|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
Speaking of 0-HD races, are there any that have been published that havent already made it into a bestiary?
Off the top of my head, we still need the Kuru, Triaxians, Skinwalkers, and Shabti in a hardcover bestiary, although not sure if Mummy's Mask made the AP cut off. and Triaxians might be hard to do as setting neutral.
Barachiel Shina wrote:
I would guess, like mythic, most of the occult monsters can be run without needing Occult Adventures. Personally I am glad we are getting more mythic...I hate abandoned rulesets, and mythic monsters are one of the better things in the system
Crystal Frasier wrote:
Let me just say that as a het cis male, I find your contributions in this thread and elsewhere really valuable. I learned a lot about trans people via this thread that I never knew before, and and it has made me aware of viewpoints or considerations I probably would have never thought about before. While I can totally relate to the idea of not spending free time on a thread that may bring up some unfun real life stuff you deal with daily, I do value your views and it has improved my outlook/conception of LGBTQ issues.
Yeah. Netflix I can watch whatever I want to watch, whenever I want to watch it. with a network...I have to tailor my schedule around what I want to watch, and 90% of the time nothing will be on I have a remote interest in.
I'd rather get more Marvel Netflix shows that I can watch at my leisure, than a station I will ignore or forget about most of the time, assuming I even have cable.
I doubt Vancian casting would go away in any future edition. IIRC, quite a few of the Paizo peeps LIKE Vancian, and I don't see them removing elements of the game that they themselves enjoy.
Although I could see it tweaked perhaps, as happens in some of the Unchained magic rules.
I am actually very happy with the TOR publishing Pathfinder books. I have avoided getting a single Pathfinder book because I mostly use my Kindle to try out new fiction. Also, I rarely see any Pathfinder books for sale in book stores, even those with gaming material. There is a pretty large segment of the population that the current book like just never reaches.
Myth Lord wrote:
As someone with some passing familiarity with Valravns and Raven Mockers, They really only have superficial resemblance to typical were creatures. So they don't really fill a Were-raven niche, especially since I imagine Were-ravens would take inspiration from Native American beliefs regarding the Raven as a trickster spirit, but would have the typical were-creature traits of being a person who can take animal or hybrid animal form.
In contrast, a Valravn is a raven-like monster, sometimes depicted as a winged wolf, who gains power from eating the dead, and can only take human form after consuming the heart of a child.
Similarly, Raven Mockers are monstrous creatures of the witch/undead persuasion, who are invisible demons or spellcasters who hunt the elderly and sick, slaying people without leaving a mark. They can prolong their own lives which each heart/soul taken.
Both monsters only have a connection to ravens, and neither occupy the niche of were-creature of popular culture.
Saying that people should just want the Valravn instead of a wereraven is like me ordering a Reuben in a restaurant and being told I should be happy with a hamburger. Yes...both involve meat between two pieces of bread, but they are not the same thing.
I agree that the scene with BW and Banner was a bit clumsily edited, in that it does seem like she relates sterilization with monster, when the intent was "Red Room programming = monster"
My understanding was that BW had to have her role extensively altered and rewritten, due to the actresses RL pregnancy. So some of the problems might be blamed on that.
Nathanael Love wrote:
Pathfinder is far more complex than any of those games, and even though I am in agreement with you that I don't think any sort of major revamp is needed, at some point the errata just piles up and requires a new "edition", whatever that means.
Plus I am sure the developers have looked at parts of the game and thought to themselves "Man this could be written better" or "Wow in hindsight we should have done X, not Y". Games like Monopoly or Chess don't have rules teams constantly tinkering with the game design, dissecting it and analyzing it.
There are creatures from myth and medieval bestiaries that approximate catfolk. You have the Nekomata and several different but similar cat Yokai from Japan, The Kirata (I think) from India, which are tigerfolk, Korrigans (I think), which in Breton myth are sometimes given cat-like properties, the Ewah which is a mountain-lion woman, and the Donestre from Medieval bestiaries, which are lion-like humanoids. Probably some others I am either blanking on at the moment. So they probably have just as much mythological street cred as the Vishkanya, for instance, even if they don't use a specific name from the above mythologies
Jester David wrote:
You sort of assume that the massive company which is Hasbro (or even the pretty successful WoTC division) actually value the tabletop industry to care enough that another company is doing "well". And even then I don't even know if Paizo, as successful as the company is, makes anywhere near enough to make Hasbro blink
Yep...here too...it usually just background noise for something else...
On the original topic, one advantage PDF's have over hardcopies is searchability and ease of use.
Now, this isn't a problem for all books. The bestiaries for instance are incredibly easy to use, and I would argue even easier than the PDF. A lot of that is down to organization and formatting of stat arrays
In contrast, the core rulebook is a thick, dense, hard to read tome. I don't generally even use the book, I just go to the PRD, because I can find stuff a lot quicker. The same with some of the other rulebook line books.
So a major step forward would be redesign of the rule books to more easily facilitate rules use. I think you could vastly improve that book with greater use of bullet lists, use of different fonts, and more diagrams and visual charts.
So that is one step Paizo can go towards for increasing the utility of their books.
I think the AI was basically a way for Thanos to "get back" the mind gem if Loki absconded with it or it was otherwise lost. However it got merged/corrupted with the AI Stark had created for the Ultron program
What is also interesting is that Vision may know about Thanos and such than he has let on. He says the human race is doomed in his convo with Ultron at the end, but is it doomed because humanity is foolish? or because Thanos is gunning for the infinity stones.
There is currently a lawsuit going on between Hasbro and Sweetpea entertainment over the rights, as Sweetpea may no longer legally have rights to the property, since made for syfy movies may not count as theatrical releases
At any rate, even if they don't own the specific rights to DnD, the rights situation is complicated, since Sweetpea never had the rights to the settings, specific characters etc. Just the generic DnD stuff.
Finally saw the movie tonight: I agree with overall views that say it's awesome and well-balanced regarding giving characters equal coverage, but that it also is over-stuffed and could have used a longer running time.
Random comments that have been brought up in the thread that I am going to quickly chime in on:
Never noticed the issue with Cap taking a hit from Ultron in the movie, and it was never something I even thought about here. PS those weren't lasers but obviously some sort of generic energy blast/repulsive effect. Most of the "fatal" strikes by the ultron sentinels was via the blue energy blasts, which Cap never got hit with.
Whedon leaving the MCU/Whedon in general. I doubt there are any bad feelings from Whedon with the Keven Fiege and Marvel studios. They all seem to have a good working relationship. Whedon is just utterly burnt out from the work. Keep in mind he has been doing almost nothing but MCU stuff (Consulting, script-doctoring, script-writing, directing, etc) since the first Captain America movie. That is a TON of work for one person, especially on some a narrow subject.
PS...Whedon uses tropes...but there is nothing wrong with using tropes, since everyone since Homer has been doing so, and Whedon pulls them off well.
I kind of figured Quicksilver might not last the movie, since he wasn't confirmed for Civil War, and Marvel might consider him disposable since they might not want two (popular) versions of the character in different movie series. Which is a shame because the MCU Quicksilver felt a lot closer to the Marvel version.
Ultron was surprisingly hilarious (I love the "Oh for God's Sake" line), and I think they did a good job of making him sort of a Crazy robot version of Stark. Overall the humor element was pretty well done.
Also...how great was it that a good chunk of the movie was you know, actually doing heroic things? Like saving people? like superheroes do? I am looking at you DCU.
Finally, Hawkeye was great. I love the reveal that he had a farm and a family, and they did a really good job of making him the "humanity" of the team.
One thing I was surprised of: I figured the events of this movie would lead into Civil War. And they didn't. If anything, Cap and Stark ended on even more chummier terms than for most of the movie.
Also kind of sad Hulk didn't get into space so he could hang out with the Guardians. Damn you fake rumors.
Oh I agree with you. I have never had an interest in seeing DnD 2 and 3, but the first movie I did see, and it had Battlefield Earth levels of badness.
I actually think Hasbro can release a big budget DnD movie that will make money...I just don't think it will actually be very good. They would need to get some good script writers and directors involved, and obviously that didn't happen for any of the Transformers or Battleship Earth.
Unfortunately, any glance at TV or movies can easily prove that you can make tons of money on products that are not actually very high quality.
Yeah I cite Battleship because, the whole premise of adapting that particular game into a big budget movie about fighting aliens is utterly ridiculous. And it still made money, despite being an absolutely crappy movie.
DnD is a far easier sell IMHO
It's not like this problem hasn't come up before. I imagine people made the same arguments about adapting comic properties back in the 90's.
Hell those arguments were heard on the forum just last year. Many posters (including I believe yourself, LazarX) were predicting that Guardians of the Galaxy was going to be a colossal bomb, since hardly anyway had ever heard of the property and so had no recognition. And then it proved to not only be a pretty well reviewed movie, but also a huge financial success.
Most of the big blockbuster entertainment being produced nowadays is largely a product of "nerd culture". To think that somehow DnD label is going to be repulse the general public in an age where films based around Kaiju, giant robots, and superheros make major buck, and where the broader culture itself is exposed to numerous fantasy tropes from video games and TV...is mind-boggling.
Battleship had a budget of $220 million. I don't see budget being a crucial problem here.
Steve Geddes wrote:
I don't see this being an issue. Hasbro has their own studios, and they have collaborated with Dreamworks, Paramount, and Universal to produce movies around Transformers, GI Joe, Ouija, and Battleship.
I mean...Hasbro is making a JEM AND THE HOLOGRAMS movie that is due out next year, and they have movies such as Candyland, Monopoly, and Hungry Hungry Hippos in the "production que/development Hell" for theatrical release live action movies.
If studio execs are willing to greenlight development on HUNGRY HUNGRY HIPPOS...do think the financing a big budget fantasy D&D movie would give them pause.
That we will get a live action, Hasbro-backed DnD movie is, for me personally, just a question of when, not if, and really only dependent on the outcome of the lawsuit with Sweetpea.
Forever Slayer wrote:
I didn't realize their was a only a specific number of big screen fantasy movies that were allowed to be made.
To make a similar point, why do we need more comic book movies? Don't we have enough? Yet in 2016 we are, from my superficial glance, getting 6 new superhero movies from 3 studios (Deadpool, Gambit, Age of Apocalypse, Suicide Squad, Batman vs Superman, Dr Strange, and Civil War).
The LotRs, Harry Potter, and Game of Thrones have all been super successful, which shows there is money to be made in the epic fantasy genre, as long as you take the material seriously and don't run afoul of any of the typical big budget movie problems.
Look at it this way: Hasbro has made billions (yes, billions) on Transformers, a property about robots that fight each and turn into trucks. Hell they turned Battleship and the Ouija Board into (bad) movies. Compared to those properties, producing a big budget DnD movie should be a cinch, since you have numerous settings, adventures, novels, and rule books to pull from.
Also, the relative merit of the older movies really isn't a factor that needs much consideration. The average movie watcher at this point has forgotten those movies exist, and there are far far more visible franchise properties that have been rebooted in even less time. Also, Hasbro can provide a far better budget and better talent than anything sweet pea can produce.
So yeah, Hasbro can make a ton of money on this property. Whether they can make a good movie is another story, and honestly I am not sure. I think a lot of it is going to come down to who they get to direct the project, and how interested/knowledgeable that person is regarding fantasy/DnD.
Exactly! Although the last one on the list...I loved the hell that the character got powers, but hated that they decided those powers = evil.
baron arem heshvaun wrote:
I think Madame Gao is probably the Crane Mother. Something someone mentioned elsewhere, but packages of heroin they were producing all had the symbol of the Heavenly cities that Iron Fist gets his powers from.
I don't think she has any connection with the inhumans, nor do I think they will figure into the Netflix series in any major way, at least not until after the Defenders.
Shadow Knight 12 wrote:
I'm not a trans* person so I'm not really qualified to talk about such matters, but something I feel is worth mentioning is that having someone that the public can empathise with may be good. One good thing about reality TV is that it develops audience attachment to a person. In that way, being emotionally attached to a trans* person would be good for the general public.
Sometime it can, sometimes it seeks to turn real life into a circus where the audience is expected to laugh at the people, not with the people. Honestly I get Lissa's concerns because slight differences in editing and focus could easily make the show go either way. I can think of at least one recent TV show which used Trans people (indirectly) as part of the latter.
The Rot Grub wrote:
I think the Paizo showrunners have basically said that not only is the Core Rulebook still selling really well, and in fact every year they sell more than the year before. So from a business sense it probably doesn't make much sense until overall sales in the RPG line and of the Core Rulebook start showing evidence of a decline.
I do think that Unchained in many ways is a stealth update to the core rules, since it does seem to tackle and seek to address several major complaints in the game. It makes me wonder if we might not see some sort of spiritual successor dealing with other commonly cited problems.
...um...okay I know he doesn't have his trademark suit on in this picture, which might help things...
And there is a precedent with the internet freaking out about the joker and then being pleasantly surprised (see: Heath Ledger casting)
This seems more Marilyn Manson and Hot Topic than Joker...
Looks like we don't have to wait until Defenders to see more of Matt Murdoch. Hopefully we get Electra and Bullseye next season.
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.
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.
And Daredevil has pretty much blown all of those TV shows away, hands down.
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.
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.