|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
NBC? news, leading up to the Jenner interview, also did a series this week about trans kids. I only saw one of those segments, but it seemed okay.
It seems, at least at a superficial level, there is growing awareness of Trans issues than say 5 years ago, where in mainstream media I heard practically nothing.
Although working part time as a cashier right now at a grocery store, I have to say the tabloid headlines about Bruce Jenner have been pretty damn horrible.
James Jacobs wrote:
Oh no I understand that the Pathfinder banshee (or for that matter the folkloric Banshee) isn't the same creature as the denizen of Banshee Chapter. I suppose Morlocks would work for the final result, but My interpretation was that the banshees were some sort extraplanar creature that "hollowed" out humans that were receptive to them, and wore them as "suits"
Anyway....on to a related question
Will the Occult Bestiary include some new monsters for the Ethereal and Astral Planes? Feels like many horror movies make use of "dimensions" somewhat like these planes, and they seem kind of underpopulated in Pathfinder with monsters compared to the outer planes.
So last night I finally got around to watching Banshee Chapter, which I think you have said you watched and enjoyed
IF you haven't, don't click on the spoiler below :)
Is there anything that fills the equivalent "niche" of a banshee in Pathfinder? I was thinking probably some sort of denizen of the ethereal plane, but I can't think of any existing Pathfinder monster that fits the modus operandi of the movie monster. Xill are the closest, but they seem closer to xenomorphs than Banshees.
Based on descriptions, I could see it working together as long as the classes didn't overlap
So a fighter VM wizard, and then later picking up some levels of rogue.
I think I would not allow though a fighter to VM Wizard and then also take wizard levels. Seems overly complex and kind of redundant. So a player would have to decide early on if he wanted to do one or another.
It looks like next week Coulson joins forces with Other Shield to assault a Hydra base, so I am guessing Dethlok and Lincoln will get rescued. I wonder though if the Inhumans will join forces thanks to Hydra abducting them? Although I could see next week's mission going south and requiring later Inhuman support, especially this far from the season finale.
Looks like we don't have to wait until Defenders to see more of Matt Murdoch. Hopefully we get Electra and Bullseye next season.
I agree with this.
There are areas that need improvement in the game, so I think we will get another version of Pathfinder someday. I just don't see any radical redesign in the future. I also think that should any change happen, we won't see a re-release of all the new books. I think Paizo is smart enough to find away around that.
Steve Geddes wrote:
Most of the setting books (including the Hardcover setting books) are fairly rules light. Depending on the degree of edition change there might be little need for updating.
You give the example of domains changing, but there are plenty of ways they could deal with domains
Don't change them at all.
Not all of the above changes are likely to produce the same degree of need for change within the setting.
In addition, abandoning Golarion and restarting with a new setting poses probably more problems than changing the rules. For one, you invalidate all the existing APs/modules/CS books/player companions, whereas only the player companions would really risk obsoletion with a rules set.
Secondly, a lot of the creators like James Jacobs have ported a lot of their game elements they have spent decades working on within the game. I don't think many of them would be very happy with abandoning them to a "dead" setting.
For me, I see zero signs that the CS/AP/Module line is running out of ideas/niche space, so I see no need to switch from Golarion to something else, especially with so much unmined material
CAN page count go up? the core rulebook is already a massive tome with binding issues. If anything, if they are going to update rules in this fashion, I would rather they just break it up into a players and a GM book.
Steve Geddes wrote:
Unless they switch genres (Say to science fiction, or to gritty low magic fantasy) I don't see why they would need to switch settings. Fighters and wizards still exist, just mechanics underlying them would be different.
Given how absolutely one-sided that battle would be...I kind of expect that might be how they defeat indominus at the end.
And its some form of Mosasaur...
People writing reviews of books they haven't read, and whose reviews are either based on the product description, speculation, or commentary by other people.
Alternatively, people writing reviews/posting threads about how a game product completely sucks, because they were disappointed/didn't like some feature, which may have amounted to 4 pages in a 200 page book.
People writing long complaint posts and rants about a product, based on third hand information that was either incomplete or inaccurate.
Lord Snow wrote:
I kind of disagree with this regarding Marvel. Tonally, and the way they are shot and staged, all the Marvel movies pretty follow the same formula. Where they differ is the genres. Yeah Winter Soldier is a political thriller and the Thor movies are fantasy. But they still have similar degrees of humor, action, etc.
And yeah...I think a recent publicist dissed Marvel movies for not being "realistic", while branding the gritty, dark vibe as the tone we will see in all upcoming D.C. movies.
Wonder Woman is suppose to have a major role in the movie, while rumors state that Aquaman might have a part more similar to Nick Fury in Iron Man.
At any rate, my understanding is that the TV and Movie divisions of WB are separate entities, and it sounds like they don't really play well together.
Depends on how massive the change is and how they decide to present the change.
If the revision tackles specific rule elements (much like unchained targeted concerns over certain classes), while leaving the chassis largely the same, than it could probably be done as as something different than the core rulebook.
Also...the core rule book as is is super dense and not very user friendly. If a second version of Pathfinder was released that extensively revised the rules layout and language, a lot of people would pick it up who otherwise might not. Hell there are people who would buy it just if they split the book into the players and GM guide.
Something like redoing the core rulebook as the Strategy Guide.
True, but Its harder to do so, and the newer people entering gaming are more likely to start with the next edition of Pathfinder, and be less interested in the older version. So there is a bit of turnover as older fans leave the hobby.
So...last spring I know the forums blew up over the editing and errata issues raised by the Advanced Class Guide, with a lot of people expressing their dissatisfaction/annoyance/etc over issues, from proofreading to exclusion of necessary mechanics to unclear rules language. Concerns that were not only expressed by the more critical members of the board, but also more moderate folks generally not prone to hyperbole.
So...with Unchained being released and making its way to people, Has this book increased your faith in Paizo? As someone who is mostly following the release via the messageboard and hasn't seen the book himself, it seems like opinions so far are pretty positive. I am not seeing really any substantial commentary about editing concerns causing confusion, and even the more critical members of the community seem to find at least a few things to love about the book (UC Rogue seems well loved, people like the VMC rules, and even the "martials can't have nice things" arguments are subdued thanks to the skill upgrades and stamina pools).
So what's the verdict? And are people becoming optimistic about the occult book thanks to Unchained?
I have no doubt there will be a "2E" but 2E can mean a wide variety of things, from a heavily errated Pathfinder, A Pathfinder where the rules largely stay the same but the layout is radically redesigned, A Pathfinder which is a gradual evolution of the system allowing backwards compatibility, to a complete tossing of the D20 mechanic.
Personally...I think we have some time left before we really need to worry about it, and books like Unchained show that Paizo can address legacy issues that they were stuck with in a manner that doesn't throw out the existing ruleset. I hope that the existing books continue to be relevant in any rules update, and if books need to be updated it's done in a novel manner that isn't just regurgitating the ultimate and advanced books.
Personally I would have just set the movies a couple of hundred years in the future...that would have allowed them to keep the most of the EU cannon.
I still worry the movie will try to replace plot and acting with nostalgia, making it less a new movie and more a "Star Wars Greatest Hits"
That was a huge problem with Star Trek Into Darkness IMHO.
And Daredevil has pretty much blown all of those TV shows away, hands down.
It was already brought up, but most likely the people who will only allow the new Summoner are probably also the people who already ban or significantly nerf the old one.
So this really shouldn't effect tables where people are already playing summoners with no issues from other players or the GM.
Unbroken that came out this past winter was directed by her, and got pretty good critical review. IMDB also lists another movie in post-production and another announced.
EDIT: reading the article first, it says Marvel is PURSUING her, not that its a done deal. I kind of would be shocked if they can snag her honestly.
Although as of last episode, he was the cop who gave him the Ogre case, on order from Commissioner Loeb.
I feel like the general tenor is less "They are varying from the comics is bad" and more just generally handling the characters bad. Daredevil went with a pretty big deviation from the source material, and it was pulled off amazingly. I don't know if Gotham has really pulled off many major variations.
Off the top of my head, so far the Riddler has been the biggest deviation from comics lore. Making Nygma a forensics expert for the GCPD is a great idea. Giving him a billion lines that wink wink hint he is the riddler isn't. Nor is the really horribly mishandled love interest, which I think is suppose to make us sympathetic but instead is falling flat
Yeah I think that is a given...there will be new races in Arcadia that are not human, some of which have already been introduced (Skinwalkers, Strix,Syrinx) and some of which have been alluded to (A half Sasquatch race mentioned in Sasquatch entry for Mysterious Monsters revisited).
There are two very different ways to look at this here.
If you are taking a authentic to history/religion approach, than I completely agree with Alkenstarian. I don't think there is much dispute within the history community that Snorri modified and reinterpreted the legends, bringing in both Christian elements as well perhaps elements of the greco-roman beliefs. If you want to run a game that is super authentic to the original Norse cultures and beliefs, than you are better off trying to figure out what elements are probably exaggerated and what are authentic.
If you and your players however are more interested in the legends as they have been passed down since Snorri's time, the so to speak "Pop Culture" version of Norse myth, than your group should go ahead and use those elements. Because sometimes you don't want to play in the real setting, you want to play in the Pulp/Popular interpretation of said setting.
Both are completely valid game choices, if your group is all on board.
So...to be honest we have listed so many monsters that its hard for me to think of any "unique" monster from mythology that hasn't already been brought up. I can find plenty of new names and variations, but that is what they are. Maybe if I can get ahold of some more good sources for African/Australian/South American monsters, this may change.
Now, looking at science fiction, horror, and fantasy MOVIES, there seems to be plenty of creatures for inspiration. Here are a few that I can think of [Spoiled of course]
This is a great recent horror movie with a truly unsettling monster. Basically, it acts as a curse (and I debated whether it would function better as one versus a creature), which can be passed via sexual contact. If you get the curse, the creature will slowly and relentlessly stalk you until you either pass the curse off, or it catches you...and does horrible things resulting in your mangled body being found the next day.
The creature would probably be a medium-sized native outsider with perfect shape-shifting abilities, with the ability to take any humanoid form, usually something to freak the cursed person out, or to allow it to get closer to its victim. Whats worse, although its corporeal, it's completely invisible and undectable by anyone who isn't cursed or was cursed in the past. It's horribly strong and resistant to damage.
You would obviously have to tweak it further for Pathfinder, since the average adventuring party in a fantasy game is a bit more resilient than a group of high school students.
This is a personal favorite of mine. It's basically a fungus like organism that invades and takes control of tissue while feeding on it, eventually taking control of the body but not the mind of its victims. It doesn't really understand how limbs and such works, so its victims tend to get pulled apart by the organism or contorted into horrible shapes. It also can grow bigger in size by fusing the bodies of it's victims into some horrible Picasso-like flesh sculpture.
Obviously this would be an ooze or plant. Its normally the form of a black ooze like substance, but can extrude jagged bits that cause piercing damage and spread it's poison. A victim who succumbs would take con damage and suffer movement penalties, and with enough damage would basically become a "new" Splinter, which can aggregate with it's "parents" to provide more HP and increase its size category. Its vulnerable to fire, and completely blind to anything not heat, so it would have those weaknesses.
The main "monster" here is an anomolous alien microbe which mixes and matches DNA to spawn new monsters from its host. So you get things like weird Eagle wasps, fly goats, fox isopods, etc.
So it's basically a template that would probably add a set number of insectoid features to a stock monster. I would probably also give such creatures the ability to spread their contagion, causing the host to develop a disease which after a sufficient amount of damage leads to the violent "birth" of a new monster
Another really great horror movie, this time revolving around extradimensional "trolls" which like to collect people. We don't get much of a look at the creature, but it seems to be Silverfish like, and they set up lairs around bridges and such. Their lairs being actually extradimensional nests where they abduct people to for the lulz, and who possess red-green morality and intelligence, and sometimes make "trades" that the person involves usually regrets.
So...Abberation or Outsider of some sort, maybe an inhabitant of the Shadow or Ethereal planes. Intelligent. Obviously some sort of dimensional or phasing manipulation abilities. We don't get a lot of information on them, although in the movie they are connected to legends of Fairy and Troll abductions, and stories behind troll tolls. Obviously this fluff would have be changed what with Trolls and Fairies being a think. You could probably refluff, say phase spiders, as something like this, but I think you could make a truly disturbing monster by playing up the "collector" and "be careful what you wish for " aspects of the monster
This is the movie based on the pictures of the isopod which eats the tongue of fish and take the place of the organ. In the movie itself, we see these guys as two forms of monster. There are isopod swarms, that well...eat people and do typical swarm stuff. And then there are the parasitic infections, which kill people.
I desperately want to see more isopod monsters, and it surprises me that we haven't gotten more vermin inspired by them (I think there is a familiar..but that is it?). One option to play up the Bay critters is to make a magical variant that actually takes over the tongue (something that movie kind of leaves out). by taking over the tongue, the parasite can control the voice and spellcasting of it's victims, maybe even going ahead and controlling the person in general.
Since we don't know the plot of Luke Cage, Iron Fist or the Defenders we might see him sooner than an unannounced (or even rumored) season 2.
Maybe, although I think he won't be the big bad in any of those other shows. We know for instance that the Purple Man will be taking that role in Jessica Jones.
I dunno...I think for a prequel series, new characters are not a bad thing. Any prequel, even a relatively good one (which Gotham isn't) suffers from telling a story where you know that certain characters will live, or that certain situations can't be solved yet. Fish is probably the only legitimate character on the show whose fate isn't known by the audience.
considering the deal with Marvel, I wonder if they will use Kingpin for some of the new Spider-man movies? I'm only up to episode 6 of Daredevil but this guy is doing a great job in the role. Would love to see him deal with a wise-cracking Spidey
The actor has made statements that their are "plans" that extend beyond Netflix for the character, but how solid those plans are I have no clue, nor in what form they will take.
At any rate, I don't think we will see much more of him before Daredevil Season 2.
My own preference for setting, at least gamewise is:
Either throw out every analog and go completely novel with everything, and don't have any fantasy counterpart cultures/nations/etc (which means no Faux Europe).
Or if you are going to have a Faux Europe, go full out and include some version of Asia, Africa, The Americas, etc.
Otherwise, it gets really weird, doing a combination of the two.
Now by all means include weird fantasy/ideas in there mixed with the analogs, I just don't feel comfortable with turning all the Mayans into Lizardfolk, or the Iroquois into Wood Elves or something.
Ivan Rûski wrote:
Maybe. I know Punisher's big thing is that he kills bad guys, doesn't just capture them or stop them. But I mean...within the MCU that isn't exactly a unique property. Iron Man and Thor are both pretty lethal, especially Iron Man in the first movie, who is functioning as international vigilante.
I do think Punisher works best as a contrast to characters like Daredevil or Spiderman, but I think you could make a pretty good show based around Punisher and his roaring rampage of revenge against the folks who killed his family.
Freehold DM wrote:
For once I agree with Rynjin. It's not so much the actress..as it is the complete pointless of the character after being deposed by the Penguin.
Everything with Dollmaker has been completely and utterly stupid. It's clear the showrunners had no clue in general what to do when their original episode order was renewed for a full season, and all of the plotlines suffer from that, but hers suffers the worst.
Although...Fish is probably the best/worst scenery chewer of the bunch, and often her acting/character seems tonally at odds with the rest of the show. Still don't know if that is a good or bad thing, since at times I find it grating, and at other times I think the actress is simply the only one who realizes how ridiculous the show gets at time.
My friend sent me this comment he found online in reference to tonight's episode:
"I just watched an amazing show about the origins of a masked vigilante who doesn't kill. It featured a spectacular turf war between rivaling factions of organized crime, a city plagued by corrupt politicians and police officers on the take, and moral ambiguity around every corner. And then after Daredevil I watched Gotham, which had fantastic dialogue like, "I'm telling on you."
Ambrosia Slaad wrote:
I just finished up Daredevil (Should have gone to bed instead but oh well...), so I can actually read this and respond...
Episode 8-11 spoiler:
Ben Urich's death was a definite HOLY @$@! moment for me, probably one of the biggest in the show. Probably because I assumed he was safe being a major comic character. His Death was brutal and totally surprising.
Personally...I am glad they deviated, as I think his death did help the show. It provided a rallying point for Matt, Karen, and Foggy, and most importantly...it really solidified Kingpin as a horrible villain. The last few episodes before this had the Kingpin worry about his mom, see his girlfriend almost die, and saw the murder of his best friend. Going into the finale, the show needed a moment to jar the audience out of any sympathy, and raise the stakes on bringing Kingpin to justice.
As for not messing with Ulrich before hand, again the above events didn't exactly put the Kingpin in an exactly rational frame of mind, and stuff was rapidly spiraling out of control.
As for spiderman...shrugs. The expanded format of 13ish hours versions 2-3 hours is always going to provide a more rich story. BUT...I I don't think Spiderman or his major villains really could be portrayed on a Netflix budget for 13 episodes, nor do I really want a gritty Spiderman. Plus I think Spiderman is just more profitable on the big screen, since it appeals to wide age groups, and I tend to think that Netflix originals cater to an older demographic.
Now if anything deserves a Netflix series IMHO, it's Punisher. Now thats a show that would thrive in the Netflix corner of the MCU
I assumed Powers Booth was Pierce's predecessor, who was probably fired after the whole "Lets nuke NYC" decision.
I think I see some potential set up for the Defenders series, but not so far the other Netflix series.
I am still confused on how series work with the Netflix deal. The creators have been talking about a Daredevil season 2, but would that have to come after Defenders? Or would we get it next year? Will we have multiple MCU series "running" at the same time?
John Kretzer wrote:
Yep...there is absolutely no reason to assume Quicksilver and Scarlet Witch are Inhumans. In fact the evidence we have so far says they are NOT.
They are definitely building the inhumans up to fill the "mutant" niche, both on the show and currently in the comics.
James Jacobs wrote:
For what it's worth, quite a few lizards are now almost completely captive bred, and wild caught animals just are not around. Bearded Dragons and Leopard Geckos for instance make pretty good pets and are no longer wild caught.
Although yeah...leaving a lizard alone with a cat for a week could be problematic.
Thejeff captures a lot of my response. I remain very very skeptical of statements that the "WRONG" authors are winning recent Hugos. It comes down to personal preference, and someone isn't wrong if they have different tastes than you.
Going through recent Hugo winners, I can't say I have read all or even most of the recent winners, but I do see a lot of authors I have personally enjoyed either as nominees or as winners. As someone who has never voted for the Hugos, it makes me very skeptical that these folks don't appeal to large segments of Sci-fi fandom, or that they are the WRONG people to vote for.