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

Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber. 4,662 posts. 1 review. No lists. No wishlists.


1 to 50 of 1,041 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber
GM_Beernorg wrote:
True, else we would never have watched Mulder eat an entire sweet potato pie in the original seasons, point taken. Guess this last one was just a bit sillier than I expected.

Yeah Darrin Morgan did this ep, who did some of the more memorable comedic episodes: Clyde Bruckman's final repose, War of the Coprophages, etc.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber

This would be a good product to drop some Xa Hoi stuff in...hint hint


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber
Kalindlara wrote:
p-sto wrote:
Thanks for the insight, Kalindlara. Going back to your previous point I have to admit I'm not fond of Paizo's habitual errata by omission. It makes it somewhat difficult to discern when something has been excluded for brevity and when Paizo is trying to bury an idea that devs felt didn't work.

It bears mentioning that the policy isn't universal. For example, the rewrite of Asmodeus's article in Inner Sea Gods specifically calls out so-called paladins of Asmodeus as being fakes, liars, and charlatans. I'm surprised Erastil's section didn't do something similar, gender equality-wise.

I'd definitely keep an eye on Inner Sea Faiths. ^_^

Also Paths of Prestige specifically calls out common folk frequently mistaking Hellknight armigers as Asmodean paladins, and the armigers themselves tend more toward evil than normal hellknights due to all the devil summoning and such.

So they kind of have provided multiple ways around the whole Asmodeus Paladin thing


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber

huh....I feel like I am the only one who didn't enjoy Man in the High Castle. The premise and setting were great, but the so-called protagonists were bleh. Somehow I feel me rooting for the Japanese wasn't the intended point of the show.

Just caught up on The Expanse. Absolutely love the show, and impressed on the effort made on the world building and set design of the show (although the belter accents sometimes confuse the crap out of me). As someone who HASN'T read the books I enjoy it so far. Also so far its almost entirely a hard science fiction show...how often do you see that in space opera?

Tried watching Fringe back when it was on...couldn't make it through a couple of episodes since it felt like a glossy and superficial X-files rip off

Breaking Bad is amazing and really worth watching the later seasons. Its one of the few shows I can honestly say got a full run of seasons and was consistently good throughout

Been watching Longmire lately and mostly enjoy it. It's not genre but as someone who lived 7 years in Wyoming it can be fun to see a police procedural handle issues and topics that were a concern of locals there.

Anyone mentioned Penny Dreadful yet? The plots...sometimes don't make a whole lot of sense, but it's totally worth watching just to see Timothy Dalton and Eva Green chew the scenery, and it really nails the gothic atmosphere.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber
137ben wrote:
The Sword wrote:


D&D and by extension Pathdinder draws its inspiration from real world tropes and legends which consistently portray undead as evil. The exceptions being recent vampire stories and older ghost stories.

Wow, this is just...I don't even know where to start. Neutral and Good undead are a standard in Egyptian, Roman, Chinese, Celtic, Irish, Tibeten, and Vietnames mythologies, and even early Christianity, so it's not like there isn't overwhelmingly abundent precedent for neutral and good undead. If anything, it's the all-undead-are-evil stories that are the odd ones out.

As someone who has read up a fair bit on folklore pertaining to undead around the world, I don't really agree with this. Yes there are exceptions in various cultures, but for the most part undead are bad news, and usually arise from horrible or tragic deaths or breaking traditional taboos. A lot of the "neutral or good" spirits in these cultures are less undead in the sense of pathfinder, but more spirits that have moved onto the afterlife, but in cultures that generally lack discrete Christian-style heaven. So in Pathfinder terms, they would be outsiders, not undead.

How you treat undead, there creation, and their role in the world is down to how you want to set up the setting your run and its cosmology.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber

The single thing I find creepiest in horror fiction is the sense of someone puppeteering your body to do horrible thing and having no control over it, and being fully aware it was happening (Carrion Comfort and Neuropath still rank as the scariest books I have ever read for that reason)

Given the number of monsters and spellcasters who pretty much can do that at a drop of the dime, I am pretty happy I don't live in Golarion

Setting specific, if played straight Golarion is an existential nightmare. The afterlife exists, but you become lose all your knowledge upon becoming a petitioner. If you are evil, you get to be tortured/hunted/made to wallow in filth for eternity without really being aware of why. if good or neutral...well I suppose your fate is more kind but still losing your memories and what make you...well you...doesn't sound appealing. And lets not forget that even if you are a good person, there are creatures and spells which can damn you to hell or the abyss, and your afterlife can end at any time if some other outsider or even jerkass mortal kills you again.

Creature wise, Kytons: Most fiends do horrible things to you for there own self-interest or the lolz. Kytons do horrible things to you because they are trying to "help" you realize new sensations and mold you to there own twisted and horrible aesthetic idea of perfection

Dominion of the black is also pretty horrible...you are just spare parts to them...


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber

Huh...so Dragonborn are now OGL under 5E? That's different than the earlier SRD which did not include them. I wonder now if someone could legally do a straight up adaptation of them for Pathfinder and use the same name?

Same goes with Warlock as a class.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber
Liz Courts wrote:
Campaign Codex: Chapter by chapter breakdown on how to do genre adventures with the Pathfinder ruleset (steampunk, ancient age, post-apoc, urban fantasy, "Thundarr the Barbarian," etc.), and provide example plot hooks and setups for them.

hah...I wouldn't mind seeing some of those chapters become entire books.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber
Ashiel wrote:
KujakuDM wrote:
Milo v3 wrote:


"Arguments"

Considering many of them say, "Twists to evil, malice, anger, doom, and hatred of the living pretty many of your counterarguments don't hold up.

Though my favorite is Attic Whisperer. Because according to you, neglecting a child to death isn't an evil act.

No, loneliness is not an evil act and is one of the ways that a child can spring back to unlife, which you have conveniently ignored. Further, neglecting a child is certainly not an evil act on the part of the child, so suggesting that the child is somehow evil because of someone else's actions is just stupid.

I hate commenting in these threads, because fundamentally its a Setting decision on how you treat undeath, but...

The child being lonely isn't just what spurs the formation of an attic whisperer. Its evil of neglect and abuse APPLIED to them that does this. There are plenty of equivalent games rules out there, like rituals and spell that can damn a chaotic good person to hell. Undead wise its likely that many allips and ghosts, as well as other undead, are also the result of an outside action being performed on the victim, not something they themselves are responsible.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber
thejeff wrote:
Krensky wrote:

We know the plans get to Leia.

We don't know how or if the people involved survive.

I mean it's Disney, so they're not going to kill everyone, but still.

I've never found the "but we know how it's going to end" complaint persuasive. Of course we know how it's going to end. In broad general terms, just like we know how every action movie is going to end. The hero beats the bad guy and gets the girl. Even in the cliffhanger action scenes, the question is how the hero escapes, not whether or not he escapes.

It's the journey and the details that can be surprising, not the final outcome.

Depends on the story you are trying to tell. In the case of Rogue one, it's a prequel with entirely new characters whose only prequel elements are "death star plans get stolen". So yeah it's about as novel as you can get, and shouldn't suffer prequelitis.

In a movie like say Pan, or the Star Wars Prequel trilogy, that heavily revolve the backstory of the main characters and settings, there is a lot less novel elements to include potentially, or you remove the mystery around characters that made them interesting.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber
Marc Radle wrote:
thejeff wrote:
The other difference is that Rey had basically just realized she had Force abilities and had absolutely no training or time to practice. Luke had gotten at least some basic training from Ben and had by the time of ESB at least some time to practice on his own.

I think it's pretty likely we will find out in the next movie she DID have some training. The prevailing theory is that Rey was at Luke's Jedi academy as a young child receiving training. She was there when Ben / Ren betrayed Luke and killed most or all of the students. The thought is that someone (Luke?) Force blocked her memories and dropped her off on Jakku.

If true, that would explain the images she saw when she first touched Luke's lightsabre, as her memories began to come back in jumbled and confusing bits. It also explains what Kylo Ren said to her when he was probing her mind - that she sees the island in the ocean ...

Combine her naturally strong natural Force sensitivity with the early training that seems to be slowly coming back to her due to recent events, and it makes sense that by the end of the movie she's able to do some cool Jedi-like things

This is my thought. Would explain Kylo's reaction to the comment about a girl helping them escape.

I don't know how old Rey is in the movie, but guessing 18-20? I thought I also heard mention that Kylo attacked the jedi training camp 10 years ago? So that would put Rey at 8-10 years old, which fits with her age in the brief flashback I think.

IF Rey had training in the force as a small child, pretty much all the problems with Rey's hypercompetence go away, especially since we have been told in the other movies that it's easier to train a kid than an adult in the use of the Force.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber
memorax wrote:
Stuff on downsizing, profitability, etc.

While I don't completely agree with Nathanael, I don't think your definition of profitable at least in relation to discussion at hand makes much sense. Products can be continued to be produced and sold at low levels that I assume must provide some level of profit. Laser disc players and VHS tapes only stopped being produced within the last few years, however I don't think you can really consider either products successful in the grand scheme of things compared to blue-ray players or dvds. If a product can efficiently operate and maximize profits with a staff of a hundred, and another product can only do with a staff of 10, I wouldn't hesitate to say the first product was more sucessful and profitable than the second.

Downsizing, or selling your company/IP to progressively smaller institutions, generally is not hailed as great accomplishment. The former usually means that you are now longer making the profits necessary to continue production as is. The latter means that you see very little room for further growth of your product and you are better selling it off in one piece than trying to develop it more.

I don't know much about the white wolf situation, but to relate this to Paizo, I would indeed consider downsizing or selling off of company products to the opposite of success. I think the people running the company do as well, which is honestly why they are fairly conservative for the most part as far as most game mechanics or setting details. I wouldn't really expect an announcement regarding a new edition until they start showing a decline in profit within one or several of their major lines. Even then, I would bet that whatever new edition comes about will still keep most of the core elements of Pathfinder and will share a large degree of compatibility with the current edition.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber

I mean...all of these arguments mostly just goes to show that Pathfinder is not an economy or civilization simulation by RAW...it's an adventuring game and spells like create water are mostly designed to help PC's get through deserts and similar environments. They weren't meant to totally replace irrigation.

That's not exactly a novel conclusion...


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber

Kevin Feige has practically out and out confirmed the already existing Infinity Stones. The only ones unaccounted for our Time and Soul IIRC, and I am pretty sure Time will be in Dr Strange, and Soul will probably pop up in Guardians volume 2. and how does "Making things really cold" fit in with the themes of time or soul? The mind stone controlled minds and gave birth to artificial intelligence; The reality stone...rewrites reality; The space stone creates portals; and the power stone is basically raw uncontrollable power that vaporizes the user or anything its directed against.

FYI Johnny Depp was rumored to be in negotiations for Strange. No idea if he was formerly offered and turned down, or they went with someone else and never offered the role (or it was just complete rumor). Kind of glad he didn't get it given how much of a parody he has become in most of his roles, and I think he would have probably been cheesy as hell as Dr. Strange.

Post Marvel phase one, you are just not going to see an unknown cast as a major character, unless its a property where the main characters are children or young teens.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber

I think people are using vastly different metrics to determine the profitability and success of a system.

Lets take a non game example. Horror movies as theatrical releases vs say, most big budget action/sci-fi movies.

Horror movies are incredibly successful and profitable. The major reason being that they are incredibly cheap to produce for the most part (Paranormal Activity and Blair Witch being extreme examples). They don't require elaborate cutting edge special effects nor draw on star appeal.

Now look at the big budget sci-fi movies. Many of them have budgets that balloon up to 200 million or more. They require a ton of investment of resources and are also incredibly risky. For every Avatar or Star Wars you have a Terminator Genysis or Fantastic Four. When they are sucessful boy are they sucessful; when they are not the #$%@ hits the fan.

If we relate this metaphor to game systems, Paizo and Pathfinder are the big budget movies; Paizo employs I would guess would be the largest number of staff of any RPG company, even 5E. They have a regular release cycle for multiple lines, and editions translated across many languages. Paizo thus has a higher threshold of sales it needs to maintain sucess.

That is why edition change is so risky. It's the same reason why studios reboot/sequel so much, or adapt existing work. If a new edition is released and is not approximately as successful as the current iteration, Paizo is potentially looking at a troubled future, which could include staff lay-offs, damaged reputations, damage to other lines, etc. RPG lines with relatively small staffs or who rely on contributors/part-time help are not faced with this issue. I would hazard a guess that Onyx Path is probably closer to the latter and the horror movie analogy than it is to Paizo.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber

It's not like the characters of Thor and Loki are actually American...


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber
Arachnofiend wrote:

Everyone who knows what they're doing then. If a player shows up and says "I want to play a Wizard who dabbles in everything", you don't tell them to take the Universalist school; you tell them to take a specialization with good powers and prepare from everything anyways because picking a specialization doesn't actually force you to specialize.

On the other hand, if someone wants to focus on buffing through transmutation spells the Transmutation school doesn't make them meaningfully superior at doing that than any other Wizard. They still have the exact same buff spells available to them.

So... Wizards are not rewarded for generalizing, and they're not rewarded for specializing. They're just incredibly powerful from the word go and don't have to do anything special to get there. Considering the fact that this is a game where literally every other class (besides the Arcanist but meh) has to decide if you want to give up B to be better at A this is a problem.

I pretty much agree with this stuff. Wizards, clerics, and related classes have an abundance of spell choice and specialization actually requires very little specialization, with all the powerful options still on board. Enforcing/increasing specialization would still allow powerful spells, but decrease disparity. It would also help solve a constant criticism, that a well optimized wizard can trivialize the roles/utility of all other characters in a party.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber

regardless if you think PF needs a new edition or what it should include, it seems IMHO a poor move to go to a simpler/less complex rule system, with 5E new and a viable competitor filling that niche. I would guess any new iteration of pathfinder will be hovering around the complexity of the present Pathfinder system, although individuals components may increase or decrease in complexity.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber

I finally saw the new movie, and got caught up on 600! posts in this thread since I tuned out. Because of fear of spoilers plus honestly I was getting a bit tired of the media saturation.

SO...my non spoilerly review is that this felt way more like a Star Wars movie than the prequels, and J.J. Abrams did a pretty decent job capturing the tone. I don't think it's as good as the original trilogy, but a satisfactory film going experience, and I am kind of wondering what a second watch would do.

spoiler:

Pros:

Again, it did a good job capturing the feel of the first movies, to the point that I think kids watching this movie will be inspired to future Star Wars fandom. CGI never ran away from Abrams, nor did his visual style overwhelm things

The new characters are all fantastic, and for the most part avoid being younger copies of the original. Finn's storm trooper who breaks his brain-washing is great, as well as his flailing around at every situation. The fact that he completely averts the "damsel in distress" trope by usually falling victim to it was nice. Poe as the new Wedge was also decent, and yeah I liked his opening line to Kylo Ren. I think it was pretty obvious he was suppose to die well into the later drafts was evident, but the potential for future buddy hijinks with him and Finn make it worthwhile. Rey was...fine, but I think too much of her backstory is left missing for future installments to flesh out to really give a solid rating.

Kylo Ren...man I love Kylo Ren. The Dark side is all about emotion and anger, and man did he symbolize that with his berserk episodes. He's everything that Anakin should have been in the prequels, and the fact that unmasked...he looks so ordinary kind of works with the idea that evil is rather banal.

My biggest fear was that this movie would give in to the dark side (GET IT) and go for the nostalgia feels over characters or plot. For the most part I don't think this movie did. Most of the original characters are relevant to the plot in some fashion, and not just meant as nudges and winks (with the exception of R2D2, which uh…really doesn’t serve much function in the movie). Same goes with background and setting elements, although see below.

Also the diversity was nice and really did help in updating. We have female stormtroopers and officers, and the resistance is similarly diverse.

And speaking of Storm Troopers...Is this just me or is this the first movie where storm troopers actually seemed a threat? They perform quite well for most of the movie

Cons:

My biggest criticism was....well the way the movies adheres a bit too close to the structure and story of A New Hope. It felt overly familiar in a bad way, and some elements seemed to be more a check mark on things to add in. Cantina Scene: check; Giant superweapons that must be destroyed by a trench run and flying into the structure: check; Han Solo the smuggler? Check. And so on and so forth.

Two particular notes are worthwhile pointing out. One I am sick of the Superweapon plot, which has been rehashed in almost identical manners now in 3 movies, and was mentioned in a prequel. And now ITS EVEN BIGGER, even though the First Order if anything has even less resources and manpower than the original Empire. It also seems...rather dated? I mean in the original trilogy, super doomsday weapons seemed more relevant with the cold war and threat of nuclear devastation. Given the relative status of the First Order relative to the New Republic, you think this could have been updated to something a bit more relevant for our times and for the setting. Some sort of evil biowarfare attack or infiltration of the Republic, or a cyber type attack or series of well timed terrorist strikes. I mean there are ways in science fiction for evil groups to do bad things beyond building planetoid sized weapons.

Second, I still hate and find totally unrealistic the complete demilitarization of the New Republic, with the empire still existent (and powerful enough that remnants can build…again planet-sized weapons. It felt like they were trying too hard to recreate the scenario that the original trilogy operated under.

So yeah overall I enjoyed it. I just hope the future installments hold up and series fatigue doesn't set in (since we appear to be getting a new star wars nearly every year from now on until the heat death of the universe). And hopefully all the loose bits left hanging without much development get proper explanation (Snoke, Rey's past and exceptional abilities, Phasm actually doing something).

P.S. Does anyone thing that Snoke and the uh...alien whose name I forgot from the cantina scene, might belong to the same species? or somehow be related?

P.P.S. I couldn't help but imagine Felicity Snoke every time that character was referenced.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber

I think DnD/Pathfinder is at its best when it allows all sort of fantasy and science fiction genres, so everyone can play the kind of game they want. I have no problem with any anime influence (Or Lovecraft...or science-fiction...or steampunk...you get my point). Specific anime tropes just shouldn't be the default assumption of the game.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber
Kirth Gersen wrote:
Cerberus Seven wrote:
If they're specced for it, is a martial of extraordinary skill and power striking people 50 ft. away with a sharp blastwave from his sword-swing really that magical and non-fighter-type-appropriate?

Also, does it change people's opinion if you call it a super Spring Attack and don't describe it as a "blastwave"?

Mechanically, assume they both have an effective range of 30 ft., require both line of sight and line of effect, require an attack roll, and deal normal weapon damage. In one case, we give it an (Ex) tag and say the fighter is rushing forward in a charge (jumping over pits or caltrops or whatever in the way), attacking, and then retreating back to his initial position. In the other case, we describe it as a video game shockwave.

What amazes me is that, if you pitch it the first way, a lot of people will nod and say, "yes, that's reasonable." If you point out the second description, they not only yell "NO WAY!!!11!", but they actively change their mind and won't let you use the first description, either. The whole concept of hitting people at reach gets taken off the table just because one possible description of it offends one person's sense of realism.

to be honest the first description of spring attack sounds worse, and almost reminds me more of old school video game play than anything anime.

People have fundamentally different baselines of what they want from classes. For a "mundane" fighter I want emulation of aaction movie heroics along the lines of something like Die Hard or movies in that vein, which require some suspension of belief but perhaps not as much as in some anime.

The True Seeing stuff seems to match that, but the shockwave stuff doesn't.

This is again just my personal baseline. I would have no problem with introduction of more fabulous new martials (see Bloodrager, Paladin, various 3pp), but I don't want that to be the default for fighters. I think you can bring Fighter up in power level without necessitating the game to be "super gritty" or making them magical.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber

Achaekek I believe is now considered a full deity in Pathfinder, which not stattable under current rules and CR 30+. So it's probably down to GM Fiat unless he is using the 3.5 stats.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber

I guess my thoughts are that...if a prestige class is meant to model a specific niche or character concept, it should be restricted in use to concepts that only make sense in later phases of the game. Things like divine raging or casters that blend divine and arcane magic seem like things that a class could just start off with at level one. You shouldn't have to wait 5+ levels to play the concept you want.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber
JiCi wrote:
UnArcaneElection wrote:
Prestige classes have a role to play in D&D/Pathfinder (of letting you build upon achievements to set yourself apart from those who just go single-classed), although unfortunately they haven't been kept within this role very well.

Well, if that's the case, they need to be brought by the drawing board. Sure, not every PrC would work as an archetype, but a lot would...

The problem is that the prestige aspect, as you stated, got either deluded or outright forgotten...

The prestige aspect seems hard to do in a setting neutral book. Things like Aldori Swordlord or Hellknight make sense as prestige classes, because they are built into the setting and imply membership of organizations.

It's pretty much why prestige classes have been restricted to campaign setting books of late, and not the rules line.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber
Trogdar wrote:
Personally, I just don't think the world needs another gritty ttrpg, There are scads of those already. It also does not at all fit the setting. The monsters you face in pathfinder at the mid level are already outside the scope of low magic and gritty, that's why I keep saying that trying to fit pathfinder into that mold makes no practical sense.

Because some people like Pathfinder, and its a well-supported system with a high quality of publishing and a complex ruleset.

Also I don't really WANT a gritty game, since I am fine with the current situation regarding healing, resurrections, and item availability, etc. All things associated with a gritty ruleset. I just think high level casters should be brought down in power some, via rewarding specialization in schools of magic and moderating the power of high level spells. I am leery of the solution of raising the power level up to bring everything in line with 9th level casters, because that sort of escalation has the potential to remove the baseline setting to far from anything I am actually interested in. Inevitably I think some class or another would be left behind, and we would still get into some new strain of Caster-X disparity anyway.

Basically...if the extreme situation is Fighter versus Wizard, I think the best solution is to increase the abilities of the weak classes, and tone down the power of the strong classes. Versus just focusing on one or the other.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber

The last few exchanges have certainly revealed how difficult it is to address the caster-martial disparity issue. Not because the system is inherently unfixable, but because even amongst those who agree there is a problem, there appears to be vast differences 6in opinion in how to correct it.

See...I am at the opposite end of the spectrum from Ashiel. I think the solution should inherently rest mostly in bringing down the power level of full casters, to at least the level of the average 6th level caster. Martials need a boost, but currently they are "closer" to my preference of power level than wizards for instance. DnD Wizards are far far far more powerful than almost any equivalent "PC like" character from most contemporary fantasy fiction.

Perhaps one solution would be too turn most of the really powerful and frequently cited problem spells into complicated occult rituals. Allow all classes access to them, but give an edge on use to characters with investment in relevant skills. Such rituals would be more complicated than ordinary spells and require some advanced set up, but would reduce some of the problematic issues frequently cited with spells.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber

I am a big fan of the nation focused Campaign Setting books, and mostly really enjoyed this. However, a lot of the former books subdivided the countries of interest into regions, then listed all sites of note. This volume...just has one big ole' section on the entire nation, with everything listed in alphabetical order. I admit I found this set up confusing and hard to use. Was there any reason why the Gazetteer was set up this way, rather than subdividing it?


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber
rknop wrote:

Yeah, I'd really hate to go to the Unchained Mutliclassing rules. I'm also not sure about the variant action economy. I've looked at it, haven't spent time to grok it. My first impression was that it sounded complicated enough that it wasn't worth learning if I wasn't going to use it, and it didn't immediately seem compelling enough to try to convince people to learn a new system for my home game.

On the other hand, I would really like to see inherent bonuses become part of the standard system. It's sad that various items are effectively required items (stat boosting belt, stat boosting headband, magic armor, magic weapon, etc.), using up slots that could be used for cool and flavorful other things.

I like the VMC rules, but they don't replace other existing multiclassing rules. Basically they work best if you want some flavor from another class without taking a full class level, or going the archetype route.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber

The easiest way is to ramp down the power of casters, by forcing more specialization, revising/getting rid of problematic spells, and implementing some of the variant rules for magic in Pathfinder Unchained.

On the martial side, more skill points, and maybe revision of combat feats so they are more condensed, freeing up space for feats that can shore up out of combat issues.

I think the above things would reduce disparity issues while still keeping Pathfinder "Pathfinder", and still keep most of the material relevant.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber

Just going to repost this from another thread on THIS SAME TOPIC:

"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."

I would still say most of this is true. I also think there is no reason to believe that the WotC/TSR paradigm is the only paradigm, and indeed the differences between those companies and Paizo (and the current RPG situation) are significant enough that what worked in the past may not work in the future.

I will say, I really doubt Pathfinder is going to go for a overall more simplistic rule set. That DnD niche seems to be successfully filled by 5E. I also would not expect any "new edition" until Pathfinder core rule book sales decline and that decline starts affecting the other lines.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber
Freehold DM wrote:
Haters should hate the films that put a fork in the original universe.

You know...you can dislike Star Trek Nemesis and Insurrection, and also dislike the new Star Trek movies. It's not an either/or situation.

I am looking forward to the new TV series, even if I have reservations on how CBS is going to handle it.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber

not a story about a pet I own(ed), but when I lived in San Diego the local exotic animal/bird rescue would often have a table with animals in balboa park if the weather was nice. They usually had a bunch of fairly well behaved birds, but the bird that most stands out in my mind was a Cockatoo (sulphur-crested I think) they had out one day. Bird loved people, but evidently wasn't a fan of kids

Of course...while we were there talking with the folks and seeing the birds, some small child come and starts trying to pet the cockatoo, much to its annoyance. The rescue folks took the Cockatoo away for some quiet time, and as he was hauled away he craned his neck around the keeper, stared at the kid, and intoned a rather angry sounding "$%@hole". One of the most hilarious things I have heard or witnessed.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber

Don't forget the second season of Daredevil, which should be hitting Netflix sometime around March-April.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber
Shadowborn wrote:

Bleah. I get it. J.J. loves the Beastie Boys. I love Motorhead, but if I were producing a movie franchise I wouldn't try to shoehorn one of their songs into every movie.

Good points: Looks like we've finally got original antagonists and new aliens. There's some of the wry humor I expect from Star Trek.

Bad points: This looks like Fast & Furious in space. A whole lot of blockbuster action movie, not a lot of Star Trek except for the trappings. It looks better than the first two, but I think I'll pass on this until it gets to Netflix.

JJ didn't direct this one...


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber
thejeff wrote:
MMCJawa wrote:
Well...I think there is a centrist policy on climate change, it just happens to fit into the measures that the democrats and such endorse. You could go far far more left on the issue, by attempting to implement things like severely reduce meat consumption, upgrade transit infrastructure to reduce car usage, increase taxes on carbon polluters, etc. It's just those things would mostly go over like a lead balloon in this country.
Ah, so Democratic position is centrist while the "left" position on climate change is what the right imagines the Democratic one to be. :)

Pretty much. US politics runs on this in regards to a slew of issues besides climate change. Some folks just love their slippery slopes...


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber
Scott Betts wrote:


I'd love to see a Republican defend this disparity. Will they accuse Politifact of bias? Try to make it seem like Democrats' lies are fewer in number but more egregious in nature? Or do they just accept that lies are more readily accepted in the Republican Party?

In case anyone is wondering what we're talking about, this is the article that breaks down the tendency of Republican candidates to lie, and of Democratic candidates to tell the truth.

Somehow...I don't think Trump and co have much to worry about regarding their base and fact checking...


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber

While I don't share probably half of Green Tea Gamers beliefs, the political agenda he espouses isn't some bizarro unique thing. In fact I would say its pretty typical of a good (if minority) section of the populace. Hell, from what I could tell when I lived there, it matches pretty strongly with the average Republican voter in Wyoming and some other parts of the west (Although I think the Tea Party has altered that a bit). Its pretty standard libertarian.

As far as voting, I hate our two party system and how it forces us into choosing "the lesser of two evils" over and over again. I think its up to the individual voter to decide if he wants vote his conscience and go third party, or weigh political realities and vote Dem or Republican. Their is nothing wrong with making either choice and we shouldn't lambast people who vote differently.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber

My last pets were a pair of Crested Geckos and three leopard geckos. One crested escaped when I still lived in San Diego and was sadly found dead months later in the closet. The other was given to a friend on my movie to Laramie, where I feared I wouldn't be able to keep him alive due to the stress of driving and a cold basement apartment. Unfortunately my leopard geckos all passed away within a year of moving to Wyoming. My apartment had piss poor heating plus the super low humidity I think did them in...they had huge troubles shedding and even with regular misting I couldn't keep their hidey hole moist enough and they developed shedding problems leading to blindness :(

While living in San Diego with the geckos, one of my other roommates gradually acquired a large menagerie, including 4 Russian Tortoises that lived on the balcony year round, a red-footed Tortoise, and a captive born and permitted Desert Tortoise. I pretty much woke up every morning to the sound of a randy male Russian tortoise named Little Mac trying to get it on with the lady tortoises he lived with. Which pretty much always ended in failure, since they had zero interest and were pretty good about backing up during the attempt and causing Little Mac to land on his back in futility.

That was just the tortoises (he worked on fossil tortoises for his masters). He also owned a ball python, rosy boa, and California kingsnake, as well as a bearded dragon, uromastyx, and a Pacman Frog.

Back in high school I had a Fish of various sorts, as well as newts and a albino clawed frog that managed to eat anything that I foolishly introduced into his tank. With the exception of a badass giant freshwater shrimp that somehow evaded getting shoved into his mouth.

I love herps and exotics, but not sure I would get another at this phase of my life.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber
memorax wrote:


If it's on topic sure. Yet if your going into a thread who subject matter is what one does not like about Pathfinder. Then criticize posters for daring to boost negative posts about Pathfinder. Well then it's just trying to silence critics imo. Same thing if someone does the same in a thread praising Paizo.

The thing about freedom of speech advocates forgot or ignore. Just because your allowed to say something does not mean you have to say something. I admit I don't always follow my advice. I never claimed to be perfect. I just find it dumb for someone who likes meat to go to a vegan website and claiming the virtues of meat. Your allowed to of course. It still come across as dumb to me and more than a waste of time. And it's the internet is not a valid reason. Humans are not animals we can think and choose before doing something. The only time one is forced to actually post if one has a actual gun to their head.

My issue is that I see the dreaded "PAIZO DEFENSE FORCE" thing thrown around any time someone posts a rebuttal to an criticism, especially if it involves certain dogmas that are posted about continually in certain forums here, regardless of the merit or relevance. And it gets thrown around even against posters who are not actually even defending Paizo, but perhaps and interpretation of the rules or a playstyle. Its at least as common as your initial criticism.

At it's simplest, the "Vegan website" metaphor fails, because this is not a "PATHFINDER SUCKS" forum, it's a forum operated by Paizo which is focused on the Pathfinder game.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber
BigDTBone wrote:
MMCJawa wrote:
also I have to say I never heard of the "make up the last digit rule". Generally speaking, In many cases analytical equipment has an accuracy fine enough that we can produce significant digits beyond the range that is useful to report, so the last digit is often "rounded up", not made up.

Rounded up all the time would create a skew in your data. With most modern analytical data the instrument reads it for you and gives you a digital value. So you take the full amount of numbers it gives and use it. The observer doesn't have to guess the last digit. But, the person who programmed that machine sure as hell had to tell the instrument how to report that information.

For example, US Pharmacopeia mandates that scales used in compounding pharmacies are accurate to within 5%. So a analytical scale may display xx.xxx grams but the scale will also tell you in the manual that it has a minimum weightable weight of 20 mg. This means that the display is guessing at the last digit. Because it can display anything and be within 5% of 20mg.

Now, that isn't to say that the guess is bad. The programming algorithms are quite good at guessing. Just like a human is pretty good at saying "5 marks and about 3 tenths to the next mark."

In many cases though, you don't need that analytical degree of certainty (and most journals will generally want you to keep your tables of data within a certain consistent number.

In my own research I use a lot of measurements derived from the skull or limb bones from whales, seals, etc. Some of the measuring equipment I use has accuracy extending down as far as 0.01 mm. But if your comparing measurements from different species of whale, really anything below a single mm is going to be pretty trivial and unimportant, and won't influence any statistical analyses I do when I incorporating critters with a size range from elephant seal to harbor seal.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber
Neal Litherland wrote:

As a gamer who lives on the Internet, I'm no stranger to discussions (sometimes heated) regarding RPG content. Sometimes people quibble over a rule, or argue over a balance issue, or simply have different tastes in what constitutes a "good" game. These 5 phrases crop up with irritating regularity, though, so I put together The 5 Totally Useless Statements You See in Every RPG Discussion. It received an unusual amount of positive attention, so I thought I'd share it here.

The 5 statements include:

- Every Table is Going to Do it Their Own Way
- The DM Can Just Change The Rule, If He Wants
- This is So Unrealistic!
- This is So Broken!
- That's Historically Inaccurate

The inverse of the "Unrealistic/Historically Inaccurate" is just as bad though, e.g. Dragons exist, so all complaints are invalid. You mention this in your blog but I would argue it makes a good additional statement.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber

Wow....This was probably the best episode yet

Also...holy %#%@

spoiler:

MARTIAN MANHUNTER!!!!!!!!!!


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber

Yeah, I think the Green Lantern movie with Ryan Reynolds is not considered to be canon for the DCCU. Not sure if Ryan would bother doing that anyway...he seems to be having more fun with the Deadpool character at the moment.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber

Man, people keep talking about the past, but what about an AP where one volume took place in a distant, dark dystopian future that was the result of failure of the PC's in the present. PCs have to recover some key bit of intel on the rise of the threat, then barter with a time dragon to get home and avert save the world.

That would not have anywhere near the problems of going in the past, because you would be playing around in a hypothetical future that will, if all goes correctly, not exist at the end of the AP. No mucking about to save Aroden or take over Thassilon.


5 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber

I like that many Paizo staff are active on the boards, and I like how suggestions, ideas, and speculation sometimes result in further development or creation of new product.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber

I don't actually think at this point that you can really change much more about the layout and flavor text. Art is important and you can only shrink that down so far. Stats are what differentiates a monster from the rest of the hordes, and gives it a distinct flavor. You can only cut so much from that. Making every monster 2 page still won't help the dragons, and legitimately not all creatures need as much flavor as others. And drastically cutting down the number of monsters is going to be a turn off for some people.

My only suggestion forward would be, perhaps adding an extra page of text for new members of major groups. You already do this for some creatures, such as robots or new outsider types. Maybe that extra page could of flavor at the beginning of some monsters could also go towards new sets of dragons or other major themed groups that you flesh out.

Also if the Revisited series could...maybe be a bit more regular, that would help fleshing out some groups. And of course future books along the lines of the Monster Codex.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber

P.S. I do agree that it would be nice to have some tiny bit of text somewhere, or a table in the back, listing where reprinted monsters originally showed up in.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber

on a completely random note, I just finished going through the bestiary. Props to the people behind the Zygomind. Such a cool and awesome fungus creature that seems to take a page from so many science fiction stories.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber

Season 1 of True Detective was amazing, but I couldn't even get through the second season. Huge drop in quality of writing, and I think the showrunner just couldn't juggle the larger cast.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Campaign Setting Subscriber

I don't have anywhere near enough experience with 3pp that Malwing has. So I can't generate a top 10 list.

However something that did leave me wanting more was Dark Roads and Golden Hells from Kobold Press. I really enjoyed this book and was hoping there would be more treatment of the "main planes" versus the new ones.

I'd like to see Kobold Press tackle The Abyss, Elysium, etc.

1 to 50 of 1,041 << 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.