Martin Kauffman 530's page

I've loved and played Pathfinder 1 since it came out; and have spent hundreds of dollars at my local game store on Pathfinder.Sadly, Pathfinder 2 is NOT an improvement. I'll continue playing until the end of season 10, at which point I will use the old system for my home group gaming.

The proposed playtest system seems to be more like 5E D&D in that it gives less chance for a player to customize his own type of character and increases the chances of similarity of same level/class characters. IF this proves to be the case, I will probably buy the CORE rulebook and play in PFS organized play; but will not buy any of the other materials and continue to utilize the PF1 rules for my home games and the games I DM at my local pool. To me, the fun is in creating interesting characters, situations and interactions- not just in the chance to achieve "legendary" power. My home and pool games are created by myself- so I do not require a multitude of books/rules beyond what I already have from PF1; and so far I have not experienced a shortage of players in either my home or pool games. Having been a strong supporter of Pathfinder since its onset, I sincerely hope that it does not go down the 5.0 D&D route.

An adventurer would easily be able to make enough gold to support a family. Assuming, of course, that s(he) survives.

The previous D&D movies were absolute trash. Maybe, if they can get a good script, deep characters played by good actors/actresses, combined with good special effects (not beholders that look like toy balloons) they can put something decent together.You have to care about the characters in order for the movie to be good. I wish them luck; but count me as quite skeptical.

With regard to attracting new players , I've always felt that Paizo should try to organize game days and/or game demonstrations at local colleges or other promising venues.

You never know where appreciative compliments will come from, or how actions you think are minor can influence others.

Players should build whatever type of character they desire as long as it is legal and they attempt to cooperate with and aid their group to the best of their character's ability ( even if the character's abilities are modest and not optimized ). If a player wants to have a unique character, or place his character in a more challenging situation then that's his choice.

If you do not enjoy pvp speak to your DM. If he does nothing, find another group to adventure with.

No one is forcing you to be in this group. If you are uncomfortable, bid them goodbye and find a group more to your liking.

My characters are almost never optimized.I'm just happy to be able to play fun and challenging games with a group of players who generally cooperate. As far as I am concerned, players should be able to make the character they want as long as they cooperate with the group and not actively sabotage or undermine team game play. Nor does it matter to me whether group tactics are optimized or most efficient as long as a TPK is avoided. I have found that there are many ways to have fun playing as long as the group is not severely divided, argumentative or vindictive. When I play clerics, I have no qualms about healing or buffing team mates or using my resources to help my group. Let's not get all worked up over issues that have no one all inclusive "right answer". Happy gaming to all.

Speak to the players and the DM prior to your next game. If the issue cannot be resolved to your satisfaction via discussion and compromise, find another group.

Unless the player of the dead character was an absolute jerk, or the character died because of his players total stupidity,I would do my best to effect his character's resurrection ( assuming the player wished to have his character resurrected ). I have found this to be the case in all the PFS groups I have played with.

Perhaps Roleplay Instead of Counting Excessively?

No, it's NOT time for another edition.

Sadly, the Andoran faction is slowly succumbing to a mixture of political correctness and multinationalism. Be proud, Andorans, for we alone are the nation and the people who represent the ideal of freedom on Golarion. We are not the masters of trade, or the seekers of lost empires, or the dealers in slaves, or in league with dark powers. Andoran lives on; and it will be reported as such on all my character sheets.

From what you say, you seem to have the opportunity to participate in a large number of games. If you and this other player can't get along, play at different tables , DM PFO scenarios yourself, or organize a home game where you don't have to invite the other player. Why get yourself aggravated?

Jeff: As the prospective DM, you have every right to set the ground rules for the campaign. If the players cant abide by this, they didn't have to play. Find another group to play with or recruit another group to DM for.

The game was far deadlier for characters. Many more traps with save or die rolls. Far fewer and more restrictive class choices. In certain respects, different races were different classes. As the game progressed, more and more races, classes, and choices became availble, for example, an assassin. Steadily, the game has changed to the point where class choices and options have become almost inumerable. In the beginning, the D.M. (not G.M.) was the godlike and final arbiter: whereas today the players have much more input- to the point they feel entitled. Of course, entitlement may just be a reflection of today's more "entitled" society in general- or perhaps that is merely a reflection of my own conservative curmudgoness. In the beginning, I believe the game was more of a straightforward fantasy battle simulator, with less emphasis on social themes.

Political correctness is today's McCarthyism utilized by left-wingers. In the 1950's, leftists were called communists to discredit and shame them. Now, this tactic is used by the left to discredit the right. This is a dangerous tactic to use, not only because it can be turned against you; but because it corrodes the entire political system which is based upon the right of freedom of speech which lets the populance know the facts and decide the right course of action. Moreover, it can be argued that any contract Mr. Sterling signed which abridged his freedom of speech was an illegal, unconstitutional, and therefore unenforceable one.

Perhaps, if you just want to cause trouble and chaos, you might consider not playing until you are in a better mood. Actions of this kind are disruptive and tend to spoil other players fun. If you have had previous disagreements with a potential DM, please settle these peacefully out of game.

It seems to me that potential reputation loss should vary in terms of the difference in levels/ power between the bandit and the traveller. A high level bandit should lose much more rep if he attacks a low level traveller.

I am still in the process of trying to decide whether I would want to play this game.I have never played a PvP game before: and , in fact, Pathfinder (tabletop) is a cooperative venture as opposed to PvP , which is expressly prohibited in that venue. I know that I am NOT one of the "fittest" and would not like my character to be a target to be repeatedly killed by other more powerful and knowledgable players or teams. I would be satisfied with a small role as long as it's fun and not a constant battle in which i would always have to be looking over my shoulder so to speak. As in real life, there has to be some authority exercised by the game designers/staff so that anarchy does not ensue, as anarchy does not benefit either society or the game. After all, the average or even below average player has to have fun in order to be attracted to, or to remain in the game. Certainly, I would NOT pay to be abused by "fitter" players.

Pushing 70 and in my thirty third happy year of gaming. Keeps me young, it does. Game on- just dont look the medusa in the eye.

Even if the DM ruled this was possible, it seems to me that a logical question the barbarian would ask the group is "where did that big weapon go? It couldn't have walked away by itself. This would give the magus a chance to either fess up or to surrepititiously drop the falchion and hopefully correct his semi-pvp error. If, however, the thieving magus does not correct his mistake then the group may have a much larger problem in the form of a selfish player willing to steal from his own teamates.

I'm very happy with Pathfinder; and i think that,on the whole, it's a distinct improvement over 3.5 DD. Long may it continue without a Pathfinder 2.0 .

The arms race is progressing nicely as the NPCs have caught up somewhat. Season 4 is more dangerous; but not suicidal. Take care about playing up, playing with a group of fewer than six, think a bit more creatively and don't assume that all problems can be solved by a frontal assault, or that diplomacy or temporary retreat is not an option. Those who are adventurers do not whine, they overcome. And remember to bring extra wands and healing potions... I do think that the PFS danger level is more in line of what it should be now than in former years. One can't reasonably expect to just come to the table and be handed a cert.

I wonder if the OP has considered that if majority of 3.5 players adopted the "we never want another revision of our favorite ruleset" mindset, Pathfinder would never come into being or would die a quick death.

Pathfinder flourishes because enough 3.5 fans thought buying 3.75 is a good idea.

Pathfinder flourishes because:1. Wotc/Hasbro abandoned 3.5 and replaced it with something far inferior- thus creating a vacant niche for another new company to step in. 2.The WoTC/Hasbro replacement was done in the worst possible way, thereby alienating many of it's former customers (I, for one, have not bought a Hasbro product since this was done) and 3. Pathfinder turned out to be an improvement on 3.5, along with great service and support by the company. Pathfinder, despite a few flaws, is an eminently playable and fun game. I don't think Pathfinder 2.0 is needed.

If you don't roleplay your stats, all you are doing is cheesy min-maxing. But I guess some people just want to be able to have the advantages of higher stats in certain areas without the penalties involved with their dump stats.

Are your players happy and enjoying the game? Talk with each of them to see what they like/dislike. Do they prefer lots of combat? any particular themes? Puzzles? Political and/or social intrigue? Find a way for each group member to shine by using his/her character's special skills/abilities. Let each member find a way to make his/her own character memorable and special. Ask each group member what they would like to see their character accomplish. The fact that your group is meeting regularly and has grown is a positive sign that you are doing well. Let us know,in a few months, how things have progressed.

In my home game, cohorts and party followers get 1/2 xp. Generally, I let the party members control their actions, but reserve the right to play these characters myself should they be unfairly mistreated or given suicidal orders.

Yee-hah. Sounds like Sandpoint is ready for an old fashioned hanging.

It seems as if a bunch of people are getting awfully upset before the game has even started. Calm down, treat each other nicely, try the game out: and, after you play it, you can always drop out if you feel it's not something you like.

This is no big deal. Just treat people online the way you would like to be treated- with courtesy and respect. If you do this, you will not only have a more successful game experience, but may make new friends in the process.

IF ONE MEMBER OF THE GROUP CONSISTENTLY MESSES UP THE REST OF THE GROUP, IT'S EITHER TIME FOR THE GROUP TO KICK HIM OUT OR FOR YOU TO LEAVE AND FIND ANOTHER GROUP. Why put up with this mess unless you're a masochist? Good luck.

Many fundamentalist Muslims do not believe in either freedom of speech or democracy; but rather in a totalitarian theocracy- which is why we have seen fatwas declared against those insulting Muhammed and/or Islam. In the U.S, people are free to critize or even insult Christianity or Judaism without being dragged out into the streets or murdered. I would hope the the murderers are caught and punished according to their country's laws; however, I wouldn't hold my breath waiting for this to happen. I do think that the U.S. should respond by cutting off foreign aid to nations which do not respect or are unable to protect the immunity of diplomatic staff in accordance with accepted international law.

Don't lst your player walk over you. Either his character is a human or a half orc.

You guys are still kicking this topic around? Walker won because a substantial majority of Wisconsin voters believe that his policies are improving the state by lowering taxes and lowering unemployment. As Clinton said, "it's the economy, stupid". There seems to be a clear correlation between very liberal, high government interference, high tax states leading to higher state spending, higher unemployment and state bankruptcy. Various other explainations have been offered on this board including corruption, computer hacking of the election process, etc; but many people just refuse to accept whats clearly in front of them- to recognize that they lost because the more "liberal" position was rejected by the voters.

Wisconsin's deficit and unemployment rate have been reduced. It's voters must think Walker is doing a great job.

It would be an interesting and possibly informative experiment to see what longer term effects this might have on the students learning. American education seems to me to be going the way of mediocrity, where everyone "wins", competition is discouraged for fear of hurting students feelings, and standards are dumbed down so that hardly anyone "fails". In New York, there has been a marked decrease for the support of classes for "gifted" students.

Thejeff- "You can't cut your way out of recession" is a Keynsian formula for neverending increasing government spending. No nation or people can ever get everything they desire. And yes, even though nations can print unbacked money while individuals can't, after a point it is realized that the printed money is worth less and less, until it is finally worthless. Essentially, high inflation ensues, which is what happened in Germany to the Weimar Republic. There, people could walk around with a wheelbarrowful of printed money which could buy a loaf of bread. And you know how that ended. A totalitarian dictatorship and Adolf Hitler... That is why I will not vote for Obama. Unlimited debt and spending, with the implicit promise that people can have all that they can ever desire, is a good intentioned fantasy path towards national ruin.

Ciretose: I am not trying to say that the Republicans are now and always have been pure and right. Neither am I saying that the Democrats are now and always have been unholy and wrong. But it is well past time the nation take the actions and sacrifices needed to bring itself back towards more fiscal stability. Just as an individual cannot continually spend and spend more and more, maximizing many credit cards until bakruptcy is unavoidable, the nation cannot blindly go down the path of reckless and ever increasing spending if it is to avoid turmoil. Obama has not only not demonstrated that he can rein in spenging to any reasonablre level; but his actual spending deficits and his own administrations projected future spending deficits make it clear that he has only made this problem worse, not better. Look at Greece, where the results of continual overspending are now beginning to come due. That is why I will not vote for Obama- because I feel his administration has made matters worse, not better for the country.

Obama = $5 Trillion more national debt ( with an additional 1.3 Trillion this year and no end to rising debt anywhere in sight), 3+ years of over 8% unemployment (the longest since the Great Depression), a Democratic Party controlled Senate which hasn't even passed a budget in two years-forcing the nation to operate from one fiscal crisis to another. This is just a short list of his failings. He came to the Presidency with little experience in running anything: and his administration has been a major disaster. God save the United States if he is re-elected.

Lots of players seem to want FREE CHEESE. Leave the rules as they are.

I must be Old School: i award XP only to players who actually play their own characters at the table. I do not let players play another player's character under any circumstances. Dependent upon in-game events, a player may sometimes control his own character and an alternate henchman (who recieves a share of XP as well).

Live Dragon. Dead Alchemist.

The fact that 4E is ending speaks loudly to its merits or lack thereof. If the general gaming community had supported it more highly, and its parent corporation were making money off of it hand over fist, do you think 5E would be coming out now? Who knows what the final 5E will look like; but as far as I am concerned it will have a long way to go to beat out Pathfinder.

I would suggest that the year's winning faction be awarded the opportunity for its characters of level 5 or higher to participate in one special faction-only mission which would have much greater risks and rewards. The mission's free player reward could be a choice of one of three unique special items/artifacts. The disadvantage of voluntary partipation would be that character death in this mission only would be final- with no opportunity to restore the character to PFS play.

I think that the encumbrance rules are quite reasonable and prevent characters from "carrying the store" with them without penalty. In both real life and in character creation, there is always a trade off between what we would like to have and what we can afford. If you want your character to lug more stuff around, put a point or two extra in strength ( or buy a horse or item which will help you carry more ).