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 Adventure Path Subscriber. 3,140 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists.


1 to 50 of 607 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Astral Wanderer wrote:
Myth Lord wrote:

I'm so glad that you are a rare case of persons in this.

And that is never going to happen anyway, Paizo's staff love them mythology.

I hope the 5th book is so crowded with them, that you don't even want to buy it. >:-D

What are you, 6 years old?

I love mythology too, but I'm not so blind as to not see that those endless lists are 99% composed by uninteresting garbage.

"Oh, look, the Sbrlxfts, a cannibal giant with four arms and three eyes! We absolutely need that, it's something totally new! Wow, the Drugtflk-Hlhhrrrtkk, a beast with horns and a serpent tail, how come this marvel wasn't added in previous bestiaries?"
Please.
There are far more interesting things than the countless unelaborate mixes of human and animal traits conceived by all possible primitive folklore that manifested on this planet. Especially if they have to be added exactly for the mere reason that they come from folklore, despite being actually worthless.

I don't think anyone expects every single monster from folklore in these lists to make it. The devs have stated in the past that they like adapting monsters from folklore, because in many ways they are time-tested from being real legends, and often have odd cultural quirks which can make them. It's not like those lists just came out of the blue.

There is also the issue that almost all monsters pulled from myth have come from European and to a lesser extent Asian myth. Some of us post these lists because we would like to see greater cultural diversity in monsters. I am a huge fan of Arcadia and can't wait to see it developed, but if it is going to be Golarion's version of the New World, I would rather it be populated with monsters from that region, not goblins with the serial numbers filed off.

At any rate, it's obvious these lists are not hurting anyone, and indeed many monsters from Bestiaries 3 and 4 have been in this list. And given that practically the majority of all monsters in the game are derived from myth, literature, and film, it seems to be a winning formula


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Aranna wrote:


But this isn't about me. It's about FOX. They paid lots of money to keep using the Fantastic Four and Dr Doom. So they are going to give you a Dr Doom whether you like it or not. Why not encourage them to make a good story even if it means discarding canon since they seem to have failed to give you good stories based on this canon so far. Maybe they just need to try something totally new? Maybe it will fail too. But I say let them try. Maybe this Doom will make more sense than the one we have been given so far.

Try it and then judge... don't dismiss it out of hand before even seeing if it can be...

1) The earlier Doom didn't follow Canon at all, which is in part of why he didn't work. And the Fantastic Four actually have a pretty large villain roster...they don't need to include Doom to keep their rights on him, since as TheJeff says, they are a parcel deal.

I don't NEED a Fantastic Four movie; their are certainly more than enough movies to keep me occupied. I will see the movie if the buzz/reviews are good. If the Doctor Doom change is symbolic of other changes, I don't think it will be.

And keep in mind, this is a Fox superhero movie, which comes from a studio that has been very hit and miss in their output. They have had some decent movies (X1, X2, First Class, Days of Future Past), but also a lot of mediocre if not absolutely horrible movies (X3, Wolverine Origins, Elecktra, Fantastic Four 2). So even without the Doom news, I would be hesitant to get excited over this movie.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Yeah I don't think the argument is

"Dr. Doom must be %100 faithful to the comics"

The argument is changing an element or two is fine if it works within the context of the storyline, but throwing out everything about the character is bad. Especially bad to do if you are working with one of Marvel's most iconic villains.

Magneto and Doc Ock are great examples where they kept the core elements, but changed certain elements. Doc Ock got a sympathetic origin story and reason for his villainy, while Magneto got a toned down costume and, in the original 3 movies, was portrayed by someone old enough to pass as a holocaust survivor.

But they still kept the iconic elements of the villains, the robotic appendages in Doc Ock and the Mutant rights extremist of the latter.

And other villains have had way way more faithful adaptations. Loki is super popular, and he is a pretty straight adaptation of the character. Ultron is getting a different origin story, but just the glimpses from the trailer make him a truly menacing figure.

Also, given all the aliens, demons, robots, and mutants in comic book adaptations, Evil megalomaniacal dictator and scientist with a metal mask is not really going to come off as to unrealistic bad. Give him a good actor and a solid role and it will work.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Guys...can we lay off the hostility?

What Mike Mearl proposes is almost exactly the same thing Paizo has done in the past. Release a AP, build products around supporting that AP. The mention of Psionics makes that pretty clear. I don't see anything saying that once they do a Spelljammer book, they will never touch it again.

Although to be fair, Spelljammer is probably niche enough that I don't see it getting heavily supported, regardless of what the 5E people did.

the ending comments from Mearls do support the idea that 5E overall will receive less material than 4E/3E did, since they are super concerned with bloat. I would also argue that simplified rulesets are harder to produce bloat, as mechanics are less laid down in stone. Although to be fair, I suspect there will be people yelling bloat at the Adventurers Handbook, since everyone has a different idea on what bloat is.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

yeah, I don't like posting homebrew stuff because once you post it, you lose control of it. Someday I would like to use the setting I have been developing either in a novel, or at the very least publish it as as 3pp rpg product. I don't want any actually novel ideas I develop to be borrowed by random people on the internet and then published.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Yeah I can't fault Star Wars for doing that, since keeping all the canon effectively straight jackets any storyline they want to run for next hundred years on from the original trilogy. And most of the movie going public probably doesn't care about the EU.

On the other hand, that would actually force Disney and Abrams to actually pursue an entirely new story, and not making us sit through Star Wars: the retirement years, while waiting for the new characters to take over.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I kind of have reached that point where I don't really care that much about the new star wars movies. Like...I don't think they will be a trainwreck, nor do I think they will be the best thing ever, but my whole attitude is kind of blah.

Part of it is, admittably, nothing I have heard so far really seems that interesting. Most of my friends agree with me in that we would rather see new characters, threats, and plots. It just feels like the next movie will be Star Wars: The Nostalgia edition. If I want nostalgia, I will watch the original trilogy.


6 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
The 8th Dwarf wrote:
The only thing that happens in the NT is shark attacks, croc attacks, people getting nude, drunk, and or stoned or nude drunk stoned people being attacked by or attacking sharks or crocs.

So your saying that this is where all the Syfy "original" films take place?


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

The geologist getting lost is one of those issues where, if that was the sole problem of the movie, no one would care. But it's just another flaw piled on top of a whole pile of other problems in the movie, ranging from characterization to plot, that ruin the movie for me and other viewers.


5 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

While the map-making geologist getting lost was bad, I was more distracted by the biologist, who gets COMPLETELY FREAKED out at the possibility of alien life signs, but then a scene or two later is ready to be best friends forever with the obviously dangerous viper penis alien.

Really...Characters just...do stuff in the movie, without any logical or consistent explanation.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Wiggz wrote:


What got me into PF were the AP's... what has me reconsidering is the bloat.

Unfortunately I get castigated for even asking about purchasing more AP materials (such as hardcover treatment of the out of print and out dated AP's) while lately the bloat has begun to increase at an exponential rate. It's tough for me and others to hear there is no manpower for updating 3.5 modules while watching Mythic Adventures, the ACG, Occult Adventures, Unchained, etc, etc, etc all coming out back-to-back-to-back with barely a breath taken. Moreover, as these books come out faster and faster their quality suffers, from adequate play testing being done to simple things like typographical errors.

There is some misleading things in this paragraph. First, while manpower might be a concern, the #1 reason why Paizo doesn't want to do further hardcover AP compilations is that it messes with their business model, which is what the company is based on. By updating or compiling former Adventure paths, they first of all create an impression that would lead people to think that this might be a regular thing, which may stop people from subscribing. Secondly, its essentially releasing 2 APs at once; that means whatever new AP is being produced stands to be less profitable as people buy the old AP and don't bother with what has been released.

This has been stated over and over again, and at any rate new rule books wouldn't interfere with new hardcover compilations, since both are largely done by different groups within Paizo.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I would expect the basic rules (combat, skill checks, movement, etc) follow core rulebook guidelines, and that a substantial number of class/races/spells/equipment that are listed in the core rule book would be valid. Maybe one of the above could be tweaked without much issue (a human only game, or no class x)

I also tend to think that OP post manages to both blow things completely out of proportion (I don't think anyone at Paizo expects every single option in a rulebook that was ever published to be open for player use), and also tries to flame as many different groups as possible in one paragraph.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I am wondering if The Winter Soldier will play into WHY Stark and Cap are going against each other. Tony would be all about destroying/capturing any present and former Hydra assets, especially Hydra assets that might have been involved with killing his parents. Cap in contrast wants to help and redeem Bucky. I would be pretty shocked if this wasn't the core root of their disagreement, and would also follow on from Cap 2 in a logical fashion.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I'd prefer keeping the the usage of wizard schools; beyond using existing game terms, this also sort of gets at the flavor if feel they are going for; This is the "wizard" if one initially based the class around real world occult and folk practices, so it makes sense it would use wizard terminology.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

the thing is, new game options allow people to build characters they want to play much more easily. Before Occult Adventures, Their were a lot of concepts that were not really possible, or which required extensive diving through tons of different books to put together.

New character options/classes/archetypes allow easier roleplay because people can design characters to their specifications, without dealing with the baggage of stuff that doesn't fit their concept, key concept abilities that don't come online until late in the game, or a character that is significantly weaker than the rest of the party.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

You have my vote for keeping the BAB and spellcasting levels the same as it currently is. If something needs more oomph, I would rather it be on the magic side of things.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

FYI, Bulmahn STRONGLY hinted that the Occultist in the Occult Adventures Playtest is heavily based on Dresdenverse wizards.


5 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I agree with others that all kineticist types should have two simple blasts available for them at the start.

One idea I had for a pyrokinetic is, instead of only blasting an opponent with fire, they can also have a simple blast option that allows them to pull all of the heat from a small area, allowing them to deal cold damage to a target. That would give them a flavorful option besides fire blast, and also help deal with concerns over enemies immune to fire damage.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Their are hints that we might see unique forms of undead that use kineticist abilities. Whether they are released in Bestiary 5, a campaign setting book, or this book, I don't know.


7 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I already mentioned this in another post, but this would be the perfect class to emulate Harry Dresden. Love the call backs to "real life" magical practices, which makes this class feel more like a wizard than the actual wizard class.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

At first I wasn't impressed by the Occultist, but reading it more thoroughly I sort of love it. It's a much more interesting and authentic "wizard" than the actual Wizard, and reading through some of the abilities and implement focuses made me picture this class as the go to source for someone actually wanting to build Harry Dresden.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Barachiel Shina wrote:
Zaister wrote:

Paizo always stated that this is the way they want to go, even before Dreamscarred's psionics.

And no, psionics (as presented by Dreamscarrd) will most certainly have no official place in Golarion, that is exactly what psychic magic is for. Paizo probably have chosen not to use this third party content because they feel its mechanics and flavor do not fit their vision for their game setting. And it is certainly not Paizo's responsibility to provide a rationale as to why third party mechanics could co-exist with official Pathfinder RPG rules.

Sounds a little unfair, but it's their game I guess. I always thought they said they would listen to their customer base, and I thought they would do the same with their customers concerning psionics. I don't believe we asked for this to replace psionics.

So now we'll begin to see gamers arguing over which they prefer in their games, psionics or psychic magic for Pathfinder. Way to "unite".

I don't think the existence of Occult Adventures will have any impact on GM's allowing Psionics. Most of the people who already ban it ban it on the basis of either thinking its overpowered, or not allowing 3pp, or not liking the flavor (or all of the above). People who like to use Psionics rules in their game will continue using Dreamscarred Press material, and probably will allow at least some of the Occult classes. I am sure many GM's will be perfectly cool with both.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Uh...how about like...wait for tomorrow? When you can actually judge and speculate in a manner that actually is evidence based?

The developers have stated that Occult Magic will be exploring design space Paizo hasn't touched yet, so I am expecting that Psychic magic users are not simply going to be wizards with the numbers filed off.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

"I was born to murder the world" - Lord of Illusions

"God doesn't want you, but I still do" Darla from Angel


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

IIRC, there is a Jormundgander expie among the Eldest of the First World

Also, something based on carnivorous caterpillars:

Kill it with fire!!!.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Advanced GM Guide: More advice for modifying Pathfinder rules to fit different styles of play (Low vs High Magic, Social Heavy vs Combat Heavy) and different sorts of settings (alternate magic rules, advice for implementing various technology levels, etc).

Steampunk Adventures: Victorian and Jules Verne like items, classes, archetypes, and subsystems. Would be a great book to include Engineer as a new class

Ultimate Intrigue: Like UC or UM, only focused on skill monkey characters.

Space Fantasy Adventures: Starship rules and combat, update and expansion of material in the Tech Guide


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I thought I recall seeing something about Stark activating an old already developed program defense program, which is what leads to Ultron. If that is the case, than I wouldn't be surprised if their wasn't a Pym name drop.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

The Dresden Chronicles are one of the few series I still actively follow, and purchase in hardcover the day they came out. So obviously I am a fan, and I think I would rank him as one of the funnest authors to read.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Malwing wrote:
I'm a little concerned. I've seen videos of convention panels and Dev chatter about what will be in Unchained, and I feel like some expectations on what it is is wildly beyond the scope of the product.

Unfortunately that has been happening with hardcovers a lot lately. Anytime you give people time to speculate or think about something that covers a broad area but has little information, people start making decisions on what HAS to be in the book, and thus get mad when something isn't in the book (or worse, Paizo does the opposite).

It's even worse for this book, since all the talk of killing sacred cows has let people's imaginations going crazy on what is in the book...


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

my opinion:

Low magic, in the sense of what casters can pull off, or the amount of magic items available, is often pretty far removed from the stories and settings of fantasy literature, movies, and other mediums

Abundant magic items become boring. Those fancy powerful magic swords start becoming boring after your PC's stumble upon the 12th one.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Now....I don't believe in ghosts, but I do have a story to tell

My first semester starting my PhD, I moved into a basement apartment in Laramie. Sometime around October I recall being uneasy in bed, and I thought I heard scratching from the bedroom window, which happened to be above my bed.

This itself isn't really that weird...there were shrubs right in front of well the window was in. Also it's Wyoming, which is no stranger to wind.

At any rate, I got bothered by it for whatever reason, and decided to check if anything was outside the window.

When I opened pulled the curtains away, I appeared to see the body (below chest level) of a girl in a white old-fashioned sleeping gown, dangling from above.

Obviously I was super freaked out, but turning on the light revealed nothing outside. Still made for an uncomfortable night, and yes I did check the other windows and made sure the apartment was locked.

So as I mentioned, I don't believe in ghosts. And I don't believe this was something supernatural. I think the experience I had was probably a result of a novel living situation (this was the first time I had ever lived alone...I had always lived with parents or roommates prior to that), time of year and environment (a windy October night), a probably sleep state of mind that didn't have me at its most alert, which led me to imagine that a reflection of the window curtains was a dressing gown. At least that is my best explanation. I will note the house wasn't especially old, nor did I ever have anything else happen during the 6 years I lived there that would make me think that was a genuine sighting


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Again, I would argue that unless you are going to severely modify the first Iron Gods adventure, it's not really a horror adventure. Certainly a GM could easily turn it into one, but then at that point you could just as easily run any book 1 of an AP for Halloween.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Magic itself might be a destabilizing factor, to a far greater extant than technology is.

Planar rips, berserker constructs, immortal despotic wizard-kings, interfering dieties, marauding monsters, undead outbreaks...

All possible at relatively low levels of technological development, which create the potential to constantly set back or inhibit technology


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
magnuskn wrote:
Skeld wrote:
magnuskn wrote:
grandpoobah wrote:
Then again, we're already seeing book 3 of Iron Gods this week, so maybe WOTR is yesterday's news....
Most probably. The devs have stopped paying attention to the board for months now. It all kinda feeds into my perception that Paizo is kind off just running in front of the lion of game mechanic problems they have created, by pushing out new products as fast as they can.

They're putting out APs at a rate of about 1/month. Just like they've done for the last 7+ years. The pace hasn't changed.

-Skeld

What I mean is that the developers are introducing new rules (Mythic Adventures, ACG, upcoming stuff, prior sub-systems in other AP's) which are not suffiently tested, often function clunkily at best and won't get erratae'd/FAQ'ed for years. And that they are just forging ahead with this approach and are leaving a mess behind them. AP's are of course unchanged, but many of them have suffered from those badly developed sub-systems in the past and probably will in the future.

Having seen multiple conversations between you and, for instance, James Jacobs, I don't see anything he could contribute to this thread that would satisfy you or make you happy.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

The monster codex is a hardcover whose rules/creatures will go up on the PRD. It's probably a safe bet that nothing in this book will be reprinted in a bestiary.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
blahpers wrote:
Secret Wizard wrote:
again, blahpers, you should join the skinsaw cult because you are building a strawman this big. stop inventing the position of people who you disagree with. nobody wants everyone to be happy.

I do. I just recognize that it isn't possible.

You can call it a straw man, but Kirth and I are just two folks with reasonable opinions on what makes a good game. For the discussion to have any meaning, you have to extrapolate to the rest of the potential player base. And I just haven't seen any attempt to reconcile "balance-or-bust" with D&D that didn't end up somehow lessening the experience to someone. It's not as simple as "make it balance-friendly and we're both happy"; the methods of making it balance-friendly can make others unhappy. Maybe there's an awesome way to do it, but I haven't seen it yet. But as long as the conversation remains civil, I'm open to suggestions.

While I do believe many of the balance issues...are exaggerated and probably less problematic with the player base as a whole than made out on the forums, I don't necessarily agree with this argument. While perfect balance and a game that pleases 100% of people 100% of the time are impossible, that doesn't mean the solution is to do nothing. Otherwise no one would ever revise a game, which obviously has happened many many times.

So...there are probably some things that could be done in the system that could boost martials. Which appears to be what Pathfinder unbound is attempting to do, with combat in general and the rouge and monk classes specifically.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Ambrosia Slaad wrote:
christos gurd wrote:
RJGrady wrote:
It's a stretch to call them cats, unless you want to call a mongoose a cat.
seeing as civets are pretty much the halfway point between mongoose and cat, i find i can make that stretch.

Rikki-Tikki-Tavi would make a pretty awesome PC, especially in something like the Serpent's Skull AP.

But whenever the party visits the town of civitsfolk, they now know to never drink the coffee.

I have a homebrew race of Mongoose folk that really really really hate the serpentfolk, for certain events that happened in their distant past.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Cats and hyenas are more closely related to each other than either are too dogs, but it still really isn't accurate to refer to them as cats

With similar logic, if you are going to call hyenas cats, than you should also be referring to walruses, seals, bears, and skunks as dogs, since all of those are in Caniformia.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I tend to be on the side that a big problem with DnD/Pathfinder magic is that it does a horrible job of emulating magic as used in most contemporary fantasy.

In fiction, magic may be powerful, but has constraints. This may be energy-based (Really powerful stuff tends to completely drain the caster, or risk burn-out completely), Risky (Really effective, but may have unintended consequences...Bring someone back to life may result in them coming back wrong, Teleporting risks materializing at the center of mountain), may have specific vulnerabilities that neutralize it (running water, thresholds, etc), or may have setting restrictions (Any use of magic in the form of X results in execution by more powerful magicians)

Now...Pathfinder has a bit of energy restriction, in that you might only have 1 9th level spell, but using that spell won't exhaust any of your other spells. While older versions of DnD incorporated risk, streamlining and simplification of magic in later editions basically removed most any risk associated with magic. I am not aware of ANY mundane counters to magic included within the games, or at least effective counters. Setting restrictions can always be homebrewed, but a lot of players really really hate them (see the bazillion threads on alignment on this forum).

Personally I would prefer adding "risks" back to higher level spells, and also make concentration checks more an actual consideration for spellcasters. But any actual attempts to reduce the power of magic users is going to meet with uproar, and I don't think the Pathfinder developers can really settle martial-caster disparity in a way that won't tick off a significant section of the fanbase.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
LazarX wrote:
Well they are going for dark and gritty, not four color, which means in a Shield series, characters are going to die, with most likely Fitz being next, now that Skye has made him redundant.

Nah...Fitz has perhaps one of the most intriguing arcs on the show right now. Simmons and May though...


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Something that might be interesting, I would like feats or other options to give other classes "low level" psychic powers. it's not an uncommon trope for characters to have a certain psychic trick or specialized skill, but not necessarily to the point where it defines their existence


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

why are we having discussion of buying a book in a ongoing series that just has "HAHAHA" written for 300 pages? That...would never happen, because editors and publishers are not idiots

You might as well lead with an example such "What if reading the first sentence summons a Balor that then eats all my family members in front of me".


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Tequila Sunrise wrote:


Yeah, it's not about 'owing' anyone anything. 'Owing' implies something much more formal than preordering a book from B&N or Amazon, IMO.

It's really about cause and effect, as you describe. An author can take however long he needs/wants to write the next sequel, but he risks slipping from his readers' minds. Cause and effect.

I suppose it's great that some readers become Fans -- yes, with a capital F -- they're the ones who gave me the heads-up when the latest Wheel of Time book came out! But I prefer a more Zen attitude toward entertainment, like you: "Oh hey, the next X book/movie/game is out!" I find things much more satisfying this way. :)

Yeah this pretty much.

If I like a book/book series, I invest...anywhere from 7 to 30 dollars (depending on where I purchase and the format) per book, and maybe a long weekend or the equivalent time units spread out over a month.

So I don't really feel that an author owes me much, other than an enjoyable read for what I have already paid for. There is so much fiction out there that its not like I can't find something else to read in the meantime.

That's why I kind of get confused on concepts such as "betrayal" or "owing"? Like...an author taking extra long doesn't even come up on my radar as anything like a betrayal. If the author slept with my wife...now that is betrayal...


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I am glad WoTC and Paizo are both making DnD, and from what I have seen of 5E, they are not trying to compete for the same market. I think that is good for the game, because I don't think one company can cater to the rule's heavy 3E fanbase and the rules lite 1E/2E/5E market, without producing something that caters to neither.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I wanted to like this series, but practically every character (at least for most of the first half of the season) completely lacks anything that could be remotely considered common sense. Also, there is just sooooooooo much padding.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

For me, the ecology sections (and similar material) is actually what makes the book readable. I find page after page of crunch boring, and I can often find cool ideas for encounters or new ways to use a monster from reading those sections.

A huge reason I was never a fan of the 4E manuals, since they seemed to either convert the ecology to crunch or just dump it completely. Looking forward to browsing a copy (although my next hardcover purchase will be the Monster Codex, so probably won't buy it).


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

The "drunken Scotsman" trope seems to have originated largely from gaming (and maybe literature?). Otherwise, yeah the greedy, bearded mining and craftsman dwarves of fantasy are not too different from folklore.

I will try to post a list of dwarf-like races later today from elsewhere in the world (I have to head to work soon). It is a pretty common trope, although in many cases different cultures have such different ideas behind their dwarves that in Pathfinder tradition they would probably be a different creature entirely.

FYI I tend to like to run them like stereotypical german engineers. I kind of hate the drunken Scotsman trope.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
richard develyn wrote:

In my opinion what you want to do with the OGL is to encourage 3PPs to publish complimentary products rather than competing ones.

I think Paizo is missing trick with this by not opening up Golarion, and in particular APs, to 3PPs.

It's certainly been done before (Glorantha comes to mind). Paizo could state quite clearly that anything published by 3PPs is not consider canon in exactly the same way that 3PP Pathfinder content is not considered canon.

The advantage, however, would be that 3PPs could publish a whole host of AP-supporting material, in much the same way River Nations was but with greater integration, in order to tailor APs to the various diverse tastes which are found around the community. For example we could have:

Additional side-quests or even major new complimentary adventures
Crib-sheets, charts and other GM aids
Hero-lab content
5 and 6 player conversions
Conversions for pre-pathfinder APs
Updates to APs to bring them in line with the new books
Major overhauls to re-imagine the APs for different play styles (more or less RP, more or less combat, etc).

All of these things would support the sales of APs rather than detract from them.

It seems like a win-win situation to me, and if some 3pp wants to write an adventure where Galactus comes down and devours the whole of Varisia - what does it matter? It wont have happened in the *real* Golarion.

Richard

I would rather they didn't. I want to see more original stuff from 3pp products, or exploitation of niches that that Paizo can't or won't support.

Also, I respect the ability of creators to exercise control of their setting. Like it or not, if you open Golarion up to 3pp, lots of people will start getting confused over what is and isn't official material, or what is and isn't fair game for things like PFS. Also, Paizo might find sections of their setting getting developed before the get to them, and suddenly you get fan wars of which version of which nation they want to use


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I do think it's interesting that earlier in the thread, people were arguing that you can't paint all the people who complain about Sarkeesian, GamerGate, what have you as misogynists, because the people behind the death/rape threats are an extreme viewpoint that doesn't reflect gamers

But some of those same people think you can paint all feminists as bad, because of a few perhaps extreme individuals

That's a pretty interesting and informative pattern right there.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Having read over the "GamerGate" issue over the weekend, I agree with Werthead. This is less about "ethics in game reporting" and more about a boyfriend's petty revenge and slut-shaming. I absolutely believe that if a woman posted these same claims about a ex, not only would this never have been blown up, but people would have gone after the poster.

1 to 50 of 607 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

©2002–2014 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.