|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
Kirth Gersen wrote:
Indeed...I am a professional paleobiologist with a PhD in Ecology. I don't think agree with anything GreyWolfLord has said in this thread.
I think you are not interpreting statements about the kineticist in the way they were intended. They released a less powerful version of the class to see what people thought regarding power level, etc. Because if it was too powerful and needed to be brought down, people would be screaming NERF at the top of their lungs. It's a lot easier to buff than nerf a class.
I will also add in, as others have stated, that their are biological underpinnings to gender dysphoria...it's not some sort of cultural phenomena, any more than people "choose" to be gay. So if you want to argue that it didn't "exist", than you would need to argue that the biological processes behind gender orientation are somehow different than they were in the past, or the environment regulating them was different.
Alternatively...it might not be that transgender people were "common" as today because a transgender person would have suffered extreme persecution, and thus would have stayed in the closet, committed suicide, faced societal sanction, or otherwise hid there condition. Even then though I am not certain historical evidence of trans people is completely lacking. There are certainly many examples of saints adopting male personas, not to mention folklore around female popes and such to indicate that gender dysphoria existed back then, even if it wasn't well understood.
PIXIE DUST wrote:
I think it fills the role of being a very easy class to build and understand for beginners, very casual players, or people who just want to hit things with a sword without fiddling with a lot of class stuff.
Yes and no. There are things like potions of sex shift, but I assume the price makes it outside the reach of a vast majority of potential customers, and it's probably specialized enough to not be a widespread formula created and kept in stock by a lot of potion makers. So it might be an option really only for nobles (which has some parallels in real life).
So you could get some sort of weird economic class thing going on, with either class (poor versus rich)
Also...you would have a hell of a motive for a transperson from an impoverished background to become an adventurer. To build up enough cash to get the potion they need/want.
I have to say that prior to hanging out on the boards here, I really wouldn't have thought much about LGBTQ concerns while world building. Now I do try to mull over those issues when creating races/cultures, and try to intentionally vary up presentation, rather than defaulting to the pop culture interpretation of medieval views.
I suspect most of the time this fleshing out will remain in the background, but I do think it adds to the realism of a setting.
I kind of actually wouldn't mind if some of the Daemon Harbingers were CR 25+. Daemons lack the rigid hierarchy of devils, but that doesn't make them entirely a race of backstabbers. And some Harbingers could certainly operate outside of the Horsemen, representing powerful individuals with their own much more limited domains, or Harbingers that just don't play well with others.
As someone who doesn't own the book, I do find the errata situation hilarious.
After the book was released, we had people proclaiming the book was horrible, needed errata right now, and was proof that Paizo was going to pot and they would never ever purchase a product from the company again.
Some people continued with that attitude through much of next year, demanding early release of errata.
And then, we got early release of errata, and people are angry, proclaiming this renders the book horrible, Paizo is going to pot, and they are never going to purchase a product from the company again.
Now I know that doesn't describe everyone, and I know the ACG had probably the worst editing issues of any hardcover, but I can't help but be "amused" by "just can't win" nature of the situation.
I've thought about how LGBTQ folks fit into my setting in the context of their given societies and cultures. There is basically a whole spectrum, ranging from complete acceptance to social class based distinctions to biology based differences. And then there is the whole layer of religion over that.
Here is my confession. I got interested in Pathfinder mostly as a consequence of stumbling upon the bestiaries online and in the Laramie Hastings. I HAD played 3.5, but stopped after my group scattered to the 4 winds. However I enjoy world building and have for years been slowly research folklore and reading other fiction to have my own go at creating a original novel. Golarion and other Pathfinder works tend tend to be a great source of inspiration.
To this day I spend far far more time reading through Campaign Setting books, adventure paths, and similar books than I do actually playing the game. HOPEFULLY this will change when I move in a few weeks to a more populous area.
Four campaigns, 3 of which were 3.5, and one of which was Pathfinder.
None of the campaigns topped 10 levels, and I don't think a fighter appeared in any of them (Barbarian, Paladin, and Ranger were the usual beat sticks). No monks either, although I recall the Rogue being pretty effective in our most memorable campaign. Caster wise we have had Druids, Wizards, Clerics, and Witches.
In the most memorable 3.5 campaign, The wizard I played was...not really all that fun, and I ended up taking levels of ranger just so he was more effective when his spells ran out. The Barbarian was by far the most powerful character in this campaign, and regulary converted enemies to redmist.
In the backup game, I made a pretty effective Psion/Ninja. I remember a Bard, Paladin, and Ranger from that game, although I can barely remember any details on the relative power level of all the characters, and I think we were roughly equal? The other 3.5 game only lasted for a few sessions before TPK city.
In the Pathfinder Game I GMed, we had a Druid beatstick (who rarely if ever cast any spells), a sleep focused witch, a kobold paladin, and a ninja.The kobold paladin was the only weak link in there...but...Kobolds are not that great a paladin option, and so I can't really lay blame there on paladins. The witch and ninja were probably the most consistently well performing characters, but I also recall the Druid and his velociraptor having a lot of really really unlucky rolls
So my experience has been that, without going to the forums and reading, I didn't really encounter caster martial disparity. BUT there are a ton of caveats...we never reached high level, we never had monks or fighters (who seem to get the most complaints), and half our PCs at any give time were run by casual players who probably wouldn't have even noticed the disparity.
Kirth Gersen wrote:
I think there are several tangled issues at work here. One...fixing martial-caster disparity presents 2 options. One...you fix it in future hardcovers. Unfortunately, doing this may lead to definite power creep, as suddenly you are obsoleting sections of the core rulebook. And if the fix that is required is say...more elemental to the game system, like changing buff durations or action economy, there might be further ripple effects that can create problems elsewhere in the game.
Alternatively, you can do a new edition, but that presents all of its own issues, and economically it isn't feasible to do this while a game is still successful.
The Caster-Martial problem is real, I don't doubt that. However it's severity varies from table to table, depending on GM and play style, optimization, level played, experience, houserules, and reading of the rules. In the games I have played it really hasn't been a huge issue, for the above listed reasons. I am sure that applies to many other people. It's basically a problem that hasn't hampered playability of the game for most, and because of that isn't hampering sales.
At the moment, core rule book sales grow every year, so this problem isn't dramatic enough for Paizo to consider it in need of a major fix. I do hope fighters get boosted and 9 level casters get nerfed in the next edition, but until then I don't expect the issue to be addressed.
My issue with Maguire is that his Peter Parker just seemed always so depressed. He was completely lacking in the smart-ass qualities I expect from Spiderman
Hopefully the new Spiderman actor can channel Maguire's nerdy qualities and Garfield's smart ass elements. Assuming I am not distracted by Aunt May being hot now.
I think stuff like you describe is pretty common. The messageboards, especially the sections about rules, are going to attract the hardcore people who have the books basically memorized, and play in a lot of games, games with people who they don't know really well. In my past games, I can honestly say they were all with people that I was already friends with, and only about half of the players spent any time looking through rule books outside of the game. I don't think any of us would have recognized if one player got something way more valuable than someone else, or if we were under WBL or not.
Yeah...when I critique any Marvel movie (produced so far at least), I critique movies I still enjoyed. So while I found some faults with Antman or Age of Ultron, it's not along the lines of "THIS MOVIE SUCKED!!!". I really like them, but I like these other Marvel movies better.
I think the Blue Ray of Age of Ultron is going to be awesome, and will probably fix my issues with the movie.
I think people don't judge Xmen the same way if only because the Xmen have always been a super hero team up. So there is no expectation that you need to set up each individual character for their own movie.
Although the X men movies have suffered from just throwing too many characters on the screen with little set up or attempt to match the original comics. That is why the new Deadpool movie has to have a separate origin built from scratch, because his earlier appearance was absolutely horrible with no relevance for the comic character.
So my issues with DC and the DCU, and why I am really skeptical they are going to pull it off, are as followed:
DC seems to intentionally want to avert a lot of the strategies/tone of the Marvel movies. For instance, because Batman (who works as a dark and gritty character) is successful, our entire setting must also be dark, gritty, and humorless
On a related note, instead of introducing the main characters in stand alone movies (allowing characterization and background development), they are doing the reverse, starting off with an avengers and using that to launch individual movies. Again I don't know if this is going to work at all.
DC's horrible TV show policy, that I outlined above. Really I would prefer TV being separate from movies, and I think this is something they could do differently than Marvel. Marvel's placement of TV shows within the MCU has hindered the shows as much as it has helped, with AoS often having to switch gears or tread water waiting for big Marvel events, and a good chunk of Carter being spent on getting over a character's "death" who can't even appear on the show.
Instead we get some weird halfway situation. We can't have Batman and Superman show up, because movies. But we can't reference the movies existing...for reasons. The CWverse for instance...pretty much is in the exact situation as the MCU regarding character usage, even though in the case of WB its entirely self imposed. This is why Gotham has to be centered around a 12 year old Bruce Wayne, and Why Superman can only be in silhouette in Super Girl.
No "Kevin Fiege". DC is going with a "director led" movie approach, where the vision of given directors is allowed to guide the DCU. The problem here is...There is no one around who can hammer the DCU into shape or keep continuity consistent. What happens if Director A kills off a character key to a plotline that another director wants to adapt? What do you do if a character is portrayed one way in a specific movie but completely differently in another? How do you build up a villain pool if fan favorites get killed off? If you want to do an extended universe, you need a maestro to keep the universe running and to plan things out far in advance (IIRC, an interview with Fiege stated he had the MCU plotted out into the late 2020's). It also allows you to have enough oversight over properties that you can keep absolute stinkers from wrecking your future plans, by preventing their creation. You also need someone who "gets" the properties they oversee, and what makes comics work. I don't think anyone in the movie division falls into that category.
Finally...WB seems to not really know how to treat fans well, and almost seem like they barely tolerate their existence. Marvel announced their big upcoming movie slate by renting out the China theater in LA and packing it with fans in a special exhibition. WB...announced there line up in a shareholder meeting. When the polished Age of Ultron trailer got leaked early, Marvel released it themselves with a Joke about Hydra. When grainy and barely viewable footage was released from Comic Con for Suicide Squad, WB released the polished footage along with a long paragraph chiding people for piracy and how they were horrible people for wanting to view the trailer
I am sure I am forgetting a point or two...but these are my concerns with the DCU. Honestly, I just wish they would take the CWverse show runners and give them the reigns of DCU. Flash and Arrow show that they get the comic books, know how to do an extended universe, and can create a quality product. Just imagine what they could do with movie budgets and unfettered access to characters...
I am fine with the present situation...honestly I hate nested replies because its a lot of extra clicking I don't want to do.
As for people posting over and over the same topic...shrugs. Obviously there is interest. Personally I don't care much for many of the rules forum threads, so I just ignore the forum for the most part.
Evan Tarlton wrote:
Only on reading Erasmus's backstory did I realize that the Medium actually almost perfectly models a Sensate borrowing another person's abilities.
Season 1 was greatly helped by having only two leads, only one of which really had any sort of life outside his job.
I think the writing is just spread too thin, covering 4 characters, all of which have more stuff going on than the case. The first season pretty much began with a murder to pull the audience in, whereas there almost has not been any time to even spend on this season's murder.
Classes of course can be refluffed however you want, and some classes are simple or generic enough that you can toss them into any type of campaign with mild adjustment. But sometimes it easier and faster to create new classes that fit a concept better. I mean, classes like the investigator are just tooled to fit a specific niche, and require less system mastery to get at a Sherlock Holmes concept than trying to retrofit a rogue or bard, especially if your retrofitting causes you to get stuck with features don't fit your class.
I think there is lots of room for Pathfinder to grow into specific genres, which will mostly result in new archetypes but also some new classes. For instance I would love to see an artificer pop up in a Steampunk Adventures book, something that I don't think you can really emulate at first level today using Paizo products
Lord Snow wrote:
I think the difference is, whereas numerous folks have produced Dracula movies over the years with no collaboration with one each. Prior to the ramp up for The Force Awakens however, all Star Wars media was set in the same timeline, from games to books. And that continuity was maintained over multiple decades.
So if you were a fan of the prior games/books...it might be disappointing to dismiss those. And if you are worried about the quality of the next movie, moreso.
I personally have no horse in the race so to speak...I haven't read a EU book in over a decade and a half, and I was never into the games.
I am just hoping that we get a solid new entry in the Star Wars, and not something that trades on nostalgia over plot to work (see Jurassic World, maybe Terminator Genisys?)
Well...I mean realistically they probably wouldn't....BUT
Drow are relatively isolated in the underdark, and while there are probably nastier things down there, they are probably even more reduced in numbers than Drow.
Drow are chaotic evil, but they seem to have enough cohesion as a culture to manage a united front against non-drow enemies.
anyway just some ideas on why they are still around. James Jacob would probably have other ideas too.
I don't even understand how the authoritarian or greenpeace clubbing seals has anything whatsoever to do with climate change.
If the authoritarian comment is that government control of stuff is bad, that sort of negates all the examples where government stepping in and regulating/deregulating things has been considered good. People right now are decrying the legalization of gay marriage in the states as big government stepping in and getting in the way of gay rights. that is an authoritarian response that I think most posters here think is fair.
On environmental issues, There are plenty of government treaties and bans that have generally helped the environment. CITES for instance has done a lot in regulating the traffic of endangered species. There is still a black market and smuggling going on, but in many parts of the world it is less than it would be without CITES.
Greenpeace is pretty insignificant when it comes to influencing research. A lot of academics consider them a joke, and they certainly are not funding climate change research, at least on any significant level. That is in contrast to companies like BP oil, EXXON, etc, which often do provide large amounts of funding to university departments. My last graduate school department was geology and geophysics, and we were probably one of the best funded departments on campus thanks to donations from the energy industry. Yet somehow people in my department still worked on climate change related research.
My main research focuses on marine mammal evolution, principally seals but also whales (especially next year). A key interest of mind is biogeography, and for marine mammals that is heavily controlled by sea surface temperature and productivity. So I spent a decent amount of time looking up how sea surface temperature and productivity has changed over time. For instance, for most of the Neogene, there was pretty much a stable band of tropical water around the equator. This produced a sort of wall which prevented different groups, such as sea lions and fur seals, from spreading south from the North Pacific. That wall was "breached" so to say around the Miocene-Pliocene boundary, and a few times later on in the Pliocene and Pleistocene, when equatorial waters cooled and productivity increased. We can easily see this in the fossil record of both hemispheres, as well as marine mammal distribution today.
I think I have heard some stuff similar to what you describe for ocean water temperature, but it's more along the lines that the ocean is so big it actually takes a while to get a "shift" in temperature, when compared to land or air. Most of the stuff I have seen and remember revolves around ocean acidity (more CO2 -> greater acidity -> bad news for anything with a carbonate skeleton, like corals) and the fact that increased temperature leads to increased evaporation which in turn magnifies the greenhouse effect.
PIXIE DUST wrote:
Yes...but you have personally already stated this...How many times? The devs have stated they read through all of the posts in this forum. Do you think repeating the same critique 3 or 4 times, that on the fourth time the Developers will suddenly go "OMG WE NEED TO FIX THE ZEALOT"?
I mean I don't even disagree with you on the zealot needing more options to make itself distinct. But me posting that 20 times...is not going to magically cause the developers to respond, and I think in unison with other posters as well as the..tone...which often accompanies posts like these. It doesn't actually help anyone, and may even hurt the class by causing subconscious push back from the developers and driving playtesters away before they even look at the class.
Also it's been...a weeks since the playtest started? What makes you think the developers are not working on solutions? I mean there were people criticizing the lack of developer response the day after the playtest.
William Ronald wrote:
Oh yeah. Best example of that was a husband and wife who decided to bring there two young children to KILL BILL VOLUME ONE. That family didn't last through the anime sequence before they had to leave.
Seriously folks...in the age of the internet its not that hard to research a movie before you go and see it.
I don't think theorycrafting is bad, however sometimes the tone used in some posts about theorycrafting...are not conducive to further discussion. Posting your initial thoughts on a class is good. Posting your initial thoughts, in a slighty rephrased manner, multiple of times and in multiple threads...is less useful. It comes across as shouting.
Doing the above, but then also including phrases like "garbage", "pathetic" or similar phrasings and descriptive terminology and exaggerations. Or slamming the devs, and demanding they respond to you. Well whatever you are doing, its certainly not constructive criticism.
Honestly I think the above just burns out the devs, who do read everything here. and contrary to what some posters may think, it certainly doesn't make them more likely to accept your "words of wisdom" on class options.
Anyway to the original subject (and speaking broadly of conspiracies, not just specifically climate change), I blame the following:
1. Dismal science education in this country. A lot of students are just not getting the background necessary to evaluate a source and determine if its legitimate or not.
2. The human tendency for indoctrination. Many people have a set of beliefs that have been imparted upon them at an early age. These beliefs are often wrapped up with political and religious ideas, and people don't want their ideas of their place in the universe challenged. In fact challenging them on these ideas just usually makes them dig in harder
3. Media's desire for conflict and "every story has two sides". This means that even when an idea has almost unanimous support (say, dinosaurs being the ancestors of birds...), the Media will go and search out someone to disagree with whatever finding is being published. On a similar note, studies that are widely considered to be crap (Say, Triassic Kraken art) get reported on even though their authors are considered cranks.
4. Overall poor ethics and training of science reporters. Reducing new science to soundbites, which may loose any of the subtlety of the original findings and even outright get things wrong. Especially if they try to go for a click bait headline. Add in that science journalists are dying out and many news stories get covered by people with no background makes things worse
5. Money. Organizations and companies with an agenda do not want to loose money or public support. Often they can inundate the media with misleading adds or buy off politicians. Even if the company goes under or changes its mind, they create a base for future believers to draw upon.
6. People are lazy. Telling people that they should change their lifestyle meets resistance, and people will look for any justification to continue whatever habits, no matter how self destructive it may be, or what long term risks it poses.
IIRC, They have already stated that the movie starts with Spiderman being powered and fighting crime.
And yeah I think Garfield was actually a better Spiderman than Maguire. Although one and two had far better plots and villains.
I dunno...I think you don't need a distinct creature category for "Hantu", since that basically just means spirit anyway, and they are all over the map as far as any actual creature type goes. So its hard for me to think of a specific "theme" that most of the outsider types having going for them. Instead...I would treat most as Kami and others as undead/aberrations/etc.
The only thing I can think of remotely is making them some sort of "memory" of ancient long extinct races. But I don't know how well that works for them really. At least some Hantu are suppose to have this origin, being the spirits of ancient beings that were the first to walk the land.