|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
I guess I have mixed feelings about this. I have been reading the books since book one, and would have preferred the book series to conclude before the TV.
On the other hand, I really like the TV series. And it would be a lot of work to adapt Book 4 and 5 into two seasons...There just isn't enough material for Sansa, Jon, and Bran for more than one season.
Honestly...I consider myself pretty easy going and I have enough character concepts that I wouldn't mind being in a restricted campaign. But to me, warning signs go off when a rule or restriction is in place with the only explanation being "I said so", because to me that suggests I am playing more with a dictator than anything else, and if that is all the explanation he needs to ban/rule on something, who is to say how the rest of the campaign will go.
Please note that I said "no reason"; If the GM explains that the absence of this race is tied into the plot in some way, or they think that particular race is unbalanced/doesn't work with home rules/contrasts to much with the flavor of the campaign, that is probably sufficient for me.
I don't think it actually is possible to create a game that can cater to every existing edition. Certainly there are commonalities between editions, but even then those commonalities are subtlety different. For instance, hit points are shared in common between all editions, but the number of hit points, and the ability to regain hit points, varies.
I think a truly barebones version that focused on these commonalities would risk being simplistic and bland, and not attract an audience. If you had later chapters in your core book giving more options for each edition you wanted to emulate, it might be a more appealing a book, but would also result in a potentially overcomplicated mess that would have trouble attracting new players. Just imagine if you have a single volume with 3 or 4 versions of every character class, and a new group has to navigate which version to use plus what feats/items/spells are appropriate for each class and each version of the class.
Same issue with monsters...1E monster design is quite different from 3E, and I assume 4E. Would your monster manual need to have 3 sets of stats for every monster?
Having only recently finished reading this volume, and loving this adventure path, I would have to say this is without a doubt the weakest volume in the path. I felt like at least 2 AP's of material and plotline was squeezed into one volume, and a lot of story elements feel kind of rushed. Especially the attack upon Drezen by the Marilith general, which feels like it could be removed completely without influencing anything. I kind of understand the reason...the statblocks for this volume are LONG and take up quite a bit of space.
If I were to get this far in the Adventure, this adventure would definitely require the greatest amount of reworking and fleshing out.
I am guessing Paizo is being very very cautious about establishing "good" orc tribes, since James Jacobs really prefer orcs as a chaotic evil race of pillagers. We don't really know anything about Irabeth's father....he could have been an orphan raised by humans, a victim of polymorph, or someone who was reincarnated as an orc after death.
Umbriere Moonwhisper wrote:
Having done a google search for Tera Elin, and given your past posting history describing said characters, your groups might be less judgemental and more creeped out...
Wonder Woman isn't really that hard to get right. The basics of her origin story are not anymore complicated than Thor's. Warner Brothers just is very very paranoid about doing any movies that doesn't involve Batman or Superman, and The Dark Knight aside, has has very poor luck with good scripts
Ya know...I am pretty sure guys will go and see female superheroes...I don't see that as being too huge an issue. The fact that Catwoman and Electra bombed has more to do with a crappy script and poor acting than anything else.
Purple Dragon Knight wrote:
Guardians of the Galaxy is about as obscure as Captain Marvel, and Captain Marvel is probably the most significant woman with super powers. And Captain Marvel really isn't all that powerful compared to The Hulk or Thor.
Honestly, all bets are off once you introduce as a major character a raccoon with a machine gun.
For what it's worth, Vision has been cast for Age of Ultron and is being played by Paul Bettany (who is also the voice of Jarvis, so they are probably connected).
While I think the Clairovoyant could very well be AI, I don't foresee Vision showing up before Avengers. I have wondered if it might be connected to Ultron, given that we have gotten no hint of Ultron yet in any marvel movies, and I feel they would want to foreshadow him (at least more than Vision).
Mark Moreland wrote:
Yes, the term "Eldest," when referring to the demigod equivalents from the First World, is Paizo IP, as are the names and descriptions of the specific entities who make up that category.
I suppose that makes sense...all the archdevils and a good chunk of the empyreal lords and demon lords are from real life, but I didn't recognize by name any of the named Eldest.
In Pathfinder, I think a big reason gods are concerned with mortal is politics. Faithful believers in a god to to their god after death, resulting eventually in the creation of more outsiders loyal to that god. Which in turn increases the influence of a diety in the Great Beyond, especially given the number of cold and hot wars between different outsider groups or dieties.
As for number of gods, like everyone else said, its going to largely depend on the flavor you are going for and the type of games you want to play. Personally, if I was creating a setting, I would be tempted to cut out the names of all the domains, paste them on a wall, blindfold myself, and throw 5 darts to select 5 different domains. I would then try to create a god based around those throws...could be a nice way of trying to create more original gods.
I am thinking they are probably going to pull a "Hulk" route, and do The Thing as entirely CGI. Which would also give Fox there own "Hulk" character.
Well beyond any race recasting issues, my general feeling from reading about this movie is that Fox wants to cash in on the same cross over action that Avengers pulled off, by building up to a Fantastic Four/X men cross over.
Which to be honest I am not sure has any chance in hell of working...half of the X-men movies have been utter crap, and the original Fantastic Four movies were rather disappointing. My room-mates and I have mixed feelings about Days of Future Past. Not to mention that, to me, Fantastic Four really feels like it would fit in better either in the Spiderman Universe or in the the Marvel Universe, not with X-men. Granted they seem to be going about this a bit better than either DC or the Spiderman movie franchises, all of which are trying to rush to a Justice League and Sinister Six movie by throwing in as many characters as they can, to the point I question whether they will have any room for actual plot.
I dunno...giant pitcher plants and sundews just feel more like environmental hazards than monsters, given the way they trap food.
I like the idea of some sort of flower fey/flower creature...seems to fill an empty niche in Pathfinder
Not sure how I feel about Treant variations...What would really be the difference for instance between an Oak or Ash Treant? Seems like something that could be more usefully done with reflavoring or in a Monsters revisited book.
That said there are a few "trees" that strike me being different enough to require their own entries. Reign of Winter had basically Pine "Treants" (Can't remember there name). And Bestiary 4 has Saguaro "treants" What about a Bald Cypress Treant? That seems like a pretty distinctive type of tree.
Ya know, if I was a pagan that venerated Norse gods, I have to feel that the race of Heimdal would be way way less offensive to me than the fact they took dieties from my personal beliefs, simplified their story, and made them into super heroes.
If Black Heimdall is the only thing that offends your religious beliefs out of the Marvel movies, you probably have some underlying issues.
Except the comics books themselves seldom care about continuity...think about how many retcons, revamping, and resurrections are done by DC or Marvel? Obviously it's not a huge issue for them in their own products, yet the minor change in race is for a movie?
How about the actor selected has a working relationship with the director, and the director feels he would do a good job of playing Johnny Storm? And given the movie hasn't even filmed yet, its not like you can evaluate his acting or the influence of his race on the movie.
Also, if you really think that casting Nelson Mandela as a white person is the exact same as casting a black person as Johnny Storm, than you live in a much different reality than I do.
I know this is a tangent, but I never understood where there wasn't at least a few good Eldest. Seems odd given that there are good fey and other first world denizens. I am hoping if we ever get a new "Book of the Damned" style book on the Eldest, we might get more members, including some good Eldest.
I think the Sincubus version of the Gaasyendietha also sort of overlaps with the Outer Dragons a bit too much, being an alien space dragon.
The below link gives a more detailed summary of info on Horned serpents as well as a list of different variants from different Native American tribes
Some random ideas might be to associate these guys with the Ethereal/Astral plane, much like Lindwyrms are associated with the First World. These serpents are often given the role of tutelary spirits and given great magical powers. Perhaps associate these with types of magic or schools of magic, and make their theme tied into the role of protectors of magic. That would give them a distinctive slant from the existing dragon types.
Antlered Serpents are a pretty huge motif in North American folklore, and generally share a few standard traits. They are almost always associated with water, whether it be lakes, oceans, or rivers. They have great magical power, and are generally on par with Thunderbirds and giants as far as magical powers. Many have healing abilities, especially associated with their horns. Generally they are legless, although this varies.
A sample of some different Native American dragons are listed below. Note that these are a pretty random sampling...I have yet to go through and concisely gather data on all the NA dragons and serpent like creatures, so I am missing a lot. But this at least gives give a sample. And some, like the Piasa and Tizheruk are probably weird enough they would best be considered their own monster. More examples are listed on the Native American Languages website:
Horned Serpents/Native American Dragons from my monster list:
Kci-Athussos = Maliseet/Passamaquoddy; lake dwelling great horned serpent; eats humans
Nahuelito = Argentinian lake serpent cryptid; large and serpent like, with characteristics of other "typical" lake monsters
Sisiutl = Pacific NW Native American; Great two-headed sea serpent with a human head and limbs in the center o fit's body, each head horned. may have been inspired by the rubber boa; can change size, from tiny to colossal; slime can cause sickness and death; gorgon like petrification powers; if killed can have great healing powers; natural enemy of Thunderbirds; guardian of the gods
Tizheruk/Pal Rai Yuk = Inuit; monstrous sea serpent, two 7ft long fox-like heads with horns, 6 fins, 2 dorsal fins, and two flippered tails; covered in thick fur and has a serrated fin down it’s back. Stealthy and fond of snatching people of of piers or overturning kayaks; can be summoned
Uktena/Uhcegila/Misi-kinepikw = NA Horned Serpent; giant serpent with glowing iridescent crystalline scales and a single large crystal horn in it's forehead, with magical powers. Also stag horns; pestilence breath; glow can blind and confuse people; enemies of the Thunderbird; not evil, but avoid humans and may be a death omen; can control game
Xiuhcoatl = Aztec turquoise fire serpent; segmented appearance with a upturned hognose snake like snout, trapeze like end of tail, covered in shredded paper like frills
Gaasyendietha = Seneca NA; River dwelling dragon like creature, capable of breathing fire and flying on a trail of fire; connected to meteors
Piasa = Cahokian; monstrous dragon, described as having a head like a bear, antlers of an elk, giant fangs, and a scaly body with bird like claws and wings; head and neck covered in a whispy mane; Tail tipped with a spear; antlers red and body black; destructive beast that preys on people, and would occasionally leave it’s Cliffside lair to terrorize the land
Ender passed for early teens (13-14), and I still think the age was fine for getting across the horror in the situation (although from a plot perspective, they botched that).
As for Game of Thrones...The child actors on the show are actually one of the best things going for it. Especially Maisie Williams. I really doubt making her a few years older has had any impact on her plotline on the show, and this is from someone that has read the series three times now.
I don't think Nocticula has a particular devotion to Shamira over her other pairings. As queen of the Succubi, I would make a joke about her being okay getting it on with anything with two legs, but then apparently there are strong suggestions that she has had trysts with JUBILEX, so she is not even that picky.
Vod Canockers wrote:
You know, while I think it was a poor adaptation, I don't think you can blame directors for aging up the character and getting a young looking actor to play him. Actual good child actors are incredibly rare, especially those who can actually pull off drama. I would rather we get an older Ender than an age faithful Ender incapable of anything more complicated than mugging the camera.
going to have to disagree here.
Saw the movie in the theater, and was a fairly big fan of the book (although I haven't read the initial series since I was in high school).
I thought that overall...the movie was a poor adaptation. The movie felt obligated to beat the audience over the head repeatably with "how special" Ender is, where the movie should have felt obligated with SHOWING him being special.
The training portion of the movie felt too rushed and compacted, which was totally unnecessary given all the scenes of adult talking about how special Ender is, or the fact that I think they showed the same attack footage of the first bug war 3 times. And I also feel rather annoyed that they discard the FTL limits in the book. It made the "twist" at the end a bit too obvious.
Malachi Silverclaw wrote:
Here's the thing. If the movie decides to deviate from the comics/books (which all movies do to some extent), the comic version you love doesn't disappear. Adaptations should stand on their own merits, and if the overall plot, characterization, and acting is good, who cares if it deviates in a trivial manner from the comics?
Having dense accumulations of windfarms offshore hurricane prone areas sounds like a disaster for migrating birds. Those are major migration corridors, and we already have enough trouble with offshore oil platforms luring in and confusing birds with lights. Add giant spinning blades to the mix? Good bye warblers.
Malachi Silverclaw wrote:
Too much stuff for the quote function
The Cosby show metaphor/example really doesn't work though. That's more equivalent to suddenly replacing Tony Stark after two movies with an asian or black actor. Yes...that would throw audiences off; so would recasting Danny Devito in the role.
The Ultimate Fantastic Four team has never been in a movie, and despite two prior movies I would say the average movie goer probably doesn't care what race Johny Storm he is. We also haven't established the relationship between the Storm siblings...are they from a biracial family? step-siblings? orphans? Who knows. When the movie is released it will be establishing the cannon for the series.
In contrast, recasting a major actor after 6 seasons as a different person of a different race is way more jarring, especially if you establish he was born to the family, and not adopted or only half a sibling.
Actually the default state for Golarion (or at least the Inner Sea) is that homosexuality is treated as normal and generally not persecuted or the topic of much discussion. There are no examples of exile and numerous examples of same sex partners (cough "that is why reading a thread before commenting is useful" cough). Also You don't have to polymorph your sex to get married. There are two married same sex couples in the most recent AP, for instance.
Except that a lot of these quotes, facts, and numbers have more than one interpretation.
In all the quotes your provided, my reading of what they meant for playstyle wasn't "4E, 3E, 2E, and 1E", it was rather "rules light narrative" versus "heavy codification of rules" or "Combat heavy" versus "Other styles of game"
No where in the quotes do they state playstyles = editions, and indeed I think you could run some version of all those playstyles I mentioned in any edition, although with varying success.
Ultimately they seem to be going for simplification of rules, and actually presenting all the rules necessary for a 4E, 3E, 2E, and 1E style caster in a single book (not to mention all the other classes), would lead to a book that make the core book for Pathfinder look like an informational pamphlet.
My reading of "allow all playstyles" has always been that there would be a chassis of a game which would feature additional models to allow more complexity in certain areas.
Yeah...I am not convinced this will ever get off the ground, at least not as a major movie release.
I received no impression that the company is all that experienced in producing movies. Whats more a movie like this, if done as live action, would require a substanstial budget, which is going to require big studio involvement, or at least support from a prominent director or actor interested in it.