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

MMCJawa's page

3,609 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists.


RSS

1 to 50 of 3,609 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

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:
MMCJawa wrote:

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 :)

** spoiler omitted **

The Pathfinder banshee is very much a different creature (it's in Bestiary 2). In fact, the creature from "Banshee Chapter" isn't what I'd call a banshee at all... it's a weird title, but a cool one. It's been too long since I saw the movie so I don't recall the specifics of the monsters... but if I recall correctly... I'd do something like morlocks with blink and displacement effects.

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 :)

spoiler:

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.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I think Disney largely keeps their hands off the creative workings of Marvel and I imagine Lucasfilm now, as long as they can deliver movies that make a profit.


I went with Trollkin...they are mentioned with hardly any details in the Northlands books, are unique to Midgard, and I so far haven't seen even any artwork for how the race should look.


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.


Aberzombie wrote:

Not bad...

** spoiler omitted **

Spoiler:

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.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

Netflix orders season 2 of Daredevil, to premiere in 2016

Looks like we don't have to wait until Defenders to see more of Matt Murdoch. Hopefully we get Electra and Bullseye next season.


Skeld wrote:

If Paizo releases a Pathfinder 2e, it will be as backward compatible to PF1e as PF was to D&D3.5 when PF was released. Anyone expecting an entirely new, or wildly different, game is going to be sorely disappointed because Paizo isn't going to release a game that will invalidate their entire back-catalog.

The entire idea of PFRPG was predicated on the fact that people didn't want a completely new game. As bets go, it was a huge winner.

-Skeld

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:
MMCJawa wrote:
Steve Geddes wrote:

In my view, the new setting should be tied to the new rules.

I think if you put out new rules whilst continuing to expand Golarion, you're going to have to put a lot of effort into converting how-things-used-to-work into how-they-work-now. Also, whatever is possible in Golarion has to be possible in the new ruleset - I'd rather they give themselves a free reign when and if they feel it's the right time for a "PF2".

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.

What I meant is that you'd need to re-do books with a lot of mechanical stuff. So all the Gods would stay the same, but if there's no such thing as domains (for example) in PF2 then you need to redo all the books detailing clerics, paladins, etcetera to bring them in line with the new system. Also you face the PR/customer service problem of people buying a 'Golarion' book from the PF1 era which doesnt work with the new RPG (PF2) they've just bought.

Alternately, you create a 'new system' but ensure old splatbooks are still viable - and I personally think that's imposing a needlessly harsh restriction on the designers of the game.

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.
Have them exist but give them different options/spells/etc
Have them exist but only have how they are used by classes change
Consolidate them into smaller sets (or break them into new domains)
Completely revamp/delete them

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


1 person marked this as a favorite.
thaX wrote:


The page count could go up, but with the overall editing and combining/maneuvering of repeat rules, the overall pages may stay the same.

It might be easier to just come out with the PFver2, but then again...

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:

In my view, the new setting should be tied to the new rules.

I think if you put out new rules whilst continuing to expand Golarion, you're going to have to put a lot of effort into converting how-things-used-to-work into how-they-work-now. Also, whatever is possible in Golarion has to be possible in the new ruleset - I'd rather they give themselves a free reign when and if they feel it's the right time for a "PF2".

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.


Aberzombie wrote:

I believe this is the latest trailer, with a greater look at Indominus Rex.

I know what dino battle I want to see - Indominus Rex versus big crocofish 9whatever it's really called).

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...


The first one was an okay popcorn flick that I admit to largely forgetting about a week after watching it. No dislike, but not something I would feel the need to see again

The second one had plotholes large enough to drive the Enterprise in, and tried to be Wrath of Khan 2.0 too much.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

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.


According to Ruffalo, they can't really do a stand alone Hulk movie because Universal gets a cut of the profits (Or I guess they could, but they don't want to feed Universal money).

Apparently as long as Hulk is teamed up, Universal gets jack.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
lemeres wrote:


It basically goes against pathfinder's original founding principle- a desire for backwards comparability and a wish to continue using the large body of previous books.

That statement above is pretty much the whole point of the book.


I don't think Hulk will die, but there were early rumors that suggest he might..get launched into space? Where he is eventually discovered by a group containing a certain talking walking tree and talking raccoon?


Lord Snow wrote:
Bjørn Røyrvik wrote:
I am reluctant to assume that the entire movie will be GRIMDARK!!!!! all the way through based on what little we've seen here. But even if this is a fair representation I'm still far more interested in this than almost anything Marvel or SW. Marvel is doing the lighter fare, DC is doing a bit darker stuff. Most of the characters can work in either type of story and it's just as well that WB isn't trying to copy MS too closely.

Marvel are (smartly) using different tones in their movies. Guardians of the Galaxy is in a completely different genre than The Winter Soldier. The Thor movies are complete fluff, Iron Man is action comedy, and the big group stuff (Guardians, Avengers) is mostly about fun. I expect more variations and subgenres would be explored as the MCU develops.

Unlike them, every indication is that all DC movies planned for the near future are going to be various shades of grimdark.

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.


Set wrote:
Lord Snow wrote:
Marvel are (smartly) using different tones in their movies. Guardians of the Galaxy is in a completely different genre than The Winter Soldier. The Thor movies are complete fluff, Iron Man is action comedy, and the big group stuff (Guardians, Avengers) is mostly about fun. I expect more variations and subgenres would be explored as the MCU develops.

Dr. Strange will hopefully take it in a very different direction.

And on Netflix, both Luke Cage and Iron Fist promise some different tones and themes.

A Black Widow movie might go full on spy-drama, with a dash of James Bond.

Quote:
Unlike them, every indication is that all DC movies planned for the near future are going to be various shades of grimdark.

Seems that way, and yet with the success of the Flash, with it's lighter tone and more enthusiastic celebration of all that is whacky and un-serious and *fun* about comics (thanks in part to Cisco naming all of the Rogues), perhaps there's someone at DC considering that the 'Batman formula' isn't the *only* road to walk, and that a *fun* superhero movie, perhaps starring someone like Superboy / Conner, or Booster Gold, or a similar character that thrives on a less grim and gritty mono-chromatic palette, could actually sell tickets and put butts in seats and earn green cash money.

More success with stuff like the Flash might result in DC feeling less shy about waving their freak flag, less like they have to apologize for and hide from the inherent goofiness and 'unrealisticness' of the genre, and lead to some *fun* superhero movies from them.

Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice does not seem to be that movie, 'though.

Interesting that Gal Godot's name is on the poster, and Jason Mamoa's is not. Seems that Wonder Woman will have a bigger presence in the movie than Aquaman.

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.


bookrat wrote:
TOZ wrote:
Nathanael Love wrote:
I didn't buy 4th edition D&D because I didn't want a new edition. I didn't buy 5e because I didn't want a new edition. Why would I buy PF 2.0?
Because you can't play PF if everyone else is playing PF 2.0.
Bah. It'll never happen. People still play 1e and 2e, even thoug ugh were aready at 5e D&D. The same will be true if Paizo goes PF 2.0; there will still be PF 1.0 games.

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.


We don't really know the full political situation in the new movies. Some have suggested that their might be some sort of cold war situation between the Imperial Remnant(s) and the New Republic, while the Resistance would be some sort of rebel group operating within the Imperial Remnant.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Jaelithe wrote:
Bjørn Røyrvik wrote:
I am reluctant to assume that the entire movie will be GRIMDARK!!!!! all the way through based on what little we've seen here. But even if this is a fair representation I'm still far more interested in this than almost anything Marvel or SW. Marvel is doing the lighter fare, DC is doing a bit darker stuff. Most of the characters can work in either type of story and it's just as well that WB isn't trying to copy MS too closely.
Hmm. I hardly agree that Captain America: The Winter Soldier or Avengers: Age of Ultron are "lighter fare." Thus far, frankly, Marvel certainly seems to 'get it' much better than DC, insofar as movies are concerned. Television is another matter: I consider The Flash by far the best of the bunch, followed closely by Agent Carter. Neither Arrow nor Agents of SHIELD do much for me at all.

And Daredevil has pretty much blown all of those TV shows away, hands down.


Ravingdork wrote:
wraithstrike wrote:
One thing I have noticed is that the new monk and rogue are being discussed more like what they are which would be "house rule suggestions", but people tend to be up in arms about this summoner/eidolon as if it is some type of official errata that has to be played. Why is that?
As I've said before, it's because that's undoubtedly how most GMs are going to end up running it. Players are generally smart enough to know this.

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.


Having Carol Danvers get hit or exposed to some sort of Kree tech isn't that hard to set up, especially if her origin is tied in with whatever happens in Infinity Wars Part 1.


Much better trailer...

Although...darn...seeing Harrison Ford at the end just makes ME feel old.


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.


JoelF847 wrote:
MMCJawa wrote:
Set wrote:


Similarly, with Gotham, I'm always hoping to see something new and shocking and spitting-in-the-face-of-canon, like Nygma *not* turn out to be a villainous Riddler but an ally to the Bat, or Fish Mooney going on to become the 'power behind the throne' of the Falcone crime family, or something that just pushes that applecart right over and dances in the wreckage.

Instead, I read constant complaints that Gotham isn't *exactly* like whatever stories we read forty years ago, and have seen at least a half-dozen times in TV shows, movies and / or cartoons. What would be the point in that? Yeesh.

The last thing I need to see is a fortieth iteration of 'latest artists version of some hundred year old classic painting, using the exact same colors that everyone else has used.'

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

I'm expecting Nygma's love interest to be what sets him on the path of becoming a villain, especially now that she's dating someone else who seems like a perfectly decent guy from the little we've seen of him. Jealousy ensues, Nygma gets revenge and kills him, and is no longer the harmless quirky lovable CSI guy, but proto-Riddler.

Although as of last episode, he was the cop who gave him the Ogre case, on order from Commissioner Loeb.


Set wrote:


Similarly, with Gotham, I'm always hoping to see something new and shocking and spitting-in-the-face-of-canon, like Nygma *not* turn out to be a villainous Riddler but an ally to the Bat, or Fish Mooney going on to become the 'power behind the throne' of the Falcone crime family, or something that just pushes that applecart right over and dances in the wreckage.

Instead, I read constant complaints that Gotham isn't *exactly* like whatever stories we read forty years ago, and have seen at least a half-dozen times in TV shows, movies and / or cartoons. What would be the point in that? Yeesh.

The last thing I need to see is a fortieth iteration of 'latest artists version of some hundred year old classic painting, using the exact same colors that everyone else has used.'

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


Samy wrote:
Mark Moreland wrote:
One of the goals of the Pathfinder campaign setting is that there be representation for players of all sorts, and that includes many players who identify as native american (of any number of specific heritages).

I hope that includes those of us who identify as otyughs. ;)

Quote:
To insinuate, even unintentionally, that people from Arcadia (read "America") are monster people that you won't be able to easily identify with is less than ideal.
I don't think anyone meant that Arcadians are across the board "monster people", just that a brand new continent would be a nice place to see some nonhuman societies, Kyonin-style, as well in addition to humans. And that some of those nonhuman societies could also be inspired by real world cultures instead of being just the generic fantasy version of that race. I think it might be similar to what you did with Pahmet dwarves, although I'm not personally familiar with them.

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).


3 people marked this as a favorite.

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]

It Follows

Spoiler:

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.

Splinter

Spoiler:

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.

Blood Glacier

Spoiler:

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

Absentia

Spoiler:

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

The Bay

Spoiler:

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.


Krensky wrote:
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.


Aberzombie wrote:
Hama wrote:
She is an amazing actress. Her character, however, is horribly written, incredibly dull and completely pointless now that Penguin is coming to his own.
This, to the Nth degree. I love Mrs. Pinkett-Smith. But the writing for her character is terrible. Not to mention, there's 75 years worth of Bat supporting characters to choose from. Why make up someone completely new?

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.


Greylurker wrote:
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.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

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:
Kthulhu wrote:
Ivan Rûski wrote:

[Chanting]Season 2...season2...season 2[chanting]

Really love this show, hoping for another season. Pissed about ** spoiler omitted ** Not really loving the costume at the end though. Something about the cowl doesn't look right. To everyone who loved that episode 2 fight scene, if you've never seen it, track down the original Oldboy. It's a Korean film and they very much took inspiration for the hallway fight from a scene in that movie. Even if you can't find the original, there was an American remake done last year that should be easier to find with a similar scene.

I think both versions are on Netflix. So if you can watch Daredevil, you can watch either of the Oldboy films.

Ok, cool. Hadn't checked Netflix for them since I own both on dvd.

EDIT: Oh, and are me and MMCJawa the only ones who like the Punisher around here?

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.


Mostly monsters and races...Between Pathfinder and 3PP there is an ever diminishing number of 3.X stuff that hasn't already been converted over in some fashion or another.


Freehold DM wrote:

I am finally up to date on gotham. Strangely enough, I have been bonding with my mother over this show. If you know my mother, you would know this makes little sense. But she is geeking out with me over the show, and that's good- she's been a bit awkward and distant since I got married.

Not sure where all the fish hate is coming from (then again, batman fans aren't known for patience or being accepting of new characters), but it doesn't really matter as the actress behind the character is leaving. A loss, from where I am sitting as she is an amazing actress. here's hoping things pick up again after the break. Loving the great acting in this show in general.

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.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

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."


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Ambrosia Slaad wrote:

I really enjoyed it. There were tiny things here and there that I might quibble about, but they didn't do anything to detract from the enjoyment of the best Marvel Comics TV show yet (and Agent Carter really set the bar high). Strong writing and good-to-amazing acting throughout, and the limited budget for TV surprisingly not posing an issue. Marvel's Feig recently spoke about re-re-casting Spider-Man as an actual teenager so they could cover many of the Parker's highschool plot & character points in the movies... screw that. Daredevil just proved that the Spider-Man re-reboot should be done in 13-episode seasons on Netflix.

However, there was a singular plot development in Daredevil that totally, infuriatingly unnecessary. ** spoiler omitted **...

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


Set wrote:
Lord Snow wrote:

I'm pretty sure they died in CA 2, at least all of them except the woman that Black Widow was camouflaged as. No idea what's up with her, but it is reasonable enough to assume she died in the coup.

They died in the end there, when Pierce revealed his treachery and delivered electrical shocks through tags that he gave them earlier.

Bah, that's just the three that showed up to Pierce's meeting. We know from the Avengers movie that there were at least five of them, and one had the voice of Powers Boothe. :)

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:
Spiral_Ninja wrote:

John, I think it's been said that since 20th Century Fox owns the license to the X-Men, they also hold the only license to the term 'mutant' and are not permitting any other companies to use the term. That's why Quicksliver and Scarlet Witch are Inhumans in the upcoming Avengers/Ultron film.

Yes they are not mutants...but that does not mean they are Inhumans either. It seems to me that they gained their powers by Hydra experimenting on them with the gem(a infinity stone) in Loki's scepter/spear.

You might be right they could be Inhumans...I just did not hear Marvel officially saying so officially and wondering id they did say so.

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:


4) I really don't want to patronize pet stores that practice sketchy animal catching stuff, which seems to me to be most pet stores. It's one thing to catch a lizard in your back yard and keep it in a terrarium (which is what I did as a kid) because that lizard isn't changing ecology. It's another to ship a lizard from some distant land to Seattle, which isn't very lizard-friendly.

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.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

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.

1 to 50 of 3,609 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2015 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours: Monday–Friday, 10 AM–5 PM Pacific Time. View our privacy policy. Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc., and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Online, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.