|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
Lord Snow wrote:
One thing I would really like to see in Enemy Within is humans vs humans, maybe with some rogue aliens scattered across the globe, wreacking havoc, leaderless and purposeless since the destruction of their mother ship. That would be awesome. :)
Also, I don't get the auto-save issue. It prevents save scumming and I have never been more than 15-20 minutes away from a save 4 hours in.
Did it ever happen to you to have to stop playing like, ''right now''? I don't know, maybe your ride is outside, waiting, or you just received a call from your boss, asking if you can go to work to replace someone who's sick. Sometimes, you just don't have 15-20 min to save and quit a game, and losing progress in a RPG is never fun.
Well, the thing that hurts Mask of the Betrayer story the most is the fact that MotB is the sequel of the horrible NWN II OC, which was still better than the original NWN OC. It is like trying to build a magnificent castle on top of stinking quicksand.
I don't recall Storm of Zehir being very stong, storywise. Was fun for the sandbox/openworld feel though.
KotOR II had better writings than KotOR IMO, and more world-changing choices, but KotOR feels more polished. Both games have a very stong beginning, but the ending of KotOR II feels rushed. I can't tell which one of the two is my favorite.
P.S.: Have you tried Shadowrun Returns yet? The text-heavy aspect of the game kind of reminds me of Torment, but I never completed Torment. The theme is very different though, and Shadowrun Returns feels more modest than Torment, storywise.
I would say storywise, it is superior to NWN's original campaign.
I would say that, storywise, it is superior to any NWN and NWN II expansion. Yeah, that one dialogue with you know who in Mask of the Betrayer was pretty awesome, and Hordes of the Underdark was decent, but KotOR and KotOR II are still superior IMO.
The only thing NWN and NWN II have over KotOR and KotOR II is the campaign editor and customization: there's more classes, races, feats and spells in NWN than in KotOR.
Scott Betts wrote:
Thanks for the link Scott!
So, what is going to be your first character? Since I never played the Sadowrun PnP RPG, I'll try to keep it simple at first with a Human Street Samurai. I'll probably go switch hitter (ranged/melee) with a focus on cyberware, if that is even possible.
Any advice from someone who know the rules of the PnP RPG?
HobGoblin42, developer, said:
''I don't want to keep you guys from writing those excellent fiction, but the current unsettled situation with Chaos Chronicles is solely based on a conflict between us and bitcomposer. At the current state the completion and release of the game is uncertain since our last attempt to find some agreement failed due the disappointment that we haven't heard back from bitcomposer after holding a long (and constructive) meeting.
Obviously, the game won't be released in this summer because bitcomposer stopped the development earlier this year through an legal injunction(which has been recalled later). The next few weeks will finally decide if the game will see the day of light or not.''
So the legal disagreement is between COREPLAY and bitcomposer, also referred as ''s$$!composer'' by the RPG Codex community. Bitcomposer funded the development of the game, so if no agreement is meet, Chaos Chronicles could very well enter the realm of vaporware.
Adamantine Dragon wrote:
I think you're speaking about Baldur's Gate II: Shadow of Amn. There was no dragon in the original Baldur's Gate, only wyverns. =^.^=
Its a shame that this probably wont work out, it looks awesome and I'd love to have this game. But I am fairly certain the OGL doesnt allow video games. If I remember from conversations about pathfinder online, something in the open game liscence specifically prevents use in video games, hence why pathfinder online isnt using the pathfinder ruleset (which extends the original 3.5 OGL).
I remember the same conversation. Vic Wertz even said that he doubted that making a Pathfinder video game using the Pathfinder/D&D 3.5 OGL ruleset would be legally possible.
Hair could be part of the equation too. With few exceptions, female protagonists tend to have long hair, while most male protagonist are bald or have short hair. Making long natural looking hair that move and respond to the physical environment and the movement of the character without clipping issues requires much more work than making a character with short/no hair.
Maybe, maybe not. Maybe it has nothing to do with Hasbro, but COREPLAY stated that their game was based on the ''D&D 3.5 OGL'', and not simply ''d20 OGL'', on their official web page, on their forums and during various interviews, which may be the cause of the legal issues they are having right now. Even if Chaos Chronicles is not a ''D&D'' game per se, the devs have indirectly associated the D&D franchise with Chaos Chronicles. They have been using the ''D&D'' tag to make their game more attractive to gamers. I can't tell if this is legal or not.
Or maybe this whole thing is caused by some internal legal dispute at COREPLAY.
Adamantine Dragon wrote:
At about that time I found "Baldur's Gate" and played that for a while, eventually playing all the games in that series, but I always liked the sandbox style of the original Baldur's Gate more than any of the more plot-driven sequels. In fact I found that direction to be counter to my own interests.
You are not alone...
IMHO, the original Baldur's Gate presented the perfect balance between sandbox exploration and story-driven experience. There is also the fact that you, the protagonist, were neither a ''random guy'' or ''the Chosen One'' that was destined to save the world. While being above average, your character was part of a complex world and a story that would still exist and unfold without him, unlike Elder Scrolls games and most JRPG where the world would be destroyed without the player/protagonist. This is something that I really liked about BG. That, plus the difficulty of the tactical battles, the huge number of NPC that could join your party (want to do an all-wizards or all-rogues party? no problem!) and the fact that nothing was randomized in the game (I hate randomized loot).
May I suggest you Shadowrun Returns, which will release on Steam at the end of the month? It is based on the Shadowrun PnP RPG, so it should be complex enough for your taste. However, it is a kickstarter game that was produced with limited budget, so don't expect anything mind-blowing. It is also a mix of steam-punk and fantasy, but there is melee weapons in the game.
For those who can keep track of everything, it's a tactics DREAM.
This is why a CRPG based on D&D 4th Edition would have been awesome. You get to enjoy all the tactical elements of the game while the computer keeps track of everything for you. Seriously, the fact that the D&D franchise is only used to produce MMORPGs these days drives me mad. Four published CRPGs use the ruleset of D&D 3rd Edition (NWN, NWN 2, PoR:RoMD and ToEE), five if you count IWD 2, but this one was more a hybrid of the 2nd and 3rd editions. Chaos Chronicles, a game still in development, will use the ruleset of the D&D 3rd Edition OGL. How many CRPG are based on the 4th Edition ruleset? Zero, and this number is not going to go up with D&D Next just around the corner.
Exactly this. It's not even a matter of saying "well less spells per day" because you're still casting high level mage spells. You're just doing it while also having a very powerful martial meatshield built in along with the ability to call forth wholly expendable creatures with many wondrous powers as desired and use them as lackies...while also casting 8th and 9th level spells, having a 3/5 BAB, and a d8 HD and the ability to cast spells while in armor (which means you yourself are at least much sturdier than traditional arcane casters).
And when you put his Summon Monster SLA in the equation, the Summoner has more ''high level'' spells per day than any full caster.
Can a Wizard or Druid cast Stinking Cloud as a standard action at level 3 without spending gold on a scroll (via summoning a dretch)?
Can they cast Haste at level 4, again without using a scroll?
The spell list of the summoner may be more limited, but it encompass nearly all the best spells in the game. On top of that, nothing is preventing a summoner from maxing UMD and using scrolls and wands, thus becoming as versatile and blasty as a full caster.
Standard action summoning, which means his SLA can be used during the surprise round (and the summoned creatures will be able to attack in the surprise round) and is more difficult to disrupt than most summoning spells which require a casting time of 1 round? Also, what Gustavo said.
Experiment 626 wrote:
Its a nova trick. He'll run out of those soon enough.
Which will force him to rely on standard Summon Monster spells and his eidolon. In other words, after using this nova trick that no other class can do, the Summoner would still behave like the other top tier classes (cleric, druid, oracle, sorcerer, witch and wizard).
Last game, one of my player tried to pull an interesting trick with his Summoner. Before that, I did not think that the Summoner was OP, but now I am not sure.
Round 1: Summoner use his Summon Monster SLA to summon 1d3 monsters as a standard action. As soon as they appear, the monsters attack.
Round 2: The Summoner choses to delay his action to act after his summoned monsters. The monsters attack and then, the Summoner uses his Summon Monster SLA again to summon 1d3 new monsters. The firsts monsters instantly disappear and the new monsters appear and the player asked me if his new summoned monsters could attack immediatly. RAW I think he was right, but since the Summoner can only have one Summon Monster SLA active at any time, I judged it was against the spirit of the rule and ruled that since the monsters he summoned with his Summon Monster SLA already attacked this round, his new summoned monsters would have to wait the next round before acting/attacking.
What do you think about that? Should I have allowed to player to subsequently attack with two groups of summoned monsters in the same round? Does that make the Summoner OP?
Is there a way to figure out a price for an artificial or mechanical limb? I'm not looking for any benefits from it
Alex Cunningham wrote:
My alchemist lost an arm on a bad crit a few sessions ago. He's from Magnimar, so he consulted the Golemworks there who sent him to Kaer Maga, blah blah it's making for a great story hook for the character. I'll let you know how it goes, but it might involve taking the "Vestigial Arm" discovery and just re-skinning it.
Burning a discovery for that seems harsh. Gold is a limited resource, but feats and discoveries are even more limited.
Yeah and that's why I would not recommand using the armor as DR subsystem in any system (Pathfinder included) that was not designed from the ground up around it. But could you name me a few systems where armor as DR works in a elegant way so that I could check them out?
I hope that Pathfinder 2.0 will feature a major overhaul of the defense system. I would like to see a system where you AC would increase with your level and where armors would decrease your AC (or your max Dex bonus) instead of improving it. I prefer systems where armors and natural armor give you damage reduction. I also like where Project Eternity is going with misses, glancing hits and hits. Tell me, fellows paizonians, does such a system already exist?
My group is currently running the Carrion Crown AP and there was a lot of situations where the animal companion of our Ranger, a medium sized wolf, could not follow us, so yeah, a large sized mount would really be a dead weight in this AP, at least during the first levels (we are currently level 5). There is a lot of climb checks involved and pulling up a horse with a rope would require a Strength score of at least 22-25 (for a 1000-1500 pounds horse) without the barding, not to mention the awkwardness of the situation. :)
Goblins Eighty-Five wrote:
It might not do any good at your level of play, but it can make mooks more likely to hit the characters with ultra-high AC. As for agro-ing, the PCs should consider things like reach + combat reflexes + stand still + combat patrol. Aside from that, the only class that I know of with built-in agro-ing abilities is a Cavalier of the Order of the Shield with the Honor Guard archetype, but that can't help you in your current situation.
also, in a game that i am currently in, my Cavalier was unmounted through most of the game so far, and was still my GM's biggest worry in the group, so much so that he had to implement monsters with "reverse DR" (being immune to high damage, instead of low damage)
Sounds like the Immortals in StarCraft II. It is an interesting idea. :)
And I never said it was. Mounted combat is a very powerful option. The part I dislike is that it is the Cavalier's ''only'' option. That, and the fact that I cannot ride a wyvern. Why can't I ride a wyvern? :P
Playing a Paladin gives you the choice between having a mount and not having a mount. Playing a Paladin does not force you into a specific fighting style.
EDIT: I think that the Paladin would be an even better class without the alignment restriction. It should be called ''Divine Champion'' or ''Crusader'' instead of Paladin and it should let you play any kind of axiomatic/holy/neutral/anarchic/unholy divine warrior you would like to play. In other words, the more a class is customizable, the more I like it and vice-versa.
Yet, if we exclude archetypes, the Cavalier is one of the few base classes in the whole game that are tied to a specific combat style. I would probably throw the Monk and the Gunslinger in the same basket, two classes that I'm not very fond of. Even the Ranger can choose between Archery and Two-Weapon Fighting, which I felt was quite restrictive back then, but now, thanks to the APG, he can choose any combat style he wants. That being said, I do like the Cavalier much, much more since Ultimate Combat came out.
EDIT: I think it boils down to expectation. I dislike the Cavalier (base class) because I didn't expect him to be what he is: a cavalier. I known it was quite stupid of me to expect something else from a class with such an explicit name. I think I will only come to peace with the Cavalier once Paizo releases a proper Marshal/Warlord/War Master class, which will probably never happen.
Its swift action at level 9. And that banner is pretty beautiful on the charger tiger of a human order of the sword beast rider, while the tiger charges the target of a challenge.
Good catch, I haven't noticed that before. Makes tactician a better ability than I thought.
What if I don't want to? What if I dislike mounted combat? It might be a powerful and viable option, but the Cavalier is the only base class that does not offer an alternative to replace his mount/animal companion. Even the Summoner can choose to use his Summon Monster SLA instead of his eidolon. Of course, it would be silly the play a ''Cavalier'' without a mount, and this is another reason why I dislike this class: it forces me to play a character concept in which I have no interest.