Lord Fyre's page

Lord Fyre wrote:

Fact, the govenment has a 30+ year history of promising spending cuts (to ofset tax cuts) that never materialized. I believe that this is at (or near) the heart of the Tea Party anger.

You mean the Republicans have a 30+ year history of promising spending cuts (to ofset tax cuts) that never materialized.

The government makes no such promises, nor do the Democrats.

Not completely true:

the Republicans do have a 30+ year history. (I do not dispute this.)

so do the Democrats.

so do Presidents of both parties.

This was what I mean by the "governmnt" making such promises.

Bitter Thorn wrote:

How much do we have to spend to spend our way out of our spending problem?

We don't have a spending problem. We have an income problem.

If Greece has taught you anything it should be that austerity will not fix the problem. We're doing everything they did - ignore the issue of income and attack social benefits. Where are they now? Where are we headed?

No. We have both.

Fact, as has been shown by the debate - the U.S. Government only takes in about 60% of the money they need to run the government.

Fact, the govenment has a 30+ year history of promising spending cuts (to ofset tax cuts) that never materialized. I believe that this is at (or near) the heart of the Tea Party anger.

Fact, trying to go "cold turkey" on social welfare programs will not happen. (As we have seen control of the House does not equal control of the Government.)

Failure to raise the debt ceiling (which appears likely now) will result in an economic disaster equivalent to the Lehman Brothers collapse.

But the problem is, Obama had already offered (in my opinion) the best deal possible. It was about 85% spending cuts (including Social Security and Medicare) and 15% tax increases, but the "hard line" Republicans walked away.

This is rather surprising cause it wasn't that long ago he was hired.

It's a Redshirt thing.

Reading and re-reading the new trait, it seems excessively nerfed.

Yes, the original trait was pretty clearly overpowered, but this seems a little too weak.
It can be taken away, and is overly focused on that specific -hard to improve- item.

Freehold DM wrote:

Actually that was one of the few things I found interesting about Civil War- I would have wanted more of a mix of heroes being forced to work with "former" villains so it ended up resembling a host of Suicide Squads as opposed to the GvsE-fest that Civil War ended up becoming, but whatever.

The way it was supposedly "intended" was that you the reader were suppose to sympathize with the Pro-Registration side. But between Cap America leading the Anti-Reggers, J.M. Stracyznski turning Tony Stark into a total fascist, the camp where they were penning the supers being pretty much an absolute Hell, you'd have to be both an idiot and morally bankrupt to sympathise with them.

... Not to mention the "reanimation of THOR's corpse.

Really? Suprising given how generally "UNHEROIC" the Pro-Registration side acted through the entire story arc. I would have thought that the the Pro-Registration faction was being set up as the 'antagonists.

Not to mention that this flies in the face of the entire history of the Marvel Universe.

Pity ... Marvel could have done something cool by:

Staying neutral on which side is right.

Insuring that the heroes acted heroicly through the entire story. (i.e., avoiding the clearly evil actions of the Pro-Registation side and the stupidity of both sides.)

Yes... and they have the Taldor logo on them!

Hummm ...

So Taldor is made up of Redshirts?

This has some interresting implications about why the empire fell apart.

And don't try the kisses, the secrets I hold, give me immunity to them and could reflect them onto their source.

Why would you actually Want immunity to 'kisses' from the Dark Mistress?

But, why?

Slime wrote:

Mikaze wrote:

... All this time I've been weighing the likelihood of this against Rune Giants ...

And don't Rune Giants match with a type of Super-Sized Giants (can't remember the name)from 2e Oriental Adventures ?

Not on purpose...

BONUS CHATTER: My theory on giants is that they're basically giant stereotypes; that's what makes them kind of interesting.

Hill giants = giant hillbillies
Stone giants = giant cave men
Frost Giants = giant Vikings
Fire Giants = giant dwarves
Cloud Giants = giant Greeks
Storm Giants = giant Romans
Marsh Giants = giant Innsmouth folk
Taiga Giants = giant shamans
Wood Giants = giant elves

And so when it came to doing Rune Giants, I decided to basically make them giant Samurai.

Which does kind of imply that there's SOME sort of connection or link between Thassilon and Tian Xia. Not really sure what that link is, but it does exist.

You realize that pigeon-holing them in this way could be a GIANT mistake.

Lord Fyre wrote:

LazarX wrote:

Pirate wrote:

Yar.

coyote6 wrote:

James Jacobs wrote:

There's only one Material Plane. The universe is big enough to hold pretty much every single campaign setting.

I dunno, how do you have Earth-616, Earth-2, Earth-DCNU, Freedom City Earth, and Gamma World (never mind the variants from different editions) all orbiting Sol in the same universe? It must be very crowded, and we just haven't noticed yet. ;)

You're thinking Solar System. That is, the collection of celestial bodies orbiting a single star. There can be trillions of solar systems in a single Galaxy, and countless trillions of full blown Galaxies in a single universe (a.k.a. the Material Plane). I'd say that's more than enough room for Earth-616, Earth-2, Earth-DCNU, Freedom City Earth, Gamma World, Oerth, Krynn, Toril, everything from star wars, everything from star trek, everything from star gate, and variations of each, and still be barely even a scratch on a single micron of the possibilities for new worlds and campaign setting material all in the same Universe/Material Plane.

~P

\

I wouldn't take Jacob's quote too seriously. After all for IP reasons alone, you'll never see Golarian setting material or any Paizo material making cano references to Eberron, Greyhawk, or any of the worlds of the DCU, or other forms of IP which Paizo doesn't own. I would treat it more as what Jacobs might do for his own homegames than Holy Rules Writ.

I also take it that Mr. Jacobs was not a fan of Sliders.

Well...it's not exactly a stellar work. It had episodes that varied a lot in overall quality and the departure of it's one seasoned actor to play a Voyager hologram did not help.

As if Star Trek: Voyager was stellar work! ;P

And John Rys-Davies wasn't a seasoned actor??

Pirate wrote:

Yar.

coyote6 wrote:

James Jacobs wrote:

There's only one Material Plane. The universe is big enough to hold pretty much every single campaign setting.

I dunno, how do you have Earth-616, Earth-2, Earth-DCNU, Freedom City Earth, and Gamma World (never mind the variants from different editions) all orbiting Sol in the same universe? It must be very crowded, and we just haven't noticed yet. ;)

You're thinking Solar System. That is, the collection of celestial bodies orbiting a single star. There can be trillions of solar systems in a single Galaxy, and countless trillions of full blown Galaxies in a single universe (a.k.a. the Material Plane). I'd say that's more than enough room for Earth-616, Earth-2, Earth-DCNU, Freedom City Earth, Gamma World, Oerth, Krynn, Toril, everything from star wars, everything from star trek, everything from star gate, and variations of each, and still be barely even a scratch on a single micron of the possibilities for new worlds and campaign setting material all in the same Universe/Material Plane.

~P

\

I wouldn't take Jacob's quote too seriously. After all for IP reasons alone, you'll never see Golarian setting material or any Paizo material making cano references to Eberron, Greyhawk, or any of the worlds of the DCU, or other forms of IP which Paizo doesn't own. I would treat it more as what Jacobs might do for his own homegames than Holy Rules Writ.

I also take it that Mr. Jacobs was not a fan of Sliders.

Mikaze wrote:

I'd have to reread them all again since we didn't actually use them in CoT(we ported some of it into Kingmaker for one character and one NPC). I can't remember the social hit in that trait though. What was it?

It's not so much detailed in the Players guide, only outlined that you are a straight up second class citizen. Apartheid is alive and well in Westcrown, and your Tiefling is on the short end of the stick.

True. But there is not actual "crunch" to support that.

I wonder if the bought and paid set are finding what looms to be a worthy price for drinking the Koch.

I am pretty sure that they are.

Though not intended as inflammatory, I apologize in advance for those who might misconstrue my statement with its intent.

2 unpaid-for wars, and tax breaks that precipitated the greatest wave of off-shoring and economic double-dealing whilst claiming financial patriotism, and the minute someone say, 'Hey, we have to deal with these shenanigans,' blame is immediate allocated.

While I want the wars to be ended immediately, I also understand the need to do what we can to un-bork what was done, and finishing things out responsibly. Troops need to be paid, and taken care of both financially and physically. Optimally, they need to be brought home.

Here are the numbers behind what you are saying.

It does not have infinite power to solve the problem, however - there are hard realities that I don't think many of our elected officials are ready and willing to face.

It is not just "our elected officials," FAR too many of the citizenry also have this problem.

That has been the crux of our budget problems since the 1980s. (... and probably earlier)

Solving who gets what's leftover if the gov't honors it's debt payments will be ugly, nooooo doubt. BUT there's no reason to invoke the 14th Amendment clause to allow the president to override Congress' Constitutionally granted budget authority in order to service the United States' debt obligations because...

The United States will not default on its debt on August 2 unless the Treasure decides to default...by not paying the amount owed on treasury bonds out of government monthly revenues first.

Except ...

... what defines a "government debt"?

For example:

paying the military?

paying the salaries of the hundreds of other government workers?

Now paying "Social Security" is a football, but what is the actual requirements of existing law on that issue?

Okay.

Circling back to the original post. There is another problem with the "Superwoman" ideal.

Namely that it can far too often cause those same women and girls to act in self-harming ways to achieve an impossible image.

Lord Fyre wrote:

I don't consider myself a "feminist"...

So you don't believe that women deserve equal treatment, protection, respect, and opportunity as men?

That's all being a feminist means. That's all: That women deserve fairness and equality. Any other interpretation or implication is incorrect and should be eradicated with fire.

Also, you should check out my posting history.

"This is all very interesting stuff... but I still think there should be more scantily clad females :)"

Gamer Chicks ARE the Hawtness

Who are the 100 Hottest Babes In Fantasy & Science Fiction?

Lord Fyre wrote:

However, I also know (from painful experience) that any man who actually describes himself as a "Feminist" is openning himself to a huge amount of criticism and hostility. I just did not want to deal with that.

(Counterwise, any woman who fails to describe herself as a "Feminist" will also open herself up to a huge amount of criticism and hostility.)

Agreed - and also somewhat disturbing. Someone who says "I believe that men and women should be treated equally and should have equal opportunities and protections" gets an entirely different reaction than someone who says "I'm a Feminist."

The two are identical - but one is a term that has been turned into a curseword for many, which it doesn't deserve.

Also true. But as I said above "Perception and Reality do not have to match."

Guess which one defines our world.

LordFyre, I can see by your later posts that you aren't espousing Feminism as a negative thing, but your opening volley plays right in to a series of stereotypes and misguided assumptions about the term - whether rightfully deserved or not, whether fostered by men or women about "man hating feminists" or any other derogatory stereotype.

However, I also know (from painful experience) that any man who actually describes himself as a "Feminist" is openning himself to a huge amount of criticism and hostility. I just did not want to deal with that.

(Counterwise, any woman who fails to describe herself as a "Feminist" will also open herself up to a huge amount of criticism and hostility.)

Remember, Perception and Reality do not have to match. Often they don't.

Lord Fyre wrote:

LazarX wrote:

Lord Fyre wrote:

LazarX wrote:

Or Lisa is... :)

*That's what I get for watching the Borderlands epsisode of Enterprise last night which featured an actual Orion slaving center.

Actually, that is what you get for watching Enterprise - at all.

Or any Star Trek in general?

I don't know - I think that the Original Series was the best. (Yes, I do make an allowance for it being made in the late 1960s.)

DS9 was the only one worth watching.

Before we start this discussion, we need a new thread!

It's a CHA world.

Not so simple. As I pointed out earlier, this is not affecting both gender's equally (or near equally).

Lord Fyre wrote:

LazarX wrote:

Or Lisa is... :)

*That's what I get for watching the Borderlands epsisode of Enterprise last night which featured an actual Orion slaving center.

Actually, that is what you get for watching Enterprise - at all.

Or any Star Trek in general?

I don't know - I think that the Original Series was the best. (Yes, I do make an allowance for it being made in the late 1960s.)

Yeah all in all I would go with the "Get the military to lock them all in until they do their job."

So would I, but do we have the time? August 2nd is coming up awefully fast.

Well since we don't see them lamenting that Brad pitt makes men have eating disorders and body issues I have to feel sorry for that author.

She must think that only women can be made to damage themselves by watching movies.

While your point is correct, there is a couple things to consider.

The study involved a slight majority of Women (65 women to 57 men), and the results still came out that "the number one predictor of 'is she a good role model?' is 'is she pretty?'" So the attitude is definitely effecting women.

Women are judged by their appearance much more then men are. (And this is universal across all major Earth cultures - European, Asian, Hindi, Middle-Eastern, and most African.) Again this is true just as much by other women as by men (in fact more so then by men).

See the question is would it be 'authorized by law' if Congress doesn't approve it? I could see an argument using the budget they passed as grounds for such legal authority but it would be... messy.

That's the catch though.

Raising the Debt Ceiling does not authorize any new spending. It gives the Treasury the authority to borrow to cover existing spending already approved by Congress.

But, yes, it would be messy. Very messy.

Bellona wrote:

I too would really love to see Aasimar and Tiefling as templates applicable to any PC race. Why should humans get all the fun? Plus, it would reduce the number of PC-race/hint-of-outsider-race combos which had turned up by late 3.x.

Actually I would see it as having the opposite effect. Asimar's are mary-sue enough as it is, the notion of asimar elves greatly disturbs my biological functions.

It doesn't always work out that way ...

I don't consider myself a "feminist" but I still find the implications of this scientific article disturbing: Sexy Action Heroines Push Dangerous 'Superwoman Ideal'

The jist of the scientific article is that "... the number one predictor of 'is she a good role model?' is "is she pretty?'"

The reason that this bothers me is that I like Fanservice as much (if not more) then the next guy. So, I admit that I am part of the problem. :(

Lord Fyre wrote:

Lisa Stevens wrote:

xorial wrote:

read that as well....it goes with a rumor I was hearing that Hasbro is trying to do something with Paizo.

Oh, oh, oh...please tell! Hopefully they will pay me enough money to buy that island in the Caribbean that I have been eyeing. Should only cost $100 million or so. :)

-Lisa

We first heard it here!

Paizo is up for sale!!!

Or Lisa is... :)

*That's what I get for watching the Borderlands epsisode of Enterprise last night which featured an actual Orion slaving center.

Actually, that is what you get for watching Enterprise - at all.

xorial wrote:

read that as well....it goes with a rumor I was hearing that Hasbro is trying to do something with Paizo.

Oh, oh, oh...please tell! Hopefully they will pay me enough money to buy that island in the Caribbean that I have been eyeing. Should only cost $100 million or so. :)

-Lisa

We first heard it here!

Paizo is up for sale!!!

If it comes to it, there is always the "Nuclear Option" ... i.e., President Obama can raise the debt ceiling without the will of Congress by invoking the 14th Amendment.

"Section 4. The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned. ..."

This is a bad idea, as it will break down the separation of powers (not to mention making even harder to deal with Congress in the future), but it is still better then defaulting.

Next spring, when the Advanced Race Guide is out, there will be a lot more options and advice for how to handle less powerful and more powerful zero HD races as player character options.

For now, though, those races that show up in Bestiaries are there because they're monsters first. If you allow them as PCs, handle with care.

(One relatively easy way to address the power gap is to grant core races a bonus feat of their choice if you allow other players to play more powerful things like aasimar. Likewise, if you allow a player to play a weaker race in a predominantly core party, you might want to give those goblins or kobolds an extra feat to bring them up to par with the humans and elves.)

Which is pretty much the "PC Boons" option that you provided on page 5 of the Council of Thieves Player's Guide. :)

I am exhausted by this mass of options.

I'm still processing the APG.

When did a gazillion options become a virtue?

What? Hasn't "Class Bloat" always been a virtue?

Russell Akred wrote:

Come on, reading is bad but writing is taboo! So feel sorry for the poor creature that wrote those books because the thoughts have been stolen from his head.

Remember don't write things down it will make you forget them.

What are you talking about? Stuff and nonsense. Reading and writing are fun and it is the perpetuation of this gibberish that keeps goblins down.

Goblin brothers and sisters, rise above this monkey's lies. Show the Paizo messageboard community your true potential: reject this myth of goblin antipathy to literature! Expose Paizo for the anti-goblin bigots that they are!

You mean like ... ?

(Please ignore this if you have already answered this recently.)

Mr. Jacobs,

Since it often comes up in the RPG Superstar: From an RPG standpoint What elements make for a "successful" villain NPC?

6 x 9

Jesus died two thousand years ago. Ask his followers about plausibility.

He got better. :)

One instead of just continuing into the 20s and 30s, but in order to get there, I'd still have to slog through levels 13 through 20.

So rather then an epic level sourcebook, would you be more interrested in a "High Level" sourcebook?

Ah, yes, I remember Space Ghost, and Web Woman, and those other Saturday Morning cartoons. Good times! I could do a campaign inspired by them.

But getting inspiration is easy. I have some ideas for settings which are pretty well determined. Spelljammer is not on my list.

But what I need is something for the heroes to do. I did once try taking a post-apocalyptic adventure and convert that, which kind of started to look like "Where in this solar system I just invented is Carmen San Diego?" Villages expand to become entire planets, and then clues have to be invented to steer the PCs to the right place at the right time to receive the next clue.

Some adventures that might work include the Witchfire Trilogy by Privateer Press, with different encounters placed on different planets. Instead of going to a temple in a swamp, perhaps they go to a space station cathedral. That sort of thing could work.

I figured that people here know the adventure paths better than I do, and might have an idea of which of the Pathfinder adventure paths would be good ones to use.

If you are willing to do some conversion, check out The Serpent's Skull for what you are tying to do.

deinol wrote:

Wait, what? Which Paizo guideline did he break? Did he insult someone? Post offensive material?

This is a discussion board. If you just want to create a poll, use one of the many polling websites out there. You can't start a discussion and expect discussion not to happen.

I created tow threads one for yes and no to epic rules. I asked that those who want or do not want epic rules stick to one of two threads. I bascially get told "screw you I'm doing it anyway". The last thread on epci content went downhill and was locked was not in the mood to see it happen again.

But, abusing the Flagging system will also lead to this thread getting locked by the moderators.

Steelfiredragon should not have posted this comment in this thread, but he violated no Paizo Message Board policy.

Can people please give their reasons they dont want epic and dont trust Paizo to fix the problems

You have linked two questions that should not be linked.

I do believe that Paizo can (or could) fix the problems with High Level and Epic Level play.

As I said earlier, it should not be rushed. WoTC's stellar effort, showed everyone that this is kind of project requires careful thought.

DM_aka_Dudemeister wrote:

It doesn't bother me too much that Paladins are heavily discouraged from this campaign, but I hope there's leeway for good characters to still follow their conscience. Loyalty to captain and crew first and foremost.

Even if that captain and crew aim to misbehave.

Is that a Firefly reference I detect? Well, I know what direction I'm taking my crew now. ^_^

But ... that means that the Arch Villain Rupert Murdoch will TPK your heroes at the end of the first book!

Were Goblins a problem in Azlant? Seems like they would've been, considering their distribution in Garund and Avistan.

Not necessarily. They might have been upstanding citizens. :)

Hmm How were the little blighters during the time of the Runelords? Seem they overlap terrain. Also might make their fear of words have a basis in history.

Actually, that makes a lot of sense.

chopswil wrote:

Maybe some Oriental styled pirates along with the western/Caribbean ones?

Since the AP we're doing right before this one is the Jade Regent AP, we'll likely be a bit burnt-out on Asian-style pirates. We'll see, though...

Actually, an AP using some of the material from the Asian Soursebook might be a good idea. :)

Marvel at more of their artwork here:

Avalanche Press on RPG.net Index

I particularly like the Arnold line tracing on All for One and One for All

Counterwise, if you are really interrested in the art, check out this (NSFW) gallery.

No love for the Anklebiters of Galt?

It's a corporate media blackout, I tell you!

Vive le revolution!

** spoiler omitted **

But, if you are a goblin ... how can you even read that map?

While Epic Level Content is a good and necessary thing, I do not want Paizo to RUSH it out.

WoTC's effort is widely deemed a failure, and Paizo can and will do better. But that requires significant R&D time on the part of the Paizo development team.

So, I do not want Epic Level Content - yet.

My question isn't about not liking something. I get that, I do NOT like the Gunslinger or what to me is the over use of Lovecraftian elements in Golarion.

My question is "Why do people who not like something want to prevent other people from having what they like"

Of course Paizo can do what they want, but why even try to convince them not to make something that others want??

You missed the point of what Umbral Reaver said.

Paizo makes X books. If Paizo makes Y books about things they dislike, the number of books they might like is X-Y. That is a smaller number of books and they fear the things they do like will receive reduced coverage and support.

meatrace wrote:

PathJammer?

STARFINDER

please, please, please no magic or elves in space

How about Jews in Space?

More seriously, Dragonstar - with Elves, Magic and Science Fiction was awesome!

Has the creative team at Paizo ever concidered making a modern/ sci-fi varient of the Pathfinder rules? I think all you guys at paizo have done an amazing thing in continueing the 3.5 rules and gaming experience. If any team could do anything with the vast history of "Spell Jammer", "Alternity" and "D20 Modern" its you. I for one love sci-fi and would love to see your spin on that genre

By the way, this is not a new idea. :)

As far as I'm concerned the Benchmark to meet would be the late great Dragonstar from Fantasy Flight Games. which used the 3.0 system as it's core. Fantastic idea for a setting and a pretty decent job in adapting D20 to space.

Yes, it was! Unfortunately it used Mind Flayers as the "Big Bad" of the setting.

So, when they become "product identity," Fantasy Flight had to abandon the setting. :(

Mmm...it doesn't bother me, but doesn't seem to be the best fit either. Paizo's art is very nice in the amount of skin department, in my opinion. And some of us gamer girls take no offense at some skin - if I'm making a fantasy character, I want her to be beautiful (and show it)!

That is because "Gamer Chicks are the HAWTNESS!!!!"