Paizo Top Nav Branding
  • Hello, Guest! |
  • Sign In |
  • My Account |
  • Shopping Cart |
  • Help/FAQ
About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ

Matrix Sorcica's page

34 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists.


RSS


"Hope your artificial gravity is turned on!"

Eh.... What?


I'd like to see your 5e conversion some time. Also, awesome!


This is excellent stuff. Thanks for sharing.


Just chiming in to say I'm really enjoying this thread.


Legendary Games are converting their Ultimate series to 5e. Is this something you would consider for Ultimate Charisma?


Tangent101 wrote:

I have no doubt at all that if they created Smurfs as a playable race, someone would want to play one of the Purple Smurfs (insane smurfs whose insanity is spread by biting the tail of another smurf - basically, Dawn of the Dead using Smurfs and done up as a Saturday Morning cartoon because the 80s were a period of insane awesomeness and weird hair) and insist that theirs was a "good" Purple Smurf.

Interesting point of trivia is that the purple smurfs were originally black and got changed into purple for the American market.

Obiviously Paizo stole the idea when designing the Golarion smurfs :)


Story Archer wrote:
I'm running a campaign using the six books of Rise of the Runelords, three books of Shattered star and one book from Curse of the Crimson Throne. They all link almost seamlessly. I'd say that overall I've cut out maybe 20% of the total material and added in another 10% worth of new stuff. Epic campaign.

Could you please tell more on what parts and how? Sounds just like my thing.


Greg A. Vaughan wrote:

So if it's relative space and a westward facing shore in an area that is probably culturally similar to the Sword Coast and the North, then you've got it.

That's it. Perfect. Thanks.

And thanks for the preview :-)


Greg A. Vaughan wrote:

The Lost Lands are big enough that there is definitely room. But there's so much politics, history, and canon tied up in the Sword Coast the question is there room to fit all that in, and that will really come down to how closely you're wanting to keep to the FR canon. Obviously we can't use anything resembling that IP, so ours will not be that similar. But if you don't mind some squishy edges in those departments, the physical space does exist.

Probably the best place to fit it would be on the western edge of the kingdoms of Foere where they meet the massive inland sea known as the Crescent Sea. It lies far to the west of any of the maps we've released yet and would be south of the Grand Duchy of Reme in an area occupied by the Kingdom of Bret Heath, the Duchy of (can't remember the name offhand), and the halfling Low Country.

Not very interested in FR Canon, so that won't be much of a problem. It's the geography, placenames and locations relative to eachother I want.

Any chance of a quick look (not detailed, subject to change, etc.) of that part of the map?

And thanks for taking your time to answer.


Greg A. Vaughan wrote:
DaveMage wrote:

After reading some of the Wilderlands box set tonight, I think I've decided in my game that Wilderlands will be on the opposite side of the globe from the Lost Lands.

I think the two areas compliment each other very nicely, and then I'll never need another new campaign world again.

:)

DaveMage, that's quite an honor. :-)

However at the scale of the Lost Lands you could probably fit all of the Wilderlands into a few of hexes of the Lost Lands, so you might not need to locate it so far away if you didn't want to.

I'm not very patiently waiting for the campaign setting and a teaser map for the outline (hint).

My campaign world has for a long time used the maps and places etc. of the Sword Coast from Forgotten Realms and I want to include it. Is there room for this coast in the Lost Lands?


Thanael wrote:
Sphaerenmeister in Germany has FGG products

Oohh... Interesting. Thanks. Only €9 for shipping a brick like Tsar. Hope they get FFG in the future, especially with Northland's, Blight and Lost Lands coming up.

Any other European 'dealers' people know about?
(And sorry, Frogs. I would prefer to support you directly, but shipping *plus* the risk of being charged an additional 25% of product and shipping cost as VAT *plus* an additional $30 for being charged those additional 25% - yes, I live in a horrible country - unfortunately makes this a no go ).


Greg A. Vaughan wrote:
I hope it turns out to be well worth your wait when are able to get it locally. We're printing extras so they'll be available.

Gould you point to some FLGSs that carry your products in Europe? I'm in the same shipping boat and can't really find any European retailers with Lost Lands products.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Heine Stick wrote:
As a Dane, the name of this race made me chuckle.

Me too. Funny they are undead as the name means they are not mortal :)


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Awesome, awesome.

Reorganize your kickstarters NOW! We need that campaign setting now!


Greg A. Vaughan wrote:
The main land forms and nations and stuff won't change

Show us! :-)


Greg A. Vaughan wrote:
Unfortunately, since the guide and the map are tying together basically every thing ever made by FGG or NG before, it's a fairly tedious and time-consuming process. I wish I could make it go faster but that will only make mistakes happen. There's simply no practical way to put a rush on it and ensure the full canon remains intact. That said, I'm going to try and get a sneak preview of the world map draft (my own hand-drawn scribble) available for display at North Texas RPGCon this summer.

Awesome! However, I don't understand how the map can be a problem to include in an upcoming (pre-campaign setting) KS, as it was a stretch goal for the SOA KS more than a year ago?


Greg A. Vaughan wrote:
Shem wrote:
I think an end of 2015 or early 2016 is a much more realistic possibility.

Such an awful long time til the campaign guide.

Please make the world map a stretch goal for any and all of the coming kickstarters - I need it!


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Creighton Broadhurst wrote:

You should be able to find our books on the German Amazon. If you search for my name - Creighton Broadhurst - all our books show up.

Here's what I found searching for me!

Hey, you have them as POD at rpg.now. That should do it :)

Though, looking at what I've spent already, I think the dead-tree copies must wait..


I'd wish you had print options other than Amazon UK for mainland Europe. Tax on the books themselves, brutal shipping charge and tax on the shipping charge makes it sadly a no go.
Will get a lot of pdfs, but wold have liked to get the "Dressings" as print. Oh well.


Auxmaulous wrote:
Creighton Broadhurst wrote:

Thanks for the suggestions chaps. I've been considering old school play/feel more and more as I plot my megadungeon.

In case you didn't know I was writing one, here's the link for more information. I'd love to get your thoughts on it, although I've only just started there should be enough info there to give you a good feel for the place.

Wow, just found a new website to add to my favorites - some great posts in there, need to do some reading.

Agreed.

And Gloamhold sounds awesome. And it just screams OSR or 5E to me.


Creighton Broadhurst wrote:

It's interesting you say you don't play Pathfinder, but still get RSP products. I've had similar comments a couple of times recently, and it makes me wonder whether I should do some Old School versions of some of my products.

I too don't play Pathfinder and I too will be making a rather large order (once I get a free evening to sit down and actually buy the stuff). I would very much appreciate non-PF versions, OSR would be cool, however I think you should really consider D&D5E - and not just because that's what I play - it looks like it's really taking off, and in my opinion combines the best elements of 2E, 3E and 4E.


I was thinking about GM's Miscellany: Wilderness and Dungeons and most of the adventures. Are the Village Backdrops I & II the equivalent to the "dressing" compilations?


Wauw! I'd been thinking about going on a Raging Swan binge due to the amazing reviews your products get.
Seems like now is the time :)


Greg A. Vaughan wrote:


Hi Matrix,

The other Frogs actually only got their early draft overview maps back in June at NorthTexasRPGcon, so I don't know that we're going to be releasing any sneak peaks of it other than the segments detailed with the Sword of Air and Barakus Kickstarters.

Thanks for the reply. So how about posting a pic of that early draft - just to get the basic shape and such in perspective? Pretty please :)

Oh, and make sure to make it the first strech goal of the Northlands Kickstarter ;)


I can wait for the setting (I think). What I can't wait for is the map.

Please show us an overview of the Lost Lands, even if it's just initial drafts or such. Pleeeeeeeease.

(It won't to be as detailed as the handdrawn map posted as part of the LCoB kickstarter).


Kirth Gersen wrote:

That would be a LOT cleaner and neater, yes. But, ideally, someone should still be able to pick up existing stuff and play, with a minimum of up-front conversion work. If I totally reworked how all bonuses accrued, then I'd be introducing a total break in translation -- at that point, I'd be better off redesigning a new game from the ground up. Which I'd totally do, but existing Pathfinder players (who right now can sorta kinda follow along, if they just look at changes and make them) would in that case need to learn a whole new system.

Why don't you just continue making Kirthfinder awesome and develop a new game from the ground up? ;-)

I like this idea of dimishing returns and think this is the direction we should be headed, both to preserve compability and to keep things so simple they can be implemented on the spot if necessary.


Kirth Gersen wrote:
Sellsword, I totally approve of your "goals" list, but, looking at your proposal, I worry it might (a) introduce a little too much randomness, and/or (b) push everyone into carrying around picks and scythes only, and just maxing out their attack bonuses. I'll definitely have to look at the math some more.

options like Power attack gets heavily nerfed (even more than Pathfinder initially did). I don't think the math holds up.


Kirth Gersen wrote:
LoneKnave wrote:
4e solution: you automatically raise every skill
Then you've still got 10th level guys who can auto-succeed against 1st level guys. I want the 10th level guys to be 10x better, not infinity times better! And you can only do that if the range of random numbers is larger than the maximum bonus size.

If you get an bonus equal to half your level like in 4E, a 10th level guy will only have +5 more than a 1st level guy. That doesn't seem unreasonable. Add in some specialization, the difference might be +10. Again, ok imo. At 20th level, those numbers would be around +10 difference, with +15 for specialization. That's ok for a 20 level difference.

Kirth, I have been thinking about a way of doing the "½lvl bonus to all skill" thing. I'm not there yet, but was going to include my thoughts when I give you feedback on the Skills document.

Concerning exploding dice and opposed rolls:
Hackmaster 5E is doing opposed rolls and exploding dice. A 20th lvl fighter only has a +10 bonus in what corresponds to BAB. All dice explode, the next die you roll, you subtract one from the result, i.e. roll an 8 on a d8, you roll one more d8, subtracting 1, for a result of + 0-7. If you get an exploding d20, you roll a d6, not an additional d20. Guess feats could increase that die.
Just something to consider.

If we're going percentile, why not used Rolemasters openended and low-openended dice? Crazy things could be done with feats and Hero Points here as well.


Adding my mail to the list for an updated version, in .doc please, please, please :)

Spoiler:
soeder_gris(at)hotmail.com


Hmm.. but still. It's the weapon's threat range that determines whether or nor you get access to rolling that critical at all. Now, I have only seen the sample pages, but I have a feeling that just getting the crit will allow you to do serious damage enough to take out your opponent? Is this so?

Sure, you'll do worse damage with the higher multiplier weapons, but that's the trade off in d20. When you start introducing 'end the fight' criticals, getting the crit seems more important.

Could you explain how the systems works precisely? Can you end the fight on any crit (in a way that is not possible in regular d20)?

Thanks.


Seems to me from the sample that weapons with a higher threat range are vastly superior to weapons with lesser ranges? How is this handled?


Kirth Gersen wrote:

I'd recommend the following, if you haven't already done so:

Most importantly, Balors have a 24 Int, and if their tactics don't reflect that, their CR should be reduced accordingly. That means that (1) they'll send summoned demons just ahead of themselves; (2) their "other treasure" will be in the form of magic items they use (and mundane javelins -- see below), not coins sitting in a cave; (3) at minimum they'll have unholy aura active, and will use damaging SLAs to knock down flying opponents; (4) quickened telekinesis can throw 15 javelins a round in addition to that. (5) If forced to melee, the monsters' feats will need to be updated to Kirthfinder:

(a) Swap the unholy sword quality for keen and finesse, Cleave for Critical Focus, and Greater Two-Weapon Fighting (no longer exists anyway) for Two-Weapon Strike. The Balor's vorpal strike ability would be replaced by Severing Strike as a bonus feat. Now every crit, and every time the Balor hits with both its whip and its sword, requires a DC 32 Fort save to avoid decapitation. Swap Iron Will for Weapon Finesse. With Weapon Focus, the sword's attack bonus is now +41/+36/+36/+36, for 2d6+20/17-20.

(b) At least one Balor should swap out the Two-Weapon Fighting feats for Dodge, Skirmish, Vital Strike, and Dimensional Agility, and simply use its sword for 2d6+20/17-20 plus 6d6 and possible decapitation. They can pop in, attack, and pop out in the same round -- and do this against up to 4 opponents/round.

Thanks for the advice. It really just proves my point that you need to modify the monsters, by changing feats at the very least. Takin the monsters from the pfsrd as is and using them at their indicated CR is a recipe for a monster massacre.

I suggest either overhauling each and every monster you are going to use (yuck) or develop some quick guidelines.
I was thinking, at least for high level, to use the 4E paradigm of X number of monsters of lvl Y is equal to a lvl Y encounter (with X being the number of PCs), instead of PF where a CR X monster is an EL X encounter. 5 Balors as presented in the pfsrd might just be an average encounter for a lvl 20 Kirthfinder party.

Oh, and I'd like the bookmarked version when you get around to it :)

Spoiler:
soeder_gris@hotmail.com


The Vulture wrote:
Not sure how much of an adjustment (if any) should be made, beyond the normal adjustments for the particular group.

I did some mock battles with 4 Balors in my head using the google docs version (haven't checked the new pdf one proper yet), and a fighter could easily kill two Balors in one round - and he would take out the rest in the round after (if any were left after the rest of the party had their go). Note that the Balors were unable to seriously threaten the fighter.

This should supposedly be beyond an epic encounter (EL 24) for an entire party, so I'd say some adjusting is needed. I was actually thinking about incorporating the 4E concept of 5 monsters of X lvl vs. 5 PCs of X lvl being an average encounter and using elite and solo versions as well.


Hi Kirth,

You made me register on the boards!!

I've been following this thread for a long time - I'm really impressed by your work.

I would love to get the document.

email:
soeder_gris@hotmail.com

Thanks.

I've been meaning to comment on Kirthfinder for a long time - here's the occasion!


©2002-2017 Paizo Inc.® | Privacy Policy | Contact Us
Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours, Monday through Friday, 10:00 AM to 5:00 PM Pacific time.

Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, Starfinder, the Starfinder logo, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc. The Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Legends, Pathfinder Online, Starfinder Adventure Path, 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.