|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
Really though when WILL we see a true ebook from Paizo (or any publisher)
There are actually several publishers that offer true-ebooks of at least some of their titles. My iPad currently has epub versions of the OSRIC rulebook, the FATE Core System rulebook, the FATE System Toolkit, the FATE Accelerated rulebook, and most notably the Call of Cthulhu 7th edition rulebook and the Investigator's Guide, and there are quite a few other RPG epubs that I own that I don't have on my iPad.
1. The printed book will not become a niche item, much less a museum piece, within your grandchildren lifetime. Almost everyone I know, to include even the most tech savy, prefer to read an actual paper book than any kind of electronic alternative.
2. I'm perfectly fine with 5e having a much slower release schedule that previous editions. So far, all the releases have been extremely high quality. If they don't feel the need to bloat the living hell out of the system, I can only see that as a GOOD thing. Somehow I don't see them rushing error-filled, badly balanced books just to get it out for GenCon. The same can't be said for the #2 publisher on that list.
Ever read the Dark Horse comics? This is exactly the way they went. They killed off Ripley instead of Hicks & Newt (although Ripley later turned out to be alive after all). And some of those stories were not only better than Alien 3 and Resurrection, they were better than Aliens as well.
Lord Snow wrote:
Also, the MCU has always been butchering every fields of science it ever touched. Just in this show we have also seen a really dumb representation of cryptography, and in Agents of Shield the physics of Fitzsimmons are often outright laughable. You learn to accept these things.
The MCU is based on comic books. Think that over. The butchery of science has been rather tame, given the source material.
The only reason anyone could ever possibly want a non-Pathfinder/3.x game is that they are bonded by nostalgia. Decent stories didn't exist before Paizo began writing them, and all other games literally don't have any rules. All praise to the mighty purple golem, and death to the infidels who have the temerity to discuss, much less PREFER, other systems!
I see we've already had a couple of "nobody could possibly enjoy prior editions for any reason but nostalgia" posts. I will refrain from further comment, because the last time I commented on that subject, my posts were erased and I got an email from a member of the Paizo staff basically telling me that my opinions were unwelcome.
So all I will say is that the way you prefer to play the game is not the only valid way to play the game. Take that as you will.
EDIT: No edition of D&D, prior or current, has ever had any rules regarding sexual orientation. I have no idea where that is coming from.
This probably needs to be addressed by the people in charge of PFS Core, as I would imagine a large number of scenarios contain spells, items. etc that are not contained within the core rulebook.
You might also have better luck posting it in the correct forum: link
I can go for both, depending on my mood. Sometimes I'm in the mood for serious. Sometimes I'm in the mood for silly. Lots of the time I'm somewhere in between.
Even WH40K, which coined the term "grimdark" has the Orks. And if you consider nearly everything about the Orks pretty g#$&+~n silly, you aren't paying attention. Yeah, it's awesome, but it's also silly as hell!
Da red wuns go fasta!
I kind of wish it wasn't. We almost made a full series without them randomly shoving a love interest at a female main character on network TV...going the entire distance would probably be unprecedented.
Besides, who really gives a s##~? I mean, is your life gonna be any more fulfilled by knowing that a fictional character got married to another fictional character that got the briefest of mentions? Does that, at the end of the day, really add ANYTHING to Agent Carter (the show)?
GM - You guys can pick any race except catfolk. They went extinct 400 years ago in my setting.
Player1 - Waaa! Yer a tyrant! I wanna play a catfolk!
GM - OK, fine, you can be the last catfolk of the one family that escaped the catfolk Holocaust.
Players 2-6 - How come Jim gets to play a catfolk, but we can't?!? We ALL want to be catfolks!
GM - Fine. Whatever. All the catfolk in the setting are dead, except there are apparently enough left that six of them can randomly meet in a tavert. F%%& it, not gonna bother putting any more effort into the setting from now on.
As has been stated before, for a great many people, a "reasonable" reason translates to "a reason I agree with".
There's also the fact that sometimes people just don't like something, and they don't have any rational explanation for why. Maybe they just don't like gunslingers. Or catgirls. Why is the impetus in these threads always on the GM to change HIS likes and dislikes, despite the fact that the game offers such a huge number of choices for the players?
Why is the GM who refuses to rewrite his campaign around one special snowflake a control freak, but the player who refuses to play anything except for that special snowflake isn't deemed a control freak?
Exactly. Which is very possible. I know, we did it often when I was younger. BECMI stuff, 1E stuff, and 2E stuff, all used in a big D&D smorgasbord. We didn't have any B/X D&D or Original D&D stuff, but if we had, it would have been just as easy to use.
Come to think of it, I'm pretty sure a few members of that group either had only the BECMI box sets, or only 1e books. I myself had the BECMI sets, some 1e supplements, and later on the 2e books and some supplements (and even later the Rules Cyclopedia). We never let it give us even the slightest pause.
Hell, I still do that to an extent. My favored game is Swords & Wizardry, but I pull inspiration (and outright steal) from lots of stuff that TSR published, as well as from a wide range of retroclones, and even later edition stuff as well. Hell, I steal stuff from systems with no link to D&D whatsoever. You can take inspiration from a scenario for the LEVERAGE RPG for a fantasy RPG session. I kinda consider this the norm....do people really pay so much attention to arbitrary boundaries in regards to what amounts to a more structured version of make-believe?
Dunst isn't a bad actress, but she never really sold me "Mary Jane" - nothing about the character really screamed that she was who I expected her to be.
Dunst was a dour, joyless version of MJ that was the complete antithesis of everything that MJ is supposed to be. If there was ever any life in a scene, it IMMEDIATELY got sucked out if MJ walked into the scene. She was the only bit of casting worse than McGuire. Yes, I put both of them as worse casting than Topher Grace.
Topher Grace, by the way, could have been a pretty good Peter Parker/Spider-Man, in my opinion.
Ivan Rûski wrote:
He wasn't perfect, but at least he wasn't a creepily obsessed crybaby who spent an entire trilogy teetering on the edge of suicidal depression.
I consider "I don't like it" to be a sufficient reason.
The GM puts a lot more time and effort into a game than the average player. his right to have fun is just as important as the player's. Yet it seems to be popular on these forums to imply that a GM who imposes any sort of limit is a horrible tyrant, and the players should all quit and walk out on him. But somehow if the GM quits, he's being a whiny crybaby who can't stand not having his own way. Nice double standard some of you are putting out there.
If you really want balance, you ban Paizo books (especially the Core Rulebook), and only allow Dreamscarred Press classes and options from Psionics Unlimited or Path of War.
It's what 5e does with feats that makes them acceptable again.
It also does a much better job balancing them. No more ridiculous feat chains for mediocre effects for martial characters, while spellcasters get better effects out of one-shot feats. If Paizo applied the same standards to feats for spellcasters that they do to feats for martial characters, then Spell Penetration (for example) would be broken up into a bunch of feats, each only applying to one school, and to a certain range of spell levels (with the lower-level feat as a prerequisite for the higher levels).
Seriously, what company has handled bloat well does anybody have any opinions?
Frog God Games, with Swords & Wizardry.
One rulebook, a bunch of monster books (Monstrosities, Tome of Horrors Complete, Tome of Horrors 4, Rappan Athuk Bestiary), and a couple of more or less system-neutral supplements (Bill Webb's Book of Dirty Tricks, Tome of Adventure Design).
1. It's a world where a superpowered man who's face fell off led a Nazi para-technical branch of the SS, and developed energy weapons from a magic rock from outer space; and was defeated by ANOTHER superpowered man, who crashed a plane into the ocean, froze into a block of ice, and was as good as new when he thawed out 75 years later. It's possible that not all elections had the same results.
2. At that time, there were actually some people in the real world who continued to refer to Trueman as the vice-president for the rest of the term; as he had not been elected as President.
I think the issue is that many people would be resistant to such a change if it rendered their existing library useless, and people would probably be hesitant to continue buying from Paizo's back catalog. While I think a new edition is inevitable, I think it's also going to be constrained to be backward compatible with the current version of Pathfinder...
What? Water is gushing out of your pipes that are made more of duct tape than pipe?
Slap some more duct tape on 'em!
If you don't use WBL you might as well write-off the martial classes after level 9 at the latest. I mean I guess you could just E6. But then why not just E6?
Not using WBL doesn't necessarily mean that the players get LESS than WBL, you know. Nor does the removal of the magic mart. It's entirely possible to play a game where players only get items they take from defeated opponents and those players are well ABOVE your sacred WBL.
WBL is.meant as a GUIDELINE, not a hard rule. And I'm pretty sure it began as merely a guideline for what to start characters that begin at higher than 1st level at, not some sort of shackle for existing players to be bound to for their entire progression.
In terms of "crunch", I recommend anything by Dreamscarred Press, Frog God Games' monster books, and Green Ronin's Advanced Bestiary.
In terms of settings and adventures, I recommend absolutely everything by Frog God Games, as well as Kobold Press' Midgard line.
There is, of course, a lot of other great stuff, but all of these are what I consider "must buy".
I'd like to piggyback off this. The simpler the system you play in, the easier it is to convert stuff over from another system. Have you considered using 5e rules but Pathfinder adventures?
If any future feats are published, I want to to EXPAND options, not limit them. That is a particular failing of 3.x and Pathfinder, in my opinion...many feats do more to limit a character that doesn't have them than they do to expand the options of a character that does take it. And when a system has hundreds upon hundreds of feats, that mean it's a LOT of options shut down since any single character can only take a tiny fraction of a percentage of those feats.