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

MMCJawa's page

2,580 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists.


1 to 50 of 2,580 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

hhhmm...Robots strike me as a bit too technological to make a whole lot of sense for familiars. One of the major differences between them and things like clockworks or golems is that they specifically constructed using science, not magic.

As for Bestiary 5, yeah the robots from this (and the Numeria book) would be fair game, and they are an obvious new creature type to add in, like adding psychopomps to Bestiary 4.

Abberations are my favorite part of the game, and So I hope Iron Gods will give me a lot of cool ones that can migrate to Bestiary 5.

Purple Dragon Knight wrote:
MMCJawa wrote:
Yeah I feel like the Transformers movies kind of does fit this topic even better than Harry Potter.

I watched the first one. Gave the second a try... walked out halfway through the second... ignored the 3rd and the rest (don't know how many there are at this point)

They made my second favorite childhood cartoon into one of the worst movie franchises

I saw the first movie in a theater, it was disappointing but could have been worse. Saw the second one, but solely to MST3K it with friends, since we heard it was ridiculous. After that I realized paying money to see something bad is just encouraging them to make more, and haven't bothered to see the last two intentionally. I did see a good chunk of the third one on cable, still didn't think it was good.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Yeah I feel like the Transformers movies kind of does fit this topic even better than Harry Potter.

I think we can dismiss ideas it might be part of a box set or some sort of super large volume. That would play havoc with the submission model, which sort of depends on people paying a rather fixed price every month or so for a volume.

I kind of think it might very well be Aboleths + Absalom, which would be pretty classic and also tie into a key location for Golarion and the Pathfinder Society. Also I feel like they have been slowly building up Aboleths in the last few years, especially with information on the fall of Azlant, Veiled Masters, etc.

1 person marked this as a favorite.
insaneogeddon wrote:

In dnd it basically comes down to devotional energy, has for a while.

Not enough = dead god.

As for getting there in the first place that requires sponsorship from the divine, or a test pillar/spire that does the same.

Oh and you have to be representative of some basic thing, philosophy or behavior another has not beaten you to.

as mentioned upthread, Pathfinder discarded that rule. Number of worshippers has absolutely no impact on a God's existence or her power. See Lissala for instance.

Ari Kanen wrote:

I think Wizards is doing a smart thing and producing a game for DMs. Their first product was a DM product. The reason I think this is clever is that DM are organizers of games. Ask yourself, if you're primarily DM or are a player, how hard is it to find a game? If you don't live in an area with other roleplayers, on roll20, it appears that advertisements for DMs appears 50 times as often as an add for players. I can DM/GM a game anytime I want, pretty much. And if I was willing, I could bring in new players. With 5e, I probably will, because of how easy it is to play.

I am curious to see how 5E turns out, but I think it's really really really too early to see how much 5E is a DM's game. Right now it's early in the game, and so they need to set up the basics, which is going to be pretty GM friendly. I would be willing to bet we will see a lot more player support than DM support, simply because it's more profitable and that was the pattern for the last two editions of the game.

It is simpler right now, but again I think complexity may very well increase, even if its at a lesser rate than 3.5/Pathfinder.

Would they release a Vudra AP that covers AP #100? I would imagine they would want to stay in the Inner Sea Region for that issue?

Psychic magic would be an obvious choice...but then again this year's release was absolutely not on my radar, so who knows?

1 person marked this as a favorite.
LazarX wrote:
It's a bit late out the gate to argue for inclusion when the book is done. As it rather have to be if it's being introduced at Gen Con.

You know they are talking about Pathfinder Unchained and not the Advanced Class Guide. The former of which isn't coming out until next spring...

I don't recall Hercules ever facing the Hundred-handed ones. He did help save the Olympians from the Gigantes, which are generally conflated with giants, although I think they had a few other odd features.

Personally my vision of an artificer class is a largely non-magical class that comes with a bombs, robot/clockwork companion which grows in power over time, and can apply temporary buffs to weapons as well as fixing stuff. I really don't see how it's needs to be a magic factory, anymore than a alchemist has to be a potion factory.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

There is still lots of design space for them to explore.

But already mentioned...Mythic is pretty much Paizo's answer to Epic. I don't think they would do both now that they have already established that demigod level outsiders are CR 25-30

Paizo's new cookbook series, starting off with Ultimate Pizza

Usually the Gencon announcement is a player-focused book that releases at Gencon, so I wouldn't expect a monster or NPC codex

Syfy is a channel. They deliberately changed the spelling of it from Sci-fi so they could trademark it

And...well Pathfinder already has the Sharktopus from Syfy channel in the game :)

You can update the monsters in 3.5 pretty easily to Pathfinder, but part of what I want is to see how Paizo would adapt those monsters to Golarion, and what sort of distinct flavoring they would give them.

Oh...and Modrons.

Artificer (Summoner/Alchemist hybrid?)

Spy (Bard/Rogue maybe?)

Spell thief = Some sort of magic using rogue type class (Wizard/Rogue)

Priest = 1/2 BAB divine caster class

Those are obvious ones that would be nice to have in the game.

Yeah monsters. And the environments books were cool.

Although strangely never much cared for Beholders.


I'm going to be a bit of a Debbie Downer and say that of the classes not already known to be in PU, I personally believe that Sorceror probably isn't in need of an unchained treatment.

If you take the principal that unchained is about radically altering classes without caring about backwards compatibility, Sorcerer isn't commonly derided as being weak (like rogue or monk), overpowered (like Summoner) or overcomplicated (I guess for Barbarian).

I mean don't get me wrong, you could do a completely new version of sorcerer in it, I just don't think its as widely called for as other classes, and would largely be for flavor reasons. Not that their is anything wrong with doing it for flavor reasons, but then you could argue the same for just about any class probably, depending on how individuals felt about it

Really if they were going to do unchained treatments of 9 level casters, they should really do new versions of all of them, and try to bring down the power level. Although I do hope there are some more magic systems and other stuff here for playing casters

So as expected, this thread devolved into another caster vs martial thread, instead of actually talking about changes that could be made to either side.

To continue the above tangent however, just a few notes:

Why do people keep talking about Zeus releasing a Kraken? and then bringing up stuff from mythology? Guys...Kraken is from Norse Mythology...Zeus only ever released a "Kraken" in movies, because the Kraken wasn't part of Greek myth. Zeus/Poseidon did at times unleash sea monsters (Ceto, etc), but none of them have Pathfinder stats.

Zeus did slay Campe to release the cyclops and hetancheires (sp?). Campe is a Drakaina, which in Bestiary 4 is I think CR 22 (and Campe being a legendary one could very well have additional class/template levels)

Not that I think these discussions have absolutely any utility at all. Because as it turns out, mythology/comics/novels were not written with a rpg rule set in mind. If an rpg can't emulate certain ideas presented in those mediums, than either you are using the wrong rpg or it's a failing of the system.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Numeria I think is actually a bit easier to deal with then Alkenstar. Gun technology as it exists in Golarion can be pretty easily copied by other parties, and should realistically be more widespread. In my own version of Golarion...firearms are a bit more widespread and frequently used than in the publisher's version.

Numerian tech is so advanced that large chunks of it couldn't be properly recreated even by our technology, nevertheless pseudo medieval societies. A lot of it is nonfunctional or malfunctioning as well.

I imagine there would be a bit of a collector trade going on with Numerian tech if your removed the theme park isolation, but mostly it would be treated as oddities and curios. A few functional laser guns or sets of power armor are not going to change the overall setting, especially since a lot of the function of high tech can be more easily replicated and produced using magic.

Marvel's Movie schedule through 2019

2017 is interesting...they have never had 3 movies on the docket before, which makes me wonder if previous two movies will be part of some big build up to the conclusion of the Avenger trilogy.

to be fair....sometimes half a movie is all you need

I think I recall hearing that the Gremlins movies were a big influence on how goblins were rebooted for Golarion.

Marcus Robert Hosler wrote:
Odraude wrote:
As a note, I don't think Psionics or Spellpoints are overpowered or unbalanced. It's just not my jam. But I like that there's the option for it for those that like it. I just hope to see Paizo's version where I can finally have a more Vancian style of psionics.

I doubt that will hapen. DSP has psionics down pretty well. There is next to zero room for Paizo to innovate.

Ultimate Psionics even has art-work that is on par with Paizo stuff.

Paizo could do a Psionic AP and setting.

Various Paizo devs have said that it's likely they will do some sort of Psychic magic system, that will be vancian, and not use power points. Psychic magic is at any rate already built into the setting, with Vudra and Castrovel.

In's easier to buff a class than nerf it. Since any nerf you do, no matter how valid, will incite rage in some proportion of players. Personally I am hoping Pathfinder unchained might offer some solution on this matter, although in general I don't think fighter is as problematic as some people think. issue is that a common trope of magic in fiction is that you pay a price to use it, and the more powerful a magic the greater risk and danger involved in using it.

DnD pretty much took the route of providing powerful magic, but in simplifying it for the game they removed most of the risk associated with it. If wizards had to seriously consider if their world altering spells might blow up in their face or require some sort of sacrifice besides some gold or spell slot usage, mundane character classes might have more opportunities to shine.

an amber ooze would be pretty interesting. Especially if it could go into stasis and release any creature it has already engulfed.

Honestly I feel like we are starting to run out of interesting ooze ideas (at least I am).

LazarX wrote:
Kydeem de'Morcaine wrote:

I have heard that DSP has a very close working relationship with Paizo. I doubt they would want to ruin that by making an obviously directly competing replacement for the core material.

I don't see any evidence of that. Paizo after all has used material from at least one third party company, (either Necromancer, Green Ronin, or Frog Games) in at least one scenario. (and gave them credit.) They haven't to date, used ANYTHING from Dreamscarred that I'm aware of. A couple of folks from Paizo have said nice things about the Dreamscarred material, but that's it.

The main reason is that it would go against their main selling strategy... selling psionics to an established market... Paizo's D+D 3.5 refugees, they built their whole business about selling to Pathfinder players. Building a core system would mean having to take on Paizo directly, and they're not really geared to take that kind of risky business move. Not because of any "ill feelings" it might generate from Paizo, because they're not likely to succeed in launching whole hog like that.

One of the recent modules that dealt with the Dominion of the Black has a monster whose abilities are taken from DSP, and this resource is cited. I think it Doom comes to Dustpawn, but it could have been Dragon's Demand.

Moot point anyway. If Paizo takes on psychic powers, it will probably use a system similar to Vancian, as no one at Paizo is a huge fan of power points.

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Wolfgang...that's great and all, but:

Insain Dragon has kept telling people to vote for whether they want an unchained fighter, and keeps citing those poll numbers. Certainly Odraude's point is relevant if at this point in the forum history a lot of people do their best at this point to avoid any discussion whatsoever of fighters. Which means that the poll is going to select towards people who are very unhappy with the fighter.

Askanipsion wrote:

I am trying a warpriest for a new campaign.

1) Shouldn't the Warpriest have Knowledge Arcana on their skill list? Why do they have Knowledge Engineering instead?

2) Any word if the final version of the warpriest still gets the cleric spell list? I feel like they should have their own spell list like the Inquisitor

3) Really wish they had Channeling at 1st or 2nd - still feels like the cleric is far superior than the Warpriest

My guess for why they have knowledge: engineering is because of siege tactics

Having read through Wrath of the Righteous and Reign of Winter, from the GM side, I don't really see too much problems. Role playing encounters are some of the easiest thing to adapt or expand upon. I'd rather have to tweak encounters to add a little more diplomacy or what have you, then have to generate a lot of stat blocks for enemies/encounters.

Odraude wrote:
RuyanVe wrote:


Nuff said.


I loved these guys and was kind of disappointed they didn't show up in the B4. Still, hoping to see more of these dudes in Giant Slayer

Reign of Winter didn't really make the cut off for the last Bestiary, although somehow the weasels got in...

Anyone care to share what new monsters are in this book?

What is the new 0 HD race? It's not obvious from the monsters posted

I am still waiting for a precise definition of "stable job" from Andrew W.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

"peaks head up"

I actually don't think the fighter needs a big enough boost to rewrite from scratch.

I do agree on the skill points problem.

Honestly I think generally changing how combat works so that fighters can be more mobile without losing full attack. That could be built into the fighter as a class, or just become the result of a change to combat rules, either of which could be in the PU book.

I do hope that if a new version of the fighter makes the book (which also wouldn't distress me unduly), that they keep the new design simple. That the fighter lacks a lot of fidgety bits (unlike say the wizard, or some of the other classes) is a big plus for the class IMHO.

"ducks for cover"

There is a chapter on class's just more theory and advice than a set of points or something like the Advanced Race Guide has.

As for the fall AP, I am going to guess something with Absalom and/or Aboleth and/or Rune Lords. Seems like for the 100th AP volume they might want to touch upon a major element of the setting.

I think sometimes the experimental and traditional models get switched around for production reasons. I believe Reign of Winter was experimental, as was Wrath, but Mummy really isn't

Man...that kid has the potential to grow into a truly insufferable spoiled brat if this is her father's normal response to requests.

The whole "modularity" thing is kind of hard to determine until we get more releases beyond the core game.

I kind of have the perspective of waiting to see who they attach as the director/lead actors. That can give you a lot of perspective on how bad a cash grab something is.

This show does sound very promising. I was disappointed with the last batch of original SyFy shows, but it looks like they are putting a lot of effort into this one.

Advanced Class Guide wrote:
Players will love the book's new resource pool for martial characters, allowing for exciting new tactical options

Depending on how this is set up (and what other changes to the combat system occur), this could result in a upgraded fighter, without changing the class.

Caliban are from a relatively new module, and so probably haven't made it online to all the relevant wiki's.

I like Thomas Jane, and based on some of his other stuff I think he can pull off what you want Snow.

True, although the Calibran is produced by a special ritual and pretty much only exists to be a thug for a hag. Which kind of explains the Caliban's appearance.

I think the reason such an approach hasn't been done is a combination of multiple factors:

Not every monster that makes it into a AP/module/CS book is necessarily well loved by everyone at Paizo.

Concern that people would be unlikely to buy a book composed solely of monsters that already exist. At least with the current bestiaries, their is a good mix of new creatures in with the old

Difficulty in making future bestiaries: If Paizo wants to do a "normal" bestiary book, say Bestiary 5, their are less existing monsters to draw from. Which means the devs have to spend more time developing the book, and also commission a lot more new art. Which at this point, might result in not getting another Bestiary, since the profit to work margin will decline.

Great work on the dieties of death. Are these global dieties, or are their different death gods for the Old World?

So is Celadon Shores the Asian and/or Kelp Forest setting book?

Yeah...I deliberately concentrated on mythology as simply because it's easier to present a list of "pre-made" creatures for the devs to work with, rather than design creatures from scratch that are useful and cool sounding for the game.

yeah...going on the Book of the Damned, Sarenrae is really old, almost as old as Asmodeus, and was probably one of the first angels.

1 to 50 of 2,580 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2014 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email 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.