control or a court case having serious vulnerabilities. In my mind, my character would be obligated to stand down and let somebody else rescue her family or kill the murderers, not go on a quest to resolve the issue herself.

I get that, Kelsey. And a GM shouldn't do things like that all the time; or even regularly. It should be a rare event that challenges the player to be a better role player and makes for an epic and awesome story.

Just killing off family, that's not epic. Having your family pop up now and then in the story, and possibly becoming important to the story; that can be epic....

I guess I can see family being involved, but actually investigating something involving them would be a bit much.

I do like being part of the world, but more in the manner of having a position in the local area than in my backstory being used as adventure fuel. If I am the sheriff of a region, that makes my character important to the greater area. If the entire group works for the King, we have a vital role to play within the nation. That is better than being a wandering adventurer, in fact. I like having actual duties.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

On that subject, players who join a themed game when they don't want to play under its themes. If I start up a game about the King's special agents, and one player is the type who does not take orders from others and doesn't give a damn what some King thinks or says, it raises the question of why that player chose this game. It is a game all about carrying out dangerous but essential missions for the King. If that does not interest the player, why play the game at all? By a similar token, players who intentionally derail things are also frustrating. I'm talking about finding ways not to pursue the King's missions or screw those missions up on a consistent basis, not taking approaches to the mission that the GM didn't expect. Again, if the player doesn't want to go around doing missions for the King, why is that player playing a game that was advertised as exactly that?


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Eldrata is a magitech Old West/Victoriana setting that focuses on monster hunting and exploring the unknown in a world characterized by epic scale, fantastic terrain, and wondrous devices. It is not Steampunk, but it shares a lot of tropes and imagery with the genre. The game takes place during a magic-fueled industrial revolution, as the secrets to using arcane magic have recently been unlocked. The world of Eldrata is one that, despite its diversity, is actually rather closely integrated. In the past divine churches spanned the globe, and now mass communication, large global trade networks, and railroads and self propelled ships have tied people ever closely together.

This is a continuation of Thyressa - American Magitech. Some things have changed, and the world has expended beyond just being an America based fantasy, but what themes were originally in Thyressa are still here.

Here is the main setting document.

Currently, I am focusing on fleshing out Castara and then an important region of a different country, and moving out from there. The sample name sections are not finished yet, but I don't have time to finish them now. I've procrastinated too much on my homework already. Eventually, each ethnic group should have at least ten sample names per gender, plus names for dwarves and drow. Magni, elves, and seraphim name children based on ethnicity, not race. Races don't generally have their own languages do to how interreliant they are.

Armor and Weapons

Here is where it starts getting a little weird. Eldrata doesn't really have much in the way of heavy armor, and even breastplates aren't that common. To avoid throwing off game balance, armor was shifted between categories, so a breastplate in Eldrata is equivalent stat wise to full plate in Golarion. Likewise, large swords like the greatsword are also not really a thing, but wielding a longsword two handed will produce equivalent damage. The shortbow is gone, replaced by the recurve bow, which is on par with the longbow. I don't play below level 4, so small monetary amounts aren't something I worry about and I don't have cost values for basic weapons. Some weapons got buffed, Eastern and Western weapons go on the same table, those names in italic are alternate weapons that mimic the listed stats, and there are no small sized player races in Eldrata.

So, how is it so far? Questions? Questions are incredibly useful, because they make me think about things I would not have considered if I weren't asked, and in general greatly speed up my worldbuilding.


5 people marked this as a favorite.

(ノ◕ヮ◕)ノ*:・゚✧

Not until August, though. Still. San Francisco! O(≧▽≦)O I've been studying at community college in my native Silicon Valley since I left Montana two summers ago, and in June I finish my lower division courses. In August, I get to enter San Francisco State University's Urban Studies and Planning program as a Junior. ヾ(●⌒∇⌒●)ノ It took me until the age of 24, but I'm finally packing off to university! My acceptance letter is so shiny. Metaphorically, of course. Because that would be weird otherwise.

Obligatory flowers in my hair: (✿◠‿◠)


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Still experimenting to find the right thing for my world. Explaining the divine casters is the hardest thing, because I dislike classic Forgotten Realms/Golarion style cosmology. Historically, I would typically kill the gods off, but I've been taking a Philosophy class and it gave me the idea of leaving things more open ended and nebulous. How does this work (Humanity refers to any character race. An elf is a race of human, not a separate species.):

Divines

These are powerful beings that exist on a separate level from humanity (what this level is isn't clear, because nobody has ever seen the realm of the divines). Precisely what they are is also a matter of debate. They have powerful magics and wished worship from followers, but whether or not they created the world and why they wanted worship is a mystery. They were commonly called gods, though nowadays many scholars dispute the accuracy of such a term. There were once hundreds of them, who organized themselves into pantheons that looked over specific ethnic groups and organized religions among them. They had some sort of council among themselves to keep each other in some degree of check, but it didn't seem to work very well considering the wealth of conquerors this world has had. The council ended up completely fracturing during the Colonial Era, breaking out into some sort of cosmological war. The sky darkened around the world and the most horrendous storms in history raged amid the deafening cacophony of battle from the skies above, and when the clouds finally dispersed the divines were gone. That was over a century ago, and nobody knows what happened in the war, where the divines went, or how many are still alive (assuming they can die).

Divine Magic

A form of magic taught to humanity by the divines. It taps in to the power of Gaia or spirit realms, and requires a great deal of spiritual self discipline to use. For some reason, all the hundreds of divines worldwide had strict rules that only priests, shamans, holy warriors, druids, or other servants of the divines should ever be allowed to learn divine magic. As a result, the use of this magic has a strong relationship with religion, even though the magic itself does not come from the divines. The churches that await the return of the divines have tried to maintain control over who can learn divine magic, but they have lost their hold over Druidism and their support base is shrinking.

Witchcraft

Witchcraft is divine magic, since it taps into the power of Gaia or spirit realms, but most people distinguish if from divine magic in practice because the divines almost universally opposed witchcraft, seemingly because it existed outside the religious structures they had control over. Knowledge was passed via coven from master to apprentice, rather than through the clergy. It has historically been something of an underground movement as a result, with witches being hunted and killed, though modern day sensibilities generally oppose that now. Witchcraft is often still controversial, but now that you can openly practice it without being executed the number of practitioners is increasing. A lot of the old guard actually find this vexing, and don't like the way their traditions are changing and new witches don't always seem to fully appreciate those traditions.

Arcane Magic

Arcane magic is the manipulation of the magic of Aether, that which rests above Gaia. This is something humanity has understood how to do for less than a century (before this discovery, Sorcerers were a massive danger to themselves and others that nobody understood, and they couldn't much control their powers), but it was such a groundbreaking discovery that the world has changed massively. Industrialization, urbanization, mass communication, railroads, and the beginnings of global economic structures are revolutionizing how people live, all because humans now understand something of how Aether works. By far the most common arcane magic user is the alchemist (who are the single most common magic user in the world), as it is the easiest and safest way to use Aether, but Wizardry and the like are up and coming traditions and Sorcerers can learn to control their powers now.

Common Religions

People are fairly torn on whether the divines were or are actually gods or not. Some common religions believe:

They are gods, and left the world because humans deeply angered them by starting a gigantic cosmic war over colonialism and genocide. Humans have to be good and follow strict rules if they are to calm down and come back. These churches are the remnants of the original divine churches, and remain quite powerful, though they are slipping.

Whether they are gods is irrelevant. The divines started the cosmic war and inflamed colonial attitudes, were kind of jerks, they ruled over humans unfairly, and we are glad they are gone.

There is a supreme god who ruled over the divines, and the cosmic war the divines started over colonialism angered this god so much that it smote them. We should all pay homage to this god and avoid angering it.

The divines are now irrelevant. God is the energy that resides in all things.

The divines are now irrelevant. The spirits of the world and Gaia are much better allies, and we should honor them instead.

The divines were not gods, and they were killed by God. God is Aether, and to use arcane magic is to touch God.

There is no god, and the divines were oppressors. Humanity now controls its own destiny and must do so with benevolence towards all.

Atheism and Agnosticism are fairly common.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

51) The PCs are all part of the national government's monster hunting and mage control force. Their superior officer formed them into a squad, and sent them forth to destroy high powered magical threats to the people of the realm.

This is basically how my campaign setting works. As a worldbuilder I naturally lean towards strong governments that have the best intentions, and relatively high levels of infrastructure and technology. This does not lend itself to traditional adventuring. So I don't use traditional adventuring.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

I post at least one or two character builds a month over in the Advice subforum, but I never get to be a player. I really like theorycrafting, though. I do my sheets by hand. Hero Lab is above this college student's budget.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Andrew Turner wrote:

My experience with police forces in the US follows.

My opinion:

When you're polite to an officer, they're polite to you. 1% of the time this isn't true.

When you're belligerent with an officer, they're belligerent with you. 99% of the time this is true.

That is highly dependent on race, geography, and how clean cut one looks. A lot of the time they will come at you belligerently from the start if you live in a s*&@ty area and dress baggy.

Quote:
What some Americans (and internationals) are calling fear of the police, I call respect for authority (which I have).

I respect authority when I can trust them.

Quote:

Simple rules, from my point of view:

If an officer engages you, be polite and respectful.

Sure. I'll politely ask if I am being detained, and if so for what reason. If I am not being detained, I will politely ask the officer to stop taking to me.

Quote:
If an officer issues a directive, follow it.

That depends highly on the directive.

Quote:
When an officer says, "Hands up!" don't start walking toward them! Put you hands up and be quiet.

Fine.

Quote:
When an officer asks for ID, don't invoke the Constitution or Patrick Henry, just show them your ID.

Absolutely not. In my state, I am not required to display ID to a police officer upon request. In fact, I have no legal obligation to identify myself to a police officer at all. As such, I will not be providing so much as my name to the police, much less ID.

Quote:
When you've broken the law, no matter how trivial or what circumstances you believe mitigate your offense, be contrite and respectful--that doesn't mean you have to admit you did or didn't do anything, but don't be deliberately stupid.

Should go without saying.

Quote:
When an officer tells you to calm down, or stop cursing at them, calm down and shut up: the officer's demand was explicit and black-and-white; there is absolutely zero chance that they actually meant for you to teach them all the profanities you know, and in as loud a voice as possible.

I prefer quiet noncompliance within the limits of state and local law, anyway.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Tectorman wrote:
Kelsey Arwen MacAilbert wrote:
That's actually an indirect reason I got rid of alignment. I am into Pathfinder for the escapism, and I like my escapism more optimistic.

You mean, you treat Pathfinder like a Saturday afternoon diversion, and you think the absolute last thing such an activity needs is the impetus for a knock-down, drag-out, philosophical war?

Say it isn't so... ;)

I get into rough themes sometimes, and I do take the game seriously. I just that I really like designing cities that are cool (I'm an urban planning student. I tend to use PF to do all the stuff in my dreams.). If the city is kind of a hellhole, it doesn't appeal to me. At the same time, I like gothic horror elements, and dark, gruesome stories. I just like the heroes to have something nice to go home to afterwards (Incidentally, this is why I couldn't get into Midnight or Lovecraft. I like the dark elements, but they lack hope.). I find the best way to reconcile that is to have a world that is a really nice place to live largely because people like the PCs go into the grimdark parts of the world and keep them in check.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
deusvult wrote:

if humans don't dominate the campaign, then the bonus feat isn't good enough.

If the campaign is supposed to be distinctive in that humans are not the (far and away) dominant race of the world, then that begs all kinds of interesting discussions. But your standard world where the norm is human and every demihuman place is special for not being human, it doesn't make sense for demihuman racial advantages to overtake human ones.

That assumes PCs should be reflective of the population as a whole, however.

My assumptions on race are extremely non-standard, however. I usually call the Human race Magni, because I assume Elves and Dwarves and Orcs and Drow to be Human.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I want a GM who lets me do the worldbuilding and is totes cool with my busy schedule. Oh, and I want James Jacobs to come down from his mighty dinosaur throne and announce a second Tian Xia book, a Vikings and Indians adventure path in Arcadia, NPC Codex 2, a Pathfinder hardcover dedicated to archetypes, and a Pathfinder hardcover dedicated to consolidating feat chains into scaling feats, improving combat feats, and giving martials a ton more combat styles besides TWF, THF, and Sword and Board. And I want Owen K.C. Stephens to come down from his throne and announce that when the Talented PDFs for every class in Pathfinder are finished Rogue Genius Games will be selling a hardcover with all the PDFs and a bunch of new talents that didn't end up in any of the Talented PDFs.


5 people marked this as a favorite.
The 8th Dwarf wrote:

While you guys seem bogged down in race - The central core of the matter is why is it so acceptable for police in the US to kill so many Americans?

Why so many Americans?

You are at war with yourself...

From the Economist "British citizens are around 100 times less likely to be shot by a police officer than Americans. Between 2010 and 2014 the police force of one small American city, Albuquerque in New Mexico, shot and killed 23 civilians; seven times more than the number of Brits killed by all of England and Wales’s 43 forces during the same period."

The 8th Dwarf wrote:

Just taking race out of this - 1000's of US citizens are being killed each year by their own police. 1000s

Then you distract yourselves from the issue by going around in circles focusing on race and not on the death toll.

It's shocking - each one of you is 100 times more likely to be killed by a police officer than an English person.

Instead of arguing about the minutiae you should be talking to your politicians abot the numbers.

The thing is, this isn't just an issue of shootings. It's an issue of the entire policing approach in America. That policing approach does have racial issues, such as the fact that it tends to be blacks stopped and frisked much moreso than whites. Blacks don't use more pot than whites, but blacks are WAY more likely to actually get arrested for it. Where I live, a white or Asian kid or light-skinned latino is caught with pot? Probably just gets it confiscated if he isn't selling. This is urban California. It's not that big a deal. A black kid? Not getting the same chance, because suddenly it's a problem that needs to be addressed because Broken Windows Theory, and every offense has to be slammed on. It's like having two totally different policing standards. Available data suggests a stop of a black man is 21 times more likely to end with him shot than a stop of a white man. Once you get into the justice system, that continues. A black man and a white man arrested for a first drug offense on the same substance? The black man often gets a harsher sentence. This is absolutely a problem that has a strong racial component.

I'm note sure how I feel about #CrimingWhileWhite (I've heard it said it's taking focus away from dehumanization of blacks to focus on whites doing dumb s!$@ and getting away with it), but the tag has a point when it comes to fairness in policing. Here's some info, with stats:

Hashtag and pot stats

Shooting rates

Simply put, we're bogged down in race because we have gigantic racial problems in our policing methods.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

I have endless ideas as GM, and don't much follow through with them.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

James, Golarion has a Norse settlement in America. Any chance of getting a Vikings and Indians Adventure Path? I would give Paizo so much money.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Got to thinking about making the Spellslinger into something that can both fight with a gun and shoot spells with the gun. Natural choice for that was the Magus. Here's the preliminary write up. Pretty sure it has problems, so please point them out.

Spellslinger:

Weapon Proficiencies:

A Spellslinger is proficient with firearms.

Gunsmithing:

At 1st level, a Spellslinger gains Gunsmithing as the Gunslinger class ability, but a Spellslinger must choose a musket. This ability replaces Spell Combat.

Spell Combat:

At 2nd level, a Spellslinger gains Spell Combat, and can use it with melee attacks or with a musket. If used with a musket, the Spellslinger fires the spell through the weapon. This ability replaces Spellstrike.

Fast Musket

At 3rd level, a Spellslinger can reload a musket as if it were a one handed firearm. This ability replaces the Magus Arcana gained at 3rd level.

Arcane Gun:

At 4th level, a Spellslinger gains Arcane Gun, as per the Wizard class feature, but when casting spells through the gun she does not have to roll to see if it gains the broken condition. This ability replaces Spell Recall and Improved Spell Recall.

Musket Training:

At 5th level, a Spellslinger can add Dex to damage with attacks made by muskets. This ability replaces the bonus feat gained at 5th level.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I removed it from my campaign setting, but I use it when I theorycraft character backstories in case I use the character under a different GM. I have several reasons. I touch up against issues that are major political arguments IRL, and I don't want to start throwing up alignments to those involved in those issues. In the setting backstory, humans and various allies killed all the gods but one, and that god is a horrid creature, so alignment isn't being enforced from above and humans are free to define their own moral compass. We don't have a cosmic or absolute ruling on what good and evil are. Finally, the setting revolves around government agents who keep the biggest threats in the monster population under control and deal with rogue mages, both of which are extremely dangerous jobs. This slants the game towards Law and towards Good heavily enough that I find it better to just have people be people instead of tagging them with an alignment when the game itself is heavily biased towards certain parts of the spectrum. Law and Good are very easily conflated when looking through the eyes of those who uphold law and order, and Chaotic Good is just going to cause trouble. Maybe even more than Chaotic Neutral or True Neutral. If that much of the alignment spectrum is problematic, it's easier to get rid of it and just say "You are an elite Crown Agent. Please role play accordingly." then have an alignment system where most alignments don't fit the game well.

So, what about you guys?


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Freehold DM wrote:
Whatever. Hama asked what happened and I told him. Your opinion is just that.

That's not opinion, it's fact. I have never seen a video game do that to an Xbox, but Xbox is very well known for that exactly problem. So yes, you are blaming the wrong company. Microsoft is the one with shoddy design.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I wanted to write up a warrior who is incredibly well read and quick of wit, who has an encyclopedic knowledge of monsters and their weaknesses and wades into battle clad in steel and wielding sword and shield. Funny enough, the Investigator seems to be pretty good for this concept, with studied strike and inspiration being pretty useful, and extracts being somewhat favorable for a campaign setting where alchemy is by far the most common form of magic. There isn't anything in the Investigator class that out and out discourages heavy armor and a shield (other than the fact that I have to be careful about when to use extracts, since I lack a free hand when fighting), so I dipped a level of Fighter at first level to get heavy armor, shield, and martial weapon proficiency, 10 HP, and Power Attack. So, here's what I came up with at level 6, with 16000 gold:

Sheet

Did I do good with the build? Is there anything I should change to fit my concept of being really good at identifying monsters (and coming up with useful facts outside combat) and fighting, and reasonably good in social situations? Is there some disadvantage to heavy armor and shield as an Investigator that I have missed? How is this build liable to hold up as a primary melee damage dealer?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Quirel wrote:


For some reason, this reminds me of a weaboo I knew who found a katana and scabbard in a pawn shop... and spent ten minutes trying to reproduce the metallic shing of a sword being drawn.

Conclusion? "They made the scabbard wrong."

...

...

...

For obsessive fans, weaboos seem to not know a lot about Japanese swords. Or swords in general, really. Or samurai, for that matter. I had a weaboo roommate who thought katana meant Japanese sword and samurai were totes more honorable than those who used guns because swords are so manly. I really should have showed him this, but I didn't.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Correct, but at the same time the Japanese do that with Americans and Europeans about as much as we do it with them. Distinctions that seem natural to someone who grew up with them aren't natural to someone who didn't, and nobody is smart enough to know all the proper distinctions. An effort should be made to get it right, but I don't think getting stuff wrong is offensive. Unless you buy into misconceptions that are in and of themselves racist, of course.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
JurgenV wrote:
So why is no one whining that asians are using european stereotype themes? White ninja racist, yellow knight ok?

Aside from the fact that cultural appropriation comes off as a negative term, and I don't think that whites having an interest in Asian culture is at all negative (insert rant about how "cultural appropriation" is basically how human civilizations have been acting for at least a couple of millennia, and globalization is a larger scale version of a common historical phenomenon), I would be inclined to agree that a lot of it has to do with white Americans perceiving European things as "normal" and Asian things as exotic. We also tend not to really care when other people borrow our stuff, because historically we have been in the majority, so it doesn't feel too strange that others adopt some of our ways. That's fairly common to American history.

I would also point out that different groups don't quite see things the same way. A good example is your use of the word yellow in reference to Asians. This is actually somewhat offensive, yet to use the word white in reference to Europeans or the word black in reference to African-Americans is not offensive. Why is this the case? Historically, yellow has been used to refer to Asians in a very derogatory manner, whereas white has never really been used as a slur towards Europeans, and we had other slurs to throw at African-Americans. As a result, you really shouldn't call any Asian people yellow, but to call someone white or black is almost never insulting. You can apply the same to the idea of other cultures adopting European things. We are very used to this sort of thing (and historically have encouraged it), so it generally doesn't insult us. Other cultures, such as American Indians, have dealt with white people trying to assimilate them into acting like Europeans, so many of them get insulted if we try to borrow things from them. I don't agree with the idea that it is wrong for a white person to have an interest in American Indian cultures, but I can understand how it causes anger to see a white teenage girl pretending to be a war chief, given the history of how we used to portray American Indians in media. Same reason you don't wear blackface anymore. Historically, that has been used to demean people. In essence, wearing blackface or a war bonnet isn't offensive because acting like a member of a culture other than your own is offensive, it's offensive because it mimics behaviors white people used to carry out when mocking or overly simplifying other cultures. That's why a black person who puts on some form of whiteface probably wouldn't catch too much flack. Historically, black people have not put on whiteface to demean white people, so it lacks the level of offense blackface carries.

Now, in the case of East Asian culture, I haven't really heard much anger from East Asians over white people borrowing things. Most of the anger, especially involving the Japanese, seems to come from white Americans who are either overreacting out of a dislike for Japanese media, or find it really creepy that a white person could become completely obsessed with Japanese culture and argue that everything Japanese is totally superior to everything else (in a word, weeaboos). From what I gather, the borrowing of East Asian elements by European fantasy isn't actually all that offensive to most East Asians, so "white ninja racist" isn't actually all that close to what the situation is. If anything, I'd be more suspect about the behavior of some of the white gamers who are hardcore against Asian elements (Not the ones who just don't like them, which is fine, but the hard core folks who constantly rant about white people who do enjoy such elements).

tl;dr: Cultures usually perceive this sort of thing as offensive because of a negative history with it, and not all cultures share that history, especially Europeans (though a fair number of people in Ireland seem to heavily dislike it when Americans claim to be Irish based off of Irish heritage, and I've seen Irish people get somewhat upset about how Americans celebrate St. Patrick's Day). Also, I don't see much to suggest that East Asians generally find it offensive for Americans to borrow Asian cultural elements.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Quote:
Are players entitled to:

Gamers aren't entitled to anything.

Quote:
A game world specifically designed to their specifications, or at least modified to suit their interests and goals?

If the world doesn't suit the players' interests and goals, and the GM isn't interested in a world that does, that group shouldn't play together. It's just not going to work out.

Quote:
Play whatever character race or class suits their fancy, even it if doesn't fit thematically, so long as those options are available to all the players?

I'm a pretty big believer in each game world having a specific theme, and the players creating characters that fit that theme. A player who cannot create a character that fits the theme is not playing the right game, and if the GM can't recruit enough players that theme just doesn't work for her situation.

Quote:
Realization of their original and/or evolved vision for said character?

Neither the GM nor the players should expect everything to progress via their visions.

Quote:

Chronic and customary victory, in the sense that the GM tailors encounters so that they will very likely be victorious after what he/she perceives as a hard-fought battle?

Survival (and even prosperity out) of even the most dangerous scenarios?

Some groups like easy battles and little or no player death, other groups prefer a hard and gritty game, and most groups are somewhere in between. The GM should recruit players and tailor the game accordingly.

Quote:
Rapidity of advancement to more efficacious and (to them, likely) more entertaining levels of power?

Another situation where every group has a different ideal that needs to be figured out.

Quote:
Flexibility from the GM to the point of impromptu rules emendations to serve any of the above purposes?

Depends on how rules oriented the GM and players are. A rules oriented GM and rules flexible players generally don't work together well, and vice versa. It's best the group has similar preferences as to how strictly to follow the rules.

Quote:

Override the GM via, say, majority vote, and thus to an extent dictate campaign parameters and strictures?

If the GM and the players disagree about what the game should be like to the point that the players can get a majority vote to overthrow the GM, that group should probably break up. It is obvious that there is a pretty big gap in what everybody wants to play, so everybody should seek a group more suitable to their interests.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

...That is an amazing idea.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Allow it, I would think. Dressing up as Leia was pretty cool, though. My parents would never have let me be an "opposite gender" character in the first place, let alone join the fun.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Cthulhudrew wrote:
Drejk wrote:
Metal is already covered as a branch of terrageokineticism.
Ah, dang. Hadn't gotten that far yet. Still... I like the term "ferrokineticist." :D

Wouldn't work. Ferro derives from Latin, and Kineticist names except for terrakinetic (which I get the feeling is becoming geokinetic) are Greek. This is an important enough issue to cause much rustling of jimmies. Ferro also doesn't refer to metal in general, but to the presence of certain types of iron.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I did my own theorycrafting. 8th level volcano mage. Started out with Earth as the primary element, since any geologist will tell you it's the debris (well, superheated and poisonous gas, too) that usually kills you, not the lava. Here she is:

Sheet

My first main issue was how long it takes to gain a second element, as I said earlier. This is the number one issue I have with the class. Dual element characters are really hard to do. I originally wanted to build to 5th level, but I couldn't get fire until 7th. I also couldn't find a way to make earthquakes, and I didn't have enough class skills. I do wonder about my build's accuracy and DR penetration ability, but I leave that to the more experienced. I really do like the class abilities, for the most part, and I love the flavor. This will probably end up being one of my favorite magic users, alongside Alchemist and Witch. I just think dual element should be available at low level, but you should of course have to pay a price for that flexibility. I don't want to wait until level 7 for volcano mage. Yes, that is a massive issue for me.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
BigDTBone wrote:
RDM42 wrote:
The restrictions in place at the beginning has little to no inherent connection to the amount of agency the players will,have once he curtain rises on the stage.
the restrictions are a harbinger of player agency. If a DM is unwilling to let a character be a race or class or even idea (pirate, magic-user) then do we really expect that DM is going to let the players shape the world? No way. That DM will always have the circle of baby-sitters of 8 be 10-12 levels higher than you can ever be. That DM will never let you ride in politics in a major city. That DM will retire your character by murder, campaign ending or alignment change (ie, that one act caused you to become NE, hand over your c-sheet) to remove player agency.

Can you demonstrate any of these assertions as logically following setting restrictions?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Fire so hot even immunity can't save you? Every substance has its limits.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Kelsey Arwen MacAilbert wrote:
When I think about this class, I want to play a quarterstaff wielding monk who can manipulate the elements. I also want to play a dragon disciple. Also an ice make wizard straight out of Fairy Tail.

Also swashbuckling wind mages, elemental fistfighters, volcano mages, thundermages, and stormcallers. Should have kineticists that manipulate bodies (necromancer types) and plants.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Put me in for changing Terrakenisis to Geokenisis, too. Geo just plain sounds better.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Which comes back into different GM styles being equally valid. The GM who has a group of friends and accomodates them and the GM who pitches an idea and recruits people who fit it are both playing the game "right". They might not work well in the same gaming group, but that's okay. Different kinds of players should have different groups.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Kirth Gersen wrote:
In other words, I NEVER set a campaign in stone without consulting the players first.

That might be a reason for the disconnect. Some of us create a campaign for an existing group, and others create a campaign and then recruit a group for it. I'm more of the second, so bending over farther than I want is less attractive than just choosing a different player who fits the concept better.


5 people marked this as a favorite.

Some stuff just isn't going to fit, Scott. My setting focuses on a specific type of game, involving the king's best monster hunters. A character who doesn't much care what the king says straight up doesn't work. Gnomes have never existed at any point during the history of the setting. The gods are dead, so a Cleric of a sun deity isn't really appropriate (We have Clerics, but they are rare and get their power from the planet itself). I don't see these as unreasonable things.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
JurgenV wrote:
Also i find the whole thing a bit racist. If you look asian (doesn't matter if you are chinese, loation, or vietnamese) no one cares, if you are a white dude insults are to be expected.

In my experience, it's other white people who do most of the insulting. A weeaboo is also not a white person who likes Asian culture, plays Asians in rpgs, and watches anime. It is a separate phenomenon, and is not limited to obsessing over Japan. Plastic Paddies are essentially the same thing.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Bob_Loblaw wrote:
I think you should just write the characters normally and if you want to include relationship status then just make it part of the story like you would normally. I don't think you should feel the need to make it the central part of the character. Heterosexuality isn't the central part of most well written characters.

With all the b*@+&~@~ LGBTs go through, it can feel cathartic to have a character who is really gay, and is damn well going to be public, because it's okay to go around being really gay, and damnation to all the haters. It also feels good to have a character who strongly represents who you are, which straight people get a ton more than LGBT people.

I would also ask if heterosexuality is not a central part of James Bond or Conan the Barbarian.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Bob_Loblaw wrote:

So today I ran into something I didn't realize would be awkward but I think I handled it right.

I had a new patient from out of state who was transgender. When she approached I treated her like anyone else (no surprises there). I had to enter her information into the computer and when I got to the gender I didn't want to assume anything. I certainly didn't want to ask what gender she is because that could be offensive on two points. One, it's not a question I would ask anyone else so why should she be different. Two, it would mean that she looks more masculine when she's trying to be feminine. I asked how she identifies herself.

I didn't want to assume anything. I'm male but like wearing women's clothing. Is there a better way to ask? I don't normally worry about it but this was so we could bill insurance properly and it is important for some medications.

Personally, I prefer to just be straight up asked my gender. I don't like being treated like I'm too sensitive to to take a question about my biology from a medical professional without freaking out.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Thanks, guys. That helps me better understand what I am looking at.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Alchemist. I want to see the alchemist next. I will buy it the instant I have the money in my account. I must have it. The alchemist is the most numerous magic user in my campaign setting and practices what is fluffed as a very diverse and important art, so the variety of roles for the class provided by a Talented PDF would be an amazingly useful resource.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

Because I actually like anime and wuxia in my Pathfinder.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

We Californians have our moments, though.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

For some inexplicable reason, I decided to attend the school LGBT club. Turns out we just voted on new officers, and we didn't have an election so much as we had a purge. With the Mean Girls crowd out of office, maybe there is some hope for the club after all.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Krensky wrote:
I find it amusing that 'metrosexuality' is considered something new and unmasculine.

...

...

...

As a historian, I should have made the connection between upper class aristocratic behaviors and metrosexuality long before you said that. I shall flog myself most severely.

1 to 50 of 356 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 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.