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

Mattastrophic's page

FullStarFullStarFullStar Pathfinder Society GM. 1,686 posts (3,002 including aliases). 23 reviews. No lists. No wishlists. 7 Pathfinder Society characters. 11 aliases.


RSS

1 to 50 of 1,686 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

Hmm... Which one would get better reactions from the well-to-do citizens of Oppara?

-Matt


Any updates?

-Matt


And I'll still be here to observe and comment!

-Matt

***

I got a lot of mileage out of going first, casting Shield, putting up Crane Style, then positioning for a second-turn tactical strike. Move into flank, Greater Trip into a sneak attack, follow up with Opportunist, and I'd have things well in hand.

-Matt


3 people marked this as a favorite.

There is a third possibility. Paizo could start releasing material for Pathfinder that is also 5E-compatible. Like the APs. It would only grow the potential audience for their products.

-Matt


I do hope everything is okay, and we find out what's up. I'll keep watching the thread, though, hoping this awesome concept gets off the ground.

-Matt


Since the archetype compatibility is still there, would an Unchained Ninja work?

-Matt


You know, the low amount of first-party material means very little power creep and great opportunities for third party publishers to step in and provide awesome content.

If you think about it, this decision is great for third party publishers.

On that note, if Paizo were to start publishing 5E-compatible APs, that would be a huge deal, and a huge opportunity for Paizo.

-Matt


Heh, I mentioned in the recruitment thread that this campaign was my dream campaign. Maybe it's too good to be true.

-Matt


Um... I just broke the law? Huh? That's a bit extreme, don't you think?

-Matt


thejeff wrote:
Mattastrophic wrote:


Thanks! So... Where were the cons held in 2013 and 2014?

14 was in London. 13 in Texas.

Ok, so, the time line we have...

2013 is when the reactionary hate voting began, and the con was in Texas.

2014 is the year of the blacklisting of the hate nominees, and the con was in London.

The con is in Washington State this year.

Hmm... Not conclusive, but I might be onto something.

-Matt


Caineach wrote:
This is the 3rd year they have run a slate. The first year they were mostly irrelevant. The second year they got a few things on the list, which were basically blacklisted. This year they dominated the nominations.

Thanks! So... Where were the cons held in 2013 and 2014?

-Matt


Hi guys. As a total noob here, I find myself wondering something...

This "reactionary" hatred-promotion... Is this year the first year it has happened?

I am wondering whether this is largely a result of the con being held in America.

-Matt

***

I don't really see a practical difference between paying for a pdf of one of Paizo's books and paying for a pdf of a Chronicle sheet. So yeah, paying for boons sounds like a great idea!

-Matt

***

I got the coffee!

+1/2 XP +1/2 Fame +1/2 for my faction mission

-Matt

***

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Dave, Andrew, you guys obviously have axes to grind. Please take it elsewhere, because your repeated mantras aren't contributing in a positive manner.

-Matt

***

Requiring that the entire table be made up of Core characters also means that a super-busted Easy Mode character is simply not allowed to join the table and wreck the Core experience. I am very glad to know that Core means Core.

-Matt


"Aasimarness," that's funny.

***

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Steven Schopmeyer wrote:
Indeed. My games involve being good as a difficult road, with commensurate benefits.

Problem is... the Pathfinder Society campaign makes being good unsatisfying and un-beneficial. And then there's the problem of needing the whole party to be willing to go down that road with you.

-Matt


Hmm... I could see gestalt working if only-noncasters got to be gestalt PCs. A fighter/rogue won't break things, but a monk/druid will.

-Matt


Yeah, Mythic is pretty terrible. Gestalt... Maybe if it was a Core-only game.

-Matt


I just had an idea... I would love to play the resurrected Chalfon Dalsine.

What level are we looking at?

-Matt

***

1 person marked this as a favorite.

You're right, Koujow. I recall, actually, very early on, having the same visions of Indiana Jones. Funnily enough, one of Paizo's freelancers, who was active all the way back in 2008, told me that the PFS are more like Dr. Belloq than Indiana Jones.

And it's true. It got a bit old after awhile, largely because I found it pretty silly to see, over and over, absolutely zero negative repercussions for the Society's shady ways. In Golarion, just as in the real world, crime does pay when you or your bosses have enough money and influence to make the consequences disappear.

Anyways, I reacted by having my character take her growing resentment of the PFS and act on it. It was pretty fun, but I agree with the observation that the other players were perfectly happy to follow the criminal railroad (my Eyes of the Ten group was a notable exception. Wow, that was great). It's amazing to see what lengths players will go to justify that Prestige Point.

It's kinda weird (and misleading) how Paladins are OK and Evil characters aren't, isn't it?

-Matt

***

So... you're saying that powergaming your character's sexual orientation is a thing?

-Matt, joking... mostly...

***

It's interesting to see how, as of right now, characters of an asexual nature (14.1%) are more prevalent than characters of a homosexual nature (5.6%).

It's also interesting to see that female characters are, as of right now, less likely to be heterosexual (35.0%) than male characters (50.9%), and significantly more likely to be bisexual (27.2% v 10.2%).

-Matt

***

That's true, the matter of her finding a suitable husband never did get resolved...

-Matt


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Speaking of, the Rules Questions forum really grinds my gears. That board is where good questions go to die. Searching it is a waste of time.

-Matt

***

The Fourth Horseman wrote:

I'd do some pretty embarrassing stuff to be able to continue playing Ozuman.

Heh, I wonder how that would compare to the shameful things I'd do in order to break out Lady Gabrielle again.

-Matt

***

It would be awesome to see some truly high-level, story-driven Pathfinder Society adventures. Adventures to aspire towards getting to play. Sanctioned APs are cool, but they are pretty much separate from PFS.

-Matt

***

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I imagine that the number of asexual characters would go down if some sort of "gold-philic" category was an option.

-Matt

***

You're probably right, 4H. But, if production hasn't ramped up over, what, six and a half years, I don't really see it ever ramping up. If it was an option, it would have already happened.

-Matt

***

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Just to add to the slow track topic, I slow-paced my main character through every level but 6th on the way to 12. It was totally worth it. And now she's 20th.

-Matt


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Tacticslion wrote:

Well, they do suck, pretty badly.

(I mean, that one guy I rolled up, just kept nat 1'ing his attack rolls with the sand tube filled with poison...)

*grindgrindgrindgrind*

-Matt


8 people marked this as a favorite.

Six Degrees of Bash the Rogue.

-Matt

***

Waitasecond... When did Golarion change to "emerging guns?"

When it comes to options... In the Easy Mode campaign, the day has already burst there, so you might as well just allow everything.

-Matt

***

Nefreet brings up a legitimate point. Many of the Core Rulebook's ioun stones are reprinted in Seekers of Secrets. If one of these stones appears on a Chronicle, does that appearance "unlock" the resonant power for that specific stone?

-Matt

***

1 person marked this as a favorite.

It's a start. What would be nice is to have a set of reference points for these sorts of stats, so players can, with a quick glance, see where their PCs are falling behind. Such a table would be great in a guide to 8-9 and 10-11.

Also useful would be a second set of reference points, this one showing stats beyond which a PC starts to trivialize content.

The space between, perhaps it could be called the Fun Zone?

-Matt

***

redward wrote:

Sub-optimal is fine. Sub-competent means you're taking more than you're giving.

Unfortunately, just what is "Sub-competent" is so subjective. I remember when I made the aforementioned PC, I asked the board the question of just what level of combat effectiveness is considered "minimum competence." I received zero answers.

The board is apparent very good at maximizing them numbas. They aren't so good at figuring out what "competence" means beyond a named bonus type.

So... In a conversation about "competence," the question remains... What does "competent" mean? How much attack bonus? How much damage? How much AC? How high of a save DC? How high of a skill modifier? Etc.

Before accusing another player of bring a character which "takes more than it gives," it might be smart to define what that competence line actually is.

-Matt

***

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I would hope that my tablemates enjoyed having me around while I was moving up the levels with my unoptimized socially-focused PC.

Just when did this idea of "playing suboptimal PCs is a troll behavior" start propagating, anyways?

Also, I would suggest adding "embrace teamwork" and "think outside the box" as tips for 8-9 and 10-11 play.

-Matt

***

Ehh, it's got guns and stuff, and there's no epic conclusion to a story begun by PFS.

-Matt

***

And that's a pretty big problem. Why would roleplaying be such a low-level activity? Why can't it be widespread and enjoyable at all levels? Why are 1-5s fun to roleplay in and 3-7s not?

-Matt

***

That's a worthy explanation... But why level five? Why stop there and not three, four, six, or seven? Why is level five so special?

-Matt

***

You say that high level play (well, PFS really stops at mid-level play, but that's a point-of-view matter) is the reason we all play, yet you also say that you have multiple people who retire characters at sixth level.

Why is that? If later levels are so important, why do these people skip them?

-Matt

***

1 person marked this as a favorite.

That's because Drgnmoon and Drogon have generated a lot of posts about 1-5s over the life of the campaign. Their voices are very loud by comparison.

-Matt

***

I haven't had a chance to play my 20th-level aristocrat yet. That would be pretty sweet.

-Matt

***

Hmm... Are there any 12+ modules coming?

-Matt

***

This is really unfortunate news. What's worse is that we will likely never see another Seeker arc. If we did, it would be released at the rate of, what, one part every two seasons?

-Matt


Holy cow, that was a pretty hidden FAQ about crafting feats. I'll have to figure out what to do with my Rogue with Craft Wondrous...

-Matt


2 people marked this as FAQ candidate. 1 person marked this as a favorite.

Does a PC with an SLA still qualify for, say, Craft Wondrous Item? "Able to cast x-level spells" and "caster level x" are two different things. The FAQ only appears to address the former.

-Matt


BretI wrote:
In PFS Organized Play there isn't any time for mysterious backgrounds that are slowly revealed.

On the other hand, you could say that in PFS, there isn't any time to dispel other players' tendency to metagame based on assumptions made about your OOC description. Revealing that you are playing, say, a Paladin, that will inspire certain assumptions about your character, assumptions which may act as a detriment to the experience. Your character might look nothing like a stereotypical Paladin and not act particularly stereotypical-Paladin-like, but the other players most often will treat your character like that stereotypical Paladin, just due to that OOC mechanical knowledge.

So, is it not easier for everyone to just tell the party about the mechanical aspects that lead to appropriate assumptions rather than the metagaming problem?

-Matt

1 to 50 of 1,686 << 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.